Newbie holding questions

On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:57:35 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

How much delay? The answer is "None." The book says do not specify an EFC
if no delay is expected.

I respectfully disagree as there is time frame in your book.taken from
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0404.html

5. When no delay is expected, the controller should issue a clearance
beyond the fix as soon as possible and, whenever possible, at least
5 minutes before the aircraft reaches the clearance limit.

So, if you don't give me a clearance beyond my fix, then the pilot should
expecting an EFC if he has to hold over a fix.

In other words, as soon as I have to enter a hold, I should be expecting an
EFC as now there is a delay. After all, you have me spinning in circles.

My expected time enroute does not include time to hold over a fix.

Allen

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...

I respectfully disagree as there is time frame in your book.taken from
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0404.html

5. When no delay is expected, the controller should issue a clearance
beyond the fix as soon as possible and, whenever possible, at least
5 minutes before the aircraft reaches the clearance limit.

So, if you don't give me a clearance beyond my fix, then the pilot should
expecting an EFC if he has to hold over a fix.

In other words, as soon as I have to enter a hold, I should be expecting
an
EFC as now there is a delay. After all, you have me spinning in circles.

My expected time enroute does not include time to hold over a fix.


http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp4/atc0406.html#4-6-1

See subparagraph c.

On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:41:34 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...

I respectfully disagree as there is time frame in your book.taken from
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0404.html

5. When no delay is expected, the controller should issue a clearance
beyond the fix as soon as possible and, whenever possible, at least
5 minutes before the aircraft reaches the clearance limit.

So, if you don't give me a clearance beyond my fix, then the pilot should
expecting an EFC if he has to hold over a fix.

In other words, as soon as I have to enter a hold, I should be expecting
an
EFC as now there is a delay. After all, you have me spinning in circles.

My expected time enroute does not include time to hold over a fix.


http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp4/atc0406.html#4-6-1

See subparagraph c.

Which your reference further supports my position. If you clear me to a
fix, then I will not hear an EFC UNLESS I have to hold at that fix.

CLEARED TO (fix), NO DELAY EXPECTED.

From B-1 of your reference.

1. Holding instructions may be eliminated when you inform the pilot that no
delay is expected.

from above indicates I will not be put in a hold as I am not being
instructed to hold

If I have to hold, then the phraseology in the very same subsection C-1
supports this.

Taken from C - 1

1. When additional holding is expected at any other fix in your facility's
area, state the fix and your best estimate of the additional delay. When
more than one fix is involved, state the total additional en route delay
(omit specific fixes).

After all, you have me going in circles. I have not been cleared out of
the hold or beyond my hold fix. That EFC will assure that if "by the book"
my radio's go belly up, then I can be assured seperation.

I realize this is the book world and the real world, ATC would just rather
have me clear the airspace as safely as I can, and the transponder 7600
sure would indicate to ATC I have a communication problem.

After all, if I have a transponder, there is a good chance I have
operational NAV equipment too.

Bottom line based on what you provided, is that if I put in a holding
pattern, I better hear EFC or anticipate additional time in the clearance.
Without an EFC, technically, I am not cleared past my holding fix.

Every hold I have been put in (practice and the two times "real deal", I
have been given an EFC.

Allen

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...

Which your reference further supports my position.


How so? It clearly tells controllers not to issue an EFC when no delay is
expected.



If you clear me to a
fix, then I will not hear an EFC UNLESS I have to hold at that fix.


Right. If you do not have to actually hold at that fix, which is the
situation we're discussing, you won't hear an EFC.



CLEARED TO (fix), NO DELAY EXPECTED.

From B-1 of your reference.

1. Holding instructions may be eliminated when you inform the pilot that
no delay is expected.

from above indicates I will not be put in a hold as I am not being
instructed to hold

If I have to hold, then the phraseology in the very same subsection C-1
supports this.

Taken from C - 1

1. When additional holding is expected at any other fix in your facility's
area, state the fix and your best estimate of the additional delay. When
more than one fix is involved, state the total additional en route delay
(omit specific fixes).

After all, you have me going in circles. I have not been cleared out of
the hold or beyond my hold fix. That EFC will assure that if "by the
book" my radio's go belly up, then I can be assured seperation.


Why would you be going in circles? You would have been cleared beyond the
holding fix prior to reaching it, unless, as you point out, your radios
failed. But in the event of radio failure FAR 91.185 tells you to leave the
clearance limit upon arrival over it when no expect-further-clearance time
has been received.

That is a controller manual, not for pilot's actions. As
PIC I will ask, nay demand the info I want and need.
91.185
(3) Leave clearance limit. (i) When the clearance limit is a
fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or
descent and approach as close as possible to the
expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or
if one has not been received, as close as possible to the
estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or
amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an
approach begins, leave the clearance limit at the
expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or
if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance
limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins
and commence descent or descent and approach as close as
possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from
the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

If you are IN the hold and have had a two-way communications
failure, your ETA has past, without a EFC/EAC time you are
stuck for a while. Certainly, if your transponder still
works, squawk. If you've had a total failure your
transponder will quit and that should get ATC attention.
You've got an emergency. But 2-way radio failure is not
supposed to be an emergency, there is a procedure. Part of
that procedure is the EFC, ask for it, it is your right as
PIC.




--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.



"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
message
ink.net...
|
| "A Lieberman" wrote in message
| ...
|
| I respectfully disagree as there is time frame in your
book.taken from
| http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0404.html
|
| 5. When no delay is expected, the controller should
issue a clearance
| beyond the fix as soon as possible and, whenever
possible, at least
| 5 minutes before the aircraft reaches the clearance
limit.
|
| So, if you don't give me a clearance beyond my fix, then
the pilot should
| expecting an EFC if he has to hold over a fix.
|
| In other words, as soon as I have to enter a hold, I
should be expecting
| an
| EFC as now there is a delay. After all, you have me
spinning in circles.
|
| My expected time enroute does not include time to hold
over a fix.
|
|
| http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp4/atc0406.html#4-6-1
|
| See subparagraph c.
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:122vf.40588$QW2.11881@dukeread08...

That is a controller manual, not for pilot's actions.


Pilots don't issue EFCs, controllers do.



As PIC I will ask, nay demand the info I want and need.


Why do you think you need an EFC?



91.185
(3) Leave clearance limit. (i) When the clearance limit is a
fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or
descent and approach as close as possible to the
expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or
if one has not been received, as close as possible to the
estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or
amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an
approach begins, leave the clearance limit at the
expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or
if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance
limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins
and commence descent or descent and approach as close as
possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from
the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

If you are IN the hold and have had a two-way communications
failure, your ETA has past, without a EFC/EAC time you are
stuck for a while.


Nope. Remember, no delay was expected, that's why an EFC was not issued.
You'll be cleared past the holding fix before you reach it.



Certainly, if your transponder still
works, squawk. If you've had a total failure your
transponder will quit and that should get ATC attention.
You've got an emergency. But 2-way radio failure is not
supposed to be an emergency, there is a procedure. Part of
that procedure is the EFC, ask for it, it is your right as
PIC.


Nonsense. What's the point of having an EFC when you won't be entering a
hold? What's the point of demanding an EFC where an EFC can't be issued?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:



Nonsense. What's the point of having an EFC when you won't be entering a
hold? What's the point of demanding an EFC where an EFC can't be issued?


Under those circumstances some helpful controllers have been known to
state after the hold is issued, "except no delay at ACMEE."