Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


I don't see why MENLO..HEMAN should be marked NoPT.


It's marked NoPT to make it clear that you should turn left at HEMAN
instead of right. (Isn't that obvious?)


If you're beginning the
ILS RWY 28R at MENLO you're not going to cross the holding fix DUMBA.


You will if you turn right at HEMAN.


I can't tell if you're joking or not. Only an idiot would turn right at
HEMAN.

In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


I don't see why MENLO..HEMAN should be marked NoPT.


It's marked NoPT to make it clear that you should turn left at HEMAN
instead of right. (Isn't that obvious?)


If you're beginning the
ILS RWY 28R at MENLO you're not going to cross the holding fix DUMBA.


You will if you turn right at HEMAN.


I can't tell if you're joking or not.

I'm not.

Only an idiot would turn right at HEMAN.

Someone might turn right at HEMAN if they thought that 1) the absence of
a "NoPT" designation on the MENLO-HEMAN leg was both correct and
meaningful, and 2) that the AIM's description of the PT as a "required
maneuver" except under specific circumstances was meaningful.

Now, I think that the fact of the matter is that the absence of the NoPT
designation is a mistake, and that that the AIM's use of the phrase
"required maneuver" is meaningless (and no, I'm not joking about that
either). But I don't think that failing to come to those conclusions
makes someone an idiot.

rg

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...

Only an idiot would turn right at HEMAN.

Someone might turn right at HEMAN if they thought that 1) the absence of
a "NoPT" designation on the MENLO-HEMAN leg was both correct and
meaningful, and 2) that the AIM's description of the PT as a "required
maneuver" except under specific circumstances was meaningful.


Someone that thinks that is an idiot.

In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...

Only an idiot would turn right at HEMAN.

Someone might turn right at HEMAN if they thought that 1) the absence of
a "NoPT" designation on the MENLO-HEMAN leg was both correct and
meaningful, and 2) that the AIM's description of the PT as a "required
maneuver" except under specific circumstances was meaningful.


Someone that thinks that is an idiot.

OK, if you say so.

rg