Aviation Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for aircraft pilots, mechanics, and enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Looking at the RNAV (GPS) 19R into Wichita, KS (KICT), the TAA arrival segments are drawn differently between NACO and Jeppesen plates. Please take note that the TAA arrivals on NACO charts show both the IAF and IF fixes on the arc segment while Jeppesen charts only show the IAF fix.
Which depiction more accurately depicts what the pilots are expected to do from ATC and when would a pilot ever perform the hold in lieu of procedure turn at ACUBO?
Thanks
I'm not familiar with Jepp plates but as far as I can see both plates are the same, it's just that Jepp chose not to depict ACUBO on the base area icons (as the FAA calls them). I assume that's to reduce clutter on the chart but I don't know for sure. In any event, I don't see how it would change the procedure in any way: all the fixes are still shown on both plates, and all the details seem to be the same.
As for the HILPT, the rule for procedure turns is that by default you have to fly them unless you have a valid reason not to (see this question). In the case of this approach, the plate says NoPT if you're approaching from the straight-in area or on the direct tracks from CADAC/BEBAC to ACUBO. If you get to ACUBO any other way, you have to fly the HILPT. The most likely reason would be that you're coming from the south and ATC vectors you directly to ACUBO rather than to CADAC or BEBAC: "N12345, proceed direct ACUBO, cleared for the RNAV 19R approach".
The FAA Instrument Procedure Handbook (chapter 4, p. 4-58) has detailed information on TAAs, including this:
ATC may clear aircraft direct to the fix labeled IF/IAF if the course to the IF/IAF is within the straight-in sector labeled “NoPT” and the intercept angle does not exceed 90 degrees. Pilots are expected to proceed direct to the IF/ IAF and accomplish a straight-in approach. Do not execute HILO course reversal. Pilots are also expected to fly the straight−in approach when ATC provides radar vectors and monitoring to the IF/IAF and issues a “straight-in” approach clearance; otherwise, the pilot is expected to execute the HILO course reversal.
But even if ATC vectors you to ACUBO they can't give you a straight-in clearance if your intercept angle is greater than 90 degrees (ATC Orders 4-8-1(d) and (e)).
You also asked in a comment what happens if ATC clears you for the approach without specifying the IAF. That's explained in the IPH:
On rare occasions, ATC may clear the aircraft for an approach at the airport without specifying the approach procedure by name or by a specific approach (e.g., “cleared RNAV Runway 34 approach”) without specifying a particular IAF. In either case, the pilot should proceed direct to the IAF or to the IF/IAF associated with the sector that the aircraft will enter the TAA and join the approach course from that point and if required by that sector (i.e., sector is not labeled “NoPT), complete the HILO course reversal.
