If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Approach From a Hold
Question for the controllers he
The KMIC VOR-A is a pretty vanilla approach. The FAF is the Gopher VOR (GEP) about 5 miles north of the field. The missed procedure is to go back to GEP and hold north, left turns -- depicted as a dotted race track on the plate. (The FAA link seems to be broken for me, at least: http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0405/05158VGA.PDF) I have been vectored into that hold (not entered from a miss) and then cleared for the approach. At that point, I flew the inbound leg towards the VOR/FAF and continued down the approach path to KMIC. Seemed logical to me and it certainly seemed to be what Minneapolis Approach was expecting. I have a CFII friend who thinks this was improper -- that since the hold was not depicted on the approach plate (as part of the approach) that I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. I guess his thought is that I wasn't really receiving vectors since I was in the hold. Who is right here? Me and Approach, or my friend? TIA, Mitty |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mitty wrote:
(The FAA link seems to be broken for me, at least: http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0405/05158VGA.PDF) Yeah, I get some kind of weird redirection loop. But, the airnav link (http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://...3/05158VGA.PDF) works fine. I have been vectored into that hold (not entered from a miss) and then cleared for the approach. I'm not sure what you mean by "vectored into that hold". Do you mean you were vectored to the final approach course? Or do you mean you were given veectors to the Gopher VOR and then instructed to hold there? Or something else? What was the exact wording the controller used? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How were you vectored into the hold if you did not hold?
Sounds like vectors to final to me, in which case you are required to go straight-in unless you request the procedure turn and are given an amended clearance. That holding pattern could also be used for timed approaches, in which case you would also be expected to proceed straight in once cleared for the approach. Finally, let's say you missed the approach and park in that pattern until the weather improves. Because it is a pattern that is lined up correctly and not more than 300 feet higher than the FAF altitude, you can go straight-in once cleared for the approach. The procedure turn is for folks arriving from every which way to GEP. Mitty wrote: Question for the controllers he The KMIC VOR-A is a pretty vanilla approach. The FAF is the Gopher VOR (GEP) about 5 miles north of the field. The missed procedure is to go back to GEP and hold north, left turns -- depicted as a dotted race track on the plate. (The FAA link seems to be broken for me, at least: http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0405/05158VGA.PDF) I have been vectored into that hold (not entered from a miss) and then cleared for the approach. At that point, I flew the inbound leg towards the VOR/FAF and continued down the approach path to KMIC. Seemed logical to me and it certainly seemed to be what Minneapolis Approach was expecting. I have a CFII friend who thinks this was improper -- that since the hold was not depicted on the approach plate (as part of the approach) that I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. I guess his thought is that I wasn't really receiving vectors since I was in the hold. Who is right here? Me and Approach, or my friend? TIA, Mitty |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I think that the first thing you would hear from the controller if you
followed the instructor's method is "Where are you going? If you want the full procedure, ask for it." A good rule to follow is this: The easiest way is almost always the correct way. Remember that the flight test folks have to fly these procedures and they don't like to be jerked around (I'll admit that flight test is unlikely to be assigned a hold). Bob Gardner "Mitty" wrote in message ... Question for the controllers he The KMIC VOR-A is a pretty vanilla approach. The FAF is the Gopher VOR (GEP) about 5 miles north of the field. The missed procedure is to go back to GEP and hold north, left turns -- depicted as a dotted race track on the plate. (The FAA link seems to be broken for me, at least: http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0405/05158VGA.PDF) I have been vectored into that hold (not entered from a miss) and then cleared for the approach. At that point, I flew the inbound leg towards the VOR/FAF and continued down the approach path to KMIC. Seemed logical to me and it certainly seemed to be what Minneapolis Approach was expecting. I have a CFII friend who thinks this was improper -- that since the hold was not depicted on the approach plate (as part of the approach) that I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. I guess his thought is that I wasn't really receiving vectors since I was in the hold. Who is right here? Me and Approach, or my friend? TIA, Mitty |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Mitty wrote: I have been vectored into that hold Which would involve language like "fly headig xxx, direct Gopher, holding instructions.") You were only vectored to the hold if you were told you were being vectored into the hold and not "vectors for the final approach course." I have a CFII friend who thinks this was improper -- that since the hold was not depicted on the approach plate (as part of the approach) that I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. You never fly the full approach when vectored unless you specifically work that out with the controller. If you're last instruction from Approach was something like "N123, you're 5 miles from Gopher, maintain 3000 until established on the final approach course, turn left heading xxx cleared VOR A approach into Crystal." then you were being vectored to final and were not supposed to go back outbound when you got to the VOR. It's hard to believe a "CFI" could screw this up. This is a garden variety VOR approach. I guess his thought is that I wasn't really receiving vectors since I was in the hold. It all comes down to the wording. What exactly did the controller say to you? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Mitty wrote:
It was a while back, but I'm pretty sure the instructions were along the line of: "Proceed direct Gopher and hold as published at 3000, expect further clearance at xx:xx Zulu." 3000 seems to be minimum vectoring altitude in that area. That makes sense. I'm not sure why you said you were "vectored into the hold", though. You went direct to the VOR and held. Nothing vectorish about it :-) When I told him I was ready to go he cleared me for the approach. I then asked for another turn in the hold to lose altitude (FAF crossing is 2500), which was approved. OK, here's my take on this. Since you were not vectored to the final approach course, and were not approaching the FAF along a segment labeled NoPT, you were required to perform a PT. A racetrack pattern is a perfectly acceptable way of flying a PT, and it sounds like this is what you did. On the other hand, this is a bit of a grey area in my mind. Rather than second guessing the controller, a quick radio call will eliminate any possible confusion on both sides. Lack of confusion is always a good thing. wrote the following: Finally, let's say you missed the approach and park in that pattern until the weather improves. Because it is a pattern that is lined up correctly and not more than 300 feet higher than the FAF altitude, you can go straight-in once cleared for the approach. What does the "300 feet higher" have to do with anything? The AIM says: 5-4-9. Procedure Turn a. A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to perform a course reversal to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold in lieu of procedure turn is a required maneuver. The procedure turn is not required when the symbol "No PT" is shown, when RADAR VECTORING to the final approach course is provided, when conducting a timed approach, or when the procedure turn is not authorized. I don't see anything in there about 300 feet. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Mitty" wrote in message ... Question for the controllers he The KMIC VOR-A is a pretty vanilla approach. The FAF is the Gopher VOR (GEP) about 5 miles north of the field. The missed procedure is to go back to GEP and hold north, left turns -- depicted as a dotted race track on the plate. (The FAA link seems to be broken for me, at least: http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0405/05158VGA.PDF) I have been vectored into that hold (not entered from a miss) and then cleared for the approach. At that point, I flew the inbound leg towards the VOR/FAF and continued down the approach path to KMIC. Seemed logical to me and it certainly seemed to be what Minneapolis Approach was expecting. I have a CFII friend who thinks this was improper -- that since the hold was not depicted on the approach plate (as part of the approach) that I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. I guess his thought is that I wasn't really receiving vectors since I was in the hold. If you made a turn (or more) in the hold which established your aircraft inbound on the FAC then you DID fly the full approach. Who is right here? Me and Approach, or my friend? You and approach. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Mitty" wrote in message ... Question for the controllers he I should have flown the full approach including the procedure turn. TIA, Mitty You did. If you were on the protected side (procedure turn) side of the final approach course you chose a perfectly fine way to get turned around. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Mitty wrote: On 4/14/2005 6:48 PM, wrote the following: How were you vectored into the hold if you did not hold? We were shooting practice approaches in IMC and I flew a low approach at Anoka (ANE) about 5 miles to the east, then asked for the hold since I wanted it to update currency. It was a while back, but I'm pretty sure the instructions were along the line of: "Proceed direct Gopher and hold as published at 3000, expect further clearance at xx:xx Zulu." 3000 seems to be minimum vectoring altitude in that area. While holding, probably during the first full time around, Approach had me climb to 4000 so he could run someone in under me. I did that. When I told him I was ready to go he cleared me for the approach. I then asked for another turn in the hold to lose altitude (FAF crossing is 2500), which was approved. Sounds like vectors to final to me, in which case you are required to go straight-in unless you request the procedure turn and are given an amended clearance. That holding pattern could also be used for timed approaches, in which case you would also be expected to proceed straight in once cleared for the approach. Finally, let's say you missed the approach and park in that pattern until the weather improves. Because it is a pattern that is lined up correctly and not more than 300 feet higher than the FAF altitude, you can go straight-in once cleared for the approach. Sounds reasonable. Is that printed somewhere? The AIM discusses timed approaches, and shows a holding pattern like that one. When straight-in from such holding patterns was not authorized, IAPs like that used to have a note "Final Approach from XYZ holding pattern not authorized." But, the procedures folks were told to stop using that note and make the patterns useable for such approaches. If you want it in writing you should contact your regional FAA Flight Procedures Office for clarification. Many things are imperfect with the FAA. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Instrument Checkride passed (Long) | Paul Folbrecht | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | February 11th 05 02:41 AM |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Hold "as published"? | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 83 | November 13th 03 03:19 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |