Practical IFR: “Cleared to Intercept?” A Common IFR Dilemma
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Would You Intercept the Inbound Without a Clearance?
Fly IFR and you’ll run into this situation soon enough: You’re on a base-leg vector to the localizer or inbound course. A kickin’ tailwind has you screaming over the ground. The needle comes alive, and you know you need to start the turn now or you’ll overshoot. However, ATC seems to have forgotten you. Do you start the turn as you try to verify you’re cleared to intercept the inbound course? Or do you hold your heading while clamoring for the clearance, knowing you’ll blow through and need a new heading to re-intercept?
This is one of those places where there’s a right and wrong answer per the regs, but it’s not so cut-and-dry in the real world. By the book it’s simple: You have not been cleared for the approach, so turning off your heading is a violation of 14 CFR 91.123 unless you have good reason to suspect communications failure or it’s an emergency. By the book, you’re going to blow through that inbound course.
Breaking the Rules
In practice, we often exercise a bit more self-determination tempered by situational awareness.
There are really only two possibilities in this situation: One is that the controller got distracted and wants us to turn. The other is the situation has changed, the controller plans to vector us through the inbound course, and has forgotten to tell us that by saying something like, “Fly heading 360. Vectors across the localizer.”
Obviously, the best thing to do is ask, “Do you want us to join the course inbound?” If the frequency is jammed up, you can raise your virtual hand by pushing IDENT to get the controller’s attention. Hopefully, one of those will do the trick.
But it might not. My experience is that if the controller is busy with other aircraft, or if I’m at a remote airport where I know the little blip representing me is in the back 40 of the controller’s scope, they probably want me to start the turn. More often that not, that’s what I’ve done, usually with a call to confirm that was right if it’s a non-towered airport, or even a quick call to Tower requesting that they relay the information.
Maybe I’ve just been lucky, but I’ve never been reprimanded for this. Quite the contrary; I’ve been apologized to and thanked plenty of times.
Could I have gotten in trouble? Sure. This decision carries risk. Aviation is all about managing risk, however, so how does this situation fit in?
Step one is working to avoid the situation altogether. Masterful IFR requires maintaining a pervasive awareness of the situation. You should know you’re converging on the final course with a tailwind, so you can proactively ask ATC if you’re cleared to intercept the final approach course even though you aren’t close.
Suppose you see this situation brewing while still a ways out on the base leg and your moving map makes it clear that your downwind heading is more like a 45 that’s diminishing distance between you and the inbound course rapidly. You could preemptively request the final heading and clearance rather than waiting. “Portland Approach, Cirrus Two Fox Tango. Request heading 220 now and approach clearance.” We’re all people. Sometimes a simple request makes life easier for everyone.
This isn’t for everyone. The consequence of obeying the letter of the law and flying through the localizer is usually only wasted time. I wouldn’t fault anyone for just trucking along and waiting. But it’s still worth mentally preparing for this situation. If that missed turn inbound puts you on course to rising terrain or other traffic you can see via your avionics, you have a bit more justification for taking matters into your own hands. The last thing you want is for the controller to remember you because a low-altitude or traffic alert went off in the control room.
The Opposite Issue: Communicating Before Turning
Question for you: When ATC tells you, “… left turn 130,” what’s the first thing you do?
Most people key the mic and parrot back the heading. Personally, I prefer to swing the heading bug and start the turn. I have two reasons.
The primary one is I can see if that turn makes sense to me before I accept it. If a left turn to 130 is a 280-degree turn, maybe ATC meant right, or maybe I misheard 130. Instead of accepting, I can ask for verification when I key up.
The second reason is to prevent spitting back a heading—and then forgetting to actually start the turn because I was in the middle of some other task when it came in. (Not that I’ve, um, ever done that or seen anyone else do it.) Even though ATC is waiting on your response, it only takes 2-3 extra seconds before you reply. Even New York controllers have that much patience. Well, usually.
For 19 years, Jeff ran many noteworthy aviation media projects with his own firm, Van West Communications, including magazines, books, videos and live seminars. Jeff previously served as editor-in-chief of IFR Magazine and co-editor of Aviation Consumer, and his work appears in AOPA Pilot, Flight Training Magazine, Plane and Pilot, and AVweb. He’s an experienced CFII/MEI with ratings for single- and multi-engine airplanes, seaplanes, and gliders. Jeff was the creator of the first pilot transition program for new Cirrus aircraft.
- Practical IFR: Does Your Approach Use the Wrong Minimums? - July 15, 2025
- Practical IFR: “Cleared to Intercept?” A Common IFR Dilemma - June 17, 2025
- Practical IFR: Practice Approaches - May 16, 2025
I really appreciated this real-world flying information. When preparing to fly I used the saying “peace-of-mind is in the details” of which Foreflight displayed each time I logged in. Your information is a critical part of the details. Thanks
I’ve done this one before on an approach, “ACME Approach, N123AB, Heading 220.” or in plain speak, “Hey, you, I’m here, can I turn now please?” I either get my PTAC or something akin to “intercept the final approach course” etc.
Unless there is a safety of flight issue I think that it is bad advice to turn in without the clearance.
My experience is that if I key my mic with just my callsign it is enough to get the clearance.
I literally had this last week and when I keyed the mic with “approach 7ky” the controller explained my heading and kept me on it.
Incidentally at a non-towered airport flying from an IAF instead of vectors reduces this problem.
I do think that calculating the next heading is a good practice… so if you get something very different that you are ready.
Final comments… YES… turn first then talk…. because you can get task saturated
Identing without being asked is NOT virtually raising your hand. Its annoying to the controller and distracting. Do not ident unless asked. There are several reasons for this. That is never the intent of the ident button.
I also agree with Alan Hawse comment.
There is no reason outside safety if flight for you to tuen in for your own convenience. Its endangering other lives and you should be brashered.
Sometimes in really busy airspace, that’s all you got at your disposal is an IDENT.
I disagree with both pieces of advice and feel that following the 2nd idea could over time cause more problems of the 1st proposed dilemma. 2-3 seconds extra to respond doesn’t seem like much, but multiply that over 10 or 20 radio calls the controller has to make with all the people he is controlling. That 20 seconds to a minute of wasted time with the controller waiting for responses could be a factor in delayed clearances. I know the priority of flying is aviate, navigate and communicate in that order, but a simple response to a clearance should not interfere with normal operations. And to turn without a clearance is an accident waiting to happen. If safety of flight looms as an issue, then the PIC ALWAYS has the authority to deviate from a clearance or a lack of a clearance.
Jeff! This is horrible advice. What were you thinking? You don’t turn off on assigned heading without clearance. You should retract this right away.
Thanks to everyone for responding, both via this forum and to me personally. I think it’s worth clarifiying a few points.
The key statement in this piece is “we often exercise a bit more self-determination tempered by situational awareness.” Am I suggesting you turn without a clear to do so if you can call and ask? Not at all. What about before trying the IDENT to get ATC’s attention? Nope, do that first. (BTW, this IDENT trick is what several controllers have told me I should do, so I in no way worry ATC will get upset.) What about if I have any reason to think there’s a traffic conflict inbound? Definitely not. And what if I don’t mind blowing through the inbound course and getting re-vectored. Heck, I have time.
But … if I have good reason to believe the issue is ATC not realizing I am about to blow through the loc and I’ll get a rapid turn late that will destablize my chances on approach, or I see traffic on the opposing base, or there’s terrain, or weather, or some other reason that there are consequences for my not turning, I can use my best judgement. I’ll do so willing to accept the consequences that this isn’t by the book.
And my experience is that gets appreciation rather than disdain. But that only happens if the lever is pulled as an act of good judgment.
This goes for a delay in responding to a radio call too. If the controller can’t get a breath in with so many calls, I will call back before doing anything else. But as SOP, that’s not my preference. And 99-percent of the time, twisting the knob and starting the turn as I call back works better and causes no actual delay in the real world. I said 2-3 seconds, but it might not ever be that long to twist a bug and start a bank before pressing the PPT.
Jeff thanks for responding. Reassuring to hear that you have gotten some in-person pushback in the Sporty’s hallways–in addition to online–about your bad advice.
“We often exercise a bit more self-determination tempered by situational awareness.” You say that was the KEY STATEMENT of your original article. But what the heck does that even mean, and how does that help instrument pilots?
Let’s be clear…you were not originally talking about the potentially legitimate emergencies that you now mention–opposing base traffic, terrain or other code recognized reasons to deviate from ATC instructions.
What you said was “if the controller is busy with other aircraft, or if I’m at a remote airport where I know the little blip representing me is in the back 40 of the controller’s scope, they probably want me to start the turn.” You article’s title called this situation a “COMMON IFR DELIMMA” and the section was titled “BREAKING THE RULES.”
The teaching of your original article–intentional or not–was that in non-emergency situations where you get in a bind, you can substitute your judgement for ATC instructions.
Maybe the length of your resume, or beard, makes you think this somehow now makes sense, but it does not. And potentially worse is your demonstration of the #1 of 5 bad pilot attitudes: the rules don’t apply to me.
With the recent demise of IFR Magazine, the community is looking for good IFR content. Please do better.