You might wish to consider a different set of sources...

From the Pilot/Controller Glossary: "Report" - Used to instruct pilots to
advise ATC of specified information; e,.g. "Report passing Hamilton VOR."

This is essentially what your controller said to you.

Again: from the Pilot/Controller Glossary: "Traffic Pattern": "Final
Approach" - A flight path in the direction of landing along the extended
runway centerline. The final approach normally extends from the base leg to
the runway. An aircraft making a straight-in approach VFR is also considered
to be on final approach.

IIRC, you stated that you were essentially flying straight to the numbers
from your present position (if it was someone else who said that, I
apologize). By even the most liberal reading of the above definitions this
procedure would be incorrect. You should be on the runway centerline when
you cross it's intersection with base.

Before proceeding, let's pick up one more definition from the
Pilot/Controller Glossary: "Straight-In Approach VFR" - Entry into the
traffic pattern by interception of the extended runway centerline (final
approach course) without executing any other portion of the traffic pattern.

Let's take a look at a sentence from one of the above definitions: "An
aircraft making a straight-in approach VFR is also considered to be on final
approach". I suppose many readings could be placed on this, but it's meaning
is quite simple: If an aircraft is making a straight-in approach VFR, the
final approach leg is extended away from the runway from the intersection
with the base leg to the aircraft's position on the extended centerline. All
it is doing is extending the length of the final approach.

So, to sum up:

Under any circumstances, when flying a straight-in approach VFR, the
aircraft should be on the extended runway centerline (obviously flying
runway heading) at the point where the runway extended centerline intersects
with the base leg, unless otherwise instructed. Obviously, the exact
location of this intersection is somewhat nebulous, but most pilots should
be able to hit it fairly closely.

I noted "unless otherwise instructed"; here is the instruction: "'Cleared
Straight-in; Report X miles Final". The troublesome part seems to be:
"Report X miles Final". But if you put the deleted words back in the meaning
is quite clear: "Report YOUR POSITION WHEN YOU ARE X miles OUT ON Final". It
then becomes obvious that, in order to comply with the controller's request,
you would need to be on the extended centerline five miles out.

That would be the absolute minimum distance at which you should intersect
the extended centerline.

But, a "common sense" reading of all of the relevant information gives the
impression that the intent of all of this is that when a pilot is cleared
"Straight-In VFR", he/she should fly as quickly as reasonable feasible to
the extended centerline, then begin flying the final approach.

Now, let's look at some of the other things you noted:

Regarding the IMPRECISE argument, don't you usually manage to put your
wheels PRECISELY on the top surface of the runway. Realistically, tolerances
are a part of flying. But, in the instance at hand, you would probably been
fine if your reported at six miles out. Sometimes it doesn't hurt to do
things a little early.

"Final is a general direction". No, final is the extended centerline of the
runway.In fact, a land surveying crew could locate a point on that line 100
miles away from the airport. So, it comes down to the abilities of the pilot
and the accuracy of his/her equipment.

"Final is a state of mind". No, final is a defined line coursed in a
specified direction. And I'm afraid your examples have no merit, primarily
because of familiarity. True, S-turns have you flying varying courses, but
your overall direction of flight is along the extended centerline. Most
everyone involved is aware of wake turbulence, of the offset method for
avoiding it, and the controller will generally know what type of aircraft is
ahead of you, which would provide a justification for your offset course.
Everyone is aware of gusts and slips. You aren't making a very good argument
on this.

I hope you are able to get this resolved...





"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...
Okay, I'll give it one more go. Like many of you, I am fascinated by this
passion for flight that occupies many of our souls. I started this thread
to present a real-world flying example that I thought some of you would
find
interesting. Judging by the many different perspectives presented, many
of
you seem quite engaged by the topic. Initially, I also hoped to learn
something, and share a possible flying error that I thought I may have
committed, so that others could potentially learn something. And, yes, I
am
an ATP/CFII who's very lucky to be able to fly an aerobatic,
high-performance, complex, taildragger from Mexico to Canada--and
everywhere
in between. I'm fairly experienced, but that doesn't mean that I don't
make
constant mistakes while flying (like all of you).

Of course, USENET has its limitations (not the least of which is having to
occasionally come into contact with rude, over-bearing people who insist
on
making presumptuous personal attacks in their zeal to convince people how
much smarter they are than anyone else). I won't engage in similar
behavior, but I think everyone knows the individuals I'm talking about.
For
those of you who have approached this topic professionally, without
resorting to such uncivil conduct, I thank you for your insights and
thoughts. I'm always amazed at how the relative anonymity of the Internet
compels people to make the most absurd and offensive comments about
complete
strangers. During my 20 years in the Marine Corps, such communication in
public would often end up with the offending individual picking his teeth
off the bar-room floor.

In between all the nasty comments and boorish behavior, I still think
there's a lot of valuable learning going on, so I'll persist. I think
I've
been able to finally resolve the issue I originally presented (at least in
my mind).

Here's what I learned thus far, and how:

I called a Class C airport near where I reside and spoke to their "ATC
Procedures Specialist" named Doug. Doug told me many interesting things:

(1) The expression "Report 5 miles final" is not an instruction. It is
not standard phraseology, and thus it is merely a request. Hence, there
was
no legal obligation to even comply with the request (certainly there was
no
violation of the FARs as some of you seem to believe). Moreover, Doug
believes there is never a requirement to fly to a precise spot on the
extended centerline during a VFR final approach (as some of you so
passionately have stated repeatedly)--regardless of whether the controller
makes this "Report X miles Final" REQUEST.

(2) At Doug's airport, they consider every approach within a 45 degree
cone of the centerline to comply with the "Make Straight In, Runway X"
instruction. Clearly, there is NO OBLIGATION to intercept the centerline
at
any PARTICULAR point (although it must be intercepted at SOME point to
land
the plane; which I clearly did in this case--at ~1/2 mile from the
numbers).

I then called KPRC, and spoke to a very cordial gentlemen named Mr. Paul
Wirdsky (sp?), who is assigned as the Tower Manager. He is the supervisor
of the controller who precipitated this thread. After listening to my
account, he stated the following:

(1) He believes his controller clearly made a mistake, and that there
is
no obligation for a pilot to intercept the centerline precisely at any
particular point. In his view, flying directly towards the airport as I
did, and aligning with the runway at about 1/2 NM before landing, was the
proper and correct thing to do.

(2) He is reviewing the tape, and will counsel the controller on her
well-intended but poorly-delivered "correction" of a pilot when the
controller mistakenly applied her own personal misinterpretation of the
regulations.

These guys seem fairly definitive to me. Oops, sorry--this is USENET. I
know some of you still will never accept their well-informed opinions, so
let me offer some additional ideas for you to think about (so perhaps
logic
will prevail where expert opinion does not).

In reference to the following definition:

STRAIGHT-IN APPROACH VFR- Entry into the traffic pattern by interception
of
the extended runway centerline (final approach course) without executing
any
other portion of the traffic pattern.

There is nothing in this definition that suggests the pilot must intercept
the extended runway centerline at any particular point (rather it simply
must be intercepted at SOME point). Consequently, the real issue I posed
is
whether one can be "on final" without being precisely on the extended
centerline. I believe you obviously can. Here's some specific themes on
the topic:

(1) Flying is inherently IMPRECISE. Specifically, nobody flies on or
intercepts an extended centerline PRECISELY. No one. Not on an ILS, not
visually, not ever. If the FAR and PTS standard was "The Applicant must
intercept the extended centerline at precisely the distance instructed by
the controller to report on final," not one of us would have our tickets.
So, what's an acceptable level of precision? I asked this question
before,
but none of the naysayers seemed to respond. If I HAVE to fly to the
extended centerline at precisely 5NM, how far can I be off and not violate
the FARs? 1 foot? 10 feet? 1/4 mile? BTW, how does even one FIND this
precise position without reference to a GPS? Even if I have a GPS, do we
measure from the numbers, the touchdown zone, or the Airport Reference
Point
(ARP)? Clearly, trying to apply this level of precision when flying VFR
at
150 kts is ridiculous. I think a better standard might be the one posed
by
the ATC Procedures Specialist above where "every approach within a 45
degree
cone of the centerline complies with the "Make Straight In, Runway X"
instruction."

(2) "Final" is a general direction. I can approach any airport from any
one
of 360 possible angles (in whole degrees). Thus, the odds are 1/360 that
the direction I am approaching from is precisely aligned with the runway
centerline. The question you should ask yourself is what maximum number
of
degrees you would be comfortable being offset from the centerline so that
you would call it a final approach? 0.1 deg? 1 deg? 10 degs? 30 degs?
45 degs? In other words, don't think of final as ONE specific heading,
but
a SET of headings all generally aligned towards the runway. A downwind
and
base leg should similarly be defined in terms of a GENERAL direction--not
a
specific and precise line.

(3) "Final" is a state of mind. If I MUST be on the extended centerline
to
be on "final" (a statement which many of you have made), how do you
account
for S-Turns? How do you justify deliberately off-setting for wake
turbulence? When a gust knocks me off the centerline, am I no longer on
final? If I slip it in without once being on the centerline (until the
flare), did I just make an approach "without flying a final?" Please.

BTW, since many of you asked: There was no traffic within the Class D
airspace known to me--certainly none in my view, and the control frequency
was not used at any time between my initial check-in, and my "5 Mile
Final"
report. FWIW, I also learned that the KPRC Tower has radar.

In short, I've concluded my decision-making and behavior in this
particular
situation to be safe, legal, justifiable, and 100% correct. I would do
the
exact same thing next time, and I encourage my fellow pilots to consider
doing the same. That said, there's certainly nothing WRONG with
offsetting
to intercept the extended centerline at an extended distance from the
airport in order to get more time to get setup for the landing, etc. (just
a
little circuitous for my tastes--as well as potentially dangerous or
impracticable in some situations when considering terrain, etc.). Of
course, many of you will find gross fault with the above, while continuing
to nit-pick, argue about punctuation, and throw wildly uninformed
accusations about the competency of myself and the ATC folks I've cited
above. Ahhh, USENET. Recommend everyone try to get a little less
keyboard
time, and a whole lot more stick time. Thanks!

Fair winds,

Jim

"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...
Hi, all. Ran into this one flying back from KOSH a couple weeks ago:

I check in with the KPRC controller "20 Miles NE" of Love Field in
Prescott,
AZ. She clears me with "Cleared Straight-in Runway 21L, Report 5 miles
final."

I fly directly towards the numbers. My heading was approximately 240
(hence, I'm ~30 deg off of the extended centerline).

At 5 miles from the airport (still offset from the centerline), I report
"5
mile final." She questions my position and gets all snippy (indeed,
darn
right rude) that I am "not on final" since I am not on the extended
centerline. She patronizingly cautions me to be "careful about this."

Hence, the question is "What does 'Cleared Straight-in; Report X miles
Final" really mean?" Is it. . . .

(1) You must fly directly from your current position to a point on the
extended centerline that is X miles from the numbers, and then report
(sounds like a base to me).

or

(2) You can fly directly from your current position to the numbers (thus
"straight-in"), and report when you are X miles away.

I obviously vote for #2, but the controller clearly thought otherwise
(it
seems to me that if 30 deg = "straight-in" in the IFR domain, it ought
to
work well enough for VFR situations). Regardless, it is potentially
dangerous when controllers and pilots define things differently. Which
definition is right?

Regards, Jim