Instrument Approach Question

[mocaman]

Hello, I have a question regarding the VOR approach into La Porte IN. (PPO) the notes in the plan view indicate that NOPT is allowed between radials 095 and 238. They show a holding pattern in lieu of a PT. Say you are holding on the 090 radial...and you are then cleared for the approach. Do you have to get established in the published holding pattern or can you go ahead and just do a PT? Thanks for all responses!

 

[TonyC]

Hello, I have a question regarding the VOR approach into La Porte IN. (PPO) the notes in the plan view indicate that NOPT is allowed between radials 095 and 238. They show a holding pattern in lieu of a PT. Say you are holding on the 090 radial...and you are then cleared for the approach. Do you have to get established in the published holding pattern or can you go ahead and just do a PT? Thanks for all responses!

I assume you're talking about This Approach Procedure. If you arrive at the KNOX VOR (OXI) from roughly the south (095 radial to 238 radial) you will fly over the VOR and proceed via the 346 degree radial to the Final Approach Fix and so on. Otherwise, you will use the published holding pattern to more closely align your airplane with the 346 degree approach course.

The latter method would include the holding pattern you described on the 090 degree radial. Since you would be arriving at the KNOX VOR outside the 095 clockwise to 238 radial, you would be required to fly the published holding pattern before proceeding along the 346 degree radial to the FAF.


OK - - that hyperlink from a "quick-view" approach plate on FLTPLAN.COM doesn't seem to work. Try this instead: VOR or GPS-A La Porte Muni (PPO)

 

[sqwkvfr]

Just the PT, unless otherwise instructed.

I disagree with ya here, Tony...I don't think you have to make a lap, do you?

 

[TonyC]

Just the PT, unless otherwise instructed.

I disagree with ya here, Tony...I don't think you have to make a lap, do you?

That's what I thought until I looked at the plate and reread the scenario. First, there is no procedure turn depicted - - only a holding pattern, and the No Pt routing in the note. You're either going to cross the VOR and head for the FAF, or you're going to cross the VOR and enter a holding pattern.

The holding pattern in the hypothetical scenario is outside of the defined cone for NO Pt, therefore I believe the published holding pattern is required to align with the Final approach course.

 

[sqwkvfr]

That's what I thought until I looked at the plate and reread the scenario. First, there is no procedure turn depicted - - only a holding pattern, and the No Pt routing in the note. You're either going to cross the VOR and head for the FAF, or you're going to cross the VOR and enter a holding pattern.

The holding pattern in the hypothetical scenario is outside of the defined cone for NO Pt, therefore I believe the published holding pattern is required to align with the Final approach course.

Right, but you just do a parallel entry for said holding pattern and fly the inbound course after turning inbound, right?...you wouldn't actually fly the holding pattern....no?

 

[TonyC]

Right, but you just do a parallel entry for said holding pattern and fly the inbound course after turning inbound, right?

right...

...you wouldn't actually fly the holding pattern....no?

Parallel entry, outbound a sufficient distance so that you can turn left to either proceed direct to the VOR or intercept the 346 degree course inbound, with an inbound leg length of no more than 1 minute constitutes one turn in holding.

I wouldn't fly ANOTHER turn in holding.

 

[sqwkvfr]

Parallel entry, outbound a sufficient distance so that you can turn left to either proceed direct to the VOR or intercept the 346 degree course inbound, with an inbound leg length of no more than 1 minute constitutes one turn in holding.

Just in time....my instrument oral is very near. Thanks!

 

[ipilot]

As far as i know. If ur withing 30 deg of the inbound course going direct to the station and ur cleared for the approach you don't have to do the hold. Otherwise you'll have to enter the hold and once ur established on the inbound course for the approach you can do the approach.
I hope this helps....

 

[philo beddoe]

Some clarification is needed here.

You absolutely must do the racetrack course reversal unless you arrive on an airway radial between 095 deg and 238 deg. The 095 and 238 will both be airways, and there may be additional airways between these two.

However, it is a mistaken assumption that ALL radial in that sector permit a straight-in. THey do not. Because of TERPS criteria the other radials require a course reversal.

Trust me on this one, I've researched it. While I agree that it is stupid that you can't use all of the radials in the sector, that's how it is. This may not be how it was intended when the concept of these sectors was first introduced, but that is how the feds are interpreting it now.

Besides, carefully observe the note:

"... OXI VOR/DME airway radials..."

 

[philo beddoe]

As far as i know. If ur withing 30 deg of the inbound course going direct to the station and ur cleared for the approach you don't have to do the hold. Otherwise you'll have to enter the hold and once ur established on the inbound course for the approach you can do the approach.
I hope this helps....

I'm not sure what you meant by this, since it is sort of vague, but if it means what I think it does, then no, you can't do that.

Unless you are being vectored or on a NoPT route, you MUST do the course reversal. The "30-degree" window is not supported anywhere in the regulations.

 

[TonyC]

However, it is a mistaken assumption that ALL radial in that sector permit a straight-in. THey do not. Because of TERPS criteria the other radials require a course reversal.

Trust me on this one, I've researched it.

References, please?



What TERPS criteria makes it safe to turn right on course from the 095 radial, and not the 096 radial?

 

[philo beddoe]

I'll look for it, but it has been awhile.

It has nothing to do with with safety, but it is relevant to terps descent gradient criteria. You are correct; every radial closer to the actual inbound course is easier, if not necessarily safer.

Here is the FAA reasoning: If you are inbound on an airway, there is a published MEA. It is therefore possible to calculate the descent required from the MEA to the intermediate segment altitude and divide by the intermediate segment distance to get gradient. For intermediate segments, 150ft/nm is around optimum, with 318ft/nm being maximum.

If you are arriving on any other radial, it is assumed that there is no no published MEA. (Yes, I know that one degree makes no practical difference, but that is not the way the red-tape makers think.)

Since there is no published MEA, it is impossible to calculate the descent required on the intermediate segment, and therefore you can't authorize that as a NoPT route, since terps requires that all segments have a calculated gradient. Purely legalese.

Now, you might then remark: " But what if I was on the airway at 9000ft? What about that descent gradient NOW?! You would be correct of course. But as always, the line had to be drawn somewhere, and it was not necessarily drawn in the most logical place.

Personally, I think it should be authorized to go stright-in from anywhere in the sector, but the feds never ask me for my blessing on these matters.

 

[TonyC]

If you are arriving on any other radial, it is assumed that there is no no published MEA. ... Since there is no published MEA, it is impossible to calculate the descent required on the intermediate segment, and therefore you can't authorize that as a NoPT route, since terps requires that all segments have a calculated gradient.

The published MSA of 3000' seems like a convenient starting point for the descent gradient calculations - - 700' in 8 miles seems quite comfortable.


If your interpretation is accurate, I believe the note on the NACO plate (I don't have a Jepp for it, so can't comment) is very misleading. To avoid confusion it should say "NoPT for arrival on Airways V-xyz, V-abc, V-ghi, and V-rst" rather than use a "radials XXX clockwise ZZZ" type of terminology.


To make sure I understand your interpretation, allow me a hypothetcal. Apparently the 095 radial defines an airway. Assume I'm inbound to OXI on that radial when ATC vectors me south for traffic. Once clear of the traffic, rather than clearing me back to the airway, ATC says "Cleared direct to OXI, cleared the VOR-A." According to your interpretation, I must now fly the holding pattern course reversal?

 

[minitour]

...Once clear of the traffic, rather than clearing me back to the airway, ATC says "Cleared direct to OXI, cleared the VOR-A." According to your interpretation, I must now fly the holding pattern course reversal?

...If you were going to fly the "direct" entry then sure, once around cross the fix the second time and you're established inbound...

If you're entering parallel, then once you turn inbound and cross the fix again, you're established inbound...

I'd say you should probably enter direct, although you could probably get away with either entry in this case since it's so close...any II's out there wanna help me out with that one? (not that you're required to enter one way or another...just recommended to enter this way or that..)

That's the way I was esplained anywho...

-mini

 

[philo beddoe]

Like all regulations and policies, the writers do not automatically think through every contingency (lost comm for example).

You are correct about the MSA being workable, but it is not a matter of SAFE altitudes but CLEARABLE altitudes (to invent a word).

Since the MSA is an emergency altitude and not an actual part of any route or clearance, I am surmising that they elected not to do it this way.

The problem is that the FAA has to assume a 'dumbest pilot, dumbest controller" philosophy when they design this stuff. I'm sure lots of us are clever enough to cook up our own approach transitions, but again, the line must be drawn somewhere.

Like I said, I have no problem with anything you propose, although I would never try those dangerous things myself. You're dangerous, man, every time you fly you are unsafe.

 

[philo beddoe]

Recheck the NACO plate and see if the word 'airway' isn't there.

 

[avbug]

As far as i know. If ur withing 30 deg of the inbound course going direct to the station and ur cleared for the approach you don't have to do the hold. Otherwise you'll have to enter the hold and once ur established on the inbound course for the approach you can do the approach.
I hope this helps....

A proceedure turn is a required maneuver where depicted, unless NoPt is indicated, you are flying a timed approach, no proceedure turn is authorized or being radar vectored to the final approach course. In this case, you may not execute a proceedure turn without authorization. See AIM Para 5-4-7, which reads in part:

Except when being radar vectored to the final approach course, when cleared for a specifically prescribed IAP; i.e., "cleared ILS runway one niner approach" or when "cleared approach" i.e., execution of any procedure prescribed for the airport, pilots shall execute the entire procedure commencing at an IAF or an associated feeder route as described on the IAP Chart unless an appropriate new or revised ATC clearance is received, or the IFR flight plan is canceled.

The proceedure in question stipulates that no proceedure turn is required, nor expected (NoPt) between R095 clockwise to R238. No proceedure turn is required, nor permitted between those radials, unless authorized by ATC. ATC will not expect you to execute a proceedure turn, a hold entry, or a turn in the hold unless you specifically request it and you are approved to execute it.

The original question in the thread specified the following:

Say you are holding on the 090 radial...and you are then cleared for the approach. Do you have to get established in the published holding pattern or can you go ahead and just do a PT?

If you are holding on the 090 radial, you are not expected nor permitted to enter the published holding pattern. You have been cleared for the approach, and the approach clearly indicates NoPT for your radial. If you want a turn, you must request it. If you want to do a hold entry for the published hold, you must request it. If you want to do anything but cross the fix (Knox) and proceed inbound, you must specifically request it, because you have NOT been cleared to do anything else when cleared for the approach.

AIM 5-4-8 clearly states:

The hold in lieu of procedure turn is not required when RADAR VECTORING to the final approach course is provided or when "No PT" is shown.

 

[nosehair]

If you are holding on the 090 radial,

How is the 090 radial between the 095 and the 238?

 

[prpjt]

The procedure turn or 'course reversal' is published as a holding pattern, thus you must do the hold. (unless you are in a situation where no PT is required)

You said you are holding on the 90 degree radial. This is not an airway radial between 095 and 238. You have to do the hold entry to get established. You are correct, depending on the wind it might be a parallel entry. Get established and go in.

I don't think there is a cone of area that you are waived from the PT requirement. The exact wording is "No PT for arrival on OXI VOR/DME airway radials between 095 clockwise 238". It appears that there are 4 airways that fit this criteria. V144, V156, V422, and V340. I don't have an enroute in front of me but it looks close on the fltplan chart.

By the wording of the notation, if you are not arriving from that direction on one of those airways, the procedure turn requirement still stands.

edit. If you are coming in from the south and not on an airway, just request a descent and a straight in, you'll probably get it.

 

[Jmmccutc]

Just the PT, unless otherwise instructed.

I disagree with ya here, Tony...I don't think you have to make a lap, do you?

i just read the thread i missed this one earlier, but frankly the IFR procedure quesitons seem to be my favorite thread...TONY and VFR...i think you're both right...like tony says you gotta enter the pattern depicted, but like VFR say i don't think you gotta make a full turn, if i'm holding 090 like the stated scenerio, and i gotta make a PT, the turn you'd make would be a turn to ENTER the hold right? do a parallel entry to the hold establish inbound continue on your way...bingo you hit the FAF and you're golden...that's my take on it...