Oct 18 course reversal change

Gary,

I think we're in danger in getting caught up in legaleze here.

Let's step back a moment, and consider what this means in the real
world.

I'm approaching my destination on an IFR flight plan. I'm in the
clouds, otherwise I'd be doing a visual approach. I'm quite possibly
being bumped around. I'm also quite possibly tired after a long and
stressful flight in IMC.

I'm nicely lined up with the final approach course, at an appropriate
airspeed and altitude. I'm cleared for the approach, but I haven't,
however, heard the magic words "vectors to final".

Does it really make sense that the regulations insist that I fly a
procedure turn to get back to exactly the same point, heading,
altitude and airspeed I'm at now?


(To get back to legaleze
I'm not denying that that's what the 1994 legal opinion says. I'm
just saying that it doesn't gel with my reading of 97.3(p) as it is
written, I'm also saying that I'd like to see the legal opinion
overturned, and whatever regulations there are in 97.20 changed so
that we don't have to fly a procedure turn in these circumstances.

Tim.

On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 13:25:51 -0500, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

"Tim Auckland" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 11:36:25 -0500, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:
I think you're reading 97.3p as though it said "We hereby prescribe that
you
perform a PT when you think it is necessary to reverse direction..."; but
it
was apparently intended to mean "When our TERPS designers think it is
necessary for you to reverse direction, they prescribe a PT (by charting
it
on an approach plate)".

I agree that is in line with the 1994 legal opinion, but I still
wonder if it's what the original drafters of 97.3(p) intended.

If the original drafters of 97.3(p) intended Procedure Turns to be
used in all cases, why did they include the words "reverse direction"
at all?

I suspect they were simply being informative by mentioning the rationale for
the prescription when they stated the definition of a PT. It makes sense
that they'd want pilots to understand what PTs are supposed to be for (even
though, like any other feature of an approach chart, a PT might mistakenly
be prescribed when it's not supposed to be).

--Gary