procedure turns revisited

I remember reading a lot of articles and opinions about procedure turns
being absolutely required except for the three conditions in FAR
91.175(j).

The newest online AIM, seems to have changed. Paragraph 5-4-9.a. now
reads:

The procedure turn or hold in lieu of procedure turn is a required
maneuver when it is necessary to perform a course reversal.

The "when it is necessary..." portion is new. Is this a change in FAA
policy, or did people misinterpret the regs in the past, or is my
memory bad?

Peter

The procedure turn was never required when drawn as the
standard dog-leg turn. But when drawn as a holding pattern,
then the course reversal must be flown as charted. In any
case, the protected airspace is established to allow the
aircraft room to safely make the required turns.

Now that GPS or RADAR allow navigation and position fixing
to the IAF/FAF a course reversal is not required.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


wrote in message
ups.com...
|I remember reading a lot of articles and opinions about
procedure turns
| being absolutely required except for the three conditions
in FAR
| 91.175(j).
|
| The newest online AIM, seems to have changed. Paragraph
5-4-9.a. now
| reads:
|
| The procedure turn or hold in lieu of procedure turn is a
required
| maneuver when it is necessary to perform a course
reversal.
|
| The "when it is necessary..." portion is new. Is this a
change in FAA
| policy, or did people misinterpret the regs in the past,
or is my
| memory bad?
|
| Peter
|

Jim Macklin wrote:



Now that GPS or RADAR allow navigation and position fixing
to the IAF/FAF a course reversal is not required.


Not so.

1. Radar vectors, provided they are provided in accordance with 7110.65,
5-9-1, have always (well, since the early 1950s) preempted the procedure
turn. This is one of the exceptions set forth in FAR 91.175(j).

2. GPS is in no way authorized to trump or preempt an otherwise required
course reversal (be it procedure turn, teardrop procedure turn, or
hold-in-lieu-of procedure turn).

Jim Macklin wrote:
The procedure turn was never required when drawn as the
standard dog-leg turn.

Really? I never read it that way. Regardless of the shape of the
procedure turn, the rules on whether you fly it or not are always the
same.

But when drawn as a holding pattern,
then the course reversal must be flown as charted

The requirement here is the course to be flown (an acceptable hold
entry rather than a generic course reversal) not whether a course
reversal has to be flown or not. In other words the requirement is
"flown as charted" not "must be flown."

wrote:

I remember reading a lot of articles and opinions about procedure turns
being absolutely required except for the three conditions in FAR
91.175(j).

The newest online AIM, seems to have changed. Paragraph 5-4-9.a. now
reads:

The procedure turn or hold in lieu of procedure turn is a required
maneuver when it is necessary to perform a course reversal.

The "when it is necessary..." portion is new. Is this a change in FAA
policy, or did people misinterpret the regs in the past, or is my
memory bad?

Peter


The AIM is incorrect and will be changed next cycle. In the meantime
the following GENOT supercedes that AIM language:

Change to the Procedure Turn Text in the AIM

The August 4, 2005, Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) revision to
paragraph 5−4−9a, Procedure Turn, has generated pilot comments that
indicate the text may be misleading and could possibly cause deviation
from the requirements of 14 CFR Part 91.175(j). This concern was brought
to the government/industry Aeronautical Charting Forum, Instrument
Procedures Group, as an issue to be resolved as soon as possible.
The group agreed that the paragraph as currently written could be
misinterpreted and cause misunderstanding on when a Procedure Turn is to
be flown. The consensus of the group was that a revision was necessary.
The text was revised as stated below and will be published in the August
2006, Change 1, to the AIM.

5−4−9. Procedure Turn
a. 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 ensure 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−inapproach, the pilot shall
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Part 91.123).

The rest of the paragraph is unchanged.
(AFS−420 12/22/05)

4-GEN-35 (June 8, 2006 Published NOTAMS)

Sam Spade wrote:

The August 4, 2005, Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) revision to
paragraph 5-4-9a, Procedure Turn, has generated pilot comments that
indicate the text may be misleading and could possibly cause deviation
from the requirements of 14 CFR Part 91.175(j).

I'm still missing something here. 91.175 doesn't say when you have to
do a procedure turn, just when you can't. The erroneous AIM doesn't
conflict with 91.175 as far as I can tell.

wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:

The August 4, 2005, Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) revision to
paragraph 5-4-9a, Procedure Turn, has generated pilot comments that
indicate the text may be misleading and could possibly cause deviation
from the requirements of 14 CFR Part 91.175(j).

I'm still missing something here. 91.175 doesn't say when you have to
do a procedure turn, just when you can't. The erroneous AIM doesn't
conflict with 91.175 as far as I can tell.

You appear to have missed the first part of 91.175.

According to FAR 91.175(a):
"Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, when an instrument
letdown to a civil airport is necessary, each person operating an
aircraft, except a military aircraft of the United States, shall use a
standard instrument approach procedure prescribed for the airport in
part 97 of this chapter."

AIM Interpretation: if the approach procedure indicates a procedure
turn, you must use it.

Exceptions according to FAR 91.175(j):
"In the case of a radar vector to a final approach course or fix, a
timed approach from a holding fix, or an approach for which the
procedure specifies 'No PT,' no pilot may make a procedure turn unless
cleared to do so by ATC."

rps wrote:

You appear to have missed the first part of 91.175.

According to FAR 91.175(a):
"Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, when an instrument
letdown to a civil airport is necessary, each person operating an
aircraft, except a military aircraft of the United States, shall use a
standard instrument approach procedure prescribed for the airport in
part 97 of this chapter."


But following a SIAP doesn't necessarily mean having to do the
procedure turn. There's a lot of interpretation there. For instance
you can have multiple IAFs and therefore you won't fly all the initial
segments published, only the one pertinent to the direction from which
you are arriving. How does the 91.175(a) paragraph above imply a
different rule for the procedure turn?

What about FAR 97.3(p):
Procedure turn means the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or final
approach course.

Doesn't that say that its not always necesary?

Peter

wrote in message
oups.com...
What about FAR 97.3(p):
Procedure turn means the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or final
approach course.

Doesn't that say that its not always necesary?

No, it's ambiguous. It could mean either:
A. We prescribe a procedure turn when we think it is necessary for you to
reverse direction... (You are required to comply with this prescription,
except where 91.175a provides otherwise.); or
B. When we prescribe a procedure turn, you are required to comply, provided
that you think it is necessary to reverse direction.

The forthcoming new AIM passage resolves the ambiguity in favor of
interpretation A.

--Gary

wrote in message
oups.com...

But following a SIAP doesn't necessarily mean having to do the
procedure turn. There's a lot of interpretation there. For instance
you can have multiple IAFs and therefore you won't fly all the initial
segments published, only the one pertinent to the direction from which
you are arriving. How does the 91.175(a) paragraph above imply a
different rule for the procedure turn?

What about FAR 97.3(p):
Procedure turn means the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or final
approach course.

Doesn't that say that its not always necesary?


I don't know why this issue is continually raised here. I fail to see it as
a real world problem. The issue is whether or not a PT is required when
approaching the destination and you're already aligned or nearly aligned
with the FAC. But how did you come to be in that position? If you're on a
direct route you should be in radar contact as radar monitoring is required
to operate off airways beyond usable navaid limits. If you're in radar
contact then radar vectors to the approach should be available and a PT
wouldn't be required. If you're not in radar contact you should be on an
appropriate route either via airways or within usable navaid limits. But
routes like that tend to appear of the IAP plate marked NoPT.