Every pilot knows what a low approach is, right?
A recently published report from the Aviation Safety Reporting System by a student pilot who became confused by ATC instructing him to perform a low approach created quite a bit of confusion, both in the cockpit and on our website.
From the ASRS report: “As I was on final, ATC called up and instructed me to make ‘little delay’ on Runway XX of which I was cleared for. They then called up again and instructed me to do a low approach instead a little bit after. I was confused what they meant by this call, so I questioned them that they wanted me do something in relation to XY and XX, however their call up again was still confusing.
“As I was on short final, I interpreted a low approach to mean ‘to steepen your approach’ and ‘land…ASAP.’”
What’s a low approach?
From the comment section, more than one person shared they also didn’t know what a low approach was:
“As a relatively new pilot (190 hours), I’d never before heard the term ‘low approach’ either,” says John.
“I have never heard of low approach either. Not once. It’s always been clear to land or go around,” said Bob.
Richard Pottorff was succinct: “So, what is a low approach?”
From the AIM (4-3-12), “a low approach (also called a low pass) is the go-around maneuver following an approach. Instead of landing or making a touch-and-go, a pilot may wish to go around (low approach) in order to expedite a particular operation (a series of practice instrument approaches is an example of such an operation). Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, the low approach should be made straight ahead, with no turns or climb made until the pilot has made a thorough visual check for other aircraft in the area.”
Interestingly, “Being ATC and a pilot, I’m failing to understand how you don’t understand ‘low approach,'” says reader TJ. “You practiced them to get your license. If you’re a student, then your instructor should have understood. If you’re a student doing a solo flight, then you’ve practiced them. How does ‘Cleared Low Approach’ confuse you? I’m confused about your confusion!”
While it was obvious to TJ, to others, not so much. “Should” is an interesting word in TJ’s comment. There are lots of things I should do or should remember or should think.
In response to TJ’s confusion, Austin says, “I don’t know of any instructor who specifically has students practice a ‘low approach.’ As an instructor myself, I will mention what a low approach is before a student’s first solo cross-country or solo to a towered airport. But I only do this because of knowing someone (student pilot of another instructor) who had the same confusion over what a low approach was and shared her story with me.”
Chap adds, “I’m currently in flight school for my private and throughout the 141 syllabus it does not mention anything about low approaches. Go arounds are extremely prevalent but I, for one, have not practiced low approaches.”
Steve continues, “I never heard the term low approach until getting my instrument rating. It is a term I’ve personally only heard in reference to instrument approaches. As a student I was taught go-arounds.”
Joe C adds, “I received my PPL in 1996 and have stayed current since; like the author of this ASRS report, I had not previously heard the term ‘low approach’ used by ATC to mean a go around. I have been instructed by ATC to ‘go around’ and I have complied without difficulty. I’m not sure I’d have done as requested had ATC instead used the phrase ‘low approach.’”
Speaking the same language
Isn’t it interesting that we’re all speaking the same language — aviation english — yet we are struggling to understand one another?
A, who is controller, says, “I’m ATC, both tower and approach control. It IS a bit unsettling that it seems the term ‘Low Approach’ is not widely known. As ATC, we use that phraseology frequently enough to feel like it is something every pilot will know. It is instilled in us from day one that the ‘options’ for pilots inbound to a runway are touch-and-go, stop-and-go, low approach, or full stop. When ATC gives the low approach clearance, we expect you to overfly the runway but not touch it. It also usually keeps the slow guys slightly faster over the runway, which is what I imagine the controller was going for in this situation. I encourage all pilots to get clarification on anything asked of them that they are unsure about. I’d rather answer your question than have to figure out why you didn’t comply with my instructions.”
The author of this ASRS did seek clarification, but remained confused.
What is obvious to a controller or to one pilot may not be obvious to another. And yet, we share the same airspace.
“The issue here wasn’t that he didn’t know what a low pass was,” wrote Brian. “The issue is that when he had a doubt about what it was, he made an assumption rather than ask. That’s the critical learning point here.”
Bingo. Well said, Brian. I hope that lesson is obvious.
Disagree, Low “APPROACH” has no common phrase with a go around. An approach is in the approach phase. If you want me to go around, say so. I have been flying since 1963 VFR only and have never heard “low” approach before and would have done the same as the student. Got down on the approach and landed as soon as possible, and got the “h” off the runway.
I was an instructor at Air Force Aero Clubs for many years. Low approach requests by ATC are common at Air Force bases. I once had a student flying solo in the pattern who was requested to do a low approach. Apparently his previous instructor and I had both failed to tell him what that meant. He made several approaches where he simply flew lower than normal on final and then did a touch and go. The tower had to send a KC-135 around during one of his landings. Fortunately for all involved the chief pilot found it rather amusing and said the go-around was good practice for the KC-135 crew!
I got my PPL in 1977, hold a Comm with multi and Instrument rating. Haven’t flown in 10 plus years(UNFORTUNATELY), Not once did I hear “make a low approach”, I personally would have asked , do you mean a low pass runway heading?
I have no idea it that phrase is currently taught or not but with all the confusion about it I would suspect not. Instead of criticizing others for not knowing we should be focused on educating everyone so that we are all on the same page…….just my opinion.
I soloed in 1963 and flying ever since for about 8,000 hrs, and have never heard of the term “low approach”.
Granted, I do not fly instruments and I rarely go into controlled airports, but if I was at a controlled airport and heard that term, the last thing I would have interpreted it to mean is a low “pass” to go around. There are two phases to landing, the approach and the touch down. If you wanted me to terminate the approach and go around, say so, not confuse it by insinuating “make your approach a little lower”, does not make sense.
“360 for spacing” “S turns for spacing”
“Expedite” “your traffic is” Low pass” Low pass with restriction” “Caution’ are terms experienced pilots and controllers use in their common vocabulary. I can easily understand how these may confuse and add to the stress of a low time pilot with comparably few landings and little or no controlled field experience.
I admit I went back to the regs after reading this article. And I’m based on a Class D inside a Bravo. I applaud the person who submitted the report.
At my airport during practice approaches ATC usually says cleared for the option. So i could do a touch and go, low approach or go around. That clearance comes with a clearance like, maintain runway heading to two thousand then left turn 180 for an example…….contact departure…..(charlie space airport)
So do aspiring pilots have to be spoon fed everything?? Making excuses for lack of studying on your own is not reflective of someone who is serious about what they are doing. Get out the books!
Would the word, “pass”, instead of approach, have cleared up the pilots doubt?
The perplexity is the lack of ability to measure comprehension and composure, and that while education levels are easy to track, often the educator is actually the weak link.
Low approach, though not heard before, should not have been an issue if one actually comprehended the elements in play.