Procedure turn required?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the "is a required
maneuver" phrase applies only when "it is necessary to perform a course
reversal". IMHO, any other interpretation is absurd.

Well, required in the sense of geometry or what? If you have to turn
around, you have to turn around. And since the procedure turn =shape=
is not usually prescribed (except that it happens on one side of the
course) it's just a sexy u-turn.

They are specifically
telling you the procedure turn exists for the sole purpose of reversing
course;

Not quite. As you quoted:

"A procedure turn
is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to perform a course
reversal..."

It doesn't say "only when it is necessary", and the quote does not imply
it's the =sole= purpose of the PT.

the maneuvering required in order to
complete the procedure turn is at least as complex (and thus potentially
dangerous) as that required to simply proceed inbound on the approach from
the transition route.

The PT is actually more complex in this case, but it occurs at a higher
altitude (the same altitude really, but not commencing a descent) than
the maneuvering to proceed inbound. It's also further from the MAP (the
same distance really, but you will be flying away from the airport, not
towards it, so you are further away in time).

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...
Well, required in the sense of geometry or what?

Yes, in the sense of geometry.

If you have to turn around, you have to turn around. And since the
procedure turn =shape= is not usually prescribed (except that it happens
on one side of the course) it's just a sexy u-turn.

The *inbound* turn is usually not prescribed. The outbound leg is required
to be flown along the depicted route. In the case of the example here, that
requires a greater than 130 degree right-hand turn from the transition
route.

You only get to make up your turn on the way back in.

If the procedure allowed one to simply fly a standard-rate right-hand turn
after crossing the VOR, to return to the inbound leg, I might not have as
big an issue with the idea that the procedure turn is required. That's
still more complex, but it's reasonably efficient, does result in one being
established on the inbound course earlier, and is much less likely to wind
up with the airplane outside protected airspace (because there's a lot less
maneuvering going on).

But it doesn't. It requires that one first turns outbound, gets established
on the outbound course, and only then reverses course (again) to come back
inbound.

Not quite. As you quoted:

"A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
perform a course reversal..."

It doesn't say "only when it is necessary", and the quote does not imply
it's the =sole= purpose of the PT.

It's the introductory sentence to the entire section on procedure turns. I
don't think it's a stretch *at all* (as opposed to some of my other
interpretations) to believe that they are describing *exactly* why a
procedure turn exists.

Pete

Since it's such a nice day, I'm going to quibble. Where is it written that
you have to track the inbound course when outbound? IOW (I sense that you
fly in the Northwest, specifically western Washington), if I am coming from
the west to shoot the ILS into Paine, and my outbound turn over RITTS takes
me east of the extended runway/localizer, I am perfectly justified in flying
parallel to the localizer if I want to....the protected airspace is plenty
wide. I have seen dozens of instrument students work themselves into a
frenzy trying to get established outbound on the inbound, if you catch my
drift (no-wind conditions g).

Bob Gardner

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Jose" wrote in message
...
Well, required in the sense of geometry or what?

Yes, in the sense of geometry.

If you have to turn around, you have to turn around. And since the
procedure turn =shape= is not usually prescribed (except that it happens
on one side of the course) it's just a sexy u-turn.

The *inbound* turn is usually not prescribed. The outbound leg is
required to be flown along the depicted route. In the case of the example
here, that requires a greater than 130 degree right-hand turn from the
transition route.

You only get to make up your turn on the way back in.

If the procedure allowed one to simply fly a standard-rate right-hand turn
after crossing the VOR, to return to the inbound leg, I might not have as
big an issue with the idea that the procedure turn is required. That's
still more complex, but it's reasonably efficient, does result in one
being established on the inbound course earlier, and is much less likely
to wind up with the airplane outside protected airspace (because there's a
lot less maneuvering going on).

But it doesn't. It requires that one first turns outbound, gets
established on the outbound course, and only then reverses course (again)
to come back inbound.

Not quite. As you quoted:

"A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
perform a course reversal..."

It doesn't say "only when it is necessary", and the quote does not imply
it's the =sole= purpose of the PT.

It's the introductory sentence to the entire section on procedure turns.
I don't think it's a stretch *at all* (as opposed to some of my other
interpretations) to believe that they are describing *exactly* why a
procedure turn exists.

Pete

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
Since it's such a nice day, I'm going to quibble. Where is it written that
you have to track the inbound course when outbound?

IMHO, that's in the definition of "procedure turn" (97.3(p)). "The outbound
course, direction of turn, distance within which the turn must be completed,
and minimum altitude are specified in the procedure". Note that they say
"outbound course", not "outbound heading". To me, this means you are
required to fly exactly that course (inasmuch as you are required to fly the
procedure turn at all).

I don't disagree that there are situations in which it's perfectly safe to
parallel the outbound course. Your example at KPAE is a fine one.

But if someone believes that the regulations require the full procedure to
be flown even when no course reversal is actually necessary for the
approach, they darn well better believe that the regulations require flying
the outbound *course* as depicted, rather than just the outbound heading.
That seems much more explicitly stated than the presumed requirement to fly
the full procedure.

Pete

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 22:50:57 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

To me, this means you are
required to fly exactly that course

Yes, but "course" only refers to "The intended *direction* of flight in the
horizontal plane measured in degrees from north." It does not refer to a
particular ground track.

On the other hand, there are "Some procedure turns are specified by
procedural track. These turns must be flown exactly as depicted."


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

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
Yes, but "course" only refers to "The intended *direction* of flight in
the
horizontal plane measured in degrees from north." It does not refer to a
particular ground track.

Where does it say that?

On the other hand, there are "Some procedure turns are specified by
procedural track. These turns must be flown exactly as depicted."

As far as I know, that's to distinguish from those procedure turns that
require a particular kind of turn, versus those that simply require the
pilot to remain on the "protected" side of the turn. It has nothing at all
to do with whether one is supposed to fly the depicted outbound course.

Pete

On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:47:49 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

Yes, but "course" only refers to "The intended *direction* of flight in
the
horizontal plane measured in degrees from north." It does not refer to a
particular ground track.

Where does it say that?

Pilot/Controller Glossary under the C's for Course


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

On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:47:49 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

As far as I know, that's to distinguish from those procedure turns that
require a particular kind of turn, versus those that simply require the
pilot to remain on the "protected" side of the turn. It has nothing at all
to do with whether one is supposed to fly the depicted outbound course.

I don't know where you find a requirement that one must fly for any
distance at all outbound along the "depicted outbound course" in executing
a procedure turn that does not have a required track.

You cite 97.3 but that paragraph also states that "the point at which the
turn may be commenced, and the type and rate of turn, is left to the
discretion of the pilot". Some of the types of turns that would not
require flying along the charted outbound track include teardrop, racetrack
and 80-260. Even the 45° turn would not require flying along the "depicted
outbound course" if the pilot elected to start that turn immediately.

At the approach under discussion (KFUL VOR-A via the WILMA transition), I
would probably elect to fly a racetrack turn after Seal Beach and,
depending on the winds, I might never even be parallel to the charted
inbound course of 020 until I turned inbound. All perfectly legal
according to both 97.3 and the AIM.


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

On the other hand, there are "Some procedure turns are specified by
procedural track. These turns must be flown exactly as depicted."

This refers to things like charted teardrop reversals, where one goes
(for example) outbound on the 155 radial for five miles, turns right and
comes inbound on the 183 radial, all charted on the plate.

I would not infer from this that the outbound course of an ordinary PT
is not specified. What is in fact up to the pilot in a normal PT is the
method of reversing course once one is tracking the (given) outbound course.

One is required to fly the PT (exceptions discussed upthread). =Since=
this is true, one must turn to the outbound course in order to do so,
and cannot simply turn inbound. Since one is therefore flying outbound,
a course reversal is necessary at some point. Therefore, the type of
course reversal to be performed must be a procedure turn (of some sort).

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 22:57:11 GMT, Jose wrote:

What is in fact up to the pilot in a normal PT is the
method of reversing course once one is tracking the (given) outbound course.

Although I agree there is a requirement to turn outbound, I see no
requirement that one must, at any time, "track" the outbound course.

(By that I mean flying over the earth on the line indicated by the outbound
course).

For example, at the procedure which started this thread, one could overhead
the facility and execute a racetrack turn. In that case, one would never
be tracking the outbound course.


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