Oct 18 course reversal change

The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision
to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict
with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue.

At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following
language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language.
Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following
language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication)
portion of the FAA's web site:

"New: Revised October 18, 2005

5-4-9. Procedure Turn

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate
or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However,
the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the
symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a
RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when
conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude
prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the
aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be
completed within the distance specified in the profile view.
Note
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when
it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended
clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach
course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach
clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure
turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is
uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be
conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). "

This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course
which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for
straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT),
but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and
NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure
turn. But that's what started this discussion. I forget - what was the
original AIM ambiguity that this fixes?

Jose

The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision
to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict
with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue.

At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following
language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language.
Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following
language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication)
portion of the FAA's web site:

"New: Revised October 18, 2005

5-4-9. Procedure Turn

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate
or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However,
the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the
symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a
RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when
conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude
prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the
aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be
completed within the distance specified in the profile view.
Note
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when
it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended
clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach
course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach
clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure
turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is
uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be
conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). "

--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:29:53 -0800, wrote:

The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision
to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict
with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue.

At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following
language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language.
Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following
language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication)
portion of the FAA's web site:

Never paid any attention to it.
Under vectors they bring me around to an intercept on an inbound
heading. No reversal is needed.
I've never been "cleared for the approach" with vectors until I was
relatively close to the actual inbound approach course. If I were
outbound and cleared for the approach I'd do the whole thing or ask
*their* intentions/expectations.

I have been asked if I'd like vectors or would like to do the whole
approach when it was obvious I was out practicing having already done
at least 6 or so approaches over the past hour or two, or if it was a
beautiful VFR day and I'm doing approaches.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"New: Revised October 18, 2005

5-4-9. Procedure Turn

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate
or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However,
the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the
symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a
RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when
conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude
prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the
aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be
completed within the distance specified in the profile view.
Note
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when
it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended
clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach
course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach
clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure
turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is
uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be
conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). "

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:55:54 GMT, Jose
wrote:

This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course
which is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for
straight in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT),
but the controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and
NoPT is not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure
turn. But that's what started this discussion. I forget - what was the
original AIM ambiguity that this fixes?

The ambiguity is still there.
The first sentence in the newly revised wording hints that a procedure
turn is not necessary unless "it is necessary to reverse
direction...".
However, the second sentence completely overrides the first sentence.
It states that the PT (or hold-in-lieu) is a required maneuver when it
is depicted on the approach chart.
The third sentence then goes on to say that the procedure turn is not
permitted in certain circumstances.
The note then goes on to say that the pilot may elect to use the
procedure turn when it is not permitted if she or he first receives an
amended clearance from ATC.

It'd be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "when it is necessary
to reverse direction" wording completely, but this wording is also in
FAR 97.3(p).
It'd also be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "is a required
maneuver when depicted on the approach plate" concept, but apparently
this is spelled out in some way by something referenced by FAR 97.20.

I'm not holding my breath.

TIm.





Jose

The FAA recognized that a mistake had been made in the recent revision
to the AIM concerning course reversals; that the wording was in conflict
with the 1994 legal interpretation on the issue.

At last week's FAA/Industry Aeronautical Charting Forum the following
language was adopted to replace the recent change in AIM language.
Because of the long lead time in amending the AIM, the following
language will soon appear in the NTAP (Notice to Airmen Publication)
portion of the FAA's web site:

"New: Revised October 18, 2005

5-4-9. Procedure Turn

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate
or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However,
the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the
symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a
RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when
conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude
prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the
aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be
completed within the distance specified in the profile view.
Note
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when
it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended
clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach
course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach
clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to insure the procedure
turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is
uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be
conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). "

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:29:53 -0800, wrote:

The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart.

Finally.

"onward through the fog"


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

"Jose" wrote in message
...
This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which
is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in
(i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the
controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is
not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn.

Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case. So
there may be some residual doubt as to how to fly an approach when there's
an obvious chart error (about a PT or about anything else); but what's most
important in such a case, I think, is to email the FAA's chart-error address
). In my experience, they'll promptly issue a NOTAM
and then fix the chart in the next revision.

--Gary

"Tim Auckland" wrote in message
...
The ambiguity is still there.

No, I think it's cleared up now (finally!).

The first sentence in the newly revised wording hints that a procedure
turn is not necessary unless "it is necessary to reverse
direction...".

The first sentence, taken by itself, is still slightly ambiguous (though
less so than before, since it now says that the procedure is "prescribed"
when a direction-reversal is necessary; in other words, when the FAA thinks
you need to reverse course, they prescribe a PT, by charting it).

However, the second sentence completely overrides the first sentence.

I'd say it clarifies rather than overrides--the second sentence eliminates
the ambiguity that would otherwise have been present in the first sentence.

It states that the PT (or hold-in-lieu) is a required maneuver when it
is depicted on the approach chart.
The third sentence then goes on to say that the procedure turn is not
permitted in certain circumstances.
The note then goes on to say that the pilot may elect to use the
procedure turn when it is not permitted if she or he first receives an
amended clearance from ATC.

Yup. That all seems unambiguous now.

It'd also be way clearer if the FAA just dropped the "is a required
maneuver when depicted on the approach plate" concept,

I think that concept is what clears up the previous ambiguity--the depicted
PT is required, apart from the specifically listed exceptions.

--Gary

"New: Revised October 18, 2005

5-4-9. Procedure Turn

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate
or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a
required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However,
the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not permitted when the
symbol "No PT" is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a
RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when
conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude
prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the
aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be
completed within the distance specified in the profile view.
Note
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when
it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended
clearance from ATC. When ATC is Radar vectoring to the final approach
course or to the Intermediate Fix, ATC may specify in the approach
clearance "CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH" to insure the procedure
turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is
uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be
conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123). "

Gary Drescher wrote:

"Jose" wrote in message
...

This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which
is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight in
(i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the
controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is
not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn.

Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case.

If that's the case, then there are a lot of charts with errors. I've
seen a lot of them (perhaps most?) that have this situation. Here's an
example:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0510/05949V24.PDF

If you are flying a heading of 235 10 miles NE of ICING. ATC clears you
direct ICING and then cleared VOR 24 approach. Your statement is that
you fly 10 miles, do a U-turn, fly the procedure turn, then the
approach. That just seems insane.

Yes, ATC will most likely vector you to the final approach course and
then clear you for the approach (turn left heading 235, join the final
approach course, cleared VOR 24 approach), but if they don't...


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## VP, Product Development
## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/)
"Sometimes it happens."
-- Forrest Gump

"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message
...
Gary Drescher wrote:

"Jose" wrote in message
...

This still leaves open what to do if you are on a non-vector course which
is pretty close to straight in, at an appropriate altitude for straight
in (i.e. the same altitude you'd be at inbound from the PT), but the
controller doesn't clear you straight in, a PT is depicted, and NoPT is
not depicted. Presumably you do a U-turn, and then a procedure turn.

Yes, nominally, although presumably there's a chart error in that case.

If that's the case, then there are a lot of charts with errors. I've seen
a lot of them (perhaps most?) that have this situation. Here's an
example:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0510/05949V24.PDF

If you are flying a heading of 235 10 miles NE of ICING. ATC clears you
direct ICING and then cleared VOR 24 approach. Your statement is that you
fly 10 miles, do a U-turn, fly the procedure turn, then the approach.
That just seems insane.

Yes, ATC will most likely vector you to the final approach course and then
clear you for the approach (turn left heading 235, join the final approach
course, cleared VOR 24 approach), but if they don't...

Hm, that's a good point. I was thinking more of charts where an IAF that's
distinct from the FAF is nonetheless aligned with the FAC, but not
designated NoPT. In cases like that, I've reported the chart to the FAA, and
have seen an immediate NOTAM issued to correct the chart.

But you're right that an FAF is often and IAF too, and there's usually
nothing on the chart that says NoPT if a direct course to the IAF/FAF is
already aligned with the FAC (and at the same altitude).

Oh well. I guess the situation is still more confused than I'd realized.

--Gary

"A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed boldwhen it is necessary
to reverse direction/bold to establish the aircraft inbound on an
intermediate or final approach course."

FAA's explanation of the AIM change (August change, not this one)
implies that no PT is required "if the aircraft is aligned within 90
degrees of the inbound course."
(http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Exofchg/exchg3.html.) I couldn't find
the FAA's explanation for the October change, which has not made its
way into FAA's online version of the AIM.