What counts as a "Hold" for IFR currency?

[UndauntedFlyer]

Finally, if someone can make me understand exactly how intercepting the holding course inbound is not "Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigation systems" I'd be most grateful.

My opinion is that the whole part about holding procedures is a joke unless the FAA defines holds better in the regulation.

And the point that Doozer makes about "intercepting and tracking courses" is an even bigger joke. Why did the FAA ever add such a requirement to the IFR currency requirements? Writing it was a waste of ink on the page. After all, if a pilot flies the 6 approaches (or even one) or even intercepts an airway one time isn't this "intercepting and tracking coures?"

 

[Holding Short]

Let me rephrase the question...

I already know about the types of entries, but let's just say we were told to... "Hold North of the XYZ VOR, 360 Radial, Right Turns, Expect Further Clearance 1845Z" And we were flying inbound to the fix, on a heading of let's say 230 (ok, I know this on is a direct entry, but bear with me here...), what I'm getting at is, what is an easy way to deduce which is the best way to enter a hold, given a certain heading to a fix.

I'll give it a shot.

Note the outbound heading of the the holding pattern. Now, assuming you are heading directly to the fix, note where that outbound heading falls on the face of the DG(heading indicator). If it falls any where between directly ahead(12 o'clock) and 70 degrees to the right, it will be a tear drop entry.

If that heading you figured out earlier falls between directly ahead and 110 degrees to the left on the face of the DG, it will be a parallell entry.

If that heading falls anywhere else on the DG , other than 70 right or 110 left it will be direct entry. This is all for a right hand pattern.

Flip it around for left patterns.... 110 right of DG face ; 70 left. The teardrop section(70 left) will now be on the left side of the DG and the parallel(110 right) will be on the right.


Example

"Hold North of the XYZ VOR, 360 Radial, Right Turns, Expect Further Clearance 1845Z" And we were flying inbound to the fix, on a heading of let's say 230


Outbound heading is 360. Your inbound on 230 heading. 360 does not fall anywhere on the 70 right or 110 left of the DG face , so it would be direct.
Try it out.

HS

 

[Flyerjosh]

Personally I think that if ATC tells you to make a right 360, it's a hold. I don't bother to log holds in my logbook. But then again we go back to the sim every 6 months anyway, so it doesn't really matter... we cover holding during recurrent.

 

[nosehair]

I submit that you're killing two birds with one stone on each approach conducted in this manner.

And I submit that you are short-cutting it.

Again, I say it is up to the pilot for himself and up to the instructor when doing training, but when I do something like you are saying, ie., "substitute" a procedure turn for a holding pattern, it is a short-cut and you are making a decision that you don't need actual "holding procedures" practice.
There is more to holding than making the dreaded entry. (You flew past your EFC! What? What EFC? Hey! What the- my radio's dead! What the f* do I do now?)

Like calling a "traffic pattern" a "rectangular course", or a high go-around from a simulated forced landing, calling that a "go-around" from a botched approach or landing. Each maneuver/procedure has it's own specific elements of training. Combining maneuvers is risky. Is the student getting every element that the maneuver is designed to teach?

It's short-cutting, and some level of training is being skipped. I'm not saying *every* hold, or approach, or other maneuver you practice must always have every element of the maneuver or procedure, but you should do enough often enough to remain competent and proficient. That is your call and is left up to your integrity.

It only becomes a problem when "short-cutting" becomes a habit, a lifestyle, and proficiency declines, and worse, the bragging becomes the goal of the new pilot.

 

[Doozer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doozer
I submit that you're killing two birds with one stone on each approach conducted in this manner.

"And I submit that you are short-cutting it. "

And you would be absolutely right.

Having said that, you'll never see me argue that proficiency isn't more important than currency; however, the original topic was what counts, not what should count. It was about legality; not proficiency. If we want to debate proficiency vs. currency, that's best left for another thread (or over several beers).

As an FAA instructor and as a military instructor/evaluator, I can and could tell when someone adequately mastered a maneuver, a concept or some other training requirement.

You mentioned personal integrity. Well, as an instructor, I'm in the customer service business, and I happen to believe that part of personal integrity while instructing is giving someone the most bang for his buck -- not milking him for more training dollars. When someone has obviously grasped or exceeded the requirements I tell him and -- unless he wants more practice -- we move on. Conversely, when someone hasn't grasped the requirements, I tell him why, I reiterate how he needs to demonstrate mastery and we don't move on until he has.

I can't monitor everyone's integrity -- and I won't try. I like living, so I'm not about to overestimate my proficiency; anyone I endorse has also demonstrated a similarly mature attitude.

There are exceptions, but the FAA's legal counsel consistently rules in favor of the letter of the regulations -- even when common sense screams otherwise. Perhaps the FAA will exercise some common sense in this subpart during the next iteration of 14 CFR. Until then, the rules are the rules.

It's up to each of us to decide if we will continue to strive for proficiency or merely strive for legality. Maybe I can buy you a beer at the wake of one of the latter.

 

[nosehair]

Maybe I can buy you a beer at the wake of one of the latter.

Well said. You understand what I mean, and I'm sure Undaunted was only stirrin' up the pot on this subject. He makes a point about the types who will try to make a legal point of "holding" at the yellow line, or other such nonsense.

 

[2Inverted]

My big problem now is figuring out HP entries..... Anybody with good mental tips to remember which headings give you which pattern entries?

To enter the hold make the smallest turn (# of degrees) you can and that will determine the entry type. The important thing is to be on the protected side and .....