Tower clearance override appch restriction?

[FM_Weasel]

With such clear visual landmarks and an operational need, I think a charted visual approach procedure would be a great idea.

Anyway, it will work until it doesn't. In the past my facility has had aircraft bust the restrictions and the subsequent QA inquiry looked much more closely at the controller's method than the pilot's deviation from the restriction.

 

[atcguruaf]

That's a good note for this thread. I'd like to find a source for it outside the 7110 to see a directive for the pilot. I cruised the CFRs and AIM so far with nothing specific about landing clearances. It's probably there somewhere.

In the AIM. Page 4-3-22.

NOTE−
A clearance to land means that appropriate separation on
the landing runway will be ensured. A landing clearance
does not relieve the pilot from compliance with any
previously issued restriction.

 

[JoshATC]

Jackpot

..

 

[The Heatles]

So an IFR aircraft is on a visual approach, with an altitude restriction until a certain point on the final. They are switched to local. Local then clears them to land, does this override/negate the restriction? Can they descend at that point?

Tower seems to think one thing while approach thinks the other. I am sure you can guess which thinks what.

As always, everyone has opinions, but I am only looking for .65 quotes OR valid interpretations. Thanks everyone.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. A landing clearance does not cancel a previously issued restriction... Now if the tower controller say, "cancel the crossing restriction at XXXXX, cleared to land" then its a different story.


REFERENCE...
3-10-5. LANDING CLEARANCE, Section D's NOTE

NOTE-
A clearance to land means that appropriate separation on the landing runway will be ensured. A landing clearance does not relieve the pilot from compliance with any previously issued restriction.

 

[The Heatles]

1 .65 reference and 1 AIM reference... oops. Thanks for the useful reply tho.

 

[j_time41]

1 .65 reference and 1 AIM reference... oops. Thanks for the useful reply tho.

Actually posted it wrong. But where did it polo? And, of course, you are always welcome

 

[posller]

Fantastic ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you all for your work, this was a very productive thread.

 

[meatasaurusx]

None, final has sequencing authority to all runways.

Note: The altitude restriction is not for obstruction, but for a close by airport protecting for their departure releases.

If they have a restriction to protect other airports why would they switch the ac to tower before all possible conflicts are resolved?

 

[FM_Weasel]

Sometimes the airspace is tight enough that you'd otherwise need to keep the aircraft on freq to 3 mile final or so. I see how that's not practical.

 

[posller]

Sometimes the airspace is tight enough that you'd otherwise need to keep the aircraft on freq to 3 mile final or so. I see how that's not practical.

That is exactly why.