Procedure Turn or Not KPWM ILS 29 from CDOGG1 Arrival

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

taters

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
1,712
Display Name
Display name:
Taters
Made for some debate between me and the Capt and ATC yesterday flying a new procedure.

You are flying the CDOGG1 RNAV ARRIVAL landing ILS 29. "RJ 1234 , maintain 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29. Do you do the procedure turn or not?

I should add by the way we briefed the visual and some junk moved in on the decent..
 
Last edited:
I say you would fly the procedure turn, since you are not approaching southwest bound. Okay, now what is the answer.
 
taters said:
Made for some debate between me and the Capt and ATC yesterday flying a new procedure.

You are flying the CDOGG1 RNAV ARRIVAL landing ILS 29. "RJ 1234 , maintain 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29. Do you do the procedure turn or not?

I should add by the way we briefed the visual and some junk moved in on the decent..
Click to expand...

Not. What position did ATC take in the debate?
 
I'd say unless he cleared you for a straight in you'd have to do a direct entry into holding pattern. For me personally, I'd rather do the reversal in holding anyway. You'd have a good left turn to do coming off the 018.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
I'd say unless he cleared you for a straight in you'd have to do a direct entry into holding pattern.
Click to expand...

Why?

For me personally, I'd rather do the one lap in holding anyway. You'd have a good left turn to do coming off the 018.
Click to expand...

Yup, and you'd have a good right turn coming off V268 southwest bound but that's a NoPT route.
 
roncachamp said:
Not. What position did ATC take in the debate?
Click to expand...

ATC
"This is new for us...so we really aren't sure ,still learning..we dont even know if you are on the CDOGG or not unless you tell us"
 
roncachamp said:
Why?



Yup, and you'd have a good right turn coming off V268 southwest bound but that's a NoPT route.
Click to expand...

Because he wasn't cleared for a straight in approach, he wasn't being vectored to final, his RNAV arrival didn't say NoPT and timed approaches weren't being conducted. In this case it would be mandatory.
 
Velocity173 said:
Because he wasn't cleared for a straight in approach, he wasn't being vectored to final, his RNAV arrival didn't say NoPT and timed approaches weren't being conducted. In this case it would be mandatory.
Click to expand...

Why is it mandatory if one of those does not apply? The regulations do not say when a course reversal is mandatory, they say when one is prohibited.
 
Velocity173 said:
Because he wasn't cleared for a straight in approach, he wasn't being vectored to final, his RNAV arrival didn't say NoPT and timed approaches weren't being conducted. In this case it would be mandatory.
Click to expand...

Indeed....

I told atc as I was the flying pilot, "confirm your expecting my procedure turn"...His response indicated a tone of surprise but he stated" you can do it if you want I guess, I can give you vectors or what ever you want".....I asked for (and was cleared) for a straight in clearance and proceeded with the 90* intercept..given that SAPPE was merely an IAF. I really didn't see the value in the PT... What was interesting is the FMS sequenced us straight in on the arrival, without any discontinuity at SAPPE....ATC expected us to go straight in

I cant find specific guidance on a RNAV Star that terminates at an IAF, giving you NoPT without saying it anywhere on the plates.
 
Last edited:
taters said:
Indeed....

I told atc as I was the flying pilot, "confirm your expecting my procedure turn"...His response indicated a tone of surprise but he stated" you can do it if you want I guess, I can give you vectors or what ever you want".....I asked for (and was cleared) for a straight in clearance and proceeded with the 90* intercept..given that SAPPE was merely an IAF. I really didn't see the value in the PT... What was interesting is the FMS sequenced us straight in on the arrival, without any discontinuity at SAPPE....ATC expected us to go straight in
Click to expand...

If you didn't see the value in the PT, why would you think ATC would expect one?
 
roncachamp said:
If you didn't see the value in the PT, why would you think ATC would expect one?
Click to expand...


The Hold is in Bold,
NoPT is only for V268 South-westbound
Wasn't given straight in clearance
Not a vectored approach
 
taters said:
I didnt do it given my eventual straight in clearance
Click to expand...

Do you believe it's mandatory without that?

The Hold is in Bold,
Click to expand...

So what?

NoPT is only for V268 South-westbound
Click to expand...

Making it irrelevant to this discussion. I suspect the lack of NoPT for arrivals on the CDOGG is a chart error.

Wasn't given straight in clearance
Click to expand...

That's not one of the regulatory prohibitions on PTs.

You seemed surprised that ATC did not expect a PT. Why?
 
Last edited:
taters said:
Indeed....

I told atc as I was the flying pilot, "confirm your expecting my procedure turn"...His response indicated a tone of surprise but he stated" you can do it if you want I guess, I can give you vectors or what ever you want".....I asked for (and was cleared) for a straight in clearance and proceeded with the 90* intercept..given that SAPPE was merely an IAF. I really didn't see the value in the PT... What was interesting is the FMS sequenced us straight in on the arrival, without any discontinuity at SAPPE....ATC expected us to go straight in

I cant find specific guidance on a RNAV Star that terminates at an IAF, giving you NoPT without saying it anywhere on the plates.
Click to expand...

Yeah I would've done the same thing. I guess you're right about the intercept as well. It's going to the IAF so even if you did shoot through it wouldn't be a biggie. This situation is really like a TAA only you don't have the option of NoPT. Best course to get around it is just to ask for the straight in. There's another example I read months ago in either AOPA or IFR refresher where the guy was even established within a few degrees of course and did the Hold in lieu of PT. ATC chewed him out over it. All the pilot had to do way clarify that he could do a straight in and it would've ended the confusion.
 
roncachamp said:
Do you believe it's mandatory without that?



So what?



Making it irrelevant to this discussion. I suspect the lack of NoPT for arrivals on the CDOGG is a chart error.



That's not one of the regulatory prohibitions on PTs.

You seemed surprised that ATC did not expect a PT. Why?
Click to expand...

General Operations Manual SOP/ IAW Aim 5-4-9 would support that we do one, unless cleared straight in.

At another APT we frequent with a similar clearance/plates..we do the PT, then the ILS
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah I would've done the same thing. I guess you're right about the intercept as well. It's going to the IAF so even if you did shoot through it wouldn't be a biggie. This situation is really like a TAA only you don't have the option of NoPT. Best course to get around it is just to ask for the straight in. There's another example I read months ago in either AOPA or IFR refresher where the guy was even established within a few degrees of course and did the Hold in lieu of PT. ATC chewed him out over it. All the pilot had to do way clarify that he could do a straight in and it would've ended the confusion.
Click to expand...

How can asking for straight in get around an otherwise required PT?
 
The approach procedure is itself regulatory, so you must fly it as published (including the course reversal) unless otherwise approved. The AIM enumerates the four conditions under which a published course reversal may be skipped:
  1. Vectors to final
  2. NoPT route
  3. Holding at the fix at the depicted altitude
  4. Cleared "straight in"
...and none of those conditions exist in the OP's case. Therefore, by regulation, the course reversal is required.

BTW, this issue is discussed in detail in the March 2010 issue of ASRS Callback.
 
Based on the clearance in the OP, the HILPT is mandatory according to FAR 91.175(j), 97.3 and the specific approach chart. Both the AIM and Order 7110:65U provide instructions on this matter. Some controllers have a hard time understanding this and may expect the aircraft to turn on to the FAC. If that is what they want, they are required to clear the aircraft straight in or vector the AC to the FAC. That being said, if the HILPT isn't needed to align the aircraft with the FAC, I would recommend that the pilot clarify the situation with the controller as was done in this case. The FAA General Counsel has ruled on this issue in 1994 re:Mr. Tom Young, Chairman Charting and Instnuncnt Procedures Committee. Air Line Pilots Association. Both controllers and pilots are bound by their rulings, whether they like it or not:

Finally, you ask whether a course reversal segment is optional "when one of the conditions of FAR section 91.175(j) is not present." Section 91.175(j) states that in the case of a radar vector to a final approach course or fix, a timed approach from a holding fix, or an approach for which the procedures specifies "no procedure turn." no pilot may make a procedure turn unless cleared to do so by ATC.

Section 97.3(p) defines a procedure turn, in part, as a maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft on a intermediate or final approach course. A SIAP may or may not prescribe a procedure tum based on the application of certain criteria contained in the TERPs. However, if a SIAP does contain a procedure turn and ATC has cleared a pilot to execute the SIAP, the pilot must make the procedure turn when one of the conditions of Section 91.175(j) is not present.
Click to expand...
 
roncachamp said:
And as far as you're concerned the AIM is regulatory.
Click to expand...

No but my Ops Manual IS which is supported directly by the AIM in this case..



yes the AIM isn't regulatory...that doesn't meant playing that game cant get you a phone number taxing in
 
Last edited:
roncachamp said:
How can asking for straight in get around an otherwise required PT?
Click to expand...

5-4-6
4. If proceeding to an IAF with a published course reversal (procedure turn or hold*in*lieu of PT pattern), except when cleared for a straight in approach by ATC, the pilot must execute the procedure turn/hold*in*lieu of PT, and complete the approach
 
Ron Levy said:
The approach procedure is itself regulatory, so you must fly it as published (including the course reversal) unless otherwise approved. The AIM enumerates the four conditions under which a published course reversal may be skipped:
  1. Vectors to final
  2. NoPT route
  3. Holding at the fix at the depicted altitude
  4. Cleared "straight in"
...and none of those conditions exist in the OP's case. Therefore, by regulation, the course reversal is required.

BTW, this issue is discussed in detail in the March 2010 issue of ASRS Callback.
Click to expand...

The AIM is not regulatory. The regulations don't say when a course reversal may be skipped, they say when a course reversal is prohibited. The three conditions under which a published course reversal is prohibited, unless cleared to do so by ATC:

  1. In the case of a radar vector to a final approach course or fix
  2. A timed approach from a holding fix
  3. An approach for which the procedure specifies “No PT”
 
taters said:
No but my Ops Manual IS which is supported directly by the AIM in this case..



yes the AIM isn't regulatory...that doesn't meant playing that game cant get you a phone number taxing in
Click to expand...

A phone number from ATC? Doubtful. You said yourself the controller seemed surprised when you asked to confirm the course reversal was expected.
 
roncachamp said:
The AIM is not regulatory. The regulations don't say when a course reversal may be skipped, they say when a course reversal is prohibited. The three conditions under which a published course reversal is prohibited, unless cleared to do so by ATC:

  1. In the case of a radar vector to a final approach course or fix
  2. A timed approach from a holding fix
  3. An approach for which the procedure specifies “No PT”
Click to expand...
roncachamp is wrong. You can confirm that by reading the regulations cited above, or by contacting the FAA Flight Procedures Branch (AFS-420). You are not permitted to deviate from a published SIAP except as specifically authorized, and the AIM tells you when you can skip a published PT. in the OP's case, no such authorization was received, so no deviation is authorized, and that means flying the full approach as published, including the course reversal.
 
taters said:
5-4-6
4. If proceeding to an IAF with a published course reversal (procedure turn or hold*in*lieu of PT pattern), except when cleared for a straight in approach by ATC, the pilot must execute the procedure turn/hold*in*lieu of PT, and complete the approach
Click to expand...

Is the AIM regulatory?
 
What procedure turn? I'm not seeing a procedure turn on that STAR. Most RNAV procedures do NOT have PTs - and do not have no PT since none is displayed -

You need to look at the ILS approach - and what were you cleared for? ILS29. ILS29 CATII SA -etc - it does not matter, however since flying the RNAV STAR how do you get on to the final approach course coming up on SAPPE?

Of COURSE you have to fly the PT. How else do you get on the ILS?

Now, if you get cleared for the STAR and then told to expect a visual - you can use SAPPE as a fly by WP . .

So, back to the OP - How did you get on the ILS? Seems like you did not do the PT so how did you legally fly through the waypoint and turn on course for the LOC - and at what altitude.
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
What procedure turn? I'm not seeing a procedure turn on that STAR. Most RNAV procedures do NOT have PTs - and do not have no PT since none is displayed -

You need to look at the ILS approach - and what were you cleared for? ILS29. ILS29 CATII SA -etc - it does not matter, however since flying the RNAV STAR how do you get on to the final approach course coming up on SAPPE?

Of COURSE you have to fly the PT. How else do you get on the ILS?

Now, if you get cleared for the STAR and then told to expect a visual - you can use SAPPE as a fly by WP . .
Click to expand...

SAPPE is on the ILS.
 
roncachamp said:
SAPPE is on the ILS.
Click to expand...

yep - sure is. But there is no PT on the STAR . . . as I said - how did they overfly SAPPE and enter the LOC for the ILS without turning? So - they turned. Did they get vectored to the turn or were they cleared: "Fly CDOGG1, SAPPE transition cleared for the ILS 29 Portland . . ." Seems to me they needed a procedure turn . . .how else would you fly the approach from SAPPE coming from the SW?
 
You are not permitted to deviate from a published SIAP except as specifically authorized, and the AIM tells you when you can skip a published PT. in the OP's case, no such authorization was received, so no deviation is authorized, and that means flying the full approach as published, including the course reversal.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too, Ron. That's why I said I would fly the course reversal. I cannot or the life of me think of why it would be acceptable to not fly the reversal and don't understand why ATC would have been confused. It seems so obvious, I must be wrong :(.
 
comanchepilot said:
yep - sure is. But there is no PT on the STAR . . .
Click to expand...

From the OP:

"You are flying the CDOGG1 RNAV ARRIVAL landing ILS 29. "RJ 1234 , maintain 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29. Do you do the procedure turn or not?

as I said - how did they overfly SAPPE and enter the LOC for the ILS without turning? So - they turned. Did they get vectored to the turn or were they cleared: "Fly CDOGG1, SAPPE transition cleared for the ILS 29 Portland . . ." Seems to me they needed a procedure turn . . .how else would you fly the approach from SAPPE coming from the SW?
Click to expand...

I'd start a left turn as I approached SAPPE and intercept the localizer.
 
roncachamp said:
From the OP:

"You are flying the CDOGG1 RNAV ARRIVAL landing ILS 29. "RJ 1234 , maintain 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29. Do you do the procedure turn or not?



I'd start a left turn as I approached SAPPE and intercept the localizer.
Click to expand...

That is certainly what ATC probably expected - but if you don't turn soon enough or over shoot the turn - how do you legally get back on the LOC?

And at the GS intercept altitude - how does that left turn provide obstacle clearance?
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
.
So, back to the OP - How did you get on the ILS? Seems like you did not do .
Click to expand...

On page 1 of this thread, we asked for a straight in clearance and I intercepted via the FMS guidance

The captain and I agreed the PT was technically required on paper in lieu of a vector or Straight -in clearance..especially after ATC admitted some confusion..I was more than comfortable with the intercept..given how bad I needed to go #1
 
Last edited:
taters said:
On page 1 of this thread, we asked for a straight in clearance and I intercepted via the FMS guidance

The captain and I agreed the PT was technically required on paper in lieu of a vector or clearance..controller again admitted he was unsure what should happen..I was more than comfortable with the intercept..
Click to expand...

well, then you got radar vectors to final - no PT required! :rolleyes:
 
comanchepilot said:
That is certainly what ATC probably expected - but if you don't turn soon enough or over shoot the turn - how do you legally get back on the LOC?
Click to expand...

The same way I would if I was coming in from the north on V268.

And at the GS intercept altitude - how does that left turn provide obstacle clearance?
Click to expand...

At the GS intercept altitude? The MDA on the STAR is 3000, as is the MEA on V268 and the minimum altitude on the HILPT. 3000 MSL at SAPPE is about 560' below the glideslope.
 
comanchepilot said:
well, then you got radar vectors to final - no PT required! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Original Clearance " maintain at or above 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29" we were coming down the CDOGG1 which terminates at SAPPE
 
somorris said:
That's what I thought too, Ron. That's why I said I would fly the course reversal.
Click to expand...
You thought and said right.

I cannot or the life of me think of why it would be acceptable to not fly the reversal
Click to expand...
You still think right.

and don't understand why ATC would have been confused.
Click to expand...
I will resist the temptation to make a personal comment about some controllers who post here (well, one controller who posts here) and just say read the March 2010 ASRS Callback to find out that both some pilots and some controllers don't understand the rules on this, and things can get really fouled up when either assumes wrongly the other one knows the rules, or assumes that the other wants something other than what the rules call for. So, those who said they'd ask to be sure, sure ain't wrong.

It seems so obvious, I must be wrong :(.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, Captain Freud, a course reversal is just a course reversal. :wink2:
 
Last edited:
roncachamp said:
From the OP:

"You are flying the CDOGG1 RNAV ARRIVAL landing ILS 29. "RJ 1234 , maintain 3000 until SAPPE cleared ILS 29. Do you do the procedure turn or not?

I'd start a left turn as I approached SAPPE and intercept the localizer.
Click to expand...
Then you'd be making the same mistake the pilots in Situation #3 in the Callback article made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top