Hi all
I am contemplating flying to Le Castellet LFMQ later this month and was looking at the IFR approach plates. Specifically the RWY 13 approach has me confused – there is only one available, using GNSS, called RNP C 13. As you see in the plate below, this is indeed a circling approach as the C implies – there is a VPT that you are supposed to fly starting at MDA overhead that takes you south of the field and then back on runway heading pretty much to the same lateral position as where you first entered the approach. Jepp plates show the same.
On initial approach at MDA a straight in would seem sensible, at least for light aircraft – cat A being below 1000 ft AGL already. Can anyone shed some light on the rationale behind this approach? Is it mandatory to fly the VPT in small aircraft? Or is it perhaps customary to cancel IFR when able and fly straight in anyway? Other tips and recent insights on LFMQ appreciated as well!
@Tango first and foremost the plate you posted is not a VPT approach it is a standard approach.
There is a VPT at Le Castellet but this isn’t it.
Secondly below 4500ft you are OCAS. There is an AFIS so it will depend on what time you arrive.
If there is an AFIS and Rwy 13 is in use it will be a straight in landing.
If no AFIS you will need to get the parameters during a circle to land, which in this case appears to consist of maintaining MDA (2330 QNH 960ft QFE). up to the overhead of the runway (check signal square) then integrate as you would for a VFR circuit.
You will get the QNH from Provence app in the absence of AFIS.
Check VFR (VAC) plate for visual circuit.
Please note I have only taken a brief look at the plate there may be other factors to consider.
Thx. I know this is the standard approach plate but that is my question – perhaps I didn’t express it well. The way I read the plate there is only one IFR approach for 13, that consists of the standard approach followed by a visual phase – the VPT. So I was wondering
1. is the VPT part mandatory (I realise it’s OCAS but if you don’t follow the VPT are you technically still on the IFR approach or are you supposed to cancel IFR if you do? There are no straight-in minima on the plate).
2. why did they design it that way (perhaps because the initial approach is slightly offset from rwy axis?)
Besides implying Circling minimums, the C in the name also reflects that the final track is not aligned with the runway and that is likely the reason for no straight in minimums. As pointed out by @gallois, a circling minimum does not mean that circling is mandatory. Continuing to land straight in is perfectly acceptable. With 960/1010’ minimums and >2nm from the threshold when reaching them, any Cat A/B aircraft should have no trouble doing a normal straight in descent to the runway if the winds allow. However, the comment about Visual phase implies that a straight in landing is not allowed and at least a circuit needs to be done. Given the airfield is only usable during ATS SKED (AFIS), there will be someone on the radio.
Having said that there is another thread about the “legality” of doing straight in landings after an IAP at airfields OCAS in France. But that is not really related to the chart.
Since contact the day before is mandatory if an IFR approach is planned, that would be a good time to ask them. If NW winds are more or less standard, then landing runway would be 30 anyway and the RNP Rwy 30 approach would make more sense since it has lower, and straight in, LNAV CDFA minimums.
Note that the IAP you show is out of date. The runways are now 12/30. And the VPT Rwy 12 seems more for circling off the RNP Rwy 30 IAP than the RNP C Rwy 12 IAP.
You could also do the LNAV approach to rwy 30 followed by a circle to land (MVL) to Rwy 12.
Either way you do not need to cancel IFR as the CTL is part of an IFR procedure.
You can not do a straight in landing in France if there is no ATS on the airfield. That is the same for IFR or VFR.
At Le Castellet the CTL and the VFR circuit are pretty much the same.
Just did this approach myself. I flew it by the book, i.e. down to 2330 then fly a normal VFR traffic pattern. I suspect the reason for this very odd approach is the surrounding terrain. Since I was doing it for instrument currency I didn’t try to switch to a straight in landing, but it would be worth asking on the radio if it’s possible.
It woulf normally be possible with an AFIS.
The CTL normally only comes into play if no ATS is present. I’ll have to have anothet look at the charts to see if there is a difference from the norm.
AFIS cannot clear you for a visual, you have to cancel IFR. In case of marginal weather, you’ll do the pattern. I tried once to make the straight-in direct version in a DA42 and you have to dive a bit, not a big thing as soon as you have visual, but again depend on the weather. This day it was very cloudy and we were 50ft to the minima when I got visual. But in the final descent, you are very close to mountain, more than usual.
greg_mp wrote:
AFIS cannot clear you for a visual, you have to cancel IFR.
Not that it would matter that much at an AFIS airport in visual conditions, but why do you have to cancel IFR? Why not just tell the AFISO that you will make a visual approach?
IMO the visual part of this approach is still part of the IAP and therefore it would be unnecessary to cancel IFR.
The plates at Le Castellet say that the airfield cannot be used, other than based aircraft, if no AFIS is present..
If sticking to the AIP, therefore, there would be no necessity for this visual wording to appear and a direct (straight in approach) would always be possible even though the runway axis and the final approach do not line up.
IIRC if the offset was 30° or more then it would be a CTL.
So the reason for this visual section is again IMO airport specific and that probably relates to what greg_mp wrote.
At the end of the offset you will be at 1000ft and 0.7nm the MAP from the threshold. The offset means turning left to go from 110° to 125° approach track. But how early could you turn left with a 2180 hill immediately to the left of the final approach at 3.6 NM from the threshold and 2.nm from the MAP.
The procedure designers obviously thought that even with a 1400m runway, it was safer all round to make aircraft fly above the runway and make a normal right hand circuit (away from the hills) which also happens to correspond with the VFR circuit.
Does anyone know if Le Castellet is still owned by the ex wife of the ex head of formula 1 Bernie Ecclestone?
Just my 2cents I haven’t flown there for many years 6 or 7 I think.
