![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Yossarian" wrote in message
. 97.142... I was using a Frasca 141 sim today with an instructor when this question came up. Fullerton CA (KFUL) VOR-A approach. At WILMA on V64, flying the full approach. Do you need to turn outbound at the VOR for the procedure turn? Instructor says no because a Victor airway leads to the IAF. I say yes because even though that's true, "No PT" is not listed on that feeder route. You'll need a true expert to answer the question with certainty. However... I agree with your instructor. AFAIK, there is NEVER a requirement to make a procedure turn. The "NoPT" exists to prohibit a procedure turn, not to tell you when you are required to make one. Obviously, if you're going the wrong way, you need a course reversal at some point. But that's a practical requirement, not a regulatory one. In the case of the approach from ALBAS, not only is there clearly no need for a procedure turn, they've even gone so far as to put the IAF way out there. While I'm not an expert in the TERPS, I suspect that there's something in there that stipulates when "NoPT" is used; probably any arrival 30 degrees or less from the final approach course gets a "NoPT" (the arrival from ALBAS just barely squeaks by). If the approach designer had been given the latitude to put "NoPT" on any arrival where he thinks a procedure turn is unnecessary, we'd probably see that on the arrival from WILMA too. I would agree that in general, it would be nice to be established on the final approach course at the FAF. But again, I'm not aware of any requirement for this. Assuming you can cross the FAF at the FAF (which should never be in question), and then immediately establish yourself on the final approach course (which should be no problem in this case), I don't see any problem. As far as I can tell, the procedure turn on that approach is for pilots who are coming at the VOR from the opposite direction. For example, someone who flew the missed approach. Of course, lacking the "NoPT", you are of course welcome to fly the whole procedure turn. But you're looking at 45 seconds or so just to get established outbound parallel to the final approach course, and that's not counting the time spent flying back to it (and then, of course, the time for the procedure turn itself). I'm betting not many people fly the procedure turn coming in from WILMA. I'm a little curious as to how this question is on r.a.piloting, but not on r.a.ifr. I've cross-posted for your benefit (and quoted your entire post for theirs). ![]() Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Procedure turn required? | Yossarian | Piloting | 85 | July 6th 05 08:12 PM |
Sports class tasking | [email protected] | Soaring | 12 | April 25th 05 01:32 PM |
Agent86's List of Misconceptions of FAA Procedures Zero for 15 Putz!!! | copertopkiller | Military Aviation | 11 | April 20th 04 02:17 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |