{"id":27565,"date":"2025-05-28T06:23:53","date_gmt":"2025-05-28T10:23:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ops.group\/blog\/?p=27565"},"modified":"2025-05-28T18:28:39","modified_gmt":"2025-05-28T22:28:39","slug":"visual-approaches-no","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ops.group\/blog\/visual-approaches-no\/","title":{"rendered":"Visual Approaches: When To Say No"},"content":{"rendered":"

There is a recent history in the US of serious incidents that have occurred during visual approaches – you don\u2019t have to hunt long to find them. The reality is this: when we accept a visual approach, we accept more risk.<\/em><\/p>\n

That isn\u2019t to say that this risk cannot be effectively and safely managed. Visual approaches are still an important way to increase the efficiency of congested airspace. But we do<\/em> have to give ourselves the room, the capacity, and the mitigations to fly them safely<\/strong>. And in my opinion, that\u2019s where the true risk<\/strong> lies.<\/p>\n

The FAA seems to agree. On April 2, it issued an eye-opening Safety Alert for Operators<\/a> (SAFO) regarding visual approaches. The lowdown is this: visual approaches can be riskier<\/strong> than they seem, especially in today\u2019s busy airspace. Let\u2019s take a closer look.<\/p>\n

FAA SAFO on\u00a0 Visual Approaches<\/strong><\/h6>\n

The FAA\u2019s SAFO is resolute in its message – the pilot-in-command has the ultimate responsibility (by law) to say no to clearances that excessively increase workload or erode safety margins. <\/strong>In other words, they don\u2019t want us to hesitate to say \u2018UNABLE\u2019.<\/strong> Ultimately, it\u2019s our decision as pilots, and no one else\u2019s.<\/p>\n

FAA Reg 14 CFR \u00a7 91.3 specifically says:<\/span><\/p>\n

“…The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.”<\/em><\/p>\n

This includes the full authority<\/strong> to refuse or decline any clearance or instruction that they deem unsafe or beyond the operational limits of the aircraft or crew. The SAFO then continues with another important message – ATC will support a PIC\u2019s authority to declare \u2018unable\u2019<\/strong> when a clearance may reduce safety margins.<\/p>\n

This is where the SAFO falls short a little, at least on a real-world basis. What needs to be included is \u2018with impunity.\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n

Recent Events<\/strong><\/h6>\n

In a US NAS burdened by traffic volume, aging infrastructure and controller shortages we continue to hear reports of excessive delays and even confrontation when a clearance is declined.<\/p>\n

Check out the recent diversion<\/a> of a Lufthansa A350 at KSFO\/San Francisco due to non-acceptance of visual separation at night.<\/strong><\/p>\n