Another question about this approach (and I've seen similar apparent
ommisions on other approaches):

Why isn't the initial approach segment from PAWLING marked "NoPT"?

To me, it makes no more sense to do a PT when coming in over PAWLING
than it does when coming in over KINGSTON, yet the KINGSTON IAS is
marked "NoPT", and the PAWLING one isn't.

Is this just a charting error, or is there a subtlety that I'm
missing?

TIA for any info.

Tim.

On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 15:20:49 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:

The VOR or GPS-1 into Sky Park, NY (46N)
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...s/05462VG1.PDF has a
note saying "Final approach from Saggi Int holding pattern not
authorized. Procedure turn required". What doesn't make sense about
this is that SAGGI is an IAF, and you're allowed to use a holding
pattern as a PT. So, what's the note all about?

It's also not clear why the PT and missed hold are charted on opposite
sides of the approach course. Let's say you flew the approach, missed,
and entered the hold at SAGGI. The weather got a bit better and you
were cleared for another approach. The maneuvering you've had to do is
absurd. The logical thing would be to just continue in the hold until
you were inbound to SAGGI and continue from there. But, no, you've got
to turn around again, intercept the approach course outbound, do a PT,
re-intercept inbound, and then proceed. What's the point?

This seems like the kind of approach I need to bring a student to, just
to see how they handle it.