HELP!?! LOZ VOR Approach question!!

[pilotsav27]

For this question refer to KLOZ VOR Rwy 6 Approach - -

http://airnav.com/depart?http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0904/00720V6.PDF

If holding at LOZ VOR at 4000', and you're cleared for the approach, how do you get out of the hold and set up to land. On the inbound leg to the VOR you can be at 2300' crossing the VOR. My instructor says to descend while in the hold from 4000' until at the proper altitude, then intercept the inbound course and proceed as the chart shows. However, I know another instructor that says if holding and then cleared, intercept the outbound radial proceed outbound, do the PT, and the rest of the approach as normal! I have heard several different ways to do the approach, but I never thought that descending while in the hold would be the right way?? Insight anyone?? :banghead::banghead:

 

[Roger, Roger]

Is there anything on that chart that prohibits using the holding pattern as your procedure turn (the course of action that the first CFII suggested)?

 

[ctab5060X]

Here is the approach chart for you...

 

[Roger, Roger]

Oh, I know the answer....I'm just trying to make the OP think through it, like I would one of my students

 

[tgrayson]

For this question refer to KLOZ VOR Rwy 6 Approach - -

The AIM says to turn inbound from the hold; if you want to do the PT, you would need to tell ATC that you intend to do so.

In this approach, you can only safely descend in the hold to 3900, since that is the altitude that is protected for the PT. Once established inbound, you can descend to 3200, or 2300 if within 4DME.

Read this:

http://www.terps.com/ifrr/sep95.pdf

 

[pilotsav27]

My thoughts are that if I can only descend to 3900 for the PT, like tgrayson said, I cannot descend unless established inbound. If I were descending while in the hold, not necessarily being guided by the VOR (if on outbound leg), I can not descend to 2300 until established inbound. If this is the case there's no way I can fly a stabilized approach if I'm having to chop and drop to get down to 2300 by the time I cross the VOR. I understand I would have to let ATC know I was going to do the PT if I so choose. The actual PT is in bold on the chart, so this is to serve as the course reversal part of the procedure, correct? If the hold was bold I could use it as course reversal in lieu of the PT. Also, I've heard that I can extend my outbound leg of the hold (as long as I stay within 10NM) then intercept inbound, which will give me time to descend to the proper altitude. Im a brand new instrument student, so If Im wrong about something TELL ME! I can take it!

 

[tgrayson]

so If Im wrong about something TELL ME! I can take it!

You're not wrong. If this hold were a hold-in-lieu, the altitude difference is limited to, I recall, only 300 feet between the holding altitude and the inbound course, so in this approach, you do indeed have a lot of altitude to lose.

You can extend the outbound course, but only because the hold is on the same side as the protected area of the PT. If you extend the hold past one minute, though, you're no longer holding, but performing a racetrack course reversal (which is fine), but it kicks in the need to inform ATC.

(Did you read the article I pointed you to?)

 

[pilotsav27]

tgrayson,

i actually just read the article a little while ago. For some reason the first time you posted it I didnt see it. Anyway, so as far as my instructor saying to use the hold to descend...thats wrong? And I can ONLY descend if established inbound to the VOR to 3200 or 2300 if within 4 DME. Also, extending the outbound leg of the hold is legal to do, but not advised. If I want to go outbound and do the PT, I need to advise ATC. If you all were flying this approach, what would you do if cleared out of a hold?

 

[tgrayson]

Anyway, so as far as my instructor saying to use the hold to descend...thats wrong?

It's only wrong if he's advising you to descend to an altitude lower than 3900 while outbound.

And I can ONLY descend if established inbound to the VOR to 3200 or 2300 if within 4 DME.

Yes.

Also, extending the outbound leg of the hold is legal to do, but not advised.

I don't know what you mean by "not advised". Not advised by whom? It's a perfectly fine thing to do in this situation, but not all situations.

If I want to go outbound and do the PT, I need to advise ATC.

Yes.

If you all were flying this approach, what would you do if cleared out of a hold?

I'd probably tell ATC that I was extending the outbound leg of the hold, descend to 3900 and turn inbound after about two minutes, depending on my groundspeed.

 

[pilotsav27]

tgrayson,

Thanks for all the help and the article! My instructor was having me descend on the outbound leg of the hold, WAY below 3900', he said that's what a hold was for to lose or gain altitude (of course he said that wasnt the only reason for one). I completely understand the approach now. Now, the toughest thing for me is deciding whether or not calling my instructor out on that little issue. Thats not the only issue either.....entering holds..I have that DOWN. He asked the other day what type entry...I said tear drop. He said NO just do direct....then when you cross the VOR turn outbound to 205. I said thats gonna make a tight hold and we'll blow right through the inbound radial and have to circle WAY back around....he swore up and down I was wrong....but BAM it happened just as I said it would. We worked it out in his office afterward and I showed him why I should have done a tear drop and why the hold went wrong.....I felt like the instructor! He's a brand new CFII, but he did my primary instruction and did really well. Should I consider changing to a more experienced one? I've only had 4 lessons from him and he's already told me several things that are wrong or borderline wrong.

 

[tgrayson]

he said that's what a hold was for to lose or gain altitude (of course he said that wasnt the only reason for one).

Well, *some* holds are for gaining or losing altitudes, but that doesn't mean that all holds are for that purpose or that the destination altitude can be one of your own choosing. I would be concerned about his reasoning processes in this instance.

I feel for the guy, because FAA provided material on how to fly instrument approaches is so incredibly poor. They generally fail to communicate that the most important goal is not to hit anything. Your technique in flying an instrument approach either keeps you in the airspace protected for it at the altitude you're flying, or it doesn't, and no amount of argument is going to change that.

Now, the toughest thing for me is deciding whether or not calling my instructor out on that little issue.

I believe the article I pointed to describes this exact situation and explains why the student failed the checkride. Could you perhaps give it to him? In fact, you might consider giving him all the articles on that website.

Should I consider changing to a more experienced one?

Tough question. More experience probably does weed out the major misconceptions, like how to enter holds. Other misconceptions can often survive a good deal of experience because they don't result in instant death. If your guy is willing to admit his mistakes and learn, you might be better off than with a more experienced instructor who won't listen to any information you bring to him. I went through four instrument instructors of widely varying degrees of experience, and received alarming "information" from each of them. Instead, I relied on my aviation friends on Compuserve (pre-internet days) for reliable information. You could do the same.

 

[pilotsav27]

Again, tgrayson and roger roger, thanks for the help! I enjoy learning new material and Im finding the IR to be awesome! I do not find it as difficult as everyone said it would be. But I'm finding it to be extremely enjoyable! However, I've done A LOT, and I mean A LOT of studying prior to even taking my first lesson. But occasionally, I do have questions! :laff: Thanks for helping!

 

[nosehair]

You can extend the outbound course, but only because the hold is on the same side as the protected area of the PT. If you extend the hold past one minute, though, you're no longer holding, but performing a racetrack course reversal (which is fine), but it kicks in the need to inform ATC.

I have not been aware that this kicks in the need to inform ATC. I've looked in the AIM for this requirement. Can you give a specific paragraph? Thanks.

 

[tgrayson]

I have not been aware that this kicks in the need to inform ATC. I've looked in the AIM for this requirement. Can you give a specific paragraph? Thanks.

The AIM can't possibly consider every contingency, so a little common sense is in order. The holding pattern is a one minute maneuver, by definition. ATC isn't going to expect you to carry it past that and may be basing traffic separation on that understanding. You need to tell them if you're going to do something unexpected.

 

[ctab5060X]

The AIM can't possibly consider every contingency, so a little common sense is in order. The holding pattern is a one minute maneuver, by definition. ATC isn't going to expect you to carry it past that and may be basing traffic separation on that understanding. You need to tell them if you're going to do something unexpected.

Just asking here...

What if you had made arrangements with ATC prior to entering a hold for extended leg lengths (longer than your standard 1 minute)? Thinking of holding while waiting for conditions to improve here...

 

[dasleben]

You're not required to inform ATC that you're doing the procedure turn. If you're cleared for the approach, you're cleared for the full procedure unless you're specifically being vectored to the final approach course. ATC doesn't need a play-by-play, and you don't need their permission beyond the initial approach clearance.

 

[IslandFlyer]

So if you're cleared for the approach and don't want to rush the approach, you would just exit the holding pattern on the outbound leg, intercept the 205R outbound, conduct the PT then finish the approach as normal without advising ATC? I'm just trying to figure it out for myself (definitely need to brush up), but I thought that once turning inbound after being cleared for the approach you would start losing altitude to cross the FAF at 2300'. I guess that would be a lot of altitude to lose in one minute.

What would everyone else do? The PT or drop the altitude once established inbound in the hold after being cleared?

 

[oktex88]

ATC would expect you to complete the turn in holding and then go inbound at LOZ. If you were still at 4,000 then that is an errror on ATC's part and you should tell them you are "unable" to start the approach until you get lower. You should request to continue the hold and get a clearance for lower or ask specifically to fly outbound at LOZ with a procedure turn. Flying outbound and doing the PT should only be used if a course reversal is needed which it is not if you are holding at LOZ which is why flying inbound at LOZ is the only legal way to do it unless you advise ATC that you will be doing the PT.

From the AIM:

"Where the fix is associated

with an instrument approach and timed approaches
are in effect, a procedure turn shall not be executed
unless the pilot advises ATC, since aircraft holding
are expected to proceed inbound on final approach
directly from the holding pattern when approach​

clearance is received."

m.

For those holding patterns where there are no published minimum holding altitudes, the pilot, upon receiving an approach clearance, must maintain the last assigned altitude until leaving the holding pattern and established on the inbound course. Thereafter, the published minimum altitude of the route segment being flown will apply. It is expected that the pilot will be assigned a holding altitude that will permit a normal descent on the inbound course.​

You may descend in the hold on some approaches where there is a hold instead of a PT. But for this approach you cannot because it is not a hold in leiu of the PT From the AIM:

3.
If an aircraft is established in a published holding pattern at an assigned altitude above the published minimum holding altitude and subsequently cleared for the approach, the pilot may descend to the published minimum holding altitude. The holding pattern would only be a segment of the IAP if it is published on the instrument procedure chart and is used in lieu of a procedure turn.​

 

[pilotsav27]

As another instructor told me this morning, just do whatever ATC says and you're good to go! If you can't do what they say, TELL THEM, and they'll give you something else to do! I already knew this, but I mainly wanted to know the correct way of doing the published procedure! Sounds to me like there are a couple of different options that are completely safe.

 

[SteveC]

The correct way is to descend when established inbound from the hold. If you think you need a longer leg to do the descent, ask for a longer leg. It is not correct to exit the hold outbound then do a procedure turn.

Here are some more things to think about: How close to the centerline of the inbound course must you be in order to be considered "established" so you can start your descent? Is there any reason that you must wait until you are wings level on the centerline before starting down? If you decide that you can actually start your descent as you are finishing up your turn onto the final, how much time does this give you to get down to altitude at the VOR? What descent rate would be required? What if you flew the outbound leg for one minute at 120 knots and then slowed to 90 knots when starting to turn inbound - how much time/what descent rate will you need then? What happens if you are still a couple hundred feet high at the VOR? Can you still make a stabilized descent from that point and safely make the runway (assuming you break out by minimums)? If you cross the VOR at 2500, are flying at 90 knots, what descent rate will you need to hit 2.1 DME at 1620? Is this acceptable and safe?