On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:21:52 GMT, "Brad Salai"
wrote:



If the intent were that a PT is required unless one of the four exceptions
applied, they would (or at least should) have said:

The procedure turn or hold in lieu of procedure turn is a required
maneuver unless the symbol "No PT" is shown, when
RADAR VECTORING to the final approach course is provided, when
conducting a timed approach, or when the procedure turn is not
authorized.

which would have been clear and unambiguous. General rules of construction
suggest that you should interpret the language so that the first sentence is
not redundant or meaningless, which leads to the second interpretation, what
G. Drescher calls *addition*. Maybe the rules of construction should be in
the POH?

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.



That's basically how Jepp defines it for their approach charts.

"It (the procedure turn) is a required maneuver, except under the following
conditions:
1. The symbol “NoPT” is shown.
2. Radar vectoring is provided.
3. A one-minute holding pattern is published in lieu of a procedure turn.
4. A teardrop course reversal is depicted.
5. The procedure turn is not authorized. "

The one-minute holding pattern and teardrop course reversal are also
mandatory in the same sense; Jepp means that you can't do a PT turn of the
type and starting point you wish if one of those is charted.

Also, Jepp's convention for the procedure turn not being authorized is that
they don't chart it.


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