non published holding patterns

[Illini Pilot]

draw it out on your kneeboard or whatever! its the easiest way and you'll have something to reference to double check before you enter

 

[bobbysamd]

Holding entries

[O]n a checkride you have to show proper entries. I had a student of mine fail a multi-instrument check ride because he liked to do his own hold entries because like he said, "they are not regulatory in nature". He came back with me and we did some remedial and he learned correct holding pattern entries and passed his checkride.

I have a friend who is a current instructor. We talked the week before last, and he told me that the PTS has been changed to allow any kind of holding entry as long as one remains in protected airspace. In other words, you can use an 90/270 instead of a parallel entry, teardrop, or whatever.

Just the same, during training and on a checkride I would use the AIM-recommended holding entries (primarily because they are the ones I know and understand the best, having taught them to a good number of instrument students). Despite what the PTS might say, many examiners are not especially open-minded. They want to see holding entries by the book. So, as long as you do it by the book, there is no room for argument, or pink slips.

Finally, I've had only two real holds. One was to a VOR and it was a straightforward direct entry to a published hold. The other was to a DME fix, with ATC defining the leg length in DME, so no worries about timing. It, too, was a straightforward, direct entry. I realize that two holds does not consititute the entirety of ATC's holding mindset, but my experience and those of others lead me to believe that ATC will try give holding in as straightforward a manner as possible. Flight instructors tend to give more perverted holds, for good reason.

 

[labbats]

from an atc standpoint and as someone with about 1500 hours of cross country ifr expierience, most controllers personally aren't going to care how you enter the hold.

As long as it's right turns, right? Haha! Man that was some intense flying! Minimums! Go around! No, wait... I see it!! Learned lots and had fun.



Personally, I don't do the established parallel entry as written in the AIM. It's much easier to create a teardrop and intercept the inbound a ways out from the fix rather than do a proper parallel entry where you loop around and find yourself right on top of the fix, with a heading different from a normal inbound. Now you've got to deal with the extra turn, the extra time to make that turn, and a fix popping up on you at the most difficult time of a hold. It doesn't make sense. Instead, cross the fix, then make a 30 degree cut from your wind correction to the protected side for the allotted time (1 min with no wind) and then turn your teardrop back towards the inbound course. You intercept a much more steady needle, plus all of the other reasons I mentioned.

It'd be much easier if I could just draw it. I suggest getting some chalk and making a holding pattern on the ground, then walking towards it from different angles. It helped me understand how and why different intercepts were needed and gave me a better understanding of spatial orientation.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I had a student of mine fail a multi-instrument check ride because he liked to do his own hold entries

So long as the entries kept him in protected airspace, the Examiner should have been reported to the FSDO for violating FAA policy. It's a recurrent issue, with AFS-600, the Designee branch rep[etedly telling examiners

==============================
Another question frequently asked, "Must the pilot examiner test the applicant using the recommended holding pattern entry, or can the applicant use any desired method? In the past, an applicant would have been required to use one of the three recommended procedures; however, a change has occurred.

***
If an applicant elects to use holding pattern entry procedures other than those recommended by the FAA and, in doing so, remains within the holding pattern airspace to be protected, the procedure would be acceptable if accomplished safely.
==============================

AFS-600 Designee Update Vol. 6, No. 2, April 1994

 

[SkyWestCRJPilot]

Some more input regarding holds. Nonpublished holding is generally a failure of the ATC system. Things get too saturated and they have to put you in a nonpublished hold. If it's published then the slowdown has been known to happen before but a nonpublished hold means things have really gotten screwed up. Most of my nonpublished holds have been, "hold inbound on your present inboud radial." Otherwise they've always been, "Hold as published," which is on an airway or at the IAF. To figure out the way to enter a hold I use the thumb method or a modified version of it. (Hard to explain without showing you my thumb, sorrry) Back when I was in the CRJ all you did was enter the hold in the FMS and it figured the entry out for you and the autopilot flew it all. It was great. Now back in the E-120 I'm back to the thumb method.

 

[moving2vegas]

atc gods must hate me then

I flew a garmin 430 equipped mojave for awhile and got non- published holds constantly. I remember 3 in one day. I assumed it was because I was GPS direct, off an airway, and screwing things up for center. Alot of these posts (by very qualified pilots) seem to say holding in general is fairly rare. Maybe I pi$$ed off the wrong person somewhere.


ADDED: SkyWestCRJPilot, it's adorable but dude you gotta take that baby pic down. Every time my wife sees it she starts talking baby. You're improving my sex life but I fear my bank account will soon die as a result.

 

[sky37d]

I've had to do 2 holds, once when I was way to early for Oshkosh, it was a direct entry, 2 min legs, the other was a standard teardrop for a published hold to an NDB approach. That being said, for the Pt, the examiner had me holding at the intersection of 2 radials. THAT was a B1Tch.

 

[rettofly]

Personally, I don't do the established parallel entry as written in the AIM. It's much easier to create a teardrop and intercept the inbound a ways out from the fix rather than do a proper parallel entry where you loop around and find yourself right on top of the fix, with a heading different from a normal inbound. Now you've got to deal with the extra turn, the extra time to make that turn, and a fix popping up on you at the most difficult time of a hold. It doesn't make sense.

Amen to that. Also, a teardrop guarantees that you're on the protected side of the hold.

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

from an atc standpoint and as someone with about 1500 hours of cross country ifr expierience, most controllers personally aren't going to care how you enter the hold.

hey Labbats, you wouldnt be refering to our GPS RWY 02 into Marion Illinois after our jump up from Nashville would you????
A little bit of nonstandard holding, a little argument that was anti CRM about which way we were supposed to hold? That was a fun approach, um.....go around!!! no wait! I see the runway, LAND! Hah, that was a good approach man, I cant remember who was flying that leg, you or me? Must of been you if I called the go around huh? Whats new man? Still looking for a pilot at CMA. They have a guy they are using for pilot service but **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**, if you have the times get it going..... I know the guys at the company liked you after the endless trips we did in that plane. I still have those pics of that thunderstorm on the way into Cheyenne. Did we ever have good flying weather???

 

[labbats]

Check your PMs slacker....

 

[V1 cuts R fun]

I didn't get any PMs........what the **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**!!!!