Procedure turn questions

Sheep44

Well-Known Member
I have a question about procedure turns that nobody has been able to answer for me satisfactorily.
Maybe I have it wrong, but as I understand it, FAR 91.175(j) basically says that if there is a procedure turn published as part of a instrument procedure, you are required to follow it unless; 1. You are given vectors 2. You are established on course from a holding fix, or 3. The Term "NoPT" appears for the route you are flying. My question is, am I missing something or are there times when it would be quite obvious to not make the published procedure turn. I have heard from two different things from two different CFII's. Let me give you some examples and some links to look at the plates to tell me what you think. These are just examples I found at random, and I am sure there are other approaches out there that would create similar questions.

Example 1: Lovelock, Nevada (LOL) VOR or GPS C approach:

http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl?SouthWest/LOL_v_gC.GIF

If you are coming inbound from Robud intersection, would you need to make the procedure turn? It is published, and the three requirements listed above do not exist. If not, what altitudes would you fly? Is it safe to assume that you would be receiving vectors for this approach? If not, how would you turn around at the IAF so you could turn around and THEN turn around at the procedure turn? Am I missing something really simple here? Wouldn't it be reasonable to just make the straight in approach? Where does it say that in the FARs or the AIM? Take a look at the VOR/DME or GPS A approach for the same field:

http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl?SouthWest/LOL_vd_gA.GIF

It would seem to make a lot more sense to me to make the VOR or GPS C approach similar to the GPS A approach. I know this should be simple, but I feel like I am really missing something here.

Here's a second example:

Yuma, Arizona (YUM) VOR 17:
http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl?SouthWest/YUM_vr17.GIF

I have the same questions about this one, with some additional imformation-The 337 radial is an airway, with an MEA of 5,000-in this case, would the holding pattern used to "reverse course" really be intended to lose the altitude to get down to 2800 feet?

I know this is a long post, and probably will require a lengthy reply, but I would really appreciate any opinions and ideas about this one.

One more thing-here are two articles that I have read that are very informative, but have not really completely answered my questions, especially about the first LOL approach that I have listed. They are both PDF articles.

http://www.terps.com/ifrr/jul96.pdf

http://www.terps.com/ifrr/nov96.pdf

Thanks in advance for you replies.
 

seagull

Well-Known Member
First off, not sure where you came up with the second "exclusion" to having to do a Pt. There are only two. 1. Radar vectors to the FAC. 2. You are established on a NoPt route. Perhaps you are confusing the issue of using a holding pattern in lieu of a Pt?

I think the answers to the rest of your questions are now fairly obvious in light of the above.

>> If you are coming inbound from Robud intersection, would you need to make the procedure turn?

Clearly, yes.

>>t would seem to make a lot more sense to me to make the VOR or GPS C approach similar to the GPS A approach

It would if the VOR or GPS-C provided you with enough data to safety do that. Obviously, they do not.

>>The 337 radial is an airway, with an MEA of 5,000-in this case,
would the holding pattern used to "reverse course" really be intended to lose the altitude to get down to 2800 feet?

You could use the pattern to lose altitude as required, but you must make the initial turn outbound regardless. I would guess terrain precluded the use of a standard Pt here.
 
Top