1. If airport weather condition is below minimum, but pilot report that flight weather condition is above minimum, Does controller can issue approach clearance to pilot?

  2. If weather condition get worse than published minimum, should pilot cancel his approach and execute missed approach even in final approach phase?

  • $\begingroup$ I'm a little confused. You are taking about IFR concepts, but weather minimums. If the pilot gets to the MDA without establishing visual, they have to go around and execute the missed approach. That's purely a pilot decision. If you are talking VFR, they don't execute missed approaches... $\endgroup$
    – Ron Beyer
    Oct 4 '19 at 3:45
  • $\begingroup$ @RonBeyer The question make much better sense in a Part 121 or 135 world where wx below mins = can't start the approach. The answer by wbeard52 not only answers the question, but helps one make sense of what's being asked. $\endgroup$
    – Ralph J
    Oct 4 '19 at 4:34

You haven't told us what country you are referring to. I am going to talk about the United States regulations.

There are two separate regulations that come into play. Part 91 and Part 121 or 135.

Under Part 91. The pilots are allowed to commence any approach (irrespective of weather) and determine if they can continue to land based on the criteria listed in §91.175(c).

Under Part 121 / 135. The pilots can only commence an approach (proceed past the final approach fix) if the latest weather received is above landing minimums. Mainly, pilots are concerned with visibility. They will not be able to use "flight visibility" as the weather visibility is most likely different as the airplane descends towards the ground. The pilots must use the weather reported from the airport.

To answer the second question, if the pilots are past the final approach fix and new weather arrives indicating the airport is below minimums, the pilots are allowed to continue the approach to minimums to see if they can land per §91.175.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for answer. My country refers to ICAO regulations. Is it different with FAA? $\endgroup$
    – Min
    Oct 4 '19 at 5:17

There are many places where ATC doesn't give clearance at all. A VFR flight can be completed without any ATC communications of any kind.

Assuming an ATC clearance is required, ATC doesn't give an approach clearance based on reported weather, they give a clearance and it is up to the pilot to fly the approach and execute a go around according to the approach procedure if visual contact with the runway or approach lights isn't established. Often weather conditions are changeable, what was reported in the last METAR can be significantly better or worse just a few minutes later, so a pilot can give the approach a try.

With very few exceptions a pilot can go around at any time, even on a late final. From a weather point of view it is a judgment call to be made by the pilot, if visual contact with the runway is lost for example. Notable exceptions I can think of are airfields like Aspen, where a go-around is impossible after a certain point in the approach.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for answer. I understand that you mean ATC don't have authority not to give approach clearance even weateher condition is worse than published weather condition. If so, I wonder why there is minima criteria for IAP. Regardless of minimum of IAP, can pilot decide to land if he have viaual reference at MAP/DH? $\endgroup$
    – Min
    Oct 4 '19 at 9:12
  • $\begingroup$ Depending on the jurisdiction, there may be legal implications if the pilot is caught continuing the approach when the ceiling and/or visibility is below reported minimums. $\endgroup$ Oct 4 '19 at 13:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.