Holding Pattern Question

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If no delay is expected, why issue a hold?


For a variety of reasons. Let's say your destination is an uncontrolled
field and there's traffic ahead of you for that field. The controller can't
clear you for the approach because the preceding aircraft hasn't cancelled,
but he expects it to cancel before you'd experience any delay.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
If no delay is expected, why issue a hold?


For a variety of reasons. Let's say your destination is an uncontrolled
field and there's traffic ahead of you for that field. The controller can't
clear you for the approach because the preceding aircraft hasn't cancelled,
but he expects it to cancel before you'd experience any delay.



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

Matt

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If no delay is expected, why issue a hold?


For a variety of reasons. Let's say your destination is an uncontrolled
field and there's traffic ahead of you for that field. The controller
can't clear you for the approach because the preceding aircraft hasn't
cancelled, but he expects it to cancel before you'd experience any delay.


I thought you had to get an expect further clearance time as part of the
hold instructions in case your radio failed shortly after directed to hold?
Otherwise, how would you know how many turns to make in holding before
proceeding on course? I'm not arguing, just asking,

Dennis

"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.

"Dennis Johnson" wrote in message
. ..

I thought you had to get an expect further clearance time as part of the
hold instructions in case your radio failed shortly after directed to
hold? Otherwise, how would you know how many turns to make in holding
before proceeding on course? I'm not arguing, just asking,


Why is it that comm radios fail but nav radios do not?

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...406.html#4-6-1

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

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Dennis Johnson" wrote in message
. ..
I thought you had to get an expect further clearance time as part of the
hold instructions in case your radio failed shortly after directed to
hold? Otherwise, how would you know how many turns to make in holding
before proceeding on course? I'm not arguing, just asking,


Why is it that comm radios fail but nav radios do not?

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...406.html#4-6-1




Probably because com radios require a functioning microphone, PTT and
speakers or earphones. More parts to fail and thus more likelihood of
failure. Most pilots carry enough spares, but even so there is more
likelihood of a comm failure than a nav failure.

Matt

On 09/24/07 17:54, Dennis Johnson wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If no delay is expected, why issue a hold?


For a variety of reasons. Let's say your destination is an uncontrolled
field and there's traffic ahead of you for that field. The controller
can't clear you for the approach because the preceding aircraft hasn't
cancelled, but he expects it to cancel before you'd experience any delay.


I thought you had to get an expect further clearance time as part of the
hold instructions in case your radio failed shortly after directed to hold?
Otherwise, how would you know how many turns to make in holding before
proceeding on course? I'm not arguing, just asking,

Dennis



The EFC is of use only if you experience communication failure. Assuming
that's the case, then with no EFC, you're expected to proceed upon reaching
the holding fix as though the EFC was zero.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"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?

In article ,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Dennis Johnson" wrote in message
. ..

I thought you had to get an expect further clearance time as part of the
hold instructions in case your radio failed shortly after directed to
hold? Otherwise, how would you know how many turns to make in holding
before proceeding on course? I'm not arguing, just asking,


Why is it that comm radios fail but nav radios do not?

I've had several lost-comms. I seem to remember:

1) Fried xmit relay in the audio panel

2) Defective headset jacks

3) Broken wire in my headset cable

None of these affected the nav radios.