Required hold?

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 17:14:45 -0500, Dave Butler
wrote:


Perhaps the question you intended to ask is: "am I required to do a procedure
turn at RAINEE?" A hold is never required there unless so instructed by ATC.


Not so. If you arrive via the transition from CLL, a procedure turn is
required.

Hmmm. You said, "Not so", and then wrote something that agreed with what I said.

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:12:13 -0500, Dave Butler
wrote:



Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 17:14:45 -0500, Dave Butler
wrote:


Perhaps the question you intended to ask is: "am I required to do a procedure
turn at RAINEE?" A hold is never required there unless so instructed by ATC.


Not so. If you arrive via the transition from CLL, a procedure turn is
required.

Hmmm. You said, "Not so", and then wrote something that agreed with what I said.

The joys of internet communication -- misunderstandings 'r us :-)


--ron

Dave Butler wrote:

Nicholas Kliewer wrote:
In the following approach (VOR/DME or GPS-A),
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0411/06276VDGA.PDF
am I required to hold at RAINEE? Does it
depend which IAF I use?

Perhaps the question you intended to ask is: "am I required to do a procedure
turn at RAINEE?" A hold is never required there unless so instructed by ATC.

If you arrive by one of the transtions marked NoPT, or if you are given vectors
to the final approach course, no procedure turn is required.

Yes, I meant to ask that. And actually, I didn't know that the racetrack was
anything but a hold. Thanks. You all are a great resource.

Stan Prevost wrote:

If you arrive at RAINEE as the IAF, you must fly the hold-in-lieu course
reversal procedure. Only once around the hold is required. Additional
turns require ATC approval.

To clarify, I need only cross RAINEE, do a standard entry (direct,
parallel, or teardrop), then cross RAINEE again inbound on the final
approach course, for a total of 2 crossings? Similar to a procedure turn?

"Tyler" wrote in message
...
Stan Prevost wrote:

If you arrive at RAINEE as the IAF, you must fly the hold-in-lieu course
reversal procedure. Only once around the hold is required. Additional
turns require ATC approval.

To clarify, I need only cross RAINEE, do a standard entry (direct,
parallel, or teardrop), then cross RAINEE again inbound on the final
approach course, for a total of 2 crossings? Similar to a procedure turn?


Yes, that's right. The purpose of the HIL is the same as the purpose of a
PT.

Stan

In article ,
Tyler wrote:
Stan Prevost wrote:

If you arrive at RAINEE as the IAF, you must fly the hold-in-lieu course
reversal procedure. Only once around the hold is required. Additional
turns require ATC approval.

To clarify, I need only cross RAINEE, do a standard entry (direct,
parallel, or teardrop), then cross RAINEE again inbound on the final
approach course, for a total of 2 crossings?

Exactly.

Similar to a procedure turn?

Not only is it similar to a procedure turn, it IS a procedure turn.

Roy Smith wrote:
In article ,
Tyler wrote:

Stan Prevost wrote:


If you arrive at RAINEE as the IAF, you must fly the hold-in-lieu course
reversal procedure. Only once around the hold is required. Additional
turns require ATC approval.

To clarify, I need only cross RAINEE, do a standard entry (direct,
parallel, or teardrop), then cross RAINEE again inbound on the final
approach course, for a total of 2 crossings?


Exactly.


Similar to a procedure turn?


Not only is it similar to a procedure turn, it IS a procedure turn.


No, it's a hold in lieu of a procedure turn. You can do a PT type entry
and course reversal, as long as you remain within the confines of the
published holding pattern. The holding pattern in lieu of a procedure
turn does not protect quite as much airspace as a standard 10 mile PT.

JPH

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tyler wrote:

Similar to a procedure turn?

Not only is it similar to a procedure turn, it IS a procedure turn.


This depends on how much you want to play with words. They are both course
reversal maneuvers, for sure. But if the FAA didn't want to distinguish a
racetrack-type course reversal from a "barbed" procedure turn, they wouldn't
call it a "hold in lieu of procedure turn". Nevertheless, it is surely true
that in most usage, the term "procedure turn" encompasses all the variations
on course reversals. Nobody I know has ever accused the FAA of being
consistent.

PROCEDURE TURN- The maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse
direction to establish an aircraft on the intermediate approach segment or
final approach course. The outbound course, direction of turn, distance
within which the turn must be completed, and minimum altitude are specified
in the procedure. However, unless otherwise restricted, the point at which
the turn may be commenced and the type and rate of turn are left to the
discretion of the pilot.

(See ICAO term PROCEDURE TURN.)

PROCEDURE TURN [ICAO]- A maneuver in which a turn is made away from a
designated track followed by a turn in the opposite direction to permit the
aircraft to intercept and proceed along the reciprocal of the designated
track.

Note 1: Procedure turns are designated "left" or "right" according to the
direction of the initial turn.

Note 2: Procedure turns may be designated as being made either in level
flight or while descending, according to the circumstances of each
individual approach procedure.

In article ,
"Stan Prevost" wrote:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tyler wrote:

Similar to a procedure turn?

Not only is it similar to a procedure turn, it IS a procedure turn.


This depends on how much you want to play with words.

My intent wasn't to play with words. In real life, I'm just a software
geek. I'm thinking that the "hold in lieu of procedure turn" is a
subclass of "procedure turn", therefore it IS a procedure turn (or
written more conventionally in computer-science-geeky terms, is-a PT).

But, this may be one of those cases where what's correct in techno-speak
is probably misleading in plain English. I certainly agree with you
that when most people say "procedure turn", they're probably thinking of
the 45-180 style most of us learned in instrument training.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Stan Prevost" wrote:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tyler wrote:

Similar to a procedure turn?

Not only is it similar to a procedure turn, it IS a procedure turn.


This depends on how much you want to play with words.

My intent wasn't to play with words.

Sorry, I didn't say that right, I was just trying to get a handle on how to
address the ambiguity and conflicts in the FAA's terminology.

In real life, I'm just a software
geek. I'm thinking that the "hold in lieu of procedure turn" is a
subclass of "procedure turn", therefore it IS a procedure turn (or
written more conventionally in computer-science-geeky terms, is-a PT).


In one sense, a HIL is certainly a subset of PT, and I think that is true
relative to the P/CG and ICAO definitions of PT. However, if A is "in lieu
of" B, then A and B are different things, and not hierarchically related,
IMO. Otherwise, the FAA could call it a "racetrack-type PT" or "hold-type
PT". These are the terms I try to use in my common usage.

This could be clearer, terminology wise. It is not worth the interminable
confusion it causes.