Does it matter? 4 NM leg or minute outbound?

[Shiftace]

So a student posed this question:

If there is a HILPT, say for an RNAV approach, and you have to make a lap in the pattern for course reversal - do you have to fly the published distance (4 or 7 nm)? Say it is a parallel entry, can I do 1 minute leg outbound? and turn around? Or do I have to fly the published distance.

I found the Young LOI that kinda hits on this, but nothing concrete. Do you have any source that says either way.

S

 

[drunkenbeagle]

I'm not aware of another source, but what I teach is to do the 4 mile legs as published. I also teach to load the hold in lieu into the GPS, and that way what you are flying is going to line up with what the GPS is saying. The hold is already more work than most GA pilots are used to, especially without an autopilot. Why make things harder?

The Instrument Procedure book, Ch. 4 page 49 says "A holding pattern-in-lieu-of procedure turn may be specified for course reversal in some procedures. In such cases, the holding pattern is established over an intermediate fix or a FAF. The holding pattern distance or time specified in the profile view must be observed. For ahold-in-lieu-of PT, the holding pattern direction must be flown as depicted and the specified leg length/timing must not be exceeded."

I read that to mean that you can't exceed the distance or time, and if it is depicted explicitly, you have to follow that too. Plus, I can't think of a good reason not to in real life.

 

[milleR]

My interpretation has always been that the holding pattern defines the protected area. The 'must be observed' language means that you are not to exceed the limitations of the depicted area. If ATC were to tell you to 'hold as published' then yes, you'd fly it as written. But for a PT a one minute outbound leg would be perfectly fine.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

My interpretation has always been that the holding pattern defines the protected area. The 'must be observed' language means that you are not to exceed the limitations of the depicted area. If ATC were to tell you to 'hold as published' then yes, you'd fly it as written. But for a PT a one minute outbound leg would be perfectly fine.

I find it as ambiguous as "direct to the IAF, cleared for the approach." Is that straight in, or with the course reversal? 99% of the time, straight in, unless it isn't? I just learned to read back "cleared for the straight in approach" so it is on the tapes.

 

[MikeD]

The hold is already more work than most GA pilots are used to, especially without an autopilot. Why make things harder?

wow. GA has gotten soft. A hold is too much work now, esp without an autopilot.

The Instrument Procedure book, Ch. 4 page 49 says "A holding pattern-in-lieu-of procedure turn may be specified for course reversal in some procedures. In such cases, the holding pattern is established over an intermediate fix or a FAF. The holding pattern distance or time specified in the profile view must be observed. For ahold-in-lieu-of PT, the holding pattern direction must be flown as depicted and the specified leg length/timing must not be exceeded."

I read that to mean that you can't exceed the distance or time, and if it is depicted explicitly, you have to follow that too. Plus, I can't think of a good reason not to in real life.

I find it as ambiguous as "direct to the IAF, cleared for the approach." Is that straight in, or with the course reversal? 99% of the time, straight in, unless it isn't? I just learned to read back "cleared for the straight in approach" so it is on the tapes.

Does SNoRT apply, is the only question.