Air carrier inbound to hln was refused a visual approach by ATC after reporting the airport in sight...

Narrative:

Approximately 20 NM south of helena; montana on V21 salt lake center handed us to helena approach. After the controller queried our position; due to the non-radar environment; he immediately issued the DME arc for the ILS runway 27. As we were in visual conditions with the aerodrome in sight; we inquired about the visual approach; but he insisted on the instrument procedure. Unfortunately; with the late assignment and confusion; we joined the arc from well inside. After we were established; the remainder of the flight was uneventful. Cause; after shutdown I spoke with the helena tower controller. He explained that he had traffic directly below us on V21 and so the only way he could descend us; in his non-radar environment; was to assign us the arc for the ILS. He understood that salt lake center handed us to him too late for a smooth transition. Suggestions; I think a company publication; like a quarterly bulletin; discussing the unique nature of an approach control; in a non-radar environment; concerning conflicting traffic could condition other pilots to be prepared for an instrument procedure despite being in VMC with the airport in sight.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier inbound to HLN was refused a Visual Approach by ATC after reporting the airport in sight; later conversations revealed conflicting IFR traffic in this non-RADAR environment as the reasoning for ATC's insistence on the ILS procedure.

Narrative: Approximately 20 NM south of Helena; Montana on V21 Salt Lake Center handed us to Helena Approach. After the Controller queried our position; due to the non-RADAR environment; he immediately issued the DME ARC for the ILS Runway 27. As we were in visual conditions with the aerodrome in sight; we inquired about the Visual Approach; but he insisted on the instrument procedure. Unfortunately; with the late assignment and confusion; we joined the arc from well inside. After we were established; the remainder of the flight was uneventful. Cause; after shutdown I spoke with the Helena Tower Controller. He explained that he had traffic directly below us on V21 and so the only way he could descend us; in his non-RADAR environment; was to assign us the ARC for the ILS. He understood that Salt Lake Center handed us to him too late for a smooth transition. Suggestions; I think a company publication; like a quarterly bulletin; discussing the unique nature of an Approach Control; in a non-RADAR environment; concerning conflicting traffic could condition other pilots to be prepared for an instrument procedure despite being in VMC with the airport in sight.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	985866
Time
Date	201112
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZLC.ARTCC
State Reference	UT
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Captain Pilot Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types

Air carrier inbound to hln was refused a visual approach by ATC after reporting the airport in sight; later conversations revealed conflicting IFR traffic in this non-radar environment as the reasoning for ATC's insistence on the ILS procedure.