DISCONTINUITIES AND MANUAL LEGS: TWO DIFFERENT PROBLEMS
A discontinuity says that two coded portions are not connected. A MANUAL leg describes a leg with manual termination. These can appear together, especially around vectoring, but deleting the printed gap does not necessarily remove the underlying manual leg. Read the procedure and clearance before changing either. The target is an accurate route representation, not a screen from which every discontinuity has been removed. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]
1. Classify the gap. Inspect the leg before it, the leg after it and their role in the procedure. An unintended failure to join two cleared segments differs from the intentional end of a vectoring portion. Check whether a runway, SID, STAR or approach revision created the break. That history often explains why an old connection is no longer valid. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]
2. Connect only an intended continuation. If the actual cleared path joins those two portions, use the appropriate clearing/stringing operation and inspect TMPY. Confirm the resulting course, turn and first downstream fix. If the continuation still depends on future vectors or clearance, retain the meaningful break and use the appropriate selected guidance. A missing continuation cannot be supplied by the appearance of a convenient INSERT prompt. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]
3. Recognise MANUAL termination. The source standard states that clearing the discontinuity alone cannot delete this type of leg. It describes deliberate leg selection/removal with heading guidance and later re-interception as appropriate. Treat that as a separate manoeuvring and sequencing task. Do not repeatedly CLR the gap while expecting the infinite or conditional leg ahead of it to acquire an automatic endpoint. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]
4. Reconnect from the actual flight situation. Once the onward clearance is established, decide whether it requires direct-to, interception of a specified course, or a revised future sequence. Select the function that matches that task, then inspect the proposed path and current FMA. A straight line drawn between two database fixes does not prove that the aircraft has established the required intercept or that NAV is engaged. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]
5. Verify the retained procedure. After insertion, examine the first active leg and the next relevant restriction. A revision can remove or replace manually edited parts of an arrival during re-stringing. Review the whole affected arrival or departure, not simply the former gap. If the intended connection still cannot be explained against the chart, keep the aircraft in an understood guidance state while resolving it. [66, PDF pp. 331-341]