Must you do the 1 minute hold no matter what direction you approach the FAF from due to the fact that there is no marking for NoPT on the NE side?
Normally I have seen these type approaches where if you are comming in close to lined up with the localizer, they will put NoPT out there to tell you you don't have to do it but this one does not have that.
The local DE uses this airport allot for LOC approaches so I don't what to blow this one by not fully understanding this approach.
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
RV12-IS, #121606, N912BC - Building Now!
RV10, #41942, N????? - Project Sold
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB - SOLD
The only IAF I see is the NDB, it also says ADF required, so I would say that unless you are vectored to LOC final...in otherwords, you plan to fly the procedure...that the Procedure Turn holding pattern is the only way to fly this approach.
Reaching way back...in the Air Force, I believe we were taught that this is one "kind" of non-precision Procedure Turn (along with a barb, or a No PT track). ICAO it is sometinmes called a "race track". Not sure if these terms are still AIM standard.
Regardless of what you call it, looks to me as the hold is the only way.
I would agree with Joe, besides, if you are not under radar control for a specific approach, you are never 'wrong' by flying the full procedure. If you are under radar control, and you want to fly the full approach, it is always a good idea to ask the controller first .
The simple way to avoid this, is to put "INOP" on your ADF...
As far as the approach goes, you MUST fly the 1 minute hold to fly this approach without radar vectors. Even if you are coming straight in on a 240 heading...without RV's, you have to fly it to be legal, and get reestablished right back in the same direction you were going three minutes ago (three legs of the hold).
If under radar control, and the words "Radar Vectors" have been said, the required hold is no longer in effect.
Sure makes sense and this is the way I would do it if it was real life. Just wanted to make sure.
As far as INOP on the ADF, not a good option around here due to the approaches available and or the fact that the rental spam can does not have an IFR GPS. Makes finding enough approaches for the checkride difficult.
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
RV12-IS, #121606, N912BC - Building Now!
RV10, #41942, N????? - Project Sold
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB - SOLD
If you are going to have to fly this approach during your check ride with the examiner, he will more than likely simulate the approach controller and issue his own radar vectors for you to fly. This is true for most busy airports as the examiners do not wish to disrupt the controllers.
Everything said by others so far is correct (I'm impressed!). Remember to start your clock at the NDB. Remember, a simple VFR GPS with a moving map will indicate the NDB and can offer you situational awareness...The Examiner will allow you to use it as such. he will expect you to use any resource you have for a safe approach.
Also, be VERY familiar with any and all avionics in the aircraft you use for the check ride...He/she will more than likely test your knowledge.
Been lurking for a long time. Great discussions going on so I thought I might as well sign in.
This is an interesting approach based on the surrounding terrain. It would appear that you'd be at a minimum of 5,900' to as high as 7,000 feet flying direct to the NDB (non-vectors). Getting down to 2820 in 4.6 nm (MAP) would be an interesting decent. If my calcs are right that's a 6.3 degree slope.
The procedure turn gives you an opportunity to reduce your altitude to 3,900 on the outbound leg, then down to 3,600 inbound to the IAF.
So in a non-vectors approach I'd say the procedure turn is both required and needed. Even with radar vectors I'm going to guess you're going to be pretty high and would need it unless you cross the IAF at 3,600.
NDB approach with procedure turn in mountainous terrain. I might have to try this one in Flight Simulator.
I'll chime in and concur with the other folks - the procedure turn (in this case, a hold-in-lieu-of-PT) is required unless some special conditions, like radar vectors, apply.
Brantel, AIM Section 5-4-9 is a good reference and is definitely worth a read or two (or three) - you'll pick up some tidbits for an approach like this. The Instrument Procedures Handbook is a good reference as well. Check out Chapter 5. You can find it at...
.
Glad to have you aboard 
Interesting info. I wouldn't have thought about the time necessary to decend.