Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn

I finally got around to opening my 2004 FAR/AIM (the only one I have
here in the office), and found:

97.3 "Symbols and terms used in procedures."
97.3 (p) "Procedure term means the maneuver prescribed when it is
necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an
intermediate or final approach course. ..."

To me, this means that any discussion of procedure turns is irrlevant
unless "it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft
on an intermediate or final approach course.".

So, we have to define two more items:

a) "to reverse direction".
I would argue strongly that any turn less than 90 degrees is NOT
reversing direction. I can't think of any field (except perhaps
politics :-) where say a 30 degree change of direction is considered
reversing direction.

b) "to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or final approach
course."
This is where I consider pilot's discretion comes in. However, if
you're already aligned with the required course (or close to it), then
there's no way I consider it necessary to reverse direction to
establish myself on the course.

As 97.3 (p) is regulatory, I think there's a strong case for saying
procedure turns are not mandatory.

--------

The second part of 97.3 (p) addresses your issue about how you do the
turn:

"The outbound course, direction, distance within which the turn must
be completed, and minimum altititude are specified in the procedure.
However, the point at which the turn may be commenced, and the type
and rate of turn, is left to the discretion of the pilot".

So, yes, you can do an Immelman if you can keep it within the
parameters mentioned above.

Tim.



On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 18:33:31 -0700, Ron Garret
wrote:

So this just occurred to me in the debate on procedure turns.

The AIM famously says "The procedure turn is a required maneuver..."
But the AIM is not regulatory. Is there anything in the FARs that
requires a PT? I'm pretty sure there isn't anything in Part 91.
Someone in another thread said that there was something in Part 97, but
I can't find it.

If nothing in the FARs requires a PT then a reasonable interpretation of
the AIM is: "WHEN it is necessary to reverse course (which is determined
at the pilot's discretion I suppose) you must do so by executing a PT
(or a hold in lieu of)..." as opposed to, say, doing an Immelman or half
a lazy eight.

rg

In article ,
Tim Auckland wrote:

So, yes, you can do an Immelman if you can keep it within the
parameters mentioned above.

Cool! I've always wanted to try one of those in IMC! ;-)

rg

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:49:34 -0700, Ron Garret
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Auckland wrote:

So, yes, you can do an Immelman if you can keep it within the
parameters mentioned above.

Cool! I've always wanted to try one of those in IMC! ;-)

rg

Don't do it with passengers unless you've got parachutes.