On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 20:11:47 -0500, Matt Whiting
wrote:



Is this a common occurrence when flying GPS approaches? Is this the
only scenario where the PT is applicable in this case?


I don't know whether it is common or not, but there does not seem to be
anything wrong with the clearance (or your instructor's interpretation of
the need for a PT).

You might also have to execute a PT at MAPOE if you were too high when you
got there, even if you were coming from the straight-in area.

In general, in flying approaches, if I desire a specific approach that is
not the one being used, I will request it. With regard to GPS approaches,
if I desire a particular IAF, I will specifically request it, too. So far,
I've not been refused (or had to hold because of the request).

As to why ATC cleared via MAPOE instead of CIMAN, ATC may have felt that
would be a shorter route. I do not believe that ATC thinks that executing
a PT is any big deal for a pilot, so they would most likely clear you for
an approach via the closest IAF to your location. OR he may have wanted
you to go that way for traffic reasons.

There's no rule of which I am aware that says that if you are in the left
base area, that you need to be cleared via the associated IAF.




--ron