"C J Campbell"
wrote:

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
.. .
| Cub Driver wrote:
|
| "I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree
| entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..."
|
| I understand that to mean "ridiculous as it seems, I can ..."
|
| We know someone can make a case for it. People do it all the time on
| this newsgroup. That doesn't make it a good case,
|
| He called it a "very good case."

He can call it a green-eyed lizard if he wishes, but that doesn't make it
true.

You understood him to be saying that he thought it was a
"ridiculous" case. He didn't use that word, and I don't
think he meant that. One doesn't normally call something a
"very good case" if one thinks it's a "ridiculous case."

My personal opinion is that the FAR clearly states that the
45 left turn is illegal. I also think the FAA finds that to
be inconvenient, but too much trouble to change the FAR, so
they ignore it. Pilots ignore it too, since we all know the
FAA wants us to fly the 45, so it can't be illegal. If push
came to shove, the Chief Counsel will probably say that an
aircraft making the 45 turn is not yet approaching the
airport for a landing. "Interpreting" the language of a law
or statute to get the answer you want is a time-honored
method. Not enforcing a statute or regulation is also a
popular method of ignoring it.



Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.