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

Holding Pattern Entries



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 9th 03, 02:01 PM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Holding Pattern Entries

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote:
If one's SA is what it should be, ciphering out which of the three

standard
entries to use becomes a waste of time and therefore counter to safe
practice.


Shouldn't require any ciphering out. Once you visualize where you are and

where
the hold is, figuring the entry should be essentially 'automatic.' This

is why
I've never been a fan of any of the various 'memorization' methods such as

the
thumb, dividing the DG into P-T-D, etc. If you can see what it looks

like, you
just fly the entry without further thought. Frankly it sounds to me like

your
initial instructor might have made this process painful enough for you

that you
just wrote it off early. I nearly did the same myself.


Ha! I could feel you out there steaming!

If you draw a few entries via the method I posted, you'll see that it
produces practical P-T-D entries automatically.

That's why the concept of "the official entries" is a bad idea.


The concept is good (and it's not going away.) The execution (by pilots)

is
often bad. It leads to a frustration which sets in and can be hard to

combat.
I was once more aligned with your thinking, but over time and with

experience
I've come to realize that they're actually a very elegant and simple tool
waiting to be discovered.


Any method that supports an industry of gizmos to figure it out isn't simple
and elegant.

That has not been my experience in my airplane. As you pointed out, the
whole secret to holding is situational awareness. If I'm doing a

one-shot
course reversal, I will adjust the procedure accordingly to give myself

the
time to intercept properly.


Which procedure will you use and how will you select it?


The one I posted - it's the one I use every time. By "adjust the procedure"
I mean the time I fly on the outbound leg, which may mean adding 30 seconds
to it to ensure adequate time to intercept the FAC. I would do the same
thing if I had flown a "book" entry.

Why are you willing to do that on course reversals and not hold entries?


I'll do it on any procedure I fly. Situational awareness, remember?

Shame on you if you do - that's why a racetrack is depicted; you're

allowed
to go all the way around if you need to.


That's a poor choice and only an option that should be taken if your

flying was
sufficiently sloppy to require it.


Not necessarily. Why do you think holds are depicted for some course
reversals? Why not a PT every time?

The guy waiting to fly the approach behind
you now has to wait. Why - simply because you didn't want to do a little
applied thinking?


If I have to make a full circuit, it won't be because I didn't fly a perfect
teardrop entry. It will be because there is something about the approach
that requires it. I've never had to do this, BTW.(Really, the orthodox
teardrop is the only one that's any different from my method, and it's not
much different.)

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.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #2  
Old July 9th 03, 02:04 PM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote:
To Dan's credit, the 'when all else fails' method of hold entry is fine.

It works
when you can't think straight...


Heyyyy...!
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #3  
Old July 9th 03, 02:31 PM
Ryan Ferguson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dan Luke wrote:

Heyyyy...!




You're prolly the only guy on usenet with whom I have so many fundamental
disagreements, yet still like to chat with.

Stay cool, mang.

-Ryan
CFI-ASE-AME, CFI-RH, CP-ASMEL-IA, CP-RH, AGI

  #4  
Old July 9th 03, 04:51 PM
Ryan Ferguson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah. And if we bring our wives along, we could have all-out grudge match!


We really need to go flying sometime. No telling how many clearances we
could bust while we were arguing.


  #5  
Old July 9th 03, 04:58 PM
Ryan Ferguson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It should be a method you can use without thinking. There's no hold 'entry,'
you just fly to the fix or navaid, turn to the outbound heading (regardless of
which direction you're coming from - let's hope that if it's a direct entry
you were able to puzzle that out, though), and focus intently on whether to
turn RIGHT or LEFT when your minute (assuming 1-minute legs) is up. Now fly
back to the fix and voila, you're established.

-Ryan
CFI-ASE-AME, CFI-RH, CP-ASMEL-IA, CP-RH, AGI


Sydney Hoeltzli wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:
"Ryan Ferguson" wrote:
To Dan's credit, the 'when all else fails' method of hold entry is fine.
It works when you can't think straight...


Heyyyy...!


"Don't Think. You only hurt the team."
-Bull Durham

Sydney

PS I tried drawing a few holding pattern entries by my interpretation
of the method you describe, and I'm afraid I can't make them come
out equivalent to T/P/D. Especially acute on the teardrop region.
Unless I'm mistaking what you wrote, most of them come out to be
P-ish which seems to me hardest to get established inbound, esp.
if there's much xwind blowing you towards the holding pattern side.
I dunno. It just seems to require more thought than just doing the
"correct" entry, hmmmmmm, which way do I turn towards the inbound
course, decisions decisions. Maybe I don't "get it"?


  #6  
Old July 9th 03, 05:09 PM
Michael
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ryan Ferguson wrote
If one's SA is what it should be, ciphering out which of the three standard
entries to use becomes a waste of time and therefore counter to safe
practice.


Shouldn't require any ciphering out...
If you can see what it looks like, you
just fly the entry without further thought.


You know, that was going to be my response - and then I realized we're
not all looking at it the same way. The AIM divides the compass into
three sectors - 180 degrees for direct, 110 for parallel, and 70 for
teardrop. Suppose you're close to one of the sector division lines?
Now you're going to be doing mental math or some other timewasting
procedure to figure out if you should be doing a parallel or teardrop
entry.

My solution is don't do that. Pick the one that looks right. So
you're doing a teardrop when you're really in the parallel sector by
10 whole degrees. SO WHAT? It's still going to work just fine. If
you've correctly visualized the entry, being off a few degrees is
irrelevant.

I would be happier if the official depiction, instead of using sector
lines, had grey sectors maybe 30 degrees wide (probably centered on
the present dividing lines) for those regions where either of the
entries is appropriate. After all, that's realistically how we do it.

Michael
  #7  
Old July 9th 03, 06:57 PM
Stan Prevost
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Michael" wrote in message
m...

The practical test is another matter. No, the official hold entries
are no longer required.


Not for the instrument rating. But I have always heard it said that the
following excerpt from the ATP Airplane PTS is interpreted to require
standard PTD entries:

4. Follows appropriate entry procedures for a standard, nonstandard,
published, or non-published holding pattern.

Stan












  #8  
Old July 9th 03, 07:21 PM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Michael" wrote:
I would be happier if the official depiction, instead of using sector
lines, had grey sectors maybe 30 degrees wide (probably centered on
the present dividing lines) for those regions where either of the
entries is appropriate.


Oh, that would make it *so* much less confusing.
Jeez.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #9  
Old July 9th 03, 07:50 PM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Sydney Hoeltzli" wrote:
PS I tried drawing a few holding pattern entries by my interpretation
of the method you describe, and I'm afraid I can't make them come
out equivalent to T/P/D.


To hold on the 270 radial, right turns:

Arriving at the fix on a 315 heading, turn left to 270 for one minute, turn
towards the inbound course line, fly back to the fix and commence holding.
This is the same as a parallel entry.

Arriving at the fix on a 135 heading, turn right to 270 for one minute, turn
towards the inbound course line, fly back to the fix and commence holding.
This is the same as a direct entry.

Arriving at the fix on a 225 heading, turn right to 270 for one minute, turn
towards the inbound course line, fly back to the fix and commence holding.
This is the same as a teardrop entry. Yes, it can be "more acute" than a
standard teardrop. Widen out if you think it will be. Situational awareness,
remember?

The only things you have to figure out before before you get to the fix are
which direction is the shortest initial turn to the outbound course and
which side of it will you be on when it's time to turn back to the fix.
Neither of these things requires more than a glance at the heading indicator
and knowing which side of the inbound course you arrived from. No mnemonic
tricks, fingers-on-the-HI or Sporty's whiz-wheels required.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #10  
Old July 9th 03, 07:51 PM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote:
It should be a method you can use without thinking. There's no hold

'entry,'
you just fly to the fix or navaid, turn to the outbound heading

(regardless of
which direction you're coming from - let's hope that if it's a direct

entry
you were able to puzzle that out, though), and focus intently on whether

to
turn RIGHT or LEFT when your minute (assuming 1-minute legs) is up. Now

fly
back to the fix and voila, you're established.


By George, I believe he's got it!
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


 




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
Hickory NC Airport Flight Pattern HBYardSale Aerobatics 1 March 11th 04 03:19 PM
Machinista 2004 - call for entries Robb Mitchell Machinista.org Home Built 0 February 24th 04 03:19 PM
the Jumping Jack - Electric ARF Pattern Plane FlitonUSA Aerobatics 0 January 15th 04 08:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.