Parallel Entry to Holds

bc2209

bc2209

Well-Known Member
The AIM says to turn to a heading to parallel the course outbound for one minute. The argument being made is that, for a VOR hold, if you don't track the radial outbound then the wind might push you to the non holding side of the hold.

However, going by just what the AIM states, it says turn to a heading on the outbound course. Soooo....thoughts?
 
Do what the AIM says. Don't make it more complicated than it has to be. You are expected to make up to a 110 deg turn to the outbound heading upon station passage. You're going to be so off course anyways that further complicating your task is only going to make it more difficult. In addition, the distance you spend trying to get the radial is going to mess up the timing, forcing you to turn back to the station with less range (thus more sensitivity).

I've tried it both ways.. it's a huge cluster when you try to track the radial outbound unless your initial turn is very small. Do the entry, stay in protected airspace, and deal with wind correction when you're established.
 
bc2209 said:
The AIM says to turn to a heading to parallel the course outbound for one minute. The argument being made is that, for a VOR hold, if you don't track the radial outbound then the wind might push you to the non holding side of the hold.

However, going by just what the AIM states, it says turn to a heading on the outbound course. Soooo....thoughts?
Click to expand...

You are expected to be on the non-holding side of the hold. There actually is a "protected" area on that side for this very reason. It isn't as large as the Holding side (unless on an airway) but it is enough for the purposes of an entry.
 
If you track the course outbound, your making your inbound turn will get stupid and you won't intercept the inbound course until you're right on top of the fix.

Best way I've found is to "gasp" ...parallel... the outbound course. If you have an HSI, set the inbound course then fly half scale deflected outbound for 1 minute. If you have an OBS, either maths to find an outbound radial or reverse sense.

*disclaimer: If flying a GPS/FMS with autopilot coupling, just do that.
 
Maurus said:
Seriously. There should only be Direct and Teardrop IMO. Parallel is too much work :p
Click to expand...
Seriously. Any parallel entry could be a teardrop, and you'd be on the larger protected side. And further since no one cares if you do a knife edge turn to enter direct instead, I can't see any reason to have them.
 
If you turn to a heading to parallel the inbound course, and find yourself getting pushed towards the course, you know where the wind is coming from. ;)
 
Maurus said:
Seriously. There should only be Direct and Teardrop IMO. Parallel is too much work :p
Click to expand...

It's not even that it's to much work. They are just a set up to do a squiggly line back to the fix once you turn back inbound. Cross the fix, turn for your teardrop entry, start your time. It'll give you more time to set up on your inbound back in. I had a DPE tell me on my multi-inst time to throw out parallel entries. He showed me why. I haven't bothered with a parallel since.
 
Maurus said:
Seriously. There should only be Direct and Teardrop IMO. Parallel is too much work :p
Click to expand...
You have me curious. This never crossed my mind. I admit to a preference for teardrop over parallel when things are close but still see situations where parallel is the easiest choice.

A simple one is approaching the holding fix from the holding side on a course perpendicular to the holding course. In a standard right turn pattern, parallel is a simple 90 degree left turn. Direct is a right 270. Teardrop is, I suppose, a left turn about 30 degrees past parallel 120 degrees total).

Are you saying you think the extra 30 degrees to be able to make a "normal" right turn to the inbound makes more sense than having to make a left turn to intercept the inbound?
image.jpeg
 
Hold entries are recommendations. Do what works for you. Don't like parallel? Don't do it. Just like a procedure turn. Lots of recommended ways to do it, none legally wrong.
 
There I was...

giving an combination checkride to an Air Force Flight Standards pilot on a beautiful VFR day. We were headed to an NDB for holding and he's spouting all the techniques for determining drift corrections inbound, outbound, southbound, etc. (he knew FAR MORE about instrument stuff than I). He elected Parallel Entry and somehow the wind blows us to the non-protected (or whatever the term was then) side. As we hit the 1-minute mark he snaps into a perfectly coordinated turn and yep, turns the wrong way...

Knowing the area and controllers (Jackson, MS) I knew we'd be "safe," but I wasn't certain how to keep him "in the game" and recover the maneuver. He realized his mistake halfway through the turn, made several colorful remarks about it that would've been fun to hear again on the recorder, and keyed the mic. I over-keyed him and told the controllers we needed to break it off and requested vectors for a different entry...

We had a good laugh about it on the ground once he realized I wasn't going to bust him for it. Lesson learned - holding can be cruel and bite any of us.
 
WMostellar said:
There I was...

giving an combination checkride to an Air Force Flight Standards pilot on a beautiful VFR day. We were headed to an NDB for holding and he's spouting all the techniques for determining drift corrections inbound, outbound, southbound, etc. (he knew FAR MORE about instrument stuff than I). He elected Parallel Entry and somehow the wind blows us to the non-protected (or whatever the term was then) side. As we hit the 1-minute mark he snaps into a perfectly coordinated turn and yep, turns the wrong way...
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was wondering when I read Marus' post.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Are you saying you think the extra 30 degrees to be able to make a "normal" right turn to the inbound makes more sense than having to make a left turn to intercept the inbound?
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Keeps the direction of turns the same in the hold at all times to help eliminate the possibility of turning the wrong direction. Intercepting the inbound course prior to the holding fix is much easier. As a result you can now make accurate drift corrections on your outbound leg. You can make the inbound easy on a parallel entry by going direct to the fix but then you have sub-optimal information to help correct your outbound leg.

Basically with a teardrop you are stabilized within the hold much earlier and it provides a bit more situational awareness.
 
z987k said:
Seriously. Any parallel entry could be a teardrop, and you'd be on the larger protected side. And further since no one cares if you do a knife edge turn to enter direct instead, I can't see any reason to have them.
Click to expand...
It is easier for smaller aircraft to get away with it. On larger aircraft's, it is still doable but takes finesse because you have to overfly the station and can't lead it, If care is not taken, it will get wide real quick.

Just like one of the previous posters said, the guys designing the holding have accounted for sufficient space to maneuver in the unprotected but may not be as large as the protected side.
 
Call me lazy... I put it in the FMS... It calculates the angle and wind and tells me what it will do. Looks good? Execute!

In GA and/or old school world, stay on the protected side. You can always get a "drift" (no pun intended, but it works) by you inbound course/heading. Just stay on the protected side, you don't know what's going on in the other side. Using finger techniques and math works great on the ground for discussion, but inflight you must think about it a bit more... Keep on the protected side if in doubt. Nobody can get busted by a different entry if you stay in the protected side and do a teardrop vs parallel entry. Just cross your fix and turn the right direction and it's all good at that point in the holding procedure.


Common sense must prevail.
 
higney85 said:
Call me lazy... I put it in the FMS... It calculates the angle and wind and tells me what it will do. Looks good? Execute!

In GA and/or old school world, stay on the protected side. You can always get a "drift" (no pun intended, but it works) by you inbound course/heading. Just stay on the protected side, you don't know what's going on in the other side. Using finger techniques and math works great on the ground for discussion, but inflight you must think about it a bit more... Keep on the protected side if in doubt. Nobody can get busted by a different entry if you stay in the protected side and do a teardrop vs parallel entry. Just cross your fix and turn the right direction and it's all good at that point in the holding procedure.


Common sense must prevail.
Click to expand...

Common sense dictates flying it IAW the recommended procedure. You will not automatically fly into the side of a mountain if you are 1/2 mile off the protected side.
 
gotWXdagain said:
Common sense dictates flying it IAW the recommended procedure. You will not automatically fly into the side of a mountain if you are 1/2 mile off the protected side.
Click to expand...

No, as the gpws would yell at me if it was attempted, outside of situational awareness already screaming a problem..Is there a good story here?... Cause by your example I'm thinking you saw someone give it a go....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top