Newbie holding questions

It's a moot point anyway,
whatever caused my comm radios to go belly up will affect my nav radios the
same way and I won't be able to identify the holding fix.


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

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)

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I got cleared to an intermediate fix, "expect no delay."

To me this means your EFC time =is= the time you reach the intermediate fix.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:022vf.40587$QW2.6269@dukeread08...

A hold, by definition is a delay.


But if you don't enter the hold you are not delayed.

A Lieberman wrote:
What light? You have not seen my radios? There are no lights anywhere.

Are you serious? I don't think I've ever seen a tranceiver of any kind
(not just limited to aviation) which didn't have some sort of visual "Tx"
indication.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:


Without an EFC I wouldn't enter the hold. It's a moot point anyway,
whatever caused my comm radios to go belly up will affect my nav radios the
same way and I won't be able to identify the holding fix.


Although that is certainly a likely result in a light aircraft, it may
not be in an aircraft with more sophisticated avionics busses.

91.185 is written with the premise that comm capability fails but nav
capability continues to exist.

Your scenerio is not a 91.185 situation; it's a major emergency if in IMC.

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. 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.

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


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
message
news |
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:022vf.40587$QW2.6269@dukeread08...
|
| A hold, by definition is a delay.
|
|
| But if you don't enter the hold you are not delayed.
|
|

In article bravf.7872$V.454@fed1read04, wrote:

Although that is certainly a likely result in a light aircraft, it may
not be in an aircraft with more sophisticated avionics busses.

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.

Roy Smith wrote:
A Lieberman wrote:

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


Are you serious? I don't think I've ever seen a tranceiver of any kind
(not just limited to aviation) which didn't have some sort of visual "Tx"
indication.

KX-170? ...for one example.

Roy Smith wrote:
In article bravf.7872$V.454@fed1read04, wrote:


Although that is certainly a likely result in a light aircraft, it may
not be in an aircraft with more sophisticated avionics busses.


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.

Human factors, or not, that makes my case: i.e., a sophisticated
aircraft can easily loose comm yet still have full nav capability.

Airliners often lose comm in the manner you mention, albeit a transient
loss of comm (until the company SELCALs them ;-)

Peter R. wrote:
wrote:


At some locations timed approaches permit more than one approach at a
time, provided the holding pattern meets criteria and the missed
approach does not conflict with the inbound tracks.

Timed approaches were once used a lot, then over time diminished in
their use, and now they are on the increase again.


Thanks, Tim.

What are some example of airports where timed approaches are in use?

Cheyenne (Sp?) WY (non-radar approach control)

Eagle, CO

San Luis Obispo, CA