Narrative:

I was on an IFR flight plan from luk to 9a5 and was cleared to gqo VOR at 3500 ft, IMC. I was approximately 5 mi north of choo choo, was cleared for a GPS 20 approach to 9a5, and told to report on final approach. I told the controller that I was lined up with the extended centerline of the runway. He said, 'how can you be on final approach if you have not passed the FAF?' at this point, I was very close to oktee (if). He said that I had to turn left and proceed to mebge (IAF), so to satisfy him, I turned left about 90 degrees and went out 5 mi east to mebge intersection, and then made a right 270 degree turn back to the 'if' (oktee), the same place that I was to start with. As I approached oktee and turned left 90 degrees to reintercept the final approach, I started my descent to 2700 ft. I broke out VMC at 3000 ft and had the airport in sight. I canceled IFR and landed. It is my understanding that in the sector that I was in (north of 9a5), I was expected to go to oktee intersection (if) and shoot a straight-in approach (according to the 2001 aim) -- the basic 'T' for GPS approachs. The intersection that they made me go to (mebge) is for aircraft approaching from the southeast, left base area. There was no other traffic in the area that I heard. My complaint is that even though it was not an unsafe maneuver, it was certainly an unnecessary one, and not to mention reprogramming of the GPS to go to the intersection. If I am wrong with my interpretation of the aim, I welcome any comments that you have. However, if I am correct, I think that chattanooga approach control should be brought up to date as well.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AC68 IS CONFUSED WITH ATC INTERP OF GPS APCH REQUIREMENTS FOR 9AJ.

Narrative: I WAS ON AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM LUK TO 9A5 AND WAS CLRED TO GQO VOR AT 3500 FT, IMC. I WAS APPROX 5 MI N OF CHOO CHOO, WAS CLRED FOR A GPS 20 APCH TO 9A5, AND TOLD TO RPT ON FINAL APCH. I TOLD THE CTLR THAT I WAS LINED UP WITH THE EXTENDED CTRLINE OF THE RWY. HE SAID, 'HOW CAN YOU BE ON FINAL APCH IF YOU HAVE NOT PASSED THE FAF?' AT THIS POINT, I WAS VERY CLOSE TO OKTEE (IF). HE SAID THAT I HAD TO TURN L AND PROCEED TO MEBGE (IAF), SO TO SATISFY HIM, I TURNED L ABOUT 90 DEGS AND WENT OUT 5 MI E TO MEBGE INTXN, AND THEN MADE A R 270 DEG TURN BACK TO THE 'IF' (OKTEE), THE SAME PLACE THAT I WAS TO START WITH. AS I APCHED OKTEE AND TURNED L 90 DEGS TO REINTERCEPT THE FINAL APCH, I STARTED MY DSCNT TO 2700 FT. I BROKE OUT VMC AT 3000 FT AND HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT. I CANCELED IFR AND LANDED. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IN THE SECTOR THAT I WAS IN (N OF 9A5), I WAS EXPECTED TO GO TO OKTEE INTXN (IF) AND SHOOT A STRAIGHT-IN APCH (ACCORDING TO THE 2001 AIM) -- THE BASIC 'T' FOR GPS APCHS. THE INTXN THAT THEY MADE ME GO TO (MEBGE) IS FOR ACFT APCHING FROM THE SE, L BASE AREA. THERE WAS NO OTHER TFC IN THE AREA THAT I HEARD. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NOT AN UNSAFE MANEUVER, IT WAS CERTAINLY AN UNNECESSARY ONE, AND NOT TO MENTION REPROGRAMMING OF THE GPS TO GO TO THE INTXN. IF I AM WRONG WITH MY INTERP OF THE AIM, I WELCOME ANY COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE. HOWEVER, IF I AM CORRECT, I THINK THAT CHATTANOOGA APCH CTL SHOULD BE BROUGHT UP TO DATE AS WELL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.