Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: "John Clonts" <none@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 22:51:10 GMT
>> But the aircraft in question was /G, so he could fly direct MINES. And
>> MINES is an IAF, so an approach beginning there would be a "full
>> approach" ???
>>
>
> Yes, he could use GPS to fly direct to MINES. But if he wanted to use GPS why did he ask for the "full
> VOR/DME 22" approach? Check the plate, there's a GPS overlay, he could have used GPS exclusively to fly the
> approach. Requesting the "full VOR/DME 22" approach suggests the objective of their navigational exercise was
> VOR/DME approaches, not GPS approaches.
I see what you mean, thanks!
John
.
- References:
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Brad Salai
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: rps
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Steven P. McNicoll
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Ron Garret
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Steven P. McNicoll
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Tim Auckland
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Tim Auckland
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Steven P. McNicoll
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: John Clonts
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: Steven P. McNicoll
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- From: John Clonts
- Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- Prev by Date: Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- Next by Date: Re: Flight Level and a half
- Previous by thread: Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- Next by thread: Re: Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|