Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk

Hello,

A couple of quick questions/calrifications:

1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy
36L missed:

"...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold"

I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from
flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before
executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg.

Is this the correct technique for entering a direct hold or should I
be intercepting the inbound radial? It seems this would result in a
better pattern because of tendency to overshoot when flying direct
and immediately turning.

2) What would be an appropriate holding speed in a 172? I have been
using 80kts, which requires about 1700-1800rpm at 3000'.

Thanks.

On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:
Hello,

A couple of quick questions/calrifications:

1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy
36L missed:

"...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold"

I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from
flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before
executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg.

I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder
if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to
clarify.

When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean
you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold.

Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you
approach the holding fix.

If the appropriate entry is direct, then when you cross the fix, you turn
to the outbound heading.


Is this the correct technique for entering a direct hold or should I
be intercepting the inbound radial? It seems this would result in a
better pattern because of tendency to overshoot when flying direct
and immediately turning.

2) What would be an appropriate holding speed in a 172? I have been
using 80kts, which requires about 1700-1800rpm at 3000'.

I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other
than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing
with their timings, etc.


Thanks.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote:

On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:
Hello,

A couple of quick questions/calrifications:

1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy
36L missed:

"...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold"

I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from
flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before
executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg.

I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder
if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to
clarify.

When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean
you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold.

Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you
approach the holding fix.


Duh! Of course. Thanks for pointing that out.

I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other
than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing
with their timings, etc.


I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated
standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel
efficient). Obviously I need more practice.

Cheers,

Terence

On 10/12/07 08:58, Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote:

On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:
Hello,

A couple of quick questions/calrifications:

1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy
36L missed:

"...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold"

I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from
flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before
executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg.

I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder
if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to
clarify.

When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean
you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold.

Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you
approach the holding fix.


Duh! Of course. Thanks for pointing that out.

I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other
than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing
with their timings, etc.


I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated
standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel
efficient). Obviously I need more practice.

You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits,
of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride
may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise
for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught.

Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say?


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:04:42 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote:

You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits,
of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride
may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise
for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught.

Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say?

I'm a lapsed PP-SEL working on my BFR, then transitioning to
instruments. Recently I've been stymied by weather, aircraft
availability etc. so I've been using the time to study and practice in
MS FlightSim.

On 10/12/07 14:46, Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:04:42 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote:

You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits,
of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride
may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise
for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught.

Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say?

I'm a lapsed PP-SEL working on my BFR, then transitioning to
instruments. Recently I've been stymied by weather, aircraft
availability etc. so I've been using the time to study and practice in
MS FlightSim.

Congratulations on getting back to flying. Stay on the group, as there
are a lot of great people here that can help.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote:

On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:

I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other
than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing
with their timings, etc.


I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated
standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel
efficient). Obviously I need more practice.

The slower speed means more crab to handle the wind also. I'd fly at
least 90 in a hold in a Hawk, but if you comfortable at 80 nothing wrong
with that.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:


The slower speed means more crab to handle the wind also. I'd fly at
least 90 in a hold in a Hawk, but if you comfortable at 80 nothing wrong
with that.

Besides, what's the point of flying in circles faster than you have to.
As Scotty would say, at Warp 10, we're going nowhere mighty fast.

Matt Whiting wrote:
Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen

On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:

I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other
than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing
with their timings, etc.


I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated
standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel
efficient). Obviously I need more practice.

The slower speed means more crab to handle the wind also. I'd fly at
least 90 in a hold in a Hawk, but if you comfortable at 80 nothing wrong
with that.

The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.

Blanche wrote:
The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.


They never will. They put you in the hold to keep you from going anywhere. Why
would they possibly want you to fly in place faster?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com