Holding entry question

[MidlifeFlyer]

It doesn't necessarily eliminate the teardrop. Just visualize where you're at so you can decide how much to turn outbound.

I can't tell you how many instrument students 'get it' when you just tell them "cross the fix and turn outbound".

-mini

This absolutely works.

You can see a lot of students (and pilots) get screwed up turning all sorts of ways after trying to figure out the entry. I once heard that, on the private pilot knowledge test, the #1 error made in the cross country planning answers was choosing an answer 180° in the wrong direction. Too much focus on the numbers; to little on basic situational awareness of the big picture.

It's really the same thing with hold entries. Too much "70/20"; not enough "look at it."

The bottom line big picture is that even the AIM-recommended hold entries all begin with a turn outbound. Every time. It's either to the outbound course or within 30° of the outbound course for a teardrop.

After that, it's visualization. That's where pilots are different. Some can just "see" the numbers; others draw the hold; still others use pencils, fingers, and toes on the DG.

 

[Roger, Roger]

I would just like to say that this is a great example of why I joined this site...to learn useful things. Thanks guys!

 

[minitour]

The bottom line big picture is that even the AIM-recommended hold entries all begin with a turn outbound. Every time. It's either to the outbound course or within 30° of the outbound course for a teardrop.

Bingo.

It's so funny too, because when I first heard this it was from an "old salty dog" that flew for the military, civilian, yadd yadda, had a sh** ton of flight time and said "eh, just cross the fix and turn outbound *spit*". I honestly thought he was bulls*itting me.

Funny how that works...

-mini

 

[RightSeatGirl]

Wouldn't a direct entry in this scenario cause you to stray too far to the north of the hold fix to even be considered within acceptable limits? Then again I suppose a parallel entry has the potential to overshoot the inbound radial and land you on the unprotected side of the hold. Interesting.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Wouldn't a direct entry in this scenario cause you to stray too far to the north of the hold fix to even be considered within acceptable limits? Then again I suppose a parallel entry has the potential to overshoot the inbound radial and land you on the unprotected side of the hold. Interesting.

I'm sure there is someone here who can give metes and bounds, but part of the "hold any way you want" theory is that protected airspace is large enough to account for that 260° direct entry.

The biggest problem with a direct entry here is that it's an awfully big turn. To mini's simple "turn outbound..." some would add "...using the least # of degrees." Why maneuver more than you need to?

It's definitely enough for the parallel entry if for no other reason that parallel would be the recommended AIM entry which is pretty much guaranteed to keep you in protected airspace. And remember that the recommended parallel contemplates that you will be on the unprotected side of the inbound course, not tracking it outbound.

AIM 5-3-7:

==============================
Parallel Procedure. When approaching the holding fix from anywhere in sector (a), the parallel entry procedure would be to turn to a heading to parallel the holding course outbound on the nonholding side for one minute, turn in the direction of the holding pattern through more than 180 degrees, and return to the holding fix or intercept the holding course inbound.
==============================