Flyer59 wrote:
Of the non IR rated pilots I know 90 percent would not know which way to hold that chart, that’s the reality.
Obviously you need to interpret the chart correctly, but I was thinking about actually flying the pattern by pilotage.
No – its not for noise abatement specifically. It certainly is not at Le Touquet as it makes the noise problem worse by directing low level traffic over the town. Its just that France has decided to make the more general circle to land more formal, and hopefully to improve safety.
… which means the VPT is for noise abatement. Understood.
At the risk of stating the obvious you don’t need to descend to MSA to fly the Avignon VPT. If there is a mistral blowing it can get very rough indeed on the downwind leg. The last time I flew the VPT I stayed at 3000’ and didn’t descend until final, it was blowing 50kts straight down the runway. A low cloud base and a mistral don’t usually happen together so mostly its no problem staying high.
If you stray on the Cannes VPT you get an email with your radar printout if you infringe one of the noise sensitive areas.
@what_next license to learn, as was said before …
…they could have said circle to “land west of the airport” as I’ve seen in the US.
You will find a lot of that on Europan approach plates as well. Often in the form of “circling north of the field not allowed” which means you can do it on all three other sides as you please.
Noise abatement was mentioned as “yeah … in some places” and there were no prescribed tracks.
Most often there are no prescribed tracks in Europe either. But where they have them, they need to be followed as strictly as possible. Either because of terrain/obstacles (e.g. Innsbruck, Bolzano) or noise (eg. Cannes, Bern). Some places even require proof that the pilot has briefed himself like Cannes: https://en.cannes.aeroport.fr/user/login
Well… Interesting answers so far 
What sparked my curiosity was “prescribed tracks” and the fact that an approach plate does exist for a circle to land. During my training we did some exotic approaches like backcourse localizer. We also did circle to land at actual WX minima. I’ve been happy with my training. Per my request and schedule I did most of it in actual IMC and even some in a FIKI plane with some forecast icing that never happened. One important area was flying LPVs. ILS were … the thing from the past that you might still encounter elsewhere …
About circle to land everybody said basically: you do what you have to do and you don’t pay attention to the ears of the people on the ground but to the safety of your aircraft. Noise abatement was mentioned as “yeah … in some places” and there were no prescribed tracks. My training happened at the outskirts of Philadelphia and the traffic circuit was right over some expensive looking houses.
My first thought was also that these prescribed tracks are some sort of a suggestion and the chart might be there to help using the landmarks. But then, this being an IFR chart, I kind of assumed that I’m expected to follow those tracks with some precision and so I wondered how to do that. If that precision were not desired, they could have said circle to “land west of the airport” as I’ve seen in the US.
what_next wrote:
It would be nice if it were so, but some charts can not be understood at first glance.
You’re right – maybe I don’t find such complicated charts very often.
Again I point to the circling procedures at Innsbruck which have to be fully understood long before the approach
Can’t agree more – I always do that for destination, both alternates and maybe some other airports along the route 
Usually I do recap a day before flight and then during the flight when on AP I spend some time to refresh and memorize.
@Stephan_Schwab
I have been to Avignon twice last year with my TB20 and I had to fly the VPT to RWY35 after an ILS 17 because of the wind. Don’t panic should there be the Mistral winds with 360/ 30-40kt. Wind is more or less on the runway. It’s rather “smooth” at lower levels. You break off at 2.2AN on the ILS and then you fly acc. to the landmarks which are very good to be seen (railway tracks and river, but also abeam threshold 17, then approaching the first hill on downwind for turning base. Don’t forget to turn base in time with that high mistral winds pushing you. I chose to land with only 1/2 flaps. Groundspeed on final is of course low, but keep some extra IAS to compensate for gusts. Available landing distance should be sufficient.
bookworm wrote:
VPT seems to be a very French thing. Are there other European states that use it? Most just publish VM(C) minima.
Not all call it VPT, but circling approaches with prescribed ground tracks are quite common elsewhere too. Especially when difficult terrain is involved. One that we have do deal with regularly is Innsbruck LOWI. We have to train that in the simulator. Bolzano LIPB is another example which also requires specific training.
Emir wrote:
Understanding chart at first glance and understanding all approaches depicted on it (included circle-to-land) is basis of IFR.
It would be nice if it were so, but some charts can not be understood at first glance. Sometimes there is a full page of text connected to them. Again I point to the circling procedures at Innsbruck which have to be fully understood long before the approach. Trying to do anything “at first glance” while already performing the procedure may end in the middle of some solid granite.
