Yet another "Radar Required" question.

Is this any different than what I wrote?

I agree, NoPT is not the same as PT not authorized, but I was trying to
correct what I thought was an error in Roy's reasoning...

Perhaps I did not make myself clear.

wrote in message ...


Richard Hertz wrote:


There is no PT identified on the chart so it needs no "NoPT" to tell you
not
to PT. The NoPT is (I think) only shown on segments of an approach that
have PTs (the approach has PT) but where some IAF do not require a PT
and
some do.


Jeppesen doesn't chart "Procedure Turn N/A" which is quite different than
"NoPT." "NoPT" is used only on segments of an IAP that has a course
reversal
and a segment so marked does not require the course reversal. Jeppesen's
view
is that the lack of a course reversal (PT or HIL) makes it self-evident
that the
course reversal is not authorized.



As for the Radar required - check the 2 NM and 1.1 NM points on the
chart -
it looks like they have it there for that? (Though I suppose your GPS
might
be able to tell you that but it probably is not a waypoint).

Yes, your GPS can tell you and, no, it is not a waypoint. It is an Along
Track
Distance (ATD) fix, which is like a DME stepdown fix.


AIM 1-1-19-13

"13. Unnamed stepdown fixes in the final approach segment will not be
coded in
the waypoint sequence of the aircraft's navigation database and must be
identified using ATD. Stepdown fixes in the final approach segment of RNAV
(GPS)
approaches are being named, in addition to being identified by ATD.
However,
since most GPS avionics do not accommodate waypoints between the FAF and
MAP,
even when the waypoint is named, the waypoints for these stepdown fixes
may not
appear in the sequence of waypoints in the navigation database. Pilots
must
continue to identify these stepdown fixes using ATD."