Hi all,
I’ve been told by many that I should not make more than 90 degree turn when turning at IAF, meaning that, for example I cannot go directly from an overhead hold to an IAF at many places and would have to dead-reckon further out to ensure that.
What is the actual UK/EU regulation? None were able to confirm it when challenged…
Thanks!
This is a procedure design issue and as such is found in PANS-OPS and not in regulations. Anyway, PANS-OPS explicitly allows up to 110° of turn at the “offset” IAFs of T-bar or Y style procedures. With fly-by waypoints there is really no reason to limit the turn angle at the IAF as long as the initial approach segment is long enough that it can be reliably intercepted after the turn.
@Airborne_Again, sorry, my question was for the turn AT the IAF – that bit is usually to the pilot, and not the procedure designer, right?
arj1 wrote:
Airborne_Again, sorry, my question was for the turn AT the IAF – that bit is usually to the pilot, and not the procedure designer, right?
That’s how I understood your question. In T/Y-bar procedures, which is the norm for RNP approach procedures, the procedure specifies the inbound tracks (or “capture regions”) of the IAFs – this indirectly defines the turn angles at the IAFs. In this situation PANS-OPS explicitly allows turns of up to 110° AT the offset IAFs.
PANS-OPS part III, section 2, para. 3.1.3: The lateral initial segments are based on course differences of 70° to 90° from the intermediate segment track. This arrangement ensures that entry from within a capture region requires a change of course at the IAF not greater than 110°.
It is further specified that if there is a need for a course change larger than 110°, then a course reversal (procedure turn or racetrack) should be used at the IAF. The figure below illustrates the situation. When arriving at the left IAF on a 360°–020° track, then turns between 90° and 110° are required. Arrival on a more westerly track – like the airplane in the figure – would require a turn of more than 110° so a course reversal is required.
Please give an example of what you mean.
A-A has answered the same as I was going to answer.
I meant that if I leave the CIT hold at EGTC and fly north to ADSON, I’ve been told that I cannot just go directly to ADSON, I’d have to dead-reckon to north-west before arriving at ADSON so that my turn at ADSON is no more that 90 degrees (actually, acceptable up to 110 degrees) and just going directly to ADSON would mean fail at the exam.
And I cannot find any regulatory reference for that.
As a non-UK pilot, this looks like a completely messed up procedure to me. Presumably the charted hold at CIT is for the missed? Since holding inside the FAF would certainly be novel.
In IFR you don’t just fly random vectors of your own volition, you fly charted paths. So randomly leaving the hold kind-of-north-westish so that you can then approach ADSON at an appropriate angle is a complete no-no. In real life one would hope (though this IS the UK) to get vectors, in which case you wouldn’t normally expect to use the IAF anyway – you’d get vectored round to rejoin at TC211.
So as far as I can see if you go missed off this approach and there is no radar service, you are condemned to going round the CIT hold until you run out of fuel.
But maybe the UK does things differently.
Same situation at Blackpool.
Queried the 110 deg thing and self position so as to be less than 110 deg with my examiner (also does initials) during IR revalidation. He said the 110 deg thing no longer applies, which seemed sensible! So went from hold straight to IAF…I passed :-)
PeteD wrote:
Same situation at Blackpool.
Queried the 110 deg thing and self position so as to be less than 110 deg with my examiner (also does initials) during IR revalidation. He said the 110 deg thing no longer applies, which seemed sensible! So went from hold straight to IAF…I passed :-)
Thanks PeteD!
I think A_A answered your question in detail before I asked for an example.
A procedure turn is the answer but the transit from the hold to the IAF should be written in the text or one should expect vectors or ATC clearance to leave the hold to the IAF,as looking at the hold altitude and the IAF altitude there might, without clearance be a risk to separation.
