How about an IFR question

[Tnathan]

So, I am dusting off my mic and seeing what I can do with the pacer. Kind of related to this board. I have asked this question before and checked on the internet, but never got much comfort.

So I take off and follow my departure procedure, even if as part 91 I may not have to. I move around in the enroute phase and all goes as expected and then we come to the point where you get the radio call from ATC for all the marbles I have been waiting for and the hopeful conclusion of a perfect flight: the approach clearance.

I have been getting vectored around and get pointed at some fix on the approach or maybe to just intersect the approach course. The call usually goes something like this for me around here “Nxxxxx you are 5 from some waypoint or the approach course, maintain altitude until established, cleared the bla bla approach. The angle to the approach course is often reasonable but typically less than perpendicular, but do I do the procedure turn I wonder. If I recall, It is as easy or easier to go in as to turn outbound, and I don’t think Potomac controllers have it in their head I am going to spend 5 minutes going the wrong way after they got me here.

I believe the controller handbook has guidance that if the angle is less than something like 30 degrees from the approach course they “should” clear you straight in, but I often don’t hear those magic words. So here I am where things are about to get busy and I have uncertainty about which way to turn. I got some guidance from a CFI once to query ATC to make sure we are on the same page. I thought “okay, I will just make it part of the plan to ask then.”

Well, Once I got a controller who cleared me for the approach but intended for me to go straight in, and seemed confused by my question. We had an extended conversation trying to verify there wasn’t something he was missing. Another time I got a controller who got snarky with me and refused to answer the question. In response to my question, he said “well what does the plate show?” I said “it showed a procedure turn” and he said “you have been cleared to fly the procedure as depicted.” So I did the PT. I feel stupid asking but hate that at this critical phase of flight when i would like to focus on aviating a plan that I am confident in, I get sucked into length painful conversations and potentially having to reprogram the gps.

One strategy I have tried is in my readback to say what I think they mean: cleared straight in approach, or cleared for the complete procedure. Another strategy I have tried is when I hit the fix and turn inbound to just say “established and proceeding inbound on the approach.” I figure if that’s not what they wanted they could correct me and I could quickly whip the plane the other way.

Most sources usually cite the rule that says no PT is required if vectored to final, noPT depicted, timed approach, etc. Generally around here controllers seem to have a perspective their job is to get you off their radar asap, but I don’t often get vectors to the FAF or hear the magic words cleared straight in either. But if I make the assumption that’s what they want for efficiency, I could rightfully get violated. Not how I want to end my flight, being told I have a number to call when I land.

How do you pros out there practically work with ATC? Any tricks of the trade? Hate feeling like I am the knob on the radio.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jspey]

Be the knob. Ask the questions. I have to believe that it's better than the alternative. You can always call them on the landline to get their perspective later after the excitement has worn off.

[dgapilot]

Any time I’ve been “radar vectors” to the approach, it has always been to intersect the inbound course. If they are sending you to an IAF, many times the IAF will be noted NOPT which means no procedure turn(see FDK ILS LOC 23 with EMI as the IAF).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tnathan]

Any time I’ve been “radar vectors” to the approach, it has always been to intersect the inbound course. If they are sending you to an IAF, many times the IAF will be noted NOPT which means no procedure turn(see FDK ILS LOC 23 with EMI as the IAF).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What a great example. You guessed the approach I was doing when I got the snarky controller. And yes, if he would have brought me in from EMI, it is clear. I wouldn’t have asked because it is clearly marked no PT from emi to numbe.

I can’t remember but I think I was north of emi coming in from the east. I wasn’t on that feeder route clearly marked. I wasn’t be vectored to the faf. But if emi to numbe doesn’t require a PT why should you need to do one when you are even straighter?

The end result after getting grilled was I did a turn in the hold because it was bold and I didn’t fit an exception even though I was more or less lined up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tnathan]

Be the knob. Ask the questions. I have to believe that it's better than the alternative. You can always call them on the landline to get their perspective later after the excitement has worn off.

Thanks and like I said I have come up with some compensation strategies: when I do the readback tell them what I intend to do. If they disagree and don’t say anything then I am on tape and that’s the whole point of the readback.

I was just curious what others do.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RickF]

If you are on vectors and cleared for the approach you turn to the inbound coarse.
The only time you would do the procdure turn is if the controller told you to do it.

Other than training, in my career I have only done the proceedure turn going into two places and both of those were outside the US.

Rick

[dgapilot]

The other thing to remember, procedure turns were designed for a non radar environment (yeah, a large part of the US was non radar up into the mid 1980s). If on radar vectors, there should be no need to do a procedure turn. The only time you would do one is lost communications, of if the ATC radar goes down. The procedure turns are still published explicitly for the lost comma or lost radar possibility.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dgapilot]

From AIM
Approach Control

• Approach control is responsible for controlling all instrument flight operating within its area of responsibility. Approach control may serve one or more airfields, and control is exercised primarily by direct pilot and controller communications. Prior to arriving at the destination radio facility, instructions will be received from ARTCC to contact approach control on a specified frequency.
• Radar Approach Control.
  
  • Where radar is approved for approach control service, it is used not only for radar approaches (Airport Surveillance Radar [ASR] and Precision Approach Radar [PAR]) but is also used to provide vectors in conjunction with published nonradar approaches based on radio NAVAIDs (ILS, VOR, NDB, TACAN). Radar vectors can provide course guidance and expedite traffic to the final approach course of any established IAP or to the traffic pattern for a visual approach. Approach control facilities that provide this radar service will operate in the following manner:
    
    • Arriving aircraft are either cleared to an outer fix most appropriate to the route being flown with vertical separation and, if required, given holding information or, when radar handoffs are effected between the ARTCC and approach control, or between two approach control facilities, aircraft are cleared to the airport or to a fix so located that the handoff will be completed prior to the time the aircraft reaches the fix. When radar handoffs are utilized, successive arriving flights may be handed off to approach control with radar separation in lieu of vertical separation.
    • After release to approach control, aircraft are vectored to the final approach course (ILS, RNAV, GLS, VOR, ADF, etc.). Radar vectors and altitude or flight levels will be issued as required for spacing and separating aircraft. Therefore, pilots must not deviate from the headings issued by approach control. Aircraft will normally be informed when it is necessary to vector across the final approach course for spacing or other reasons. If approach course crossing is imminent and the pilot has not been informed that the aircraft will be vectored across the final approach course, the pilot should query the controller.
    • The pilot is not expected to turn inbound on the final approach course unless an approach clearance has been issued. This clearance will normally be issued with the final vector for interception of the final approach course, and the vector will be such as to enable the pilot to establish the aircraft on the final approach course prior to reaching the final approach fix.
    • In the case of aircraft already inbound on the final approach course, approach clearance will be issued prior to the aircraft reaching the final approach fix. When established inbound on the final approach course, radar separation will be maintained and the pilot will be expected to complete the approach utilizing the approach aid designated in the clearance (ILS, RNAV, GLS, VOR, radio beacons, etc.) as the primary means of navigation. Therefore, once established on the final approach course, pilots must not deviate from it unless a clearance to do so is received from ATC.
    • After passing the final approach fix on final approach, aircraft are expected to continue inbound on the final approach course and complete the approach or effect the missed approach procedure published for that airport.
    
    
  • ARTCCs are approved for and may provide approach control services to specific airports. The radar systems used by these centers do not provide the same precision as an ASR/PAR used by approach control facilities and towers, and the update rate is not as fast. Therefore, pilots may be requested to report established on the final approach course.
  • Whether aircraft are vectored to the appropriate final approach course or provide their own navigation on published routes to it, radar service is automatically terminated when the landing is completed or when instructed to change to advisory frequency at uncontrolled airports, whichever occurs first.

[Tnathan]

Thanks, for the flight I am reflecting on, it was a round robin flight. I had just done the vor-34 into kdmw and went missed. When I got back on with Potomac, he didn’t vector me back to emi, he gave me a vector to numbe for the ils 23 at kfdk, which resulted in the snarky conversation I had, and ended with me doing a lap in the hold, even though I was more or less lined up to go straight in.

I think part of my confusion is “when have they vectored me for the final approach course?” Here numbe is and IAF on the intermediate approach course. I use to think that fall within the vector exception, I need a vector to the FAF, but that’s not what the rule says. It say no PT if you are vectored to the final approach course.

My memory of this event is a little hazy, I also wonder if I set myself up for failure. I recall it was not out of the ordinary for controllers when I was doing these flights to ask how I wanted the next leg to terminate. I think at that point in my training, my respnse would be to simply say which approach I wanted (e.g., ILS 23 at Fredrick and then go missed and proceed to the next airport. I would get a response like approved as requested. . . . So, if I ask for the approach and say nothing more, the controller could have assumed in this case I asked for the complete approach. His point could have been, I know you are doing training, you asked for the approach, I gave you what you asked for, why are you now asking me to clarify to you what you asked for? If I wanted straight in I should have asked for it, and he was trying to teach me a lesson to be clear about what I am asking for. But it still begs the question in my mind when being vectored when can I assume it was a vector to the final approach course and when wasn’t it.


Here’s the aim section


5 − 4 − 9. Procedure Turn and Hold − in − lieu of Procedure Turn

a. A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold−in−lieu−of−PT is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart, unless cleared by ATC for a straight−in approach. Additionally, the procedure turn or hold−in−lieu−of−PT is not permitted when the symbol “No PT” is depicted on the initial segment being used, when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the profile view. For a hold−in−lieu−of−PT, the holding pattern direction must be flown as depicted and the specified leg length/timing must not be exceeded.

NOTE −

The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold −in−lieu−of−PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight −in approach, the pilot must immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Section 91.123).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalkj

[PA-16]

Keep it simple, if you dont understand a clearance than ask for clarification, simple. Why mess around? ATC expects you to do one thing, not something else.

I never get a procedure turn unless not in radar contact or I ask for it.