Approach clearance while executing a missed...

[Shiftace]

Here is the scenario on an Instrument Check Flight.

Student is asked to fly an RNAV approach and execute the missed approach and fly the published hold. The fix that defines the hold is IAF for the RNAV approach on the opposing runway. So - student is to fly RNAV 18 approach, go missed and hold.

As they approach and cross the fix, still outbound for the hold - the evaluator playing the role of ATC - clears the student for RNAV 36 approach. Student turns and heads straight to the fix. Is this correct? Or do you have to fly the full outbound and wait for the inbound turn?

 

[SteveC]

Here is the scenario on an Instrument Check Flight.

Student is asked to fly an RNAV approach and execute the missed approach and fly the published hold. The fix that defines the hold is IAF for the RNAV approach on the opposing runway. So - student is to fly RNAV 18 approach, go missed and hold.

As they approach and cross the fix, still outbound for the hold - the evaluator playing the role of ATC - clears the student for RNAV 36 approach. Student turns and heads straight to the fix. Is this correct? Or do you have to fly the full outbound and wait for the inbound turn?

Fly outbound, turn inbound and commence the approach. Unless the approach clearance included the words “turn R/L direct FIX, cleared RNAV 36 blah blah blah…”

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

As they approach and cross the fix, still outbound for the hold - the evaluator playing the role of ATC - clears the student for RNAV 36 approach. Student turns and heads straight to the fix. Is this correct? Or do you have to fly the full outbound and wait for the inbound turn?

I may not be picturing the scenario correctly, but if you are already outbound in the combined RNAV 18 missed hold/RNAV 36 HILPT, I don't see a regulatory difference between a turn inbound and a turn direct.

Practically, since I am changing approaches, I would use as much of that 4NM hold as I needed to ensure my avionics were set up properly for the new approach.

 

[///AMG]

I may not be picturing the scenario correctly, but if you are already outbound in the combined RNAV 18 missed hold/RNAV 36 HILPT, I don't see a regulatory difference between a turn inbound and a turn direct.

Practically, since I am changing approaches, I would use as much of that 4NM hold as I needed to ensure my avionics were set up properly for the new approach.

I mean it's wild, but I might even request a couple turns in said hold to do the same......

It can be hard to do during evaluation time when you're amped up and want to knock it out of the park, but slow is still smooth, smooth is still fast, as they once said. I love saving gas, hoarding it even, more than just about anyone else, but nothing burns more gas than dicking up an approach because you weren't set up/stabilized/whatever because you were in a hurry, and now you have to go missed again. You then look dumb, and saved no gas.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

I mean it's wild, but I might even request a couple turns in said hold to do the same......

Absolutely.

It can be hard to do during evaluation time when you're amped up and want to knock it out of the park,

In recurrent training and IPCs, I've set up scenarios where I hope the pilot does that. If they don't and they look rushed, it's a debrief discussion, even if they were able to make the transition.