Busted IFR Checkride

Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said hold
wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in the
big picture.... Thanks again. JK

Mark Astley wrote:

Jon,

Busted rides occasionally happen, and from the numerous posts, it looks like
you're coping just fine. But if you need further cheering up, here's how my
instructor busted HIS ride:

He started off with the easy stuff, tracking to a VOR. However, he missed
the flag switching from TO to FROM, and just kept on tracking. Apparently,
it was a fairly calm day so that little course correction was necessary,
otherwise trying to keep the needle aligned may have clued him in
(eventually). Anyway, the DE let this go on for about 10 minutes or so
before suggesting they do a 180 rather than circle the globe on course. The
rest of the ride went off without a hitch.

blue skies,
mark


"Jon Kraus" wrote in message
.. .


Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
More to follow...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA Argggg...

Jon Kraus wrote in
:

Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said
hold wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in
the big picture.... Thanks again. JK


When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern. The
outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a crosswind.

Andrew Sarangan wrote in
. 158:

When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
crosswind.

Why? After the first lap, you should know where the wind is and make
appropriate heading corrections to maintain some semblance of a racetrack
pattern, and you should usually have some idea of the winds, anyway.

In real life, though, nobody cares what the pattern looks like, as long as
you stay in protected airspace. I try to keep it as oval as possible,
though, just out of pride.

--
Regards,

Stan

When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
crosswind.

Why will[ the hold not be a race track pattern]? After the first lap, you
should know where the wind is


Because the round parts will be different radii. You hold constant rate, but
are blown downwind. So, one half circle is little, the other is big.

Jose



--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Stan Gosnell wrote in
:

Andrew Sarangan wrote in
. 158:

When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
crosswind.

Why? After the first lap, you should know where the wind is and make
appropriate heading corrections to maintain some semblance of a
racetrack pattern, and you should usually have some idea of the winds,
anyway.

In real life, though, nobody cares what the pattern looks like, as
long as you stay in protected airspace. I try to keep it as oval as
possible, though, just out of pride.



If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you want
to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind correction on
the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on both ends of the
holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to the inbound.

Andrew Sarangan wrote:


If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you want
to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind correction on
the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on both ends of the
holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to the inbound.

Your collective "we" doesn't include all of us. ;-) If your churning along at
200 or 230 knots, standard rate is useless. It then becomes a 25-degree bank
achieved. In fact, that is what the writer of the holding pattern criteria
presumed, because the criteria were rewritten in 1963 to account for military
and transport jet operations.

Little biddy puddle jumpers have more airspace than they could ever use. ;-)

Andrew Sarangan wrote

If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on
both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to
the inbound.

Gee...thanks for the explanation Andrew, and to think that for all of
these years, for a one minute pattern, I've been teaching that one
should *triple* the drift on the outbound leg. We taught it that way at
PanAm long before the FAA changed the AIM as follows.

From AIM 5-3-7

(c) Compensate for wind effect primarily by drift correction on the inbound
and outbound legs. When outbound, triple the inbound drift correction to
avoid major turning adjustments; e.g., if correcting left by 8 degrees when
inbound, correct right by 24 degrees when outbound.



Bob Moore

Bob Moore wrote in
. 8:

Andrew Sarangan wrote

If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns
on both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound
parallel to the inbound.

Gee...thanks for the explanation Andrew, and to think that for all of
these years, for a one minute pattern, I've been teaching that one
should *triple* the drift on the outbound leg. We taught it that way
at PanAm long before the FAA changed the AIM as follows.

From AIM 5-3-7

(c) Compensate for wind effect primarily by drift correction on the
inbound and outbound legs. When outbound, triple the inbound drift
correction to avoid major turning adjustments; e.g., if correcting
left by 8 degrees when inbound, correct right by 24 degrees when
outbound.



Bob Moore


OK, now I'm confused. If you triple the correction, wouldn't the inbound
turn be less than standard rate? What am I missing here?

Andrew Sarangan wrote

OK, now I'm confused. If you triple the correction, wouldn't the inbound
turn be less than standard rate? What am I missing here?

Well...ignoring the turns for the moment, using the same drift
correction for the outbound leg as used on the inbound leg (with
an opposite sign of course) would result in parallel tracks. This
is one times the inbound drift (1x). Now, for a one minute pattern,
there are two standard rate turns, each requiring one minute to
complete. The distance blown off during each of the turns is the
same as one would be blown off during one of the one minute strait
legs, requiring an ammount of drift correction on the outbound leg
for each of the turns equal to the ammount used for the one minute
strait leg. All adds up to be three times (3x) the inbound drift
correction.

Yes, even the old AC 61-27C, Instrument Flying Handbook had it wrong.

Bob Moore

Andrew Sarangan wrote in
. 158:

If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on
both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to
the inbound.

It won't be a perfect racetrack, true, but I said "some semblance of a
racetrack", as the original poster was talking about one that didn't
resemble a racetrack at all. I don't try for perfect standard rate turns,
I try for keeping a general distance from the inbound course, usually using
less than standard rate on the turn into the wind. If the turns are
somewhat less or more than standard, I don't care. With GPS, this is all
easy enough. If you're doing NDB holding, then you have no idea what shape
your pattern is, and at least I don't care. Blindly applying all rules of
thumb all the time isn't something I advocate.

--
Regards,

Stan