Procedure turn required?

felixk

felixk

Well-Known Member
Hi

I can't seem to find a solid answer to this question. Even the AIM has left me confused.

Assume i am flying an approach to a non towered airport. The approach has a procedure turn. (there is no NOPT depicted on the approach) I was cleared for the full approach. If I was flying from a direction that required a course reversal and i am flying the full approach then there is no doubt that I need to fly the procedure turn. But let's say I'm flying from a direction that puts me on course for the runway do I still need to fly the procedure turn?

Basically my question is do I need to fly a procedure turn if a course reversal is not needed?

Thanks

Felix
 
As a controller I normally ask if you are going to do the procedure turn but if you are coming from a direction that does not require a procedure turn I would expect you to commence the appraoch without the turn. Can I ask what approach you are talking about?
 
I assume he's talking about an approach like this:

vor.jpg


You're south of the VOR, inbound on the 166 radial. Is a course reversal required if you are already established on the inbound course?

Unless otherwise specified by ATC, I would assume you would need to turn around and do the PT.
 
juxtapilot said:
Unless otherwise specified by ATC, I would assume you would need to turn around and do the PT.
Click to expand...

Inbound on the R-166? I go straight in...

It's not marked that way, but going Crazy Ivan on the approach might cause some problems. :bandit:
 
juxtapilot said:
I assume he's talking about an approach like this:

You're south of the VOR, inbound on the 166 radial. Is a course reversal required if you are already established on the inbound course?

Unless otherwise specified by ATC, I would assume you would need to turn around and do the PT.
Click to expand...

Technically, you're supposed to in that case, even as nonsensical as it would be for that specific case. Have TRACON give you one vector to join the inbound 166 prior to clearing you for the approach, and then make it a straight-in from there. At least thats what I'd do.
 
i'd either get a vector to join final course and gain clearance, eliminating the PT. Or if cleared to the VOR and cleared for the approach from the south, i'd clarify whether straight in clearance was assumed or course reversal. When in doubt ASK! Check this out!
 
I did a procedure turn the other day in IMC at CYS on a VOR approach (no radar), and got chewed out by approach because I didnt let him know I was going to do it even though it was required and he never said to do anything otherwise.
 
"Crazy Ivan." Very nice! Gonna have to add that to the cockpit vernacular. Maybe throw in a loud, sudden "con sonar!!!" every once in awhile too. Next time we get a delay vector I'll tell the PAX we just needed to clear our baffles. :D

We discussed this one a few months back. And I agree with those that say "technically" you should do the PT. Yeah, get a vector if you can.
 
jynxyjoe said:
Yeah, but is the Crazy Ivan left or right on the bottom half of the hour?
Click to expand...

You've got to mix it up. ATC shouldn't be able to predict your movements. Run fast, run deep!

But yeah, technically the procedure turn is required, but I mean...if you're at the FAF altitude within that 10nm ring, what would you accomplish? You're already on a published segment.
 
I agree with those who said the PT is required.

But, there is definitely a practical disconnect between what is required for the pilot and what ATC might expect, that's been anecdotally documented many, many times (in fact, see rherrick's comment in this thread). The ultimate answer is, unless it is clear to you that you are being vectored to the final approach course, say something to clarify, even if it's just to ask, "Is N1234X cleared [straight in] [for the procedure turn].

btw, the AIM is pretty clear on the rule: "The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart." You won't see "unless the pilot personally doesn't think it's needed" in any of the follow-up discussion.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I agree with those who said the PT is required.

But, there is definitely a practical disconnect between what is required for the pilot and what ATC might expect, that's been anecdotally documented many, many times (in fact, see rherrick's comment in this thread). The ultimate answer is, unless it is clear to you that you are being vectored to the final approach course, say something to clarify, even if it's just to ask, "Is N1234X cleared [straight in] [for the procedure turn].

btw, the AIM is pretty clear on the rule: "The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart." You won't see "unless the pilot personally doesn't think it's needed" in any of the follow-up discussion.
Click to expand...

I'll second that!! While it may be required by the letter of the law, it sure is not practical. Of course who says the law is always practical. :)
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
the AIM is pretty clear on the rule: "The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart." You won't see "unless the pilot personally doesn't think it's needed" in any of the follow-up discussion.
Click to expand...
No, you won't see it in those exact words,...but, in the sentence prior to your quote of the AIM 5-4-9 "The PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted...", it says, by way of describing what a PT is, "A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course."

Who makes that decision? Who decides when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the airplane inbound?

Another question. As you probably know, when the FAA wants to violate you, they must provide a regulation which was violated. Where is the reg that is violated if a pilot decides he does not need to reverse course on an approach where he is already aligned and configured for final approach when he crosses the faf?

Of course, reasonable caution must be applied. A mis-hap as a result of not being prepared for the final approach, and cutting out the PT could result in a violation of 91.13, but as long as you stay well within the approach profile, there is no violation.
 
Thanks for all the answers...

So basically what I'm getting from this discussion is that if I am cleared for the full approach I should ask the controller if he/she expects me to fly the procedure turn, and never assume one way or another.

Correct?
 
felixk said:
Thanks for all the answers...

So basically what I'm getting from this discussion is that if I am cleared for the full approach I should ask the controller if he/she expects me to fly the procedure turn, and never assume one way or another.

Correct?
Click to expand...

I haven't shot a lot of procedure turns (yay radar environment) but the ones that I have done, I remember clearly being told "Maintain two thousand seven hundred until procedure turn outbound, cleared..." instead of the normal "maintain two thousand seven hundred until established, cleared...". But yes. If you're not sure, verify.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
I haven't shot a lot of procedure turns (yay radar environment) but the ones that I have done, I remember clearly being told "Maintain two thousand seven hundred until procedure turn outbound, cleared..." instead of the normal "maintain two thousand seven hundred until established, cleared...". But yes. If you're not sure, verify.
Click to expand...

I've seen it said both ways non-radar. No biggie.

I'd probably just say "Hey y'all, mind if we just go ahead and go straight in?" That might sound funny because I don't speak with a southern accent, but it gets the point across to ATC. :)
 
felixk said:
So basically what I'm getting from this discussion is that if I am cleared for the full approach I should ask the controller if he/she expects me to fly the procedure turn, and never assume one way or another.
Click to expand...

You're going to ask a controller how to fly an instrument approach? If you're legally bound to fly the PT, the controller doesn't have the authority to overrule that. If you think the controller is in doubt about what you're going to do, then tell him, don't ask him.
 
nosehair said:
Who makes that decision? Who decides when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the airplane inbound?
Click to expand...

That's been explained to you many times and you at one time admitted being convinced, but you have since relapsed. The person who decides whether or not a PT is required the approach designer, and he indicates his decision by whether or not he places a PT on the chart or provides a NoPT route. It is not for the pilot to decide whether or not the maneuver is required, because a pilot is not competent to make that determination. He knows nothing about descent gradients, turning radii, or obstacle clearance requirements. Neither do controllers.
 
wingman999, great article. thank you.

I'm basically going to fly full approaches with this in mind:

"If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Section 91.123)."

An interesting suggestion in the article:

"Perhaps ATC should consider including “cleared via straight in” or “cleared via procedure turn” in all approach clearances to obviate similar misunderstandings."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top