VOR-A 60R Approach -- what's the best way

[McMooney]

looking at the vor-a 60r approach,  what is the best way to enter the procedure if say you are coming in 

inbound  say 280 to 300 deg?

one instructor says fly over vor then left turn back to vor then out bound 141

other just says turn to 321 as your approach the vor

https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1906/pdf/06576VA.PDF

guess adding a link to the approach would help

Edited May 24, 2019 by McMooney

[carusoam]

2 hours ago, McMooney said:

looking at the vor-a 60r approach,  what is the best way to enter the procedure if say you are coming in 

from  say 280 to 300 deg?

one instructor says fly over vor then left turn back to vor then out bound 321

other just says turn to 321 as your approach the vor

Is this related to an airport?

Can I guess... KDWH?

Want me to to post the IAP?

There are standard procedures to follow when approaching IAF... based on the angle you are approaching from...

PP thoughts only, not a CFII...

Best regards,

-a-

[McMooney]

updated original post with link to the procedure

[carusoam]

I think you need to have a conversation with the CFI who said turn away from the airport and fly a procedure turn... to come back to the airport 21° off your current heading...

He either didn't understand your question, or he really knows something I forgot... 

Got a copy of the standard intercept model from an IFR book?

Does this approach use a direct entry?  Or does the math require a procedure turn?

when you give a wide range like 280 to 300°... I get the feeling there is a trick question.  One of these numbers probably exceeds the limit for using a direct entry.

Which would you use...

• direct
• parallel
• Tear drop

My memory of this level of the IR training isn’t very strong...

Are you training for the IR?

Best regards,

-a-

[hypertech]

You mean your heading approaching the area is 280-300?  If you aren't already on vectors, ask for vectors and a straight in approach.  In the real world, I think this gets flown as a straight in approach.

Otherwise, I think instructor 1 is right. (but I don't think you have to fly right over the VOR - you do have to get established on the 141 radial).  You need to stay above the minimum safe altitude and maneuver an outbound leg and do a procedure turn.  Even if you were coming in on a heading of 321, you need to do a trip around the race track unless you are cleared for the straight in.

AIM 5-4-6

"If proceeding to an IAF with a published course reversal (procedure turn or hold­in­lieu of PT pattern), except when cleared for a straight in approach by ATC, the pilot must execute the procedure turn/hold­in­lieu of PT, and complete the approach."

 

Edited May 24, 2019 by hypertech

[N201MKTurbo]

If you need to do the procedure turn heading in those directions you are going to do a teardrop or parallel entry into the holding pattern to reverse course back to the procedure turn. 

[hypertech]

Also - if you have the ability, fly the RNAV instead.  The VOR is going to be flip flopping all over the place as you fly over it, you won't have to circle, and the minimums are better.

[carusoam]

Somewhere...  it should say NoPT for procedure turn not needed...

I’m not seeing that anywhere near the IAF...

Expect the PT to be needed...

How to enter it and which direction to turn....

Be ready with those answers because speed and time can have you out of the protected zone pretty quickly...

It really helps to have the GTN and magenta line...  

-a-

[Bob - S50]

Always fly the procedure turn unless conveniently aligned to intercept the final outside of the FAF ...and... ATC clears you for a straight in approach.  When in doubt ask.

[Oldguy]

If you are doing this for an IR checkride, you would cross the VOR at altitude, then do an entry into the holding pattern like @N201MKTurbo says and depart outbound on a 141 heading while descending to 2,000' (note the MSA from your initial inbound heading is 2,100' - there is a reason). Then procedure turn and back towards the VOR at 2,000' and start your descent to the airport after passing the VOR.

If you are flying this as an approach into Navasota in IMC, go for the RNAV if you have the equipment.

[kortopates]

Unless you are being vectored to final you must fly the Procedure Turn as depicted.

The holding pattern at the VOR is for the missed approach.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[carusoam]

Summary...

The best way includes...

• Using a different approach... One that can use your GPS... to avoid flip flopping VOR indicator as you approach the station.
• Using a ‘different approach’... One that requests ATC to give vectors to final...
• Flying the complete approach... including the procedure turn, because that is standard for something not marked NoPT.
• Most important... If you don’t know, ask. Confirm with ATC your intentions...
• Be familiar with the protected space as indicated on the chart... don’t exceed the limits in radius or altitude...
• Radius can be a challenge without DME or GPS, or really strong positional awareness...

As far as using this approach... standard consistent speed, stop watch, and really paying attention to minute/tiny detail, all help...

It takes being precise to fly a non-precision approach.

Thanks to McM... you inspired me to do some more reading/review...

Best regards,

-a-

[midlifeflyer]

Looking at both the approach and enroute chart for context, this is one of those situations in which a PT doesn't make a lot of practical sense, but the rules are clear. Assuming you are not on vectors to the final approach course, the procedure turn is required. 

For one possible exception, arguably, you can ask to be cleared straight in if you think you can do it, but ATC is not supposed to do that except from an IF, and there isn't one here. They might say OK anyway. While it is not proper, you are in "no-harm-no-foul" territory, so long as you don't cause a problem. Either way, it's more important in this case that you and ATC are on the same page.

And, yes, the holding pattern is for the missed. It is not a HILPT. The PT is a standard barb.

Edited May 24, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[ijs12fly]

McMooney,

I have a similar approach at my home airport - N51 -  VOR RWY 4.  

Don't confuse the Missed at the VOR as a published Procedure Turn.  The procedure turn is the Barb (096 heading) once you are established on the R-141 outbound and within 10 NM of the VOR.

If you want to fly the published approach - you would fly directly to the VOR TNV - the IAF,  at TNV you have the option to make a left or right hand turn to intercept the R-141 outbound.   Depending on your heading - sometimes the left turn is quicker to get you on your radial.   One thing to consider is turning right will keep you on the same side as the Barbed procedure turn - this side offers the greatest obstacle protection.  As long as you fly to the IAF and then make your turn (in either direction)  you will have adequate obstacle protection.  The idea of turning early begs the question "how early is early" to provide adequate obstacle clearance.  A lot of it depends on the other Nav gear you have.

Me personally coming from the East flying 270 to 300 degs to the VOR,  I would turn Left.

Regarding "one instructor says fly over vor then left turn back to vor then out bound 141" . 

I don't think he meant to turn back to the VOR, and believe he meant Cross the VOR,  then Turn Left until you intercept the 141 outbound.  So turn to a heading of 141 degs with about a 30-45 deg correction so you intercept the radial - so about 100 - 110 deg's or so for intercept.  Once intercept turn to 141 and the rest is easy.  

Hope this helps -

I am not an instructor so take my info as how I understand it.  It may need to be corrected.

Thanks

Steve

 

 

    

[jaylw314]

OK, @McMooney I am going to try to read between the lines, because your question was a little confusing.  I think you're actually trying to ask is:

If you are flying the VOR-A approach to 60R, and you are approaching from the southeast on a heading of 300, how should you turn outbound on the procedure turn?  Should you:

1. Make the acute turn to radial 141 before reaching the VOR?
2. Fly over the VOR and then turn left to join the outbound leg of the procedure turn (a left turn of 160 degrees)?
3. Fly over the VOR and then turn right to join the outbound leg of the procedure turn (a right turn of 200 degrees)?

I would vote for #3.

#1 is clearly incorrect, because the VOR is the IAF and you need to cross it.  Thinking about in another way--since DME is not required, how would you know when to turn outbound?  You'd only know when the TO/FROM flag on your OBS flipped--and that only happens when you cross the VOR.

#2 is probably OK, and my CFI told me to do so.

#3 is probably more OK.  IIRC, when they build an ILS approach with a procedure turn, they pick a left or right procedure turn based on which side of the turn has more terrain clearance.  Since the procedure turn is to the left, when you turn outbound you should turn in the same direction as the procedure turn to maximize terrain clearance.

Edited May 25, 2019 by jaylw314

[N231BN]

It's funny, on similar approaches I have had people tell me "as long as you are established within 10 miles you can just fly straight in." Of course I ask them where they read that and they say "that's what everybody does."

[midlifeflyer]

4 hours ago, N231BN said:

It's funny, on similar approaches I have had people tell me "as long as you are established within 10 miles you can just fly straight in." Of course I ask them where they read that and they say "that's what everybody does."

People have believed that for a long time. About 25 years ago, I almost "failed" an IPC because I wouldn't agree with that. The CFII was also a controller.

Many people believed that "a procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse direction," meant it was optional. That it was up to the pilot to decide when it was "necessary." At the opposite end were those who said ATC wasn't allowed to clear straight in unless they were vectoring to the approach gate, a point outside the FAF along the extended final approach course. Arguments were as heated as the early arguments about logging PIC or the quasi-religious wars over "pitch for airspeed, power for altitude."

The current language of AIM 5-4-9.a. Went through multiple revisions in an attempt to clarify the real middle ground.

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[midlifeflyer]

4 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

OK, @McMooney I am going to try to read between the lines, because your question was a little confusing.  I think you're actually trying to ask is:

If you are flying the VOR-A approach to 60R, and you are approaching from the southeast on a heading of 300, how should you turn outbound on the procedure turn?  Should you:

1. Make the acute turn to radial 141 before reaching the VOR?
2. Fly over the VOR and then turn left to join the outbound leg of the procedure turn (a left turn of 160 degrees)?
3. Fly over the VOR and then turn right to join the outbound leg of the procedure turn (a right turn of 200 degrees)?

I would vote for #3.

#1 is clearly incorrect, because the VOR is the IAF and you need to cross it.  Thinking about in another way--since DME is not required, how would you know when to turn outbound?  You'd only know when the TO/FROM flag on your OBS flipped--and that only happens when you cross the VOR.

#2 is probably OK, and my CFI told me to do so.

#3 is probably more OK.  IIRC, when they build an ILS approach with a procedure turn, they pick a left or right procedure turn based on which side of the turn has more terrain clearance.  Since the procedure turn is to the left, when you turn outbound you should turn in the same direction as the procedure turn to maximize terrain clearance.

I think you are right that this is the question. Between #2 and #3, I'd treat the entry the same as I would if it were a hold-in-lieu, with #2 in essence a parallel entry and #3 a direct entry. There is protection on both sides, with more on the maneuvering side.

[N231BN]

I think you are right that this is the question. Between #2 and #3, I'd treat the entry the same as I would if it were a hold-in-lieu, with #2 in essence a parallel entry and #3 a direct entry. There is protection on both sides, with more on the maneuvering side.

The way I see it, you have to be at 3000 until outbound from the VOR. That way you have 25nm to make the turn in either direction.

[midlifeflyer]

51 minutes ago, N231BN said:

5 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I think you are right that this is the question. Between #2 and #3, I'd treat the entry the same as I would if it were a hold-in-lieu, with #2 in essence a parallel entry and #3 a direct entry. There is protection on both sides, with more on the maneuvering side.

The way I see it, you have to be at 3000 until outbound from the VOR. That way you have 25nm to make the turn in either direction.

Going 25 NM off-route would probably be a violation of your clearance.

It depends where you are coming from. That's why I said "Looking at both the approach and enroute chart for context" in my first post. The approach only has meaning in the context of the enroute chart.

Check out the airways leading to the VOR. Some as low as 2,000 (which is why a straight in would be viable). The MSA is an emergency altitude, not a limitation on the protected area for a procedure turn. Coming in on one of the airways from the north with the 3,000 MEA, yes, you would remain at 3,000 until outbound. Coming in from one with a 2,000 MEA, you would not climb to 3,000, but simple make your normal turn.. 

Here's the protracted PT area from AIM 5-4-9 (top graphic)

Edited May 25, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[N231BN]

That makes sense, I'm not used to MEA's that low.

[jaylw314]

2 hours ago, N231BN said:

7 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I think you are right that this is the question. Between #2 and #3, I'd treat the entry the same as I would if it were a hold-in-lieu, with #2 in essence a parallel entry and #3 a direct entry. There is protection on both sides, with more on the maneuvering side.

The way I see it, you have to be at 3000 until outbound from the VOR. That way you have 25nm to make the turn in either direction.

IIRC, MSA is not regulatory or required at any point, but a dang important altitude to know in an emergency or lost comms

[N231BN]

IIRC, MSA is not regulatory or required at any point, but a dang important altitude to know in an emergency or lost comms

At or above 3000 I meant, unless you were arriving on the airway from the SE.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, N231BN said:

3 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

IIRC, MSA is not regulatory or required at any point, but a dang important altitude to know in an emergency or lost comms

At or above 3000 I meant, unless you were arriving on the airway from the SE.

There are ten airways arriving at TNV from all four quadrants. Only two of them, coming from the northeast would require 3,000'. The rest are no higher than 2,300.

But @jaylw314, I don't understand your reference to lost comm. Lost nav, you bet, but why lost comm?

[jaylw314]

4 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

There are ten airways arriving at TNV from all four quadrants. Only two of them, coming from the northeast would require 3,000'. The rest are no higher than 2,300.

But @jaylw314, I don't understand your reference to lost comm. Lost nav, you bet, but why lost comm?

Just that extra layer of safety while ATC can't give you terrain advisories.  Obviously you still need to come back down at some point if you're going to do another approach.  If you're going to do the same approach, it makes more sense to do the published missed.

Edited May 25, 2019 by jaylw314