"Penetration Turn"

Tld

Tld

Waffles Brah.
Minds out of the gutter for just a moment here.....AIM 5-4-9-a-3. I came across this term today, and had never seen it before. After inquiring several CFI's and the almighty google, we didn't come up with much. (google just directed us to an FAA page where a penetration turn was listed as another name for a teardrop procedure turn). Then, after asking around a bit we got some input from a dpe/former military guy who said although he hadn't heard or used the term in a long time, that it had to do with a military term used for a teardrop reversal in which a lot of altitude had to be lost rapidly. Is this correct?

Anyways, although I have an idea of what it is now, I was wondering if anyone had any further insight, or could elaborate. When would this be used? What type of aircraft/situation would require this, especially in IMC? Any military guys want to weigh in here?....
 
Tld said:
Minds out of the gutter for just a moment here.....AIM 5-7-9-a-3. I came across this term today, and had never seen it before. After inquiring several CFI's and the almighty google, we didn't come up with much. (google just directed us to an FAA page where a penetration turn was listed as another name for a teardrop procedure turn). Then, after asking around a bit we got some input from a dpe/former military guy who said although he hadn't heard or used the term in a long time, that it had to do with a military term used for a teardrop reversal in which a lot of altitude had to be lost rapidly.

Anyways, although I have an idea of what it is now, I was wondering if anyone had any further insight, or could elaborate. When would this be used? What type of aircraft/situation would require this, especially in IMC? Any military guys want to weigh in here?....
Click to expand...

Don't deviate, Penetrate! -MikeC

Sorry Talia, had to...

That does seem interesting though
 
Tld said:
Minds out of the gutter for just a moment here.....AIM 5-4-9-a-3. I came across this term today, and had never seen it before. After inquiring several CFI's and the almighty google, we didn't come up with much. (google just directed us to an FAA page where a penetration turn was listed as another name for a teardrop procedure turn). Then, after asking around a bit we got some input from a dpe/former military guy who said although he hadn't heard or used the term in a long time, that it had to do with a military term used for a teardrop reversal in which a lot of altitude had to be lost rapidly. Is this correct?

Anyways, although I have an idea of what it is now, I was wondering if anyone had any further insight, or could elaborate. When would this be used? What type of aircraft/situation would require this, especially in IMC? Any military guys want to weigh in here?....
Click to expand...


When you hear the term "penetration", the reference is to high-sector instrument approach procedured (IAPs); ie- HI-TACAN 30L; HI-ILS 2 RWY 12, etc. The penetration turn is the same as the teardrop procedure turn course reversal, but from a high environment, and denoted on the approach plate plan/profile views by a dotted line. Similarly, a procedure track is a course that descends out of the high environment into an approach.

Examples:

Penetration turn:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00354HVDATA.PDF

Penetration Track:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00074HVDT30C.PDF
 
MikeD said:
When you hear the term "penetration", the reference is to high-sector instrument approach procedured (IAPs); ie- HI-TACAN 30L; HI-ILS 2 RWY 12, etc. The penetration turn is the same as the teardrop procedure turn course reversal, but from a high environment, and denoted on the approach plate plan/profile views by a dotted line. Similarly, a procedure track is a course that descends out of the high environment into an approach.

Examples:

Penetration turn:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00354HVDATA.PDF

Penetration Track:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00074HVDT30C.PDF
Click to expand...
So Mike, Would a TACAN Z approach be like a VOR A approach?
 
MikeD said:
When you hear the term "penetration", the reference is to high-sector instrument approach procedured (IAPs); ie- HI-TACAN 30L; HI-ILS 2 RWY 12, etc. The penetration turn is the same as the teardrop procedure turn course reversal, but from a high environment, and denoted on the approach plate plan/profile views by a dotted line. Similarly, a procedure track is a course that descends out of the high environment into an approach.

Examples:

Penetration turn:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00354HVDATA.PDF

Penetration Track:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00074HVDT30C.PDF
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification!
 
DPApilot said:
So Mike, Would a TACAN Z approach be like a VOR A approach?
Click to expand...

No. TACAN X/Y/Z (for example...it could be ILS, etc) are just different variations of the same type IAP utilizing the same primary NAVAID, but not circling approaches necessarily like a VOR-A would be. You can have TACAN X RWY 16, TACAN Y RWY 16, etc.

Examples....where I used to be based:

Here is the HI-ILS to RWY 22 at KHMN. Whether you do the X, Y, or Z procedure depends on where you're arriving from:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIX22.PDF

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIY22.PDF

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIZ22.PDF
 
DPApilot said:
So Mike, Would a TACAN Z approach be like a VOR A approach?
Click to expand...

No a TACAN A approach would be like a VOR A approach. Z just indicates a different procedure for an appraoch. Example would be VOR X 5 and VOR Z 5. Same outcome and navaid, but a different procedure. VOR X 5 might just be a straight in approach while VOR Z 5 might be a DME arc.

Edit: Pff, MikeD beat me to the punch. 3 minutes slow.
 
MikeD said:
No. TACAN X/Y/Z (for example...it could be ILS, etc) are just different variations of the same type IAP utilizing the same primary NAVAID, but not circling approaches necessarily like a VOR-A would be. You can have TACAN X RWY 16, TACAN Y RWY 16, etc.

Examples....where I used to be based:

Here is the HI-ILS to RWY 22 at KHMN. Whether you do the X, Y, or Z procedure depends on where you're arriving from:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIX22.PDF

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIY22.PDF

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0905/00007HIZ22.PDF
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike!
 
Tld said:
Anyways, although I have an idea of what it is now, I was wondering if anyone had any further insight, or could elaborate. When would this be used? What type of aircraft/situation would require this, especially in IMC? Any military guys want to weigh in here?....
Click to expand...

These are generally used to get military aircraft out of the high environment onto an approach and recovered; with minimum time spent at low altitudes, and minimum ATC involvement (no vectoring needed)...all resulting in quick recovery of aircraft, minimum fuel used, and less ass-pain. ASLAR instrument approaches accomplish this too, with added drag/decel/final speed DME points on the approach final segment in order to split formations of aircraft that are penetrating on the same instrument approach together in the WX.
 
MikeD said:
These are generally used to get military aircraft out of the high environment onto an approach and recovered; with minimum time spent at low altitudes, and minimum ATC involvement (no vectoring needed)...all resulting in quick recovery of aircraft, minimum fuel used, and less ass-pain. ASLAR instrument approaches accomplish this too, with added drag/decel/final speed DME points on the approach final segment in order to split formations of aircraft that are penetrating on the same instrument approach together in the WX.
Click to expand...

They look fun to fly, but could just as easily be a pain as well.
 
Are ASLAR approaches available on the interwebs?
Also, why do the HI approaches often have that little holding pattern diagram with one shaded area?
 
Maurus said:
Oh how hard could that be, they give you a picture to help you figure out your hold entry. Too easy!










:sarcasm:


Definitely an approach that is fun after realizing you just shot it successfully.
Click to expand...

Worse is...the sick bastard that designed it! :D
 
They are fun. I've only done it in the C-5 once (for fun/training), but did it all the time in pilot training.

I can't find anything written that says whether or not civilian operators are authorized to do these approaches, since hardly anyone I know who hasn't flown in the military even know what they are. Anyone know the answer to that?
 
germb747 said:
They are fun. I've only done it in the C-5 once (for fun/training), but did it all the time in pilot training.

I can't find anything written that says whether or not civilian operators are authorized to do these approaches, since hardly anyone I know who hasn't flown in the military even know what they are. Anyone know the answer to that?
Click to expand...

Perfectly legit for civil operators to fly. But as you say, very few civil operators/persons even know of their existance, and they tend to just fly a STAR or fly into airports that aren't served by these IAPs.
 
Used widely in theater right now, especially for those of us flying aircraft not so maneuverable. Great one in WI which was a tough one on students...
 

Attachments

  • 00451HT25.jpg
    00451HT25.jpg
    236.7 KB · Views: 273
I'm a Jepps weenie so I look at that stuff and think "ArooOOoOO?"
 
I think we can all agree and say we are not glorified bus drivers.


That is a pretty complex approach

Of course it is further complicated when you are doing 300kts and have only 1NAV/COM

Great explanation MikeD!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top