Illegal IFR APP Procedure?

[Wayword ATP]

Our company outsources our recurrent training. Yesterday we were shooting the GPS36 into KGLE in IMC. I had just hit ILIAC and started turning outbound when Fort Worth told us that Radar Services were terminated and to shoot the published missed.

The instructor said to disregard the procedure turn and to continue straight in. He reloaded the approach and forced it into a Vectored mode. I was already in my turn outbound but followed his instruction and did a 120° turn and captured the inbound leg. Mind you we were in solid IMC at the time.

Afterword, I started thinking about it and came to the conclusion that we royally f’d up that approach.

What say y’all?

 

[tspear]

You were not cleared on the approach.
Hence did not matter how you did it. It was illegal.

Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk

 

[MauleSkinner]

we royally f’d up that approach.

I would agree.

 

[luvflyin]

Our company outsources our recurrent training. Yesterday we were shooting the GPS36 into KGLE in IMC. I had just hit ILIAC and started turning outbound when Fort Worth told us that Radar Services were terminated and to shoot the published missed.

The instructor said to disregard the procedure turn and to continue straight in. He reloaded the approach and forced it into a Vectored mode. I was already in my turn outbound but followed his instruction and did a 120° turn and captured the inbound leg. Mind you we were in solid IMC at the time.

Afterword, I started thinking about it and came to the conclusion that we royally f’d up that approach.

What say y’all?

Not enough info to say who boo boo’d. How did you arrive at ILIAC? From WAWLS? WATEN? Had you been Cleared Direct?

 

[Plano Pilot]

Are you sure Ft. Worth did not say "Cleared for the approach. Radar services are terminated. On the missed fly the published missed"? Or something like that.

 

[Wayword ATP]

Are you sure Ft. Worth did not say "Cleared for the approach. Radar services are terminated. On the missed fly the published missed"? Or something like that.

They said all that. We were direct to ILIAC from the due south which doesn’t say NO PT. I was already starting my procedure turn when he said Radar Services Terminated. At that point the instructor dumped the GPS and reloaded it as a Vector like you would a practice approach. But to my knowledge a straight in from ILIAC isn’t approved. You have to do the procedure turn.

 

[Wayword ATP]

Not enough info to say who boo boo’d. How did you arrive at ILIAC? From WAWLS? WATEN? Had you been Cleared Direct?

Was cleared Direct to ILIAC which Regional Approach balked at but cleared us anyway.

 

[luvflyin]

Was cleared Direct to ILIAC which Regional Approach balked at but cleared us anyway.

Then you are supposed to do the HILPT. This gets misinterpreted sometimes when you get to the IF/IAF at an angle where ‘logic’ says it would make sense to go Straight In. I wonder if the Instructor thought this. About what was the angle to ILIAC you arrived at?

 

[Wayword ATP]

Then you are supposed to do the HILPT. This gets misinterpreted sometimes when you get to the IF/IAF at an angle where ‘logic’ says it would make sense to go Straight In. I wonder if the Instructor thought this. About what was the angle to ILIAC you arrived at?

Basically straight on inline with the Final Approach Course. FlightAware only caught a blip of the my procedure turn. It shows us going straight in.

I should have spoken up but I was trying to hand fly in IMC w/o an autopilot for the first time in about 5 years. I was task saturated and when the instructor changed horses midstream I went with it.

 

[Jim Carpenter]

Wait. one step at a time, we need a bit of clarification. Like Plano Pilot mentions, tell us the sequence of comms with ATC. Was the ATC statements all at once, or in steps?
Like, you're inbound to ILIAC from the south, and ATC knows you're doing practice approach rather than actually landing at GLE, right?
Before ILIAC, you're given ".....cleared for the approach."
Just after reaching ILIAC, ATC says "Radar service terminated", and then "On missed, fly the published missed procedure."
There should have been a "Change to advisory frequency approved" from ATC right after that.
At any rate, if that was the case, and you had not received specific clearance for straight-in from ILIAC, then, yes, you should complete the HILPT, and the approach to the MAP, then flown the published missed procedure.

 

[Wayword ATP]

Wait. one step at a time, we need a bit of clarification. Like Plano Pilot mentions, tell us the sequence of comms with ATC. Was the ATC statements all at once, or in steps?
Like, you're inbound to ILIAC from the south, and ATC knows you're doing practice approach rather than actually landing at GLE, right?
Before ILIAC, you're given ".....cleared for the approach."
Just after reaching ILIAC, ATC says "Radar service terminated", and then "On missed, fly the published missed procedure."
There should have been a "Change to advisory frequency approved" from ATC right after that.
At any rate, if that was the case, and you had not received specific clearance for straight-in from ILIAC, then, yes, you should complete the HILPT, and the approach to the MAP, then flown the published missed procedure.

ATC Instructions I recalled:

-Direct to ILIAC
-Cleared for GPS36
-Radar Services Terminated & Fly Missed Approach as published

 

[luvflyin]

ATC Instructions I recalled:

-Direct to ILIAC
-Cleared for GPS36
-Radar Services Terminated & Fly Missed Approach as published

In post #7 you said "Was cleared Direct to ILIAC which Regional Approach balked at but cleared us anyway." I've been wondering about that. Do you remember how that conversation went?

 

[Velocity173]

Sounds legal to me. Are you confused about not completing the hold? Additional laps aren’t required unless you need them. Radar services terminated is required phraseology and the controller was just insuring you were to do the published missed after the approach.

 

[Larry in TN]

"Radar service terminated" doesn't change anything about your clearance or the routing you much fly. It changes what required reports you have to make.

 

[Clip4]

If you were radar vectors for the approach. Nopt.

 

[luvflyin]

Sounds legal to me. Are you confused about not completing the hold? Additional laps aren’t required unless you need them. Radar services terminated is required phraseology and the controller was just insuring you were to do the published missed after the approach.

I never got the feeling that he thought being terminated had anything to do with his decisions. The Controller throwing in the do the published was just extra chit chat from the Controller. The published missed is part of the Approach. Unless there had already been some previous conversation about how the Approach would terminate and what the climb out instructions were.

 

[luvflyin]

If you were radar vectors for the approach. Nopt.

He said was Cleared Direct ILIAC.

 

[sarangan]

May be I am not understanding the question. You were already at the IAF, and you did a 120-deg turn to intercept the final approach course. Assuming you were cleared, there is nothing wrong with what you did. The HILPT at the IAF does not require a full lap around the pattern. As long as you stay on the protected side, you can turn to intercept the final once cleared.

 

[luvflyin]

May be I am not understanding the question. You were already at the IAF, and you did a 120-deg turn to intercept the final approach course. Assuming you were cleared, there is nothing wrong with what you did. The HILPT at the IAF does not require a full lap around the pattern. As long as you stay on the protected side, you can turn to intercept the final once cleared.

It sounds like he made a turn back to the right to get on final. “...I was already in my turn outbound but followed his instruction and did a 120° turn and captured the inbound leg...” If he had just ‘shortened’ the ‘leg’ it would have taken a 180 degrees of turn.

 

[Velocity173]

I never got the feeling that he thought being terminated had anything to do with his decisions. The Controller throwing in the do the published was just extra chit chat from the Controller. The published missed is part of the Approach. Unless there had already been some previous conversation about how the Approach would terminate and what the climb out instructions were.

Just trying to figure out what the OP thought was illegal. If they were still outbound in the hold, there’s nothing wrong with cutting the pattern short and proceeding to ILIAC. If they’re already passed ILIAC, hadn’t gone outbound and immediately turned to LANVE, there’s a problem. No course reversal was done.

 

[luvflyin]

Just trying to figure out what the OP thought was illegal. If they were still outbound in the hold, there’s nothing wrong with cutting the pattern short and proceeding to ILIAC. If they’re already passed ILIAC, hadn’t gone outbound and immediately turned to LANVE, there’s a problem. No course reversal was done.

Yeah. The voices in my head say the Instructor was probably the bad guy here.

 

[Wayword ATP]

The blue line is what we did.

We were cleared for the approach, not the straight in, and upon hitting the IAF I started a turn outbound. The instructor said let’s go ahead and go straight in and reset the gps to allow for a straight in. I then stopped my turn and doubled back to capture the inbound course.

 

[ARFlyer]

From my understanding I think he did this. Which would have been incorrect as the PT is required.

 

[Velocity173]

Yep, if you did the above, that’s a no go.

 

[Piper18O]

Ironically, If the controller would have waited another 15 or 20 seconds, you probably would have been more inclined to just complete a circle that could have brought you right back to ILIAC (assuming a standard rate turn, and that would have been legal, since there is no minimum length of outbound leg, only a maximum.

 

[unsafervguy]

first, if you did turn as arflyer depicted, then it was illegal. the question becomes, is "cleared direct to ililc, cleared for the approach" a radar vector. if so then the hold does not have to be completed, assuming that your altitude would allow for the approach.

 

[luvflyin]

first, if you did turn as arflyer depicted, then it was illegal. the question becomes, is "cleared direct to ililc, cleared for the approach" a radar vector. if so then the hold does not have to be completed, assuming that your altitude would allow for the approach.

It is not. Vector is vector, direct is direct. There can be some 'combining' of the two in one transmission. Like fly heading whatever, when able proceed direct. You got there 'direct.' Direct rules apply.

 

[luvflyin]

The blue line is what we did.

We were cleared for the approach, not the straight in, and upon hitting the IAF I started a turn outbound. The instructor said let’s go ahead and go straight in and reset the gps to allow for a straight in. I then stopped my turn and doubled back to capture the inbound course.

I think your companies recurrent 'Trainor' needs a little 'Trainee' time.

 

[TrueCourse]

Regardless of what is legal or not legal, a) you both should have briefed ahead of time on what was going to happen to avoid surprises (and if you say, “well couldn’t we assume we both knew what we were supposed to do”, you see how that turned out) and b) he shouldn’t have changed everything on you at the last second or as it’s occurring. That is nuts poor CRM and bad instructing.

 

[Plano Pilot]

1st. I would have asked for straight in before getting to IlIAC.
2nd. Since you had already started your turn outbound I would have completed the turn and done a shortened lap to intercept the inbound course.

 

[Piper18O]

I once flew the RNAV 33 approach into KFNB. I was cleared direct to USACE (I was southwest of USACE at the time) and cleared for the approach. USACE is the only IAF on that approach. It calls for a procedure turn. I could have made about an 80 degree left turn to intercept final, but the chart only showed the hold/procedure turn. I entered the hold for my procedure turn and was just about 3/4 through it when the controller asked what I was doing. I told her the procedure turn. She told me I didn't have to do that. Nowhere on the chart did it say nopt. Who errored in that situation?

 

[luvflyin]

I once flew the RNAV 33 approach into KFNB. I was cleared direct to USACE (I was southwest of USACE at the time) and cleared for the approach. USACE is the only IAF on that approach. It calls for a procedure turn. I could have made about an 80 degree left turn to intercept final, but the chart only showed the hold/procedure turn. I entered the hold for my procedure turn and was just about 3/4 through it when the controller asked what I was doing. I told her the procedure turn. She told me I didn't have to do that. Nowhere on the chart did it say nopt. Who errored in that situation?

Probably you. That is a TAA Approach. It says NoPT if arriving to USACE from the 236 Course To, clockwise to the 056 Course To. It sounds like you were in that TAA sector.

 

[RussR]

I once flew the RNAV 33 approach into KFNB. I was cleared direct to USACE (I was southwest of USACE at the time) and cleared for the approach. USACE is the only IAF on that approach. It calls for a procedure turn. I could have made about an 80 degree left turn to intercept final, but the chart only showed the hold/procedure turn. I entered the hold for my procedure turn and was just about 3/4 through it when the controller asked what I was doing. I told her the procedure turn. She told me I didn't have to do that. Nowhere on the chart did it say nopt. Who errored in that situation?

It does say NoPT on the chart, look at the TAA sector for arrivals from the south and east. Assuming you were in that sector, you should not have performed the PT.

 

[tspear]

I have read by a few ATC plus and FAA rep that ATC is not allowed to do vectors to final for any GPS approach. It will always be to an approach fix.
So consider that aspect from a training perspective.


Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk

 

[unsafervguy]

It is not. Vector is vector, direct is direct. There can be some 'combining' of the two in one transmission. Like fly heading whatever, when able proceed direct. You got there 'direct.' Direct rules apply.

your correct, im so use to hearing fly heading xxx direct when able, which is a vector, I needed to go back and study the AIM again.

 

[jrcox19]

I have read by a few ATC plus and FAA rep that ATC is not allowed to do vectors to final for any GPS approach. It will always be to an approach fix.
So consider that aspect from a training perspective.

What? That's definitely false. VTF is pretty common on RNAV approaches

 

[Hang 4]

I have read by a few ATC plus and FAA rep that ATC is not allowed to do vectors to final for any GPS approach. It will always be to an approach fix.

Only time I did not get vectors to an RNAV was when I specifically asked to go to the IAF and do a procedure turn. Every other RNAV has been vectors - about 50ish approaches.

 

[Piper18O]

Probably you. That is a TAA Approach. It says NoPT if arriving to USACE from the 236 Course To, clockwise to the 056 Course To. It sounds like you were in TAA sector.

It does say NoPT on the chart, look at the TAA sector for arrivals from the south and east. Assuming you were in that sector, you should not have performed the PT.

Yes, it probably was me. My memory isn't always spot on, so I dug deep and just happened to still have the KML file of that flight. It showed my final track to USACE at between 54.8 and 60.4 degrees, for whatever those blips are worth. 54 being NoPT, 60 would have meant PT. Obviously I meant 100 degree left turn not 80 but I was even wrong on that, as it was somewhere close to 90 degrees. It was a popup because KFNB had a broken layer, I was on top and I couldn't get in VFR. When it is that close, I should have confirmed the procedure with the controller.

 

[Velocity173]

I have read by a few ATC plus and FAA rep that ATC is not allowed to do vectors to final for any GPS approach. It will always be to an approach fix.
So consider that aspect from a training perspective.


Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk

They can vector aircraft to a RNAV / GPS final, they just can’t intercept closer than 2 miles outside the approach gate.

 

[tspear]

@Hang 4

Hang 4, read the section from Velocity173. There is a very limited exception at pilots request. Otherwise, you are always vectored to an approach fix for any GPS approach. Note: it does not have to be IAF. It just base to an AF.

@Velocity173

Nice to know I recalled it correctly. How did you find the correct manual section?

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk