Teaching Holds

deadringer86 said:
This was a question on my II ride. Examiner asked if you needed to reintercept the inbound course when turning back towards the fix following a parallel entry. I said I would teach to reintercept the inbound course, and he basically told me that wasn't necessary at all. According to him, after you make the turn, just go direct to the fix. No need to reintercept the course.
Click to expand...

Make the fix an intersection. Out of curiosity, ask he what he would do - step by step - with a parallel entry to an intersection hold - without RNAV identifying the intersection.

As you do, start by considering what heading would take you to the fix in prefect, no-wind conditions. Then discuss how you will account for winds with multiple components.

Example: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0910/05612IL29R.PDF
You are on the missed and have intercepted the R110 to ALIKE. You reach ALIKE and begin your parallel entry.

Me, I've seen more than one "always head to the" fix pilot make the parallel entry, twist the dial direct to the VOR, blow right past ALIKE inbound, well outside of it, and continue the 5-6 miles to the VOR unless corrected.

It =can= be done, but it tesnd to be much less work ti just set up an intercept to the 293° inbound.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Make the fix an intersection. Out of curiosity, ask he what he would do - step by step - with a parallel entry to an intersection hold - without RNAV identifying the intersection.

As you do, start by considering what heading would take you to the fix in prefect, no-wind conditions. Then discuss how you will account for winds with multiple components.

Example: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0910/05612IL29R.PDF
You are on the missed and have intercepted the R110 to ALIKE. You reach ALIKE and begin your parallel entry.

Me, I've seen more than one "always head to the" fix pilot make the parallel entry, twist the dial direct to the VOR, blow right past ALIKE inbound, well outside of it, and continue the 5-6 miles to the VOR unless corrected.

It =can= be done, but it tesnd to be much less work ti just set up an intercept to the 293° inbound.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Ironically on the II flight, I had to do a parallel entry to an intersection hold without using GPS. I reintercepted the inbound course on that and he never said anything.
 
ppragman said:
I like a parallel entry for everything. Hit the fix, turn outbound, turn on the holding side until you're going to intercept the inbound radial at 30 degrees-ish, then roll into a normal hold.
Click to expand...
I like direct for everything.

It's really just a matter of bank angle...:bandit:

-mini
 
minitour said:
I like direct for everything.

It's really just a matter of bank angle...:bandit:

-mini
Click to expand...

I knew a guy who flew some sort of fighters n the military when I was doing my instrument. His advice, "ehh, just roll into a 6g turn when you hit the fix"
 
poser765 said:
tgrayson, if I may ask, what is your source for that graphic?
Click to expand...

The source data comes from FAA Order 7130.3A, Holding Pattern Criteria, although I had to slice and dice the data a bit to put the distances in a form of interest to pilots, rather than holding pattern designers.
 
I never understand why people call the two sides of a hold "protected" and "non-protected". Every FAA publication I have seen says "holding" and "non-holding". Not to mention when saying "non-protected" you are implying to the student that there is no protection on the non-holding side of a hold.

After teaching my Indian students I wouldn't be surprised with them trying to yank and bank on me after blowing through an inbound course because of winds as a result of saying "non-protected".

It really isn't a good way to teach holds IMO.
 
Maurus said:
I never understand why people call the two sides of a hold "protected" and "non-protected". Every FAA publication I have seen says "holding" and "non-holding". Not to mention when saying "non-protected" you are implying to the student that there is no protection on the non-holding side of a hold.

After teaching my Indian students I wouldn't be surprised with them trying to yank and bank on me after blowing through an inbound course because of winds as a result of saying "non-protected".

It really isn't a good way to teach holds IMO.
Click to expand...
Primacy. It was explained to me as protected and "not protected" or some variation of that theme. You're right though, it's something I really need to break myself of.

-mini
 
AP2B said:
This is a separate question all together, but does anyone here have reservations about paralleling the inbound course on the nonholding (non-protected) side? I track the actual radial outbound so I can get a feel for the wind before getting established anyway, but I've never been keen on flying around out in space on the nonholding side.
Click to expand...

AP, I haven't seen any discussion on this part of your question, so I figured that I would address it.

The Air Force teaches that for a procedure turn, one of the techniques you can use is the "holding techique" where basically you perform your turn around maneuver like a holding pattern.

AFMAN 11-217 said:
13.6. Holding Technique. Enter the procedure turn according to the holding procedures described in Chapter 10 with the following exceptions:
13.6.1. If your heading is within 90° of the outbound procedure turn course, you may use normal lead points to intercept the procedure turn course outbound.
13.6.2. If you elect a teardrop entry, your teardrop course must be within 30 degrees of the procedure turn course. Use course guidance if it is available.
13.6.3. If the entry turn places the aircraft on the non-maneuvering side of the procedure turn course and you are flying in excess of 180 KTAS, you must correct toward the procedure turn course using an intercept angle of at least 20°.
13.6.4. If you intercept the procedure turn course outbound, maintain the course for the remainder of the outbound leg, then turn toward the maneuvering side to reverse course.
Click to expand...

All the stuff in bold italics is regulatory (mandatory) and the other stuff is informational.

So anyway, because our regulation says that if we are in excess of 180 true, we need to correct back to the course with at least 20 degrees of correction for the "holding technique" method of executing a procedure turn, a lot of guys forget that this requirement doesn't also apply to holds as well. Consequently, they do it there as well. I'm sure some guys also know that it is only regulatory for procedure turns using the holding technique, but they do it in holds too, because it keeps everything the same.

That said, it is perfectly acceptable to track out on the non-holding side. As Tgrayson showed, there isn't THAT much difference in the size of the airspace between the two sides.
 
Thanks for that fish.

A co-worker of mine and retired Air Force flight engineer just turned me onto AFPAM11-216 and AFMAN11-217. I'm finding them to be outstanding procedural reads.
 
AP2B said:
Thanks for that fish.

A co-worker of mine and retired Air Force flight engineer just turned me onto AFPAM11-216 and AFMAN11-217. I'm finding them to be outstanding procedural reads.
Click to expand...

No probs. Obviously they aren't regulatory at all for the civilian guys, but they are filled with some good techniques. Also, most of the regulatory stuff is mirrored in the FARs/AIM, so if you follow one you are usually following the other.

There are a few differences (Fix-to-Fix, for example), so watch out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top