Procedure Turn

I'm pretty sure this question has been asked, but I can't seem to find
it. My question deals with a typical approach with a procedure turn
before the FAF, could be an NDB, VOR, GPS, etc. I know what the
purposes are. 1) Provide course reversal and 2) allow altitude loss
from the arrival altitude to the procedure turn altitude. My question
is, am I expected to make the turn it if I'm already established on
the inbound course and am already at the correct altitude.

I don't think the AIM is very clear.


From the following paragraph, I read that it is ...

5-4-8. Procedure Turn
a. A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
perform a course reversal to establish the aircraft inbound on an
intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold in
lieu of procedure turn is a required maneuver.

However, from this entry a few lines down, I wonder ...
b. Limitations on Procedure Turns.
....
2. When a teardrop procedure turn is depicted and a course reversal is
required, this type turn must be executed.


"When a course reversal is required" ??? And even in the first
paragraph it says "when it is necessary to perform a course reversal"

I'm thinking I don't have to. I know this situation doesn't happen
that often but when it does, I don't really have the answer, I suppose
I would have to ask the controller.

I appreciate your input.

This issue comes up from time to time. The assumption here is that you are
not being provied vectors for the approach. The official rule is that
unless there is a note allowing the exception of a PT (i.e. 'NoPT'), a
procedure turn is required. So yes, that means a turn in a bold hold or
backtracking out on the approach course for a course reversal.

"Bravo8500" wrote in message
om...
I'm pretty sure this question has been asked, but I can't seem to find
it. My question deals with a typical approach with a procedure turn
before the FAF, could be an NDB, VOR, GPS, etc. I know what the
purposes are. 1) Provide course reversal and 2) allow altitude loss
from the arrival altitude to the procedure turn altitude. My question
is, am I expected to make the turn it if I'm already established on
the inbound course and am already at the correct altitude.

I don't think the AIM is very clear.


From the following paragraph, I read that it is ...

5-4-8. Procedure Turn
a. A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to
perform a course reversal to establish the aircraft inbound on an
intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold in
lieu of procedure turn is a required maneuver.

However, from this entry a few lines down, I wonder ...
b. Limitations on Procedure Turns.
...
2. When a teardrop procedure turn is depicted and a course reversal is
required, this type turn must be executed.


"When a course reversal is required" ??? And even in the first
paragraph it says "when it is necessary to perform a course reversal"

I'm thinking I don't have to. I know this situation doesn't happen
that often but when it does, I don't really have the answer, I suppose
I would have to ask the controller.

I appreciate your input.

"Brad Z" wrote:
This issue comes up from time to time. The assumption here is that you are
not being provied vectors for the approach. The official rule is that
unless there is a note allowing the exception of a PT (i.e. 'NoPT'), a
procedure turn is required. So yes, that means a turn in a bold hold or
backtracking out on the approach course for a course reversal.

Next question. Does anybody actually do this? Assuming that you were
already established on the FAC and didn't need to lose any altitude,
does anybody actually do a PT just because a literal reading of the regs
says you're supposed to?

Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
Next question. Does anybody actually do this? Assuming that you were
already established on the FAC and didn't need to lose any altitude,
does anybody actually do a PT just because a literal reading of the regs
says you're supposed to?

How many people run red lights at 3:00am or break the 55mph speed limit?

Seriously though, I don't really know. Some will also suggest that it
doesn't matter if you are below radar coverage because they can't see you.

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:OWHfc.49669$rg5.131276@attbi_s52...

Seriously though, I don't really know. Some will also suggest that
it doesn't matter if you are below radar coverage because they
can't see you.


What would they do if you were above radar coverage and they did see you?

I don't know. Ask them.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:OWHfc.49669$rg5.131276@attbi_s52...

Seriously though, I don't really know. Some will also suggest that
it doesn't matter if you are below radar coverage because they
can't see you.


What would they do if you were above radar coverage and they did see you?

I recall making a GPS approach to an airport just outside a Class C. It had
a holding pattern in lieu of a PT. I hit the FAF and went for the runway.
The
approach controller said "Nxxxxx .. I take it you're not doing a PT" Me:
"Nope ..
just gonna go straight in". Him: "Ok" Me: (about a minute later) "Nxxxxx has
the
runway in sight .. cancel my IFR .. have a nice day" Him: "IFR Cancelled ..
you too ..
see ya".

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:OWHfc.49669$rg5.131276@attbi_s52...

Seriously though, I don't really know. Some will also suggest that
it doesn't matter if you are below radar coverage because they
can't see you.


What would they do if you were above radar coverage and they did see you?

Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

Next question. Does anybody actually do this? Assuming that you were
already established on the FAC and didn't need to lose any altitude,
does anybody actually do a PT just because a literal reading of the regs
says you're supposed to?

"Otis Winslow" wrote in message
...

Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.


Could you expand on that a bit?

Depending upon the circumstances, sometimes I do one .. and sometimes I
don't.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Otis Winslow" wrote in message
...

Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.


Could you expand on that a bit?