IFR visual approach Colmar LFGA

Aviathor wrote:

You can have approach control even at an uncontrolled airfield.

Do you have an example of an untowered airport with a controller? Because I thought that one precludes the other.

Airborne_Again wrote:

But ENR 1.1 1.5.1 c does. It applies at AFIS and uncontrolled aerodromes.
…
Except for the AFIS part. I don’t see any need for IFR traffic on a visual approach to follow VFR procedures when there is AFIS.

VFR procedures at an AFIS aerodrome say that you don’t have to join on downwind, but can also join on base or final if

• an AFIS agent is present on the airfield
• radio is mandatory on the airfield and
• there is no other traffic in the aerodrome traffic zone.

So I don’t see a reason why you should NOT follow VFR procedures.

Stephan_Schwab wrote:

In the case of my landing at Colmar I was handed off from the approach controller to Colmar TOWER. The airspace I was now in is class G, which means I cannot be given instructions.

I don’t find a reference to quote here, but I am certain that I learned that as soon as you speak to a TWR, you have to follow his instructions and you must get a clearance for what you are doing. Irrespective of the airspace class that you are in. Also, my home airfield was still controlled at times when I did my PPL there, and despite it being in class G, the aerodrome traffic was controlled when TWR was active. (Now it is completely A/A, which has increased the efficiency greatly…). I think this is even a test question in the PPL theory in France.

In that case, this was an instruction for you to join left downwind. It is not clearly defined where you have to fly it in most cases, you need to adapt your track according to the maneuvering capabilities of your airplane and the circumstances so that you won’t disturb other planes (translated quote from one of my PPL theory books). I would say downwind is when you are on the opposite track to the active runway at circuit height in the vicinity of the aerodrome (maybe no more than 4 nm away). If you cannot achieve that, you would have to tell TWR “unable” and ask him for a clearance that you can abide by. You could of course also make a suggestion for such a clearance.

Do you have an example of an untowered airport with a controller? Because I thought that one precludes the other.

Any airfield in France with an IAP when tower is closed. AFIS fields. If you want specific examples Pontoise (de-Gaulle APP), Troyes (Paris APP), Prunay (Paris APP), Albert-Braye (Lille APP), La Rochelle (Aquitaine APP?)…

Hundreds of non-towered airfields in the US with IAPs, for example Arcada (NOCAL APP?)

Rwy20 wrote:

Do you have an example of an untowered airport with a controller? Because I thought that one precludes the other.

Eskilstuna (ESSU) in Sweden. Airport has AFIS. Approach control provided by Västerås (ESOW) TWR/TMC during operating hours.

Rwy20 wrote:

I don’t find a reference to quote here, but I am certain that I learned that as soon as you speak to a TWR, you have to follow his instructions and you must get a clearance for what you are doing. Irrespective of the airspace class that you are in.

Not quite. If the airport has a tower but is in class F/G, then only “aerodrome traffic” is controlled. “Aerodrome traffic” is basically traffic on the airport itself or in, entering or leaving the traffic circuit.

So just speaking to the TWR is not enough.

However, as in the USA, don’t all of these have a remotely located approach controller?

Airborne_Again wrote:

“Aerodrome traffic” is basically traffic on the airport itself or in, entering or leaving the traffic circuit.

Which describes the situations in which I would speak to the TWR. Plus maybe for an overhead, but in that case I would also comply with his instructions, even if I didn’t constitute aerodrome traffic.

Rwy20 wrote:

Plus maybe for an overhead, but in that case I would also comply with his instructions, even if I didn’t constitute aerodrome traffic.

It would, as you would be entering the traffic circuit.