Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

So you are saying that Jeppesen's charting conventions, in which they
interpret the applicaple FAA forms 8260 are incorrect?


No, I'm saying the FARs prohibit the PT under specific conditions, they say
nothing about
when a PT is required. I'm not familiar with Jeppesen's charting
conventions, I'm not in a position to say anything about them.

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

14 CFR Part 97


What section?

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

To elaborate, it is in the Jepp interpretation of the FAA published
approach procedure. These procedures are regulatory by virtue of 14 CFR
97
and must be followed by virtue of 14 CFR 91


Then it appears that Jepp misinterpreted.



Because the requirement is noted in TERPS which is used to design the
approach.


The TERPs requirements apply only to the design of the procedure.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

You'll find no FAR that explicitly requires performing a charted PT
*regardless* of whether or not the PT meets the TERPS criteria. That
doesn't make all the PTs optional, does it?

Of course not.

So then when is a PT mandatory, and by virtue of which regulation?

It's never mandatory by virtue of regulation.

Then when is a PT mandatory, and by virtue of what if not regulation?

--Gary

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 00:35:29 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
.. .

To elaborate, it is in the Jepp interpretation of the FAA published
approach procedure. These procedures are regulatory by virtue of 14 CFR
97
and must be followed by virtue of 14 CFR 91


Then it appears that Jepp misinterpreted.

Since 14 CFR 97 states that the SIAP's are included by reference, it would
seem that the regulatory nature of these SIAP's is pretty clear.





Because the requirement is noted in TERPS which is used to design the
approach.


The TERPs requirements apply only to the design of the procedure.

And the procedures based on TERPs are regulatory.



Steve,

Myself, Jepp, as well as FAA published legal opinion all agree that a PT
must be flown if the pilot is cleared for a SIAP which includes a PT, and
for which one of the 91.175 exceptions is not present.

SIAP's ARE regulatory. They are included, by reference, in 14 CFR 97.

It is certainly your right to disagree with Jeppesen's interpretation, and
with the FAA Assistant Chief Counsel Regulatory Division's interpretation.

Myself, I will choose to rely on their opinions, and encourage others to do
the same.

==========================================
Nov. 28, 1994
Mr. Tom Young, Chairman
Charting and Instrument Procedures Committee
Air Line Pilots Association
535 Herndon Parkway
Herndon, VA 22070

Dear Mr. Young,

.... A SIAP may or may not prescribe a procedure turn based on the
application of certain criteria contained in the TERPs. However, if a SIAP
does contain a procedure turn and ATC has cleared a pilot to execute the
SIAP, the pilot must make the procedure turn when one of the conditions of
Section 91.175(j) is not present.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Patricia
R. Lane, Manager, Airspace and Air Traffic Law Branch, at (202) 267-3491.

Sincerely,

/s/
Patricia R. Lane
for Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations Division
===========================================

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES
Subpart C—TERPS Procedures

§ 97.20 General.

(a) This subpart prescribes standard instrument procedures and weather
takeoff minimums based on the criteria contained in FAA Order 8260.3, U.S.
Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPs), and other related
Orders in the 8260 series that also address instrument procedure design
criteria.

(b) Standard instrument procedures and associated supporting data adopted
by the FAA are documented on FAA Forms 8260–3, 8260–4, 8260–5. Weather
takeoff minimums are documented on FAA Form 8260–15A. These forms are
incorporated by reference. The Director of the Federal Register approved
this incorporation by reference pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51...
==================================

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

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

Then when is a PT mandatory, and by virtue of what if not regulation?


It's mandatory when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the
aircraft on an intermediate or final approach course, by virtue of the need
to reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or final
approach course. This really isn't that hard.

On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 21:15:13 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...
"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

You'll find no FAR that explicitly requires performing a charted PT
*regardless* of whether or not the PT meets the TERPS criteria. That
doesn't make all the PTs optional, does it?

Of course not.

So then when is a PT mandatory, and by virtue of which regulation?

It's never mandatory by virtue of regulation.

Then when is a PT mandatory, and by virtue of what if not regulation?

--Gary


According to both Jepp, and the FAA (regulatory division counsel), a PT is
mandatory if the pilot is cleared for a SIAP that includes one, and one of
the 91.175 exceptions does not apply.

SIAP's are regulatory, incorporated (by reference) into 14 CFR 97


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

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

"rps" wrote in message
oups.com...

I'm still confused. Assuming the following facts, how would you fly
the ILS RWY 28R at KSFO
....
I wouldn't turn right at CEPIN even if I was ahead of my filed ETA. There's
no way to turn at MENLO, the procedure goes only to CEPIN from MENLO.

Turning left at CEPIN certainly makes intuitive sense, but if that's the
right thing to do then why is MENLO-CEPIN not marked NoPT?
There are three (and only three) possibilities:

1. You are required to turn right at CEPIN and hold at DUMBA.
2. The absence of a NoPT designation is meaningless.
3. MENLO-CEPIN should be marked NoPT; the fact that it isn't is a
mistake.

Given that the ILS 28L approach has an almost identical segment
(MENLO-HEMAN) that IS marked NoPT my money is on #3.

rg

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...

Turning left at CEPIN certainly makes intuitive sense, but if that's the
right thing to do then why is MENLO-CEPIN not marked NoPT?
There are three (and only three) possibilities:

1. You are required to turn right at CEPIN and hold at DUMBA.
2. The absence of a NoPT designation is meaningless.
3. MENLO-CEPIN should be marked NoPT; the fact that it isn't is a
mistake.

Given that the ILS 28L approach has an almost identical segment
(MENLO-HEMAN) that IS marked NoPT my money is on #3.


I don't see why MENLO..HEMAN should be marked NoPT. If you're beginning the
ILS RWY 28R at MENLO you're not going to cross the holding fix DUMBA.

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

Since 14 CFR 97 states that the SIAP's are included by reference, it would
seem that the regulatory nature of these SIAP's is pretty clear.


It is to me.



And the procedures based on TERPs are regulatory.


Please cite the FAR that requires a charted PT to be flown whenever one of
the prohibitions of FAR 91.175(j) is not applicable.



Steve,

Myself, Jepp, as well as FAA published legal opinion all agree that a PT
must be flown if the pilot is cleared for a SIAP which includes a PT, and
for which one of the 91.175 exceptions is not present.

SIAP's ARE regulatory. They are included, by reference, in 14 CFR 97.

It is certainly your right to disagree with Jeppesen's interpretation, and
with the FAA Assistant Chief Counsel Regulatory Division's interpretation.

Myself, I will choose to rely on their opinions, and encourage others to
do
the same.

==========================================
Nov. 28, 1994
Mr. Tom Young, Chairman
Charting and Instrument Procedures Committee
Air Line Pilots Association
535 Herndon Parkway
Herndon, VA 22070

Dear Mr. Young,

... A SIAP may or may not prescribe a procedure turn based on the
application of certain criteria contained in the TERPs. However, if a SIAP
does contain a procedure turn and ATC has cleared a pilot to execute the
SIAP, the pilot must make the procedure turn when one of the conditions of
Section 91.175(j) is not present.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Patricia
R. Lane, Manager, Airspace and Air Traffic Law Branch, at (202) 267-3491.

Sincerely,

/s/
Patricia R. Lane
for Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations Division
===========================================

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 97-STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES
Subpart C-TERPS Procedures

§ 97.20 General.

(a) This subpart prescribes standard instrument procedures and weather
takeoff minimums based on the criteria contained in FAA Order 8260.3, U.S.
Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPs), and other related
Orders in the 8260 series that also address instrument procedure design
criteria.

(b) Standard instrument procedures and associated supporting data adopted
by the FAA are documented on FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5. Weather
takeoff minimums are documented on FAA Form 8260-15A. These forms are
incorporated by reference. The Director of the Federal Register approved
this incorporation by reference pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51...
==================================


I am aware of that interpretation, I am also aware that is NOT an
interpretation supported by the FARs.