A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hold "as published"?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 17th 03, 10:34 PM
John Clonts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hold "as published"?

Flying to Burnet, Texas (BMQ) the other day:

"Houston Center, 7nz request vectors-to-final Burnet GPS-01, or else request
direct JIBAJ for the GPS-19"

"7nz, you're number three, cleared direct Burnet, expect further clearance
2125"
....
I didn't understand what he was telling me to do once I got there.
....
About 5 miles from Burnet:

"Center, 7nz, unclear my instructions when I get to Burnet"

"7nz, fly the hold as published"

I read that back, but then looked on my enroute, and there was no hold. I
looked on my approach plates (GPS-1 and GPS-19) and there was no hold there.
By this time I'm just about to crossing KBMQ.

"Center, 7nz, sorry I see no published hold"

"7nz, sigh then fly heading 270, vectors to Burnet"

I then eventually flew one missed approach (GPS-19) then a successful
approach (GPS-1).

Afterwards it dawned on me that the published hold that he was talking about
was the hold depicted on the BMQ NDB-1 approach plate. The NDB is on the
field, but my mind had been in "gps" mode since I don't have ADF in this
plane.

So my question (finally!) is: was that proper of Center to assign me that
hold "as published"?

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ


Ads
  #2  
Old September 18th 03, 12:22 AM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



John Clonts wrote:

So my question (finally!) is: was that proper of Center to assign me that
hold "as published"?


It's legal but confusing. If it ain't on the enroute chart or the chart
of the approach you are going to be doing it makes no sense to pull a
holding pattern out of your ass from some other approach.

  #3  
Old September 18th 03, 12:58 AM
Bob Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I would apply the "when in doubt" rule and enter a standard pattern, holding
at the fix inbound on the course on which you approach the fix, and then
argue it out with the controller. Seems pretty clear that he did not want
you to proceed beyond the fix.

Bob Gardner

"John Clonts" wrote in message
...
Flying to Burnet, Texas (BMQ) the other day:

"Houston Center, 7nz request vectors-to-final Burnet GPS-01, or else

request
direct JIBAJ for the GPS-19"

"7nz, you're number three, cleared direct Burnet, expect further clearance
2125"
...
I didn't understand what he was telling me to do once I got there.
...
About 5 miles from Burnet:

"Center, 7nz, unclear my instructions when I get to Burnet"

"7nz, fly the hold as published"

I read that back, but then looked on my enroute, and there was no hold. I
looked on my approach plates (GPS-1 and GPS-19) and there was no hold

there.
By this time I'm just about to crossing KBMQ.

"Center, 7nz, sorry I see no published hold"

"7nz, sigh then fly heading 270, vectors to Burnet"

I then eventually flew one missed approach (GPS-19) then a successful
approach (GPS-1).

Afterwards it dawned on me that the published hold that he was talking

about
was the hold depicted on the BMQ NDB-1 approach plate. The NDB is on the
field, but my mind had been in "gps" mode since I don't have ADF in this
plane.

So my question (finally!) is: was that proper of Center to assign me that
hold "as published"?

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ




  #4  
Old September 18th 03, 01:26 AM
JerryK
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sounds like you did the correct thing. It is going to ATC awhile to adopt a
GPS mindset.



  #5  
Old September 18th 03, 01:54 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Clonts" wrote in message
...

Flying to Burnet, Texas (BMQ) the other day:

"Houston Center, 7nz request vectors-to-final Burnet GPS-01, or else
request direct JIBAJ for the GPS-19"

"7nz, you're number three, cleared direct Burnet, expect further clearance
2125"
...
I didn't understand what he was telling me to do once I got there.
...
About 5 miles from Burnet:

"Center, 7nz, unclear my instructions when I get to Burnet"

"7nz, fly the hold as published"

I read that back, but then looked on my enroute, and there was no hold. I
looked on my approach plates (GPS-1 and GPS-19) and there was no hold
there. By this time I'm just about to crossing KBMQ.

"Center, 7nz, sorry I see no published hold"

"7nz, sigh then fly heading 270, vectors to Burnet"

I then eventually flew one missed approach (GPS-19) then a successful
approach (GPS-1).

Afterwards it dawned on me that the published hold that he was talking
about was the hold depicted on the BMQ NDB-1 approach plate. The
NDB is on the field, but my mind had been in "gps" mode since I don't
have ADF in this plane.

So my question (finally!) is: was that proper of Center to assign me that
hold "as published"?


When the pattern is charted, all holding instructions may be omitted except
the charted holding direction and the statement "as published". He should
have said "hold southwest as published", not "fly the hold as published".
It would probably have also helped if he had previously said "cleared direct
Burnet NDB", and not just "cleared direct Burnet".


  #6  
Old September 18th 03, 01:55 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

I would apply the "when in doubt" rule and enter a standard pattern,
holding at the fix inbound on the course on which you approach the fix,

and then
argue it out with the controller. Seems pretty clear that he did not want
you to proceed beyond the fix.


I like to apply the "when in doubt, clarify" rule as my standard.


  #7  
Old September 18th 03, 01:59 AM
Robert Henry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually, I think they have the mindset, but don't understand the ergonomic
factors that can be encountered trying to use it.

For example, I've twice been cleared to random 5-letter fixes which do not
appear on enroute charts that turn out to be IF's for ILS approaches. These
clearances were issued en route, 60-100 miles away from the airport, well
before an expected approach had been specified. Actually, both approaches
ended up being visuals. I don't know every 5 character permutation of
"wip-pee" intersection and which one applies - running through the guesses
takes some serious knob time. Yet there's always a certain irritation
(noted by the poster as well) in the response to the request for
clarification, the spelling in my example.

Maybe a screenshot of a Garmin 430 with intersections and data fields
represented on the 100nm scale will help to convey the problem.

--

Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI

"JerryK" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Sounds like you did the correct thing. It is going to ATC awhile to adopt

a
GPS mindset.



  #8  
Old September 18th 03, 02:33 AM
John R. Copeland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Heh!
I was once cleared to a lat/lon point 300 miles away from my St. Louis =
departure!

Turned out to be a VORTAC location that I'd actually filed to.
Somebody was foolin' with me.
I told clearance delivery I'd read back the clearance, soon as I found =
that lat/lon point.
---JRC---

"Robert Henry" wrote in message =
news:[email protected]
Actually, I think they have the mindset, but don't understand the =

ergonomic
factors that can be encountered trying to use it.
=20
For example, I've twice been cleared to random 5-letter fixes which do =

not
appear on enroute charts that turn out to be IF's for ILS approaches. =

These
clearances were issued en route, 60-100 miles away from the airport, =

well
before an expected approach had been specified. Actually, both =

approaches
ended up being visuals. I don't know every 5 character permutation of
"wip-pee" intersection and which one applies - running through the =

guesses
takes some serious knob time. Yet there's always a certain irritation
(noted by the poster as well) in the response to the request for
clarification, the spelling in my example.
=20
Maybe a screenshot of a Garmin 430 with intersections and data fields
represented on the 100nm scale will help to convey the problem.
=20
--
=20
Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI
=20
"JerryK" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Sounds like you did the correct thing. It is going to ATC awhile to =

adopt
a
GPS mindset.

=20

  #9  
Old September 18th 03, 02:48 AM
Bob Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's what he tried to do, as I understand it, but he was right on top of
the fix at the time. Gotta do something while seeking clarification.

Bob Gardner

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

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

I would apply the "when in doubt" rule and enter a standard pattern,
holding at the fix inbound on the course on which you approach the fix,

and then
argue it out with the controller. Seems pretty clear that he did not

want
you to proceed beyond the fix.


I like to apply the "when in doubt, clarify" rule as my standard.




  #10  
Old September 18th 03, 03:04 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

That's what he tried to do, as I understand it, but he was right on top of
the fix at the time. Gotta do something while seeking clarification.


After being told, "7nz, you're number three, cleared direct Burnet, expect
further clearance
2125", he said he didn't understand what he was supposed to do once he got
there. That was well before he reached the NDB.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Screw hold repair in fabric? Brian Huffaker Home Built 11 May 29th 04 02:07 AM
Need Hold Harmless Waver for Ultralight or Experimental Sale Larry Smith Home Built 9 August 19th 03 02:47 AM
Need a Waiver/ Hold Harmless Agreement for UL / Experimental Sale Richard_Tonry Home Built 2 August 17th 03 12:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.