![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ryan Ferguson wrote in message ...
It should be a method you can use without thinking....focus intently on whether to turn RIGHT or LEFT Um, Ryan, dear chap: Can you kindly explain how "focusing intently on whether to turn RIGHT or LEFT" differs substantively from "thinking"???? Cheers, Sydney |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Snowbird wrote:
Well, I dunno Dan. What floats your boat, but it seems to me that if I can visualize the holding pattern well enough to tell which side of the inbound course I'll be on and which direction is the shortest initial turn to the outbound course, I can visualize the holding pattern well enough to determine which entry I need to make (no mneumonic tricks, Sporty's gadgets, or fingers on the HI, and with less thinking. Maybe it's just me. I'm on both sides of the fence here, because I understand Dan's methodology and reasoning, but I agree with you that just flying the 'recommended' hold entry is easy in the first place. I don't use any finger kung-fu or silicon memory implants to fly hold entries, I just do 'em. You and I are probably similar in that we can just 'see' it. But let's rehash the 'simple' way once more with an even more rudimentary breakdown. Maybe you'll find some utility in it. I have. Think basic here. Somewhere there's a VOR. You have to hold west of it, right turns. Fly to it from wherever you are. Once you're over the station, fly the outbound heading (west.) You have one minute to figure out which way to turn to stay in protected airspace. Do a 180 in that direction and fly right back to the VOR. You're established. No thinking. (Unless you really think deciding whether to turn left or right is 'thinking!') So at the end of the day it's a three-step process: 1. Fly to the station or fix. 2. Turn to the outbound heading. 3. Turn inbound back to the station or fix. That's it. You're established. -Ryan CFI-ASE-AME, CFI-RH, CP-ASMEL-IA, CP-RH, AGI |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan Luke wrote:
Not necessarily. Why do you think holds are depicted for some course reversals? Why not a PT every time? Usually because the approach has to be designed that way, whether it's because of obstructions, airspace, the missed approach procedure, or other issues. I can assure you that when the weather's low and everyone's trying to get in, no one will appreciate your extra lap if it wasn't necessary. And as for applied thinking, may I respectfully suggest that you might do little more of it on this subject. Draw a series of entries with the orthodox method and then overlay them with drawings of the method I suggest. I think you'll see there's not enough difference to matter. Most of the time, you're right. There's very little perceivable difference between the brain-mush method and the actual prescribed hold entries. The difference occurs when: 1) You need to hold, winds are blowing perpendicular to the inbound and outbound course, and you don't want to blown to the wrong side of the hold. (Yes, I realize that you're actually protected well into what we think of as 'unprotected' airspace, but that's simply sloppy flying - and we GA pilots have a cushion because our airplanes are slow.) 2) You need to fly a course reversal (hold-in-lieu) and stabilize the approach early (when it ideally should be stabilized.) A 172 is easy to stabilize on damn near any segment of any approach. A Twin Comanche is not. 3) When taking a flight test. 4) When instructing students who need to pass flight tests. 5) To satisfactorily pass an ATP flight test. 6) In many cases, to 'pass' a job interview, for the career-minded among us. Regardless of the way you decide to fly, Dan, you just can't throw this out! Best regards, -Ryan CFI-ASE-AME, CFI-RH, CP-ASMEL-IA, CP-RH, AGI |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ryan Ferguson wrote:
"Focusing intently" was meant to be a humorous slant on that portion of the procedure, because figuring out whether to turn left or right shouldn't tax the brainpower of even the most sluggardly of instrument pilots. Well, I guess I kinda feel that being situationally aware of where the holding pattern is and from which direction one is approaching shouldn't tax the brainpower, and once one knows that the correct P/T/D entry is pretty obvious. If you fly across the holding pattern (or the same side) to get to the fix, it's a direct entry. If crossing the fix and proceding on course would have you flying across the holding pattern, it's teardrop. If crossing the fix would have you flying away from the holding pattern, it's parallel. I don't worry about if I'm off by 10 degrees from what "looks right". So I don't grasp where the supposed superior simplicity of a method which requires one to be situationally aware enough to figure out where the holding pattern is, what is the shortest direction to turn to the outbound heading, and from there what is the proper direction to turn towards the inbound leg. It honestly seems to me that you're using as many or more brain cycles. Maybe I'm just wierd, though. Cheers, Sydney |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Ryan Ferguson
writes: Well, I guess I kinda feel that being situationally aware of where the holding pattern is and from which direction one is approaching shouldn't tax the brainpower, and once one knows that the correct P/T/D entry is pretty obvious. You'll get no disagreement from me! If that works for you, use it. As I've already mentioned in this thread, I believe learning the standard entries sans the various memory aids and finger tricks tends to lead toward proper visualization of the hold, your position, and how to enter it with very little thinking. For those who can't do that easily, the 'just turn outbound' method is an alternative which THEY might find simpler. Lots of training for holds but, in 7 years, I've never had one. Sure, I do them for practice but have never been given one by ATC. However, if the training help spacial awareness, it's all for the good. Chuck |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've had 3 assigned in 1,200 hours.
PaulaJay1 wrote: In article , Ryan Ferguson writes: Well, I guess I kinda feel that being situationally aware of where the holding pattern is and from which direction one is approaching shouldn't tax the brainpower, and once one knows that the correct P/T/D entry is pretty obvious. You'll get no disagreement from me! If that works for you, use it. As I've already mentioned in this thread, I believe learning the standard entries sans the various memory aids and finger tricks tends to lead toward proper visualization of the hold, your position, and how to enter it with very little thinking. For those who can't do that easily, the 'just turn outbound' method is an alternative which THEY might find simpler. Lots of training for holds but, in 7 years, I've never had one. Sure, I do them for practice but have never been given one by ATC. However, if the training help spacial awareness, it's all for the good. Chuck |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've had about a half dozen in 800 hours. Seems they are much more likely when the
weather is yucky. Only two were in VMC, one for traffic control going into Atlantic City for one of the airshows, and one for traffic outside of NYC on V16. The others were all in IMC. Ryan Ferguson wrote: I've had 3 assigned in 1,200 hours. PaulaJay1 wrote: In article , Ryan Ferguson writes: Well, I guess I kinda feel that being situationally aware of where the holding pattern is and from which direction one is approaching shouldn't tax the brainpower, and once one knows that the correct P/T/D entry is pretty obvious. You'll get no disagreement from me! If that works for you, use it. As I've already mentioned in this thread, I believe learning the standard entries sans the various memory aids and finger tricks tends to lead toward proper visualization of the hold, your position, and how to enter it with very little thinking. For those who can't do that easily, the 'just turn outbound' method is an alternative which THEY might find simpler. Lots of training for holds but, in 7 years, I've never had one. Sure, I do them for practice but have never been given one by ATC. However, if the training help spacial awareness, it's all for the good. Chuck -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
PaulaJay1 wrote:
Lots of training for holds but, in 7 years, I've never had one. Sure, I do them for practice but have never been given one by ATC. However, if the training help spacial awareness, it's all for the good. We've had 3 IIRC, 2 out in the boonies for the same small airport. Go figgur. The 2nd time we were able to cancel IFR and go in to our true destination visually. Equally common (2) has been "just circle a few times, present position". Frankly I hate this instruction; I can create a waypoint anywhere I want with my GPS or hold at any DME distance off a VOR, and I'd much prefer a hold to constant circling. Cheers, Sydney |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Hickory NC Airport Flight Pattern | HBYardSale | Aerobatics | 1 | March 11th 04 02:19 PM |
Machinista 2004 - call for entries | Robb Mitchell Machinista.org | Home Built | 0 | February 24th 04 02:19 PM |
the Jumping Jack - Electric ARF Pattern Plane | FlitonUSA | Aerobatics | 0 | January 15th 04 07:39 AM |