Direct to intermediate approach fix?

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

I repeat myself:


Where the order sets fortt mandatory actions or limitations, it means just
that. Where it gives several methods of compliance, it means just that.
Where it provides optional procedures, it means just that. Where it
instructs employees to be familiar with an order that applies to the
services they provide, it means just that.


FAA Order 7210.37 En Route Minimum IFR Altitude Sector Charts states; "Each
air route traffic control center shall develop and implement MIA sector
charts using these procedures/criteria." "Shall" sets forth mandatory
action, yet last September you said this order was "guidance". So, I repeat
myself, what caused you to change your mind?

FAA Order 7210.3 Facility Operation and Administration, in paragraph 3-9-2.
MVA CHART PREPARATION (TERMINAL/MEARTS) states; "Prepare a vectoring chart
as follows:", then goes on to use a lot of other mandatory words. But last
September you said this order was "guidance" as well. So, I repeat myself,
what
caused you to change your mind?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

I repeat myself:


Where the order sets fortt mandatory actions or limitations, it means just
that. Where it gives several methods of compliance, it means just that.
Where it provides optional procedures, it means just that. Where it
instructs employees to be familiar with an order that applies to the
services they provide, it means just that.



FAA Order 7210.37 En Route Minimum IFR Altitude Sector Charts states; "Each
air route traffic control center shall develop and implement MIA sector
charts using these procedures/criteria." "Shall" sets forth mandatory
action, yet last September you said this order was "guidance". So, I repeat
myself, what caused you to change your mind?

FAA Order 7210.3 Facility Operation and Administration, in paragraph 3-9-2.
MVA CHART PREPARATION (TERMINAL/MEARTS) states; "Prepare a vectoring chart
as follows:", then goes on to use a lot of other mandatory words. But last
September you said this order was "guidance" as well. So, I repeat myself,
what
caused you to change your mind?


You love to twist it, don't you. I told you several month's ago you
should take Los Angeles Center to task for violating the MIA order.
Instead, you just like to argue.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

You love to twist it, don't you.

Just the opposite, actually.



I told you several month's ago you should take Los Angeles Center to task
for violating the MIA order. Instead, you just like to argue.


That's not what you said. You said the orders were "guidance". You had no
idea the procedures in them were mandatory. You had no idea how MIAs or
MVAs were established, you thought they were based on radar coverage. What
caused you to change your mind?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

You love to twist it, don't you.


Just the opposite, actually.



I told you several month's ago you should take Los Angeles Center to task
for violating the MIA order. Instead, you just like to argue.



That's not what you said. You said the orders were "guidance". You had no
idea the procedures in them were mandatory. You had no idea how MIAs or
MVAs were established, you thought they were based on radar coverage. What
caused you to change your mind?


So, you know more about my ideas than I do?

Wow, you are very special.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

So, you know more about my ideas than I do?


I know what you wrote better than you do.



Wow, you are very special.


Agreed.