Procedure turn required?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message ...

That the clearance would be to SLI VOR, so either of the feeder fixes
would have limited, if any, application in a lost comm situation.


No, the clearance would be to the filed destination.

No, that would be the clearance limit. The last clearance fix coming to KFUL
from the west or northwest would be SLI. In the context of this thread: the
last airway fix would be SLI, not WILMA.

It's all academic anyway because routing over WILMA conflicts the SoCAL TEC
routes.

wrote in message ...

No, that would be the clearance limit.


The clearance limit will be the filed destination.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message ...

No, that would be the clearance limit.


The clearance limit will be the filed destination.

That is what I said.

wrote in message ...

That is what I said.


No, you said the clearance would be to SLI VOR.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message ...

That is what I said.


No, you said the clearance would be to SLI VOR.

Here is the context of the thread, what I said to another person who is not
playing your semantic games:

Filing to WILMA would not be appropriate because, although it's a feeder
fix for this approach, it is short of destination. If you were coming
from the north it would be typical to file the prefered airway to SLI
then direct. You don't have the option to proceed to ALBAS unless it's
on your clearance route.

wrote in message ...

Here is the context of the thread, what I said to another person who is
not
playing your semantic games:

Filing to WILMA would not be appropriate because, although it's a feeder
fix for this approach, it is short of destination. If you were coming
from the north it would be typical to file the prefered airway to SLI
then direct. You don't have the option to proceed to ALBAS unless it's
on your clearance route.


And here is a verbatim quote of your message:

"That the clearance would be to SLI VOR, so either of the feeder fixes would
have limited, if any, application in a lost comm situation."

What you wrote is incorrect. The clearance would not be to SLI VOR, it
would be to the destination airport.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message ...

Here is the context of the thread, what I said to another person who is
not
playing your semantic games:

Filing to WILMA would not be appropriate because, although it's a feeder
fix for this approach, it is short of destination. If you were coming
from the north it would be typical to file the prefered airway to SLI
then direct. You don't have the option to proceed to ALBAS unless it's
on your clearance route.


And here is a verbatim quote of your message:

"That the clearance would be to SLI VOR, so either of the feeder fixes would
have limited, if any, application in a lost comm situation."

What you wrote is incorrect. The clearance would not be to SLI VOR, it
would be to the destination airport.

The context of that was WILMA or ALBAS vis-a-vis SLI. In that context the
clearance would be to SLI, the last airway fix before the clearance limit of
KFUL.

That was the context and is the context.

I can't help it if I don't meet your "special" view of precision. But, in the
context I have always stated the the airport was the clearance *limit.*

Sigh, there is no placating you in any case, for you love being combative and
obtuse, except when you're just plain wrong, then you simply remain silent
rather than conceding and, in the process, perhaps adding something meaninful to
the discussion.