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.

"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.

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
. ..

What light? You have not seen my radios? There are no lights anywhere.


We're not talking about your panel, we're talking about mine. We got to
this point via your question to me; " If no EFC and radios go belly up while
in IMC, when would you know to leave the hold?"



a very real possibility. Otherwise, why would 7600 be an option on the
transponder? I have had to use the IDENT feature once when I had radio
problems. I could hear, but not transmit, so it does happen. I didn't
have to go 7600, since I was able to communicate via the IDENT button.


So how does something frying in one com take out the other com but not the
navs or the transponder?

"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?

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:222vf.40589$QW2.14067@dukeread08...

Speed reduction is a better fix for that, a hold takes at
least 4 minutes, reducing speed is better.


You still don't get it. The hold is never entered. The aircraft is cleared
past the holding fix before reaching it.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:S32vf.40590$QW2.33132@dukeread08...

Not all airplanes, particularly trainers have a transmit
light.


We're not talking about all airplanes, we're talking about mine.

"bsalai" wrote in message
...

This happened to me very early in my IFR experience (it's still early, but
this was very early. I got cleared to an intermediate fix, "expect no
delay." They did not assign a hold. I had never gotten anything like this
before (I had hardly gotten anything at all before) and I asked for an
expect further clearance time, and they didn't have one. Since I hadn't
run into this, I made them give me an EFC time, they finally did, but it
took a lot of work (apparently) and they were clearly not happy.

Seems like I was wrong. Should I simply have proceeded to the fix, and if
I lost radio contact prior to getting there, proceeded as filed
immediately?


Yes. This is straight out of FAR 91.185:


§ 91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each pilot who has two-way
radio communications failure when operating under IFR shall comply with the
rules of this section.

(b) [snip]

(c) IFR conditions. If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if paragraph
(b) of this section cannot be complied with, each pilot shall continue the
flight according to the following:

(1) Route. (i) By the route assigned in the last ATC clearance received;

(ii) [snip]

(iii) [snip]

(iv) [snip]

(2) [snip]

(3) Leave clearance limit. (i) [snip]

(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.

"Jose" wrote in message
...

How does a blown speaker affect my ability to identify the holding fix?


It shouldn't affect it at all.



I may not be able to ID the station, but I can check the frequency and see
the needles move. If this agrees with my time estimate, and I can ID the
problem as a blown speaker, under the circumstances I'd be confident in
identifying the fix.

Steve, you have a lot of knowledge of controller issues, which I respect.
However, you do not know why a hypothetical aircraft goes NORDO unless
it's your hypothetical.


I thought it was my hypothetical.



Back to the paper stop - the following aircraft gets a hold, and goes
NORDO, reaching the fix eight minutes after the first aircraft has gone
past the fix. You elect not to hold, which puts you eight minutes in
trail where the minimum separation is ten minutes.

This is acceptable and expected under the circumstances? (neutral
question)


The aircraft were not in trail, they were crossing.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:TFavf.40610$QW2.15302@dukeread08...

Yes, but I said if you are holding and don't have the EFC
time and your comm fails, when do you leave the fix.


In situations where you actually hold you will have an EFC.



ATC
issues a clearance to a fix as a limit, expecting to have
their problem resolved before you get there and to issue a
further clearance. The pilot may lose 2way comm before he
enters the hold and not know it, since a radio report is not
required when in radar contact, in any case, he might not
know he has lost comm until he is in the hold.


Why is it he didn't know he was NORDO until he entered the hold? Why didn't
he learn he was NORDO when he attempted to query ATC about approaching the
clearance limit without clearance beyond it or an EFC?



The issue is those 2way comm failures in conditions not
covered by 91.185.


The one we're talking about is covered by FAR 91.185.



The PIC is always told to clarify any clearance that is not
clear or fully understood... asking for an EFC time is just
that.


And the response that clarifies that is "No delay expected."

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

Well, there is always the human factor.

I remember one night I was up shooting practice approaches, when NY
Approach was calling out 757 traffic to everybody, along with the warning,
"he's not talking to anybody". I can only assume somebody in the cockpit
fat-fingered a frequency change. Being on the wrong freq is effectively
lost comm. It's probably something which you'll be able to resolve
eventually, but when you get to the fix and you're not talking to the guy
who gave you the paper stop, you've got to figure something out.


Well, if you're familiar with FAR 91.185, you'll leave the clearance limit
upon reaching it. So what's to figure out?