If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision
to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue. At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language. Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication) portion of the FAA's web site: "New: Revised October 18, 2005 5-4-9. Procedure Turn A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. Note The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). " |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course
which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn. But that's what started this discussion. I forget - what was the original AIM ambiguity that this fixes? Jose The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue. At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language. Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication) portion of the FAA's web site: "New: Revised October 18, 2005 5-4-9. Procedure Turn A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. Note The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). " -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:29:53 -0800, wrote:
The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue. At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language. Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication) portion of the FAA's web site: Never paid any attention to it. Under vectors they bring me around to an intercept on an inbound heading. No reversal is needed. I've never been "cleared for the approach" with vectors until I was relatively close to the actual inbound approach course. If I were outbound and cleared for the approach I'd do the whole thing or ask *their* intentions/expectations. I have been asked if I'd like vectors or would like to do the whole approach when it was obvious I was out practicing having already done at least 6 or so approaches over the past hour or two, or if it was a beautiful VFR day and I'm doing approaches. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com "New: Revised October 18, 2005 5-4-9. Procedure Turn A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. Note The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). " |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:55:54 GMT, Jose
wrote: This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn. But that's what started this discussion. I forget - what was the original AIM ambiguity that this fixes? The ambiguity is still there. The first sentence in the newly revised wording hints that a procedure turn is not necessary unless "it is necessary to reverse direction...". However, the second sentence completely overrides the first sentence. It states that the PT (or hold-in-lieu) is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. The third sentence then goes on to say that the procedure turn is not permitted in certain circumstances. The note then goes on to say that the pilot may elect to use the procedure turn when it is not permitted if she or he first receives an amended clearance from ATC. It'd be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "when it is necessary to reverse direction" wording completely, but this wording is also in FAR 97.3(p). It'd also be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "is a required maneuver when depicted on the approach plate" concept, but apparently this is spelled out in some way by something referenced by FAR 97.20. I'm not holding my breath. TIm. Jose The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue. At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language. Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication) portion of the FAA's web site: "New: Revised October 18, 2005 5-4-9. Procedure Turn A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. Note The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). " |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
"Jose" wrote in message
... This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn. Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case. So there may be some residual doubt as to how to fly an approach when there's an obvious chart error (about a PT or about anything else); but what's most important in such a case, I think, is to email the FAA's chart-error address ). In my experience, they'll promptly issue a NOTAM and then fix the chart in the next revision. --Gary |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
"Tim Auckland" wrote in message
... The ambiguity is still there. No, I think it's cleared up now (finally!). The first sentence in the newly revised wording hints that a procedure turn is not necessary unless "it is necessary to reverse direction...". The first sentence, taken by itself, is still slightly ambiguous (though less so than before, since it now says that the procedure is "prescribed" when a direction-reversal is necessary; in other words, when the FAA thinks you need to reverse course, they prescribe a PT, by charting it). However, the second sentence completely overrides the first sentence. I'd say it clarifies rather than overrides--the second sentence eliminates the ambiguity that would otherwise have been present in the first sentence. It states that the PT (or hold-in-lieu) is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. The third sentence then goes on to say that the procedure turn is not permitted in certain circumstances. The note then goes on to say that the pilot may elect to use the procedure turn when it is not permitted if she or he first receives an amended clearance from ATC. Yup. That all seems unambiguous now. It'd also be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "is a required maneuver when depicted on the approach plate" concept, I think that concept is what clears up the previous ambiguity--the depicted PT is required, apart from the specifically listed exceptions. --Gary "New: Revised October 18, 2005 5-4-9. Procedure Turn A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. Note The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach clearance "CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH" to insure the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). " |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
Gary Drescher wrote:
"Jose" wrote in message ... This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn. Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case. If that's the case, then there are a lot of charts with errors. I've seen a lot of them (perhaps most?) that have this situation. Here's an example: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0510/05949V24.PDF If you are flying a heading of 235 10 miles NE of ICING. ATC clears you direct ICING and then cleared VOR 24 approach. Your statement is that you fly 10 miles, do a U-turn, fly the procedure turn, then the approach. That just seems insane. Yes, ATC will most likely vector you to the final approach course and then clear you for the approach (turn left heading 235, join the final approach course, cleared VOR 24 approach), but if they don't... -m -- ## Mark T. Dame ## VP, Product Development ## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/) "Sometimes it happens." -- Forrest Gump |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message
... Gary Drescher wrote: "Jose" wrote in message ... This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn. Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case. If that's the case, then there are a lot of charts with errors. I've seen a lot of them (perhaps most?) that have this situation. Here's an example: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0510/05949V24.PDF If you are flying a heading of 235 10 miles NE of ICING. ATC clears you direct ICING and then cleared VOR 24 approach. Your statement is that you fly 10 miles, do a U-turn, fly the procedure turn, then the approach. That just seems insane. Yes, ATC will most likely vector you to the final approach course and then clear you for the approach (turn left heading 235, join the final approach course, cleared VOR 24 approach), but if they don't... Hm, that's a good point. I was thinking more of charts where an IAF that's distinct from the FAF is nonetheless aligned with the FAC, but not designated NoPT. In cases like that, I've reported the chart to the FAA, and have seen an immediate NOTAM issued to correct the chart. But you're right that an FAF is often and IAF too, and there's usually nothing on the chart that says NoPT if a direct course to the IAF/FAF is already aligned with the FAC (and at the same altitude). Oh well. I guess the situation is still more confused than I'd realized. --Gary |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Oct 18 course reversal change
"A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed boldwhen it is necessary
to reverse direction/bold to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course." FAA's explanation of the AIM change (August change, not this one) implies that no PT is required "if the aircraft is aligned within 90 degrees of the inbound course." (http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Exofchg/exchg3.html.) I couldn't find the FAA's explanation for the October change, which has not made its way into FAA's online version of the AIM. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
!!! WARNING -- AOPA credit card holders. The credit card company is trying to change the rules in mid-game. Read the statement sent to you by MBNA. | Chuck | Owning | 22 | May 23rd 05 12:37 AM |
WARNING -- AOPA credit card holders. The credit card company is trying to change the rules in mid-game. Read the statement sent to you by MBNA. | Chuck | Owning | 7 | May 5th 05 08:01 PM |
How do you explain why the A/S increases on thermal entry? | Fred | Soaring | 43 | April 24th 05 02:33 PM |