View Single Post
  #27  
Old September 30th 05, 04:55 PM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

Even if the intention is to mark all such courses NoPT, there's always
the possibility that a NoPT gets omitted due to a charting error or a
TERPS design error. And the question arises in that case: is the PT
required or not?


Not.

On one reasonable interpretation of the AIM's new wording, it's still
required; on the other reasonable interpretation, it's not.


If it's required the requirement will be found in the FARs, and you will
find no FAR that requires it.


You'll find no FAR that explicitly requires performing a charted PT
*regardless* of whether or not the PT meets the TERPS criteria. That doesn't
make all the PTs optional, does it?

The AIM is not regulatory.


No, but in some cases it offers the only readily available definitive FAA
interpretation of key regulations. That's what it's trying to do in this
case, but the chosen wording is unfortunately ambiguous.

--Gary