On 7 Oct 2005 17:05:28 -0700, "rps" wrote:

It's clear that whoever drafted the language in the explanation needs
to brush up on his or her written English skills.


It is also unclear whether the drafter even checked with the TERP's people
who design the procedures, to see if such language meets with their
approval. Or if he checked with the regulatory office to resolve the
conflict with their 1994 opinion.

Gee, if PT execution is now pilot choice, and "course reversal" is not
further defined, that opens up a whole bunch of ways to get into trouble!


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)