What is Low Approach?
-
Hi,
What is “low approach”? Where to use and when it is necessary?
Thanks.
-
Hi!
Where have you seen this term?
-
That term has been used by the Navy for “low” approach on a carrier (i.e. “your low”). Other than that, I have not heard the term apply to anything else.
-
I heard this term at a RL radio recording. It probably was a training mission (or Red Flag or something like that). Pilot requested a “low approach” and the tower approved.
-
Probably an alternative term a “low pass”.
-
It’s also used for a type of approach that is not intended to include touching the runway, used for training purposes or equipment checks. In practice, you could say it’s an intended go around, though it doesn’t necessarily have to be followed up with the missed approach procedure.
E.g.
- F-16’s will often come to an airfield close to where I live to do an overhead break, fly a pattern until short final and then go around at approximately 200ft AGL. After that, they’ll continue with their flight.
- A pilot gets only 2 greens, and he requests a visual check. He will be cleared to overfly the runway at an altitude that is lower than normally used for overflying traffic (e.g. 500ft AGL) so that the tower controller can visually verify the status of his gear.
-
Pilot approaches like a normal landing but never touches the runway?
-
It’s also used for a type of approach that is not intended to include touching the runway, used for training purposes or equipment checks. In practice, you could say it’s an intended go around, though it doesn’t necessarily have to be followed up with the missed approach procedure.
E.g.
- F-16’s will often come to an airfield close to where I live to do an overhead break, fly a pattern until short final and then go around at approximately 200ft AGL. After that, they’ll continue with their flight.
- A pilot gets only 2 greens, and he requests a visual check. He will be cleared to overfly the runway at an altitude that is lower than normally used for overflying traffic (e.g. 500ft AGL) so that the tower controller can visually verify the status of his gear.
Oh, ok. Thank you.
-
This is a term normally associated with doing practice instrument approaches at an airfield. It does not give the pilot clearance to execute a touch and go or landing, as opposed to “Cleared for the option,” “Cleared to land,” or “Cleared touch and go.”
Example:
“CALLSIGN, cleared low approach runway 13R.”You’d normally fly down to the approach minimums and execute some sort of missed approach procedure, whether published or modified instructions such as “Runway heading to 2000” or for a tower downwind to enter the landing pattern.
-
Pilot approaches like a normal landing but never touches the runway?
Yes. Usually/may be followed by flying a missed approach.
-
This is a term normally associated with doing practice instrument approaches at an airfield. It does not give the pilot clearance to execute a touch and go or landing, as opposed to “Cleared for the option,” “Cleared to land,” or “Cleared touch and go.”
Example:
“CALLSIGN, cleared low approach runway 13R.”You’d normally fly down to the approach minimums and execute some sort of missed approach procedure, whether published or modified instructions such as “Runway heading to 2000” or for a tower downwind to enter the landing pattern.
Correct,
It is termed as “touch and go”. A low approach to a touch and go would not be the standard approach. If your coming in low, that can cause problems. A low pass is done for your downleg into the martial pattern for final. Other than that, a “low approach” to me is not a good thing.
-
From my perspective, a low approach is an instrument or visual approach to landing without actually touching down, except, of course, for the final full-stop landing.
If I remember correctly, (when I flew for SAC) an IP was required to be in one of the seats before we could execute a touch-and-go. Otherwise, we had to “go around” when we reached 200 ft. AGL.
I do NOT know what TAC required.
-
Correct,
It is termed as “touch and go”. A low approach to a touch and go would not be the standard approach. If your coming in low, that can cause problems. A low pass is done for your downleg into the martial pattern for final. Other than that, a “low approach” to me is not a good thing.
A low approach is not a touch and go.
A touch and go means landing followed by taking off on the roll. Another alternative is the stop and go, that is landing, completely stopping on the runway, and immediately taking off on the remaining length.
A low approach can be visual or instrumental. It is just an approach in which you never touch the ground but carry on a go around. It is essentially the same than a low pass. Do not confuse this with being low during the approach. It has nothing to do.
In some places (especially civilian general aviation), you can hear the controller say “cleared for the option”. That means that the pilot is cleared for whatever he wants (landing/touch and go/stop and go/low approach)
-
A low approach is not a touch and go.
A touch and go means landing followed by taking off on the roll. Another alternative is the stop and go, that is landing, completely stopping on the runway, and immediately taking off on the remaining length.
A low approach can be visual or instrumental. It is just an approach in which you never touch the ground but carry on a go around. It is essentially the same than a low pass. Do not confuse this with being low during the approach. It has nothing to do.
In some places (especially civilian general aviation), you can hear the controller say “cleared for the option”. That means that the pilot is cleared for whatever he wants (landing/touch and go/stop and go/low approach)
For civilian air traffic, a low or visual approach is understood. I did not say a low approach was a touch and go. For jets, going low is not a good idea. You can hit power lines, trees, towers, buildings, other low flying stuff (fu#king r/c toys even), ect. So, IMO a low approach in your F-16 is not a good thing.
-
A low approach is a very normal thing. It is nothing more than an aircraft flying either a visual or instrument approach that terminates in an aircraft not putting landing gear on the runway and continuing down the runway and maintaining visual flying conditions after passing the middle part of the runway. It can be done for several reasons, new to area, checking condition of aircraft, practice, etc. A low pass is usually the same thing, but made at other then an active runway. I was an Air Force controller for 9 years and have cleared many different types of aircraft for a low approach without any problems.
-
For civilian air traffic, a low or visual approach is understood. I did not say a low approach was a touch and go. For jets, going low is not a good idea. You can hit power lines, trees, towers, buildings, other low flying stuff (fu#king r/c toys even), ect. So, IMO a low approach in your F-16 is not a good thing.
On the contrary, low approaches in jets are very common. Again, the most common time you’ll hear it is when an aircraft is established on an instrument approach and is given clearance for a low approach instead of landing or a touch and go. The aircraft will be protected from terrain and obstacles as long as it is on the parameters for that approach.
-
A low approach is a very normal thing. It is nothing more than an aircraft flying either a visual or instrument approach that terminates in an aircraft not putting landing gear on the runway and continuing down the runway and maintaining visual flying conditions after passing the middle part of the runway. It can be done for several reasons, new to area, checking condition of aircraft, practice, etc. A low pass is usually the same thing, but made at other then an active runway. I was an Air Force controller for 9 years and have cleared many different types of aircraft for a low approach without any problems.
I think you miss understand my interpretation of a “low approach”. My understanding of a low approach would be coming in under 500ft. A “low pass” is what your are describing. A “low approach” is when you are at very low altitude on your approach to the runway. If a “low pass” is also called a “low approach” then it is terminology.
-
On the contrary, low approaches in jets are very common. Again, the most common time you’ll hear it is when an aircraft is established on an instrument approach and is given clearance for a low approach instead of landing or a touch and go. The aircraft will be protected from terrain and obstacles as long as it is on the parameters for that approach.
Please see my previous post.
-
I think you miss understand my interpretation of a “low approach”. My understanding of a low approach would be coming in under 500ft. A “low pass” is what your are describing. A “low approach” is when you are at very low altitude on your approach to the runway. If a “low pass” is also called a “low approach” then it is terminology.
Its exactly the same as a normal approach, but without the landing.
-
I think you miss understand my interpretation of a “low approach”. My understanding of a low approach would be coming in under 500ft. A “low pass” is what your are describing. A “low approach” is when you are at very low altitude on your approach to the runway. If a “low pass” is also called a “low approach” then it is terminology.
Respectfully, your interpretation of low approach is wrong. On a low approach, you are likely to be already cleared for the approach - ie HI-TACAN or ILS RWYXX; The low approach clarifies that you are permitted to continue the approach but not to perform a landing. Being cleared for the approach clears you down to the minima for that approach but you will not make contact with the runway. I have never heard the term “low pass.”
A typical low approach would be executing an instrument approach to the MDA or DH and then executing some variant of a Missed Approach.