Newbie holding questions

Steve,
I'm not understanding your comment about "not expected to hold"
in the even of a radio failure without an EFC time. Are you implying
that as soon as I have radio failure I should begin to execute the
approach or to continue as flight planned or initially cleared? I'm real
concerned that assumption could lead to at best some heated phone calls
and at worst a leading story on the evening news.



-----Original Message-----
From: Steven P. McNicoll ]
Posted At: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 9:58 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Newbie holding questions
Subject: Newbie holding questions


"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:%D0vf.40496$QW2.15228@dukeread08...

But if no delay is expected and you have a radio failure
without an EFC, just how long are you expected to hold?


You're not expected to hold.



If you are given a clearance to hold w/o an EFC there is
still some delay expected, otherwise ATC would not issue a
hold.


If a delay was expected an EFC would have been issued.



Make them say how much delay or give an EFC/EAC time
or you'll be holding until the fuel runs out. Maybe the
book does not require ATC to issue a time, but my sense of
self-preservation wants to know.


How much delay? The answer is "None." The book says do not specify
an
EFC
if no delay is expected. If your sense of self-preservation can't
live
with
that don't fly IFR.

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
. net...

I'm not understanding your comment about "not expected to hold"
in the even of a radio failure without an EFC time. Are you implying
that as soon as I have radio failure I should begin to execute the
approach or to continue as flight planned or initially cleared? I'm real
concerned that assumption could lead to at best some heated phone calls
and at worst a leading story on the evening news.


An EFC was not issued because ATC did not expect any delay, that is, they
did not expect that an actual hold would be needed or entered. As you
approach the holding fix you're a bit concerned because you have not been
cleared beyond that fix. So you query ATC and receive no response. You've
experienced a two-way radio communications failure. Since no EFC was
received you are to leave the clearance limit upon arrival over it.

Okay Steve, I didn't realize until just now that you are only talking
about enroute holds. I was applying your comments to all types of holds.
Will you agree that a hold at an initial approach fix will always
include and EFC time?


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven P. McNicoll ]
Posted At: Thursday, January 05, 2006 11:49 AM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Newbie holding questions
Subject: Newbie holding questions


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
. net...

I'm not understanding your comment about "not expected to hold"
in the even of a radio failure without an EFC time. Are you implying
that as soon as I have radio failure I should begin to execute the
approach or to continue as flight planned or initially cleared? I'm
real
concerned that assumption could lead to at best some heated phone
calls
and at worst a leading story on the evening news.


An EFC was not issued because ATC did not expect any delay, that is,
they
did not expect that an actual hold would be needed or entered. As you
approach the holding fix you're a bit concerned because you have not
been
cleared beyond that fix. So you query ATC and receive no response.
You've
experienced a two-way radio communications failure. Since no EFC was
received you are to leave the clearance limit upon arrival over it.

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 03:45:01 GMT, Jim Carter wrote:

Okay Steve, I didn't realize until just now that you are only talking
about enroute holds. I was applying your comments to all types of holds.
Will you agree that a hold at an initial approach fix will always
include and EFC time?

I am like you Jim, seems that Steve is not very clear in what he says.

Though to be honest, I always thought a hold, is a hold is a hold, if I am
told to hold at ABC VOR enroute, I will be expecting an EFC to leave ABC
VOR to proceed on to to my destination, paper stop or not as he describes.

Are there special procedures for an enroute holds? Am I not expected to
fly a racetrack pattern around the fix I am instructed to hold at?

Like others said, it would be more appropriate to put a speed restriction
rather then hold, but Steve insists that I won't be flying in circles when
I am asked to hold.

When I got my one and only reroute, I was routed to a VOR, and I didn't
even think of asking for a EFC since I figured there was no delay as I was
being re-routed around a MOA.

With the vague way Steve writes in this newsgroup, kinda makes me nervous
if I had to ever fly through his sector if he is an ATC controller.

Allen

Steve's a big boy and doesn't need me or anyone else defending him. I
find that when I finally read what he meant it is very plain. I think my
problem is that I don't understand his original premise as precisely as
does he. I'm sure he is very precise and accurate in-the-moment, which
is really the only time he'd be giving direction anyway. So all is well
in the great wild blue yonder...

Regarding the enroute hold, I've only had to do them during training or
check rides, or at Portland, Or in the '70s while they were down to only
one runway. They were the GA and AC airport so you either flew your
approaches at the 727 speeds or you got to hold enroute until you agreed
to fly your approaches at 727 speeds. It was a wonderful environment in
which to train students right at the end of their study for their
instrument or II ticket. Ah, the good ol' days...



-----Original Message-----
From: A Lieberman ]
Posted At: Friday, January 06, 2006 4:33 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Newbie holding questions
Subject: Newbie holding questions

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 03:45:01 GMT, Jim Carter wrote:

Okay Steve, I didn't realize until just now that you are only
talking
about enroute holds. I was applying your comments to all types of
holds.
Will you agree that a hold at an initial approach fix will always
include and EFC time?

I am like you Jim, seems that Steve is not very clear in what he says.

Though to be honest, I always thought a hold, is a hold is a hold, if
I am
told to hold at ABC VOR enroute, I will be expecting an EFC to leave
ABC
VOR to proceed on to to my destination, paper stop or not as he
describes.

Are there special procedures for an enroute holds? Am I not expected
to
fly a racetrack pattern around the fix I am instructed to hold at?

Like others said, it would be more appropriate to put a speed
restriction
rather then hold, but Steve insists that I won't be flying in circles
when
I am asked to hold.

When I got my one and only reroute, I was routed to a VOR, and I
didn't
even think of asking for a EFC since I figured there was no delay as I
was
being re-routed around a MOA.

With the vague way Steve writes in this newsgroup, kinda makes me
nervous
if I had to ever fly through his sector if he is an ATC controller.

Allen

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
. ..

I am like you Jim, seems that Steve is not very clear in what he says.


What did I say that was not very clear?



Though to be honest, I always thought a hold, is a hold is a hold, if I am
told to hold at ABC VOR enroute, I will be expecting an EFC to leave ABC
VOR to proceed on to to my destination, paper stop or not as he describes.

Are there special procedures for an enroute holds? Am I not expected to
fly a racetrack pattern around the fix I am instructed to hold at?

Like others said, it would be more appropriate to put a speed restriction
rather then hold, but Steve insists that I won't be flying in circles when
I am asked to hold.

When I got my one and only reroute, I was routed to a VOR, and I didn't
even think of asking for a EFC since I figured there was no delay as I was
being re-routed around a MOA.

With the vague way Steve writes in this newsgroup, kinda makes me nervous
if I had to ever fly through his sector if he is an ATC controller.


FAAO 7110.65 and FAR 91.185 specifically refer to holding instructions
without an EFC and the AIM does so implicitly. Why then do some insist that
holding instructions must always include an EFC?

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:17:02 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
. ..

I am like you Jim, seems that Steve is not very clear in what he says.


What did I say that was not very clear?

Answer this question. Why would I hold if there is no delay? A paper stop
is a delay. I am no longer direct.

Define hold.

Hold is doing a racetrack pattern around a fix is what I was taught. If
you tell me to hold, then I am no longer cleared beyond a fix. I am now
doing circles and expect an EFC to stop spinning in circles. Are their
other holding patterns I need to know about?

FAAO 7110.65

Subsection please. I googled the above and it gave me visual flight rule
references

and FAR 91.185 specifically refer to holding instructions
without an EFC and the AIM does so implicitly. Why then do some insist that
holding instructions must always include an EFC?

Because when there is a no delay, I expect to be flying a straight line.
You tell me to hold, I better start holding per published hold instructions
and flying circles.

Go to http://www.vateud-td.org/references/Holding.asp

TAKEN from the above website
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.

I don't see me flying in circles Steve with the above instructions. I am
flying to a fix, you give me a new clearance limit. No teardrop, parallel
or direct entry. I fly a straight line.

You keep saying that I would be holding with no delay which is absolutely
wrong. My IFR filing does not include MBO to JAN, to MCB hold at MCB
direct to L31 does it? Not at all. I file to the fixes as appropriate.
You put me in a hold, and guess what, the clearance has changed and I need
an EFC.

How many ways can I say, if ATC puts me in a hold, then I expect an EFC.

The above seems to be a real good reference on on holding. Read toward the
bottom of the page for ATC actions. Read 4F and tell me that is incorrect.
And if it's incorrect, please provide a reference.

Allen

On 01/10/06 16:04, A Lieberman wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:17:02 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
. ..

I am like you Jim, seems that Steve is not very clear in what he says.


What did I say that was not very clear?

Answer this question. Why would I hold if there is no delay? A paper stop
is a delay. I am no longer direct.

Define hold.

Hold is doing a racetrack pattern around a fix is what I was taught. If
you tell me to hold, then I am no longer cleared beyond a fix. I am now
doing circles and expect an EFC to stop spinning in circles. Are their
other holding patterns I need to know about?

FAAO 7110.65

Subsection please. I googled the above and it gave me visual flight rule
references

and FAR 91.185 specifically refer to holding instructions
without an EFC and the AIM does so implicitly. Why then do some insist that
holding instructions must always include an EFC?

Because when there is a no delay, I expect to be flying a straight line.
You tell me to hold, I better start holding per published hold instructions
and flying circles.

Go to http://www.vateud-td.org/references/Holding.asp

TAKEN from the above website
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.

I'm not Steve, but ... what if the controller does not issue the clearance
beyond the current limit? If your radios are still working, you should hold, right?
If your radios have failed, that's a different story.


I don't see me flying in circles Steve with the above instructions. I am
flying to a fix, you give me a new clearance limit. No teardrop, parallel
or direct entry. I fly a straight line.

You keep saying that I would be holding with no delay which is absolutely
wrong. My IFR filing does not include MBO to JAN, to MCB hold at MCB
direct to L31 does it? Not at all. I file to the fixes as appropriate.
You put me in a hold, and guess what, the clearance has changed and I need
an EFC.

How many ways can I say, if ATC puts me in a hold, then I expect an EFC.

The above seems to be a real good reference on on holding. Read toward the
bottom of the page for ATC actions. Read 4F and tell me that is incorrect.
And if it's incorrect, please provide a reference.

Allen


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
. ..

Answer this question. Why would I hold if there is no delay?


You wouldn't. You'd receive clearance beyond the previously issued holding
fix before you reached it.



A paper stop is a delay. I am no longer direct.


A paper stop is a delay only on paper, there's no actual delay because
there's no actual hold. That's why it's called a "paper stop".



Define hold.


The Pilot/Controller Glossary defines "hold procedure" as "a predetermined
maneuver which keeps aircraft within a specified airspace while awaiting
further clearance from air traffic control." I'll go with that.



Hold is doing a racetrack pattern around a fix is what I was taught. If
you tell me to hold, then I am no longer cleared beyond a fix. I am now
doing circles and expect an EFC to stop spinning in circles. Are their
other holding patterns I need to know about?


But you don't do any circles if you receive clearance beyond the holding fix
before reaching it. That's what the controller is anticipating, that's why
he told you no delay was expected and didn't issue an EFC.



FAAO 7110.65


Subsection please. I googled the above and it gave me visual flight rule
references


Paragraph 4-6-1.c. I gave you that reference a week ago.



Because when there is a no delay, I expect to be flying a straight line.
You tell me to hold, I better start holding per published hold
instructions and flying circles.


Let's say you're cleared to a fix on your route some thirty miles or so
ahead. Would you start holding immediately, at your present position, or
would you enter a hold at that fix ahead of you?



Go to http://www.vateud-td.org/references/Holding.asp

TAKEN from the above website
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.

I don't see me flying in circles Steve with the above instructions. I am
flying to a fix, you give me a new clearance limit. No teardrop, parallel
or direct entry. I fly a straight line.


Correct. That's a paper stop. That's the situation I've been trying to
explain to you.



You keep saying that I would be holding with no delay which is absolutely
wrong. My IFR filing does not include MBO to JAN, to MCB hold at MCB
direct to L31 does it? Not at all. I file to the fixes as appropriate.
You put me in a hold, and guess what, the clearance has changed and I need
an EFC.


I never said anything at all like that. What are these references to MBO,
JAN, and MCB? I haven't seen them previously mentioned in this thread.



How many ways can I say, if ATC puts me in a hold, then I expect an EFC.


I don't know. How many ways can I say if ATC issues holding instructions
without an EFC because no delay is expected and clears you beyond the
holding fix before you reach it you haven't been delayed because you never
entered the hold?



The above seems to be a real good reference on on holding. Read toward
the bottom of the page for ATC actions. Read 4F and tell me that is
incorrect.


It's not incorrect, but it's not the situation we're discussing. Read
number 3, that's what we're discussing.

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
. net...

Okay Steve, I didn't realize until just now that you are only talking
about enroute holds. I was applying your comments to all types of holds.
Will you agree that a hold at an initial approach fix will always
include and EFC time?


I'm talking about all holds in which no delay is expected. The example I
provided was an enroute hold but FAAO 7110.65 does not differentiate between
enroute holds where no delay is expected and holds at an IAF where no delay
is expected.