Holding Pattern Question

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

In that case, you better ask for an EFC if you haven't received further
clearance prior to arrival at the holding fix.


Yes, but in that case the controller expects to issue an approach clearance
before you arrive at the holding fix. That's why no delay is expected.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
In that case, you better ask for an EFC if you haven't received further
clearance prior to arrival at the holding fix.


Yes, but in that case the controller expects to issue an approach clearance
before you arrive at the holding fix. That's why no delay is expected.

It just seems odd that they would issue the hold then. I guess it saves
a little time if you do actually have to hold, but it also seems like it
would be easy to also forget to issue the EFC.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

It just seems odd that they would issue the hold then. I guess it saves a
little time if you do actually have to hold, but it also seems like it
would be easy to also forget to issue the EFC.


Well, if things don't go as expected, what do you think can cause the
greater problem, not issuing the EFC, or not issuing the hold?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
It just seems odd that they would issue the hold then. I guess it saves a
little time if you do actually have to hold, but it also seems like it
would be easy to also forget to issue the EFC.


Well, if things don't go as expected, what do you think can cause the
greater problem, not issuing the EFC, or not issuing the hold?



Depends on the situation. I can see both being bad in their own way.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Depends on the situation. I can see both being bad in their own way.


Please explain.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Depends on the situation. I can see both being bad in their own way.


Please explain.



If the hold isn't issued and things don't go as expected and comm is
lost, then you have an airplane coming in the airspace unwanted, but at
a known and predictable time since you are tracking it on radar.

If the hold is issued with no EFC and comm is lost during the hold, then
you have an airplane which will enter the airspace at an unknown time.
Hopefully, the pilot knows enough to wait until the ETA, but what if he
doesn't? Or what if his watch is 5 minutes off?

Sometimes knowing what is about to happen is preferable to having a
somewhat unpredictable situation.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If the hold isn't issued and things don't go as expected and comm is lost,
then you have an airplane coming in the airspace unwanted, but at a known
and predictable time since you are tracking it on radar.


Not issuing the hold was not part of any scenario.



If the hold is issued with no EFC and comm is lost during the hold, then
you have an airplane which will enter the airspace at an unknown time.


Say what? If your comm was still operating prior to reaching your clearance
limit without an EFC why didn't you query the controller?



Hopefully, the pilot knows enough to wait until the ETA, but what if he
doesn't? Or what if his watch is 5 minutes off?


Hopefully the pilot will know the controller is unlikely to have his ETA and
will just fly the approach without holding at all.

Matt Whiting wrote:



It just seems odd that they would issue the hold then. I guess it saves
a little time if you do actually have to hold, but it also seems like it
would be easy to also forget to issue the EFC.


If the controller tells you no delay expected and does not give an EFC,
if you lose radios you do not hold, you procede to an approach or
straight to the airport if an approach is not needed. All this assuming
you are close to your proposed enroute time. ATC has no idea when this
is but you should be close to it if ATC loses separation and there's an
investigation all your ducks will be in a row.