PilotEdge Forums

Hi,

I was planning an IFR flight ending with FASTO2 arrival and ILS RWY 30R, and i found myself in a great lack of knowledge. I will try to explain.

The thing is that the FASTO2 arrival takes me all the way to FASTO which is the IF of the ILS approach. Now, looking to the approach plate we have 3 different IAFs. AMONT and GMN with NoPT, and JUPEX with the PT.

The question is.
Because i will shoot the approach from FASTO(IF), i understand that i do need to perform the PT at JUPEX as is not written otherwise. But what confuse me is that AMONT(IAF with NoPT) is 7.4nm from FASTO in the localizer course and i am almost flying over it as in the arrival MINGI (7nm from FASTO) is the point where i must intercept the localizer.

I don´t know if i made any sense. In few worlds. PT at JUPEX yes or no starting the approach from FASTO?

Thanks a lot! I´m thinking in circles since yesterday. My first impression was that i need to do the PT, but more i think about it looking the plates more confuse i am

Both the arrival and Fasto are before Jupex on the ILS approach.

You just keep going in the same direction, no procedure turn is required for any reason.

You just keep flying on track 301 degrees after FASTO.

A procedure turn may only be required and flown on an approach (if authorized) if you are heading in the reverse direction initially.

In this case the arrival has you heading in the forward direction

To skip the course reversal, you need to be either on vectors to final, on a NoPT segment, or "cleared straight-in." Otherwise, you must do it. In this case, you'd be established on the NoPT segment between AMONT and FASTO, so you'd be expected to continue straight-in. The fact that you don't technically pass over AMONT is a good observation, but it's not what matters. Being established on that segment is what allows (requires, actually) you to skip the course reversal.

Thank you both for taking your time to help me figure it out.

I didn´t know that in this case (not flying the whole segment) the NoPT instruction was still valid. Now i know, so next time i find something like this will be crystal clear.