Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

VPT Le Touquet

As @Ibra has quoted in French up until a few years ago there were 2 types of circle to land MVI and MVL.

MVI = manoeuvre à vue impose this has now become known on the charts by its English translation = Visual prescribed track
MVL = manoeuvre à vue libre. In other words you are free to set your own circuit.

One has to maintain visual clues or go missed by heading directly to the runway and following the missed approach for the IAP you are using.

The major difference with a MVL and a VFR circuit is that, unless stated in the IAC an MVL circuit can be left or right handed at the pilot’s discretion.

France

Here is a golden term to keep in mind for any freestyle flying, “cloud-break”: any approach where you spend more than 1second at DH/MAPT looking for a runway threshold to land on OR it takes more than 20seconds to land on it, if one day you find yourself staring at the ground for more than 30seconds (with/without runway threshold in sight), it’s a “cloud-break”, as time evolve anything you do one these belongs to game over or pure luck !

TDJ737 wrote:

Funny thing is I couldn’t find much about it in the French AIP

French VPT is well described in the MUP

https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/pub/media/reglementation/file/m/u/mup_v8.pdf
mup_v8_pdf

VPT is an MVL where you need to see the ground and follow a prescribed tracks either using your eyes or instruments
CTL is an MVL where you need to see the runway environment but you are free to keep it tight

CTL & VPT are sub-set of MVL, both are IFR flying, they sit in the protected area with same MDH, the only different is how tight you can fly and what you need to see, the VPT go-around is like CTL (I understand it’s, resume the go-missed along MAP from original IAP)

Also worth adding “UK IMCR/IRR bad weather circuit” to this mix BUT you are supposed to go down if you lose visual references (it’s irrelevant now as this way a technical fudge to solve the inconsistency between 1.8km takeoff visibility while in-flight visibility is 3km/1.5km for CAA PPL and now things are back to 1500m under SERA & FCL PPL), this mess was relevant when one could depart VFR with 1.5km visibility but needs 1.8km visibility outside clouds to fly IFR, for someone who can fly in IMC their best defense when losing visual references is to gain “height into wind along runway axis” before resuming safe SID or MAP paths to above MSA and flying a straight-in IAP rather than going free-style at 400ft agl

Switzerland has also “Visual Approach” after IAP (let’s call those fake IAP a “cloud-break” as they are bloody far away from runway threshold), the same challenge for going missed if you lose visual references or after 1h of cross-country past the MAPt with ground contact and no runway in-sight, if you have an F16 you go vertical, if not 1/ go back all to MAPT and fly MAP 2/ land on flat ground bellow or die hard trying

“On distingue les procédures de manœuvres à vue libre (MVL) et de manœuvres à vue imposée (VPT).
- Manœuvres à vue libre : manœuvres à vue effectuées à l’issue d’une procédure d’approche aux
instruments, et pour laquelle le pilote n’a pas de trajectoire à respecter, mais est supposé rester à l’intérieur
des limites de l’aire de protection associée à sa catégorie d’aéronef.
- Manœuvres à vue imposées : manœuvres à vue effectuées à l’issue d’une procédure d’approche aux
instruments, et suivant une trajectoire définie à l’aide de repères visuels ou radioélectriques. Les trajectoires
peuvent être différentes selon la catégorie d’aéronef.”

Last Edited by Ibra at 30 Apr 13:51
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

You can carry out a circling manoeuvre without seeing the runway if you have other (prescribed) visual references. E.g. see this procedure: https://www.ippc.no/norway_aip/current/aip/ad/enra/EN_AD_2_ENRA_5-1_en.pdf . I haven’t flow it for real, but I have in a full visual simulator. Interesting, to say the least.

Yeah, I think so as well. I was checking ICAO Doc 8168 and could only find reference when to go missed for a circling, not for VPT. This makes sense actually as VPT is defined using visual references backed up with timing and sometimes DME. It says local knowledge/study of terrain and obstacles is recommended.
Funny thing is I couldn’t find much about it in the French AIP.

I dont see why this circling pattern should present a problem in most GA types at 600 feet? There are plenty of visual clues that correspond with the “plate” and the pattern is actually pretty generous to allow for gentle turns. I seem to recall the missed with circle to land just down the road at Calais is similiar and didnt present any issue in the Aztec recently.

The puzzling thing about this VPT approach is why it exists. There does not seem to be anything to prevent an NDB IAP to RWY31. It would be a lot more comfortable to remain at 2000’ and then do a timed (or DME) base turn, like the existing NDB IAP to RWY13.

As it is the VPT flown at minima is often very rough with turbulence and the locals probably don’t appreciate aircraft being flown very low over the town in approach config at high power. VPTs make sense at locations such as Cannes and Nice due to terrain. But why Le Touquet?

You can carry out a circling manoeuvre without seeing the runway if you have other (prescribed) visual references. E.g. see this procedure: https://www.ippc.no/norway_aip/current/aip/ad/enra/EN_AD_2_ENRA_5-1_en.pdf . I haven’t flow it for real, but I have in a full visual simulator. Interesting, to say the least.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 29 Oct 08:09
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

There are two sorts of visual manoeuvring:

VM(C) (visual manoeuvring circling) where obstacle clearance is guaranteed within a particular distance of the thresholds

and

VPT (visual manoeuvring on prescribed track) where obstacle clearance is guaranteed within a particular distance of the prescribed track

France seems to like VPT, and most other states don’t use it.

e.g. FAR § 91.175 (e) (2)
(e) Missed approach procedures
Each pilot operating an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the United States, shall immediately execute an appropriate missed approach procedure when either of the following conditions exist:
(1) …
(2) Whenever an identifiable part of the airport is not distinctly visible to the pilot during a circling maneuver at or above MDA, unless the inability to see an identifiable part of the airport results only from a normal bank of the aircraft during the circling approach.

@ Ted.P here they don’t call it runway but identifiable part of the airport – so it can also be the well illuminated terminal building
Now you can argue that VPT is not a circling. But I must say indeed it is a circling manoeuvre with required MDA and visibility – French extravagancy with prescribed tracks.

EDxx, Germany

Are you sure that you need to have visual contact with the RWY throughout a VPT procedure? I had understood that clear of cloud and in sight of the surface was the requirement. Do you have a reference for this?

BTW the SIA defines a VPT as “Visual manœuvring using prescribed track”.

that a “circling approach” is simply what you do if there is no IAP for the current runway

that is correct, but nobody would fly this procedure at 600ft when the weather is fine. You fly it after an instrument approach when the tailwind prohibits a landing on RWY13 and additionally you could have a low ceiling. If you have no clouds, fly it at a higher altitude – the final is long enough.
If you fly this procedure you know the highest obstacle in the area will reach up to 263’ (trees)

In the unlikely event that you ever flew it down to that viz you probably would not have the field in sight until short final.

If you loose visual contact with the runway for more than a few seconds you shall fly a go-around.

Last Edited by nobbi at 28 Oct 16:13
EDxx, Germany
23 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top