Narrative:

We were flying IFR from knoxville mcgee-tyson (tys) to smyrna (mqy). We requested the GPS runway 32 approach at mqy and were told to proceed direct diley intersection (one of the initial approach fixes); which we did. We were then cleared for the approach and told to report diley inbound. We reached diley and performed the published hold that is the procedure turn for that particular approach. When we were heading outbound; ATC said we appeared to be going outbound from diley and asked why we did not proceed inbound. I responded by saying that we were in the published hold. ATC then told us to report entering a hold next time. We turned inbound and landed uneventfully after that. I had been taught that a procedure turn must be accomplished unless you are being radar vectored; doing a hold in lieu of a procedure turn; or if the approach plate says 'no pt' or 'pt na.' the hold on the GPS runway 32 approach to mqy is bold; which means it must be done. After returning home; I read in the aim about doing procedure turns (aim 5-4-9). It says to do one when it is necessary to do one. So; we could have gone straight in (because we could have turned straight in) -- I did not know this. However; the next sentence lists the criteria for when a procedure turn is not required -- 'no pt;' radar vectoring; timed approach; or 'pt na.' we did not meet any of this criteria; so it would seem that we would have to do a procedure turn according to that sentence. Under the 'limitations on procedure turns' paragraph in the aim 5-4-9; it says that when a holding pattern replaces a procedure turn; the holding pattern must be followed except when radar vectoring is provided or when 'no pt' is shown on the approach course -- neither one of which applied to us. Reading all of this; I believe that doing the hold was what I should have done. However; I could be wrong. Either way; the FAA needs to make it clear when ATC expects a procedure turn and when they do not. ATC expected us to go straight in; and when we didn't; we caused someone else to have to hold longer; which I regret. The other thing that the FAA needs to make clear is whether you are required to report entering a procedure turn hold on an approach. I was trained that you did not have to report it if you were cleared for the approach because ATC cleared (and expected) you to perform the holding maneuver.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA28 PLT EXECUTES THE FULL APCH TO MQY.

Narrative: WE WERE FLYING IFR FROM KNOXVILLE MCGEE-TYSON (TYS) TO SMYRNA (MQY). WE REQUESTED THE GPS RWY 32 APCH AT MQY AND WERE TOLD TO PROCEED DIRECT DILEY INTXN (ONE OF THE INITIAL APCH FIXES); WHICH WE DID. WE WERE THEN CLRED FOR THE APCH AND TOLD TO RPT DILEY INBOUND. WE REACHED DILEY AND PERFORMED THE PUBLISHED HOLD THAT IS THE PROC TURN FOR THAT PARTICULAR APCH. WHEN WE WERE HDG OUTBOUND; ATC SAID WE APPEARED TO BE GOING OUTBOUND FROM DILEY AND ASKED WHY WE DID NOT PROCEED INBOUND. I RESPONDED BY SAYING THAT WE WERE IN THE PUBLISHED HOLD. ATC THEN TOLD US TO RPT ENTERING A HOLD NEXT TIME. WE TURNED INBOUND AND LANDED UNEVENTFULLY AFTER THAT. I HAD BEEN TAUGHT THAT A PROC TURN MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED UNLESS YOU ARE BEING RADAR VECTORED; DOING A HOLD IN LIEU OF A PROC TURN; OR IF THE APCH PLATE SAYS 'NO PT' OR 'PT NA.' THE HOLD ON THE GPS RWY 32 APCH TO MQY IS BOLD; WHICH MEANS IT MUST BE DONE. AFTER RETURNING HOME; I READ IN THE AIM ABOUT DOING PROC TURNS (AIM 5-4-9). IT SAYS TO DO ONE WHEN IT IS NECESSARY TO DO ONE. SO; WE COULD HAVE GONE STRAIGHT IN (BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE TURNED STRAIGHT IN) -- I DID NOT KNOW THIS. HOWEVER; THE NEXT SENTENCE LISTS THE CRITERIA FOR WHEN A PROC TURN IS NOT REQUIRED -- 'NO PT;' RADAR VECTORING; TIMED APCH; OR 'PT NA.' WE DID NOT MEET ANY OF THIS CRITERIA; SO IT WOULD SEEM THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO A PROC TURN ACCORDING TO THAT SENTENCE. UNDER THE 'LIMITATIONS ON PROC TURNS' PARAGRAPH IN THE AIM 5-4-9; IT SAYS THAT WHEN A HOLDING PATTERN REPLACES A PROC TURN; THE HOLDING PATTERN MUST BE FOLLOWED EXCEPT WHEN RADAR VECTORING IS PROVIDED OR WHEN 'NO PT' IS SHOWN ON THE APCH COURSE -- NEITHER ONE OF WHICH APPLIED TO US. READING ALL OF THIS; I BELIEVE THAT DOING THE HOLD WAS WHAT I SHOULD HAVE DONE. HOWEVER; I COULD BE WRONG. EITHER WAY; THE FAA NEEDS TO MAKE IT CLR WHEN ATC EXPECTS A PROC TURN AND WHEN THEY DO NOT. ATC EXPECTED US TO GO STRAIGHT IN; AND WHEN WE DIDN'T; WE CAUSED SOMEONE ELSE TO HAVE TO HOLD LONGER; WHICH I REGRET. THE OTHER THING THAT THE FAA NEEDS TO MAKE CLR IS WHETHER YOU ARE REQUIRED TO RPT ENTERING A PROC TURN HOLD ON AN APCH. I WAS TRAINED THAT YOU DID NOT HAVE TO RPT IT IF YOU WERE CLRED FOR THE APCH BECAUSE ATC CLRED (AND EXPECTED) YOU TO PERFORM THE HOLDING MANEUVER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.