Parallel Entry Question

Coney

Coney

New Member
I'm studying for my CFII ride in March. I want to confirm that my thinking is acceptable regarding parallel entries into holding patterns. After crossing the fix, I've always tracked outbound, or flew parallel, to the holding radial for 1 minute and 15 seconds. Then I make the turn inbound toward the fix. The reason for the additional 15 seconds on the outbound is to give the pilot more time to make the course reversal and actually intercept the appropriate inbound course before crossing the fix, so the pilot can simply make a 180-degree turn (or something close to it, depending on the wind) to the outbound leg.

Sound okay?
 
You can always go direct to the fix after the turn instead of re-intercepting the radial.
 
You can cheat and find your wind correction if you reintercept the course early. The aim however states to "return to the holding fix or intercet the holding course inbound". So its up to you.
 
What do the books advise, one minute or 1:15? If they say 1:15, why reinvent the wheel before a check ride?

Remember, check rides and real life do not necessarily require the same techniques. Unfortunately.

:)
 
Like has basically been said, I think it's all about the wind. If you experience a tailwind when heading away from the fix, you might only go 30-45 seconds. If it's a headwind, it might need to be 2 minutes. I think the most important thing to do during any checkride (especially Instrument) is to tell the examiner what you're doing and why you're doing it. If you give him your reasons, he will surely understand.
 
johntlewis said:
Like has basically been said, I think it's all about the wind. If you experience a tailwind when heading away from the fix, you might only go 30-45 seconds. If it's a headwind, it might need to be 2 minutes. I think the most important thing to do during any checkride (especially Instrument) is to tell the examiner what you're doing and why you're doing it. If you give him your reasons, he will surely understand.
Click to expand...
Like Steve said, use the books. The AIM specifically says the first outbound leg should be one minute, then adjust the time for winds in subsequent turns.

However, like JohnTLewis said, if you explain a different technique to the DE and he's cool with it, great. Just make sure you know the book!
 
I also use the extra :15. You may have issues with not being able to intercept the inbound course with enough spacing prior to the holding fix. I did it on my checkride as I explained what and why I was doing it but you may want to consider talking to your DPE prior though as it may be a reason for the DPE to give you the stank eye.
 
meritflyer said:
I also use the extra :15. You may have issues with not being able to intercept the inbound course with enough spacing prior to the holding fix. I did it on my checkride as I explained what and why I was doing it but you may want to consider talking to your DPE prior though as it may be a reason for the DPE to give you the stank eye.
Click to expand...
Is that different from the "crook eye?":)
 
What is this parallel entry you speak of? All entries are direct, it is all a matter of bank angle.
 
Coney said:
give the pilot more time to make the course reversal and actually intercept the appropriate inbound course before crossing the fix
Click to expand...

Another option is to first establish the intercept heading for the inbound at a 45 degree intercept for about 20-30 seconds, and then turn to a 30 degree intercept. (If you maintain a 45 degree intercept, you'll blow through.)
 
tgrayson said:
Another option is to first establish the intercept heading for the inbound at a 45 degree intercept for about 20-30 seconds, and then turn to a 30 degree intercept. (If you maintain a 45 degree intercept, you'll blow through.)
Click to expand...

But doesn't the 45 degree intercept end up making it look more like a teardrop?

To me, if it's going to be a parallel entry, then it needs to be parallel.
 
johntlewis said:
But doesn't the 45 degree intercept end up making it look more like a teardrop?

To me, if it's going to be a parallel entry, then it needs to be parallel.
Click to expand...

If you go direct to the fix after the turn as the AIM says you can, then it sort of looks like a reverse teardrop, no?
 
johntlewis said:
But doesn't the 45 degree intercept end up making it look more like a teardrop?

To me, if it's going to be a parallel entry, then it needs to be parallel.
Click to expand...

No, no, fly outbound parallel, then when you make your turn to intercept, rather than turning 180 + 30 degrees, turn 180 + 45. Wait 20-30 seconds, then adjust back to the 180 + 30.
 
Coney, I see what you're saying. The "book" parallel entry is a parallel outbound and an inbound direct to the fix. In theory, given no wind and perfect piloting, that will bring you directly to teh fix.

Works okay for a navaid based fix that you can go directly to since you can adjust your course to keep you on target, but all you need to do it try it once with somehting lile a DME fic or intersettion to see what happens.

So like you, I aim to intercept. One way is the extra 15 seconds you've tried. The other is tgrayson's suggestion for a 45° rather than a 30° intercept (I sort of like that one but question whether it is enough). A third is, so long as there's is not a lot of extra maneuvering involved, to choose teradrop when it's a close question which to use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top