Hold "as published"?

"Robert Henry" wrote:
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.

Hah! I hear ya. Try finding TIFTO on your GPS in south Georgia.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

I get your point...I don't have the plates to refer to. Guess he had time to
get it straightened out before it became critical.

Bob Gardner

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

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:k98ab.487586$YN5.331114@sccrnsc01...

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.

"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

It would probably have also helped if he had previously said "cleared direct
Burnet NDB", and not just "cleared direct Burnet".

What does "cleared direct Burnet" mean? To the airport? ARP? A navaid
on the field?

Ari.

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:

What does "cleared direct Burnet" mean? To the airport? ARP? A navaid
on the field?

If I were to receive that clearance in that context, I would assume that
Burnet is some sort of navaid or named fix in the vicinity of the airport.
I would exclude the possibility that Burnet is the airport itself. After
all, who ever heard of a hold (published or otherwise) at an airport
reference point? This is my intuition; I'd be happy if someone could help
me formalize this.

I would probably know from my preflight preparation that there is an NDB by
that name on the field, and that's what I would add to my GPS flight plan.
Admittedly, I would probably not have the NDB approach plate handy unless it
just happened to be on the reverse side of one of the GPS approaches, so I'd
possibly have no clue as to the orientation of the published hold. I'd
probably have to ask for that.

In article ,
John Clonts wrote:

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.

I don't think that's legitimate. A given navaid can have different holds
for different procedures. The AST VOR Rwy 8 (Astoria, OR) missed approach
terminates in a hold on the 115 radial of AST, left turns. The AST ILS
Rwy 26 missed approach ends in a hold on the 075 radial of AST, right
turns. I guess all the published holds have sufficient protected airspace
(in this case, mostly the Pacific ocean), but there is no hold depicted
on the enroute chart, so I don't know what the controller would expect
if they just said "hold at AST as published".

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Craig Prouse writes:

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:

What does "cleared direct Burnet" mean? To the airport? ARP? A navaid
on the field?

If I were to receive that clearance in that context, I would assume that
Burnet is some sort of navaid or named fix in the vicinity of the airport.
I would exclude the possibility that Burnet is the airport itself. After
all, who ever heard of a hold (published or otherwise) at an airport
reference point?

I guess I was trying to ask a more general question. Forget the
context. If you are cleared direct to your destination, what point are
you cleared to?

Ari.

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:

I guess I was trying to ask a more general question. Forget the
context. If you are cleared direct to your destination, what point are
you cleared to?

If you're 40 NM out and you have the airport in sight, you can navigate
directly to "the airport" by visual reference. Any number of lat/long
points would be satisfactory navigationally. If the air isn't so clear, I
happen to use the airport reference point in the GPS database.

In the case in question, the pilot was cleared to his destination airport,
and then his clearance was amended. His new clearance limit was an NDB with
the same name as the airport. The navaid happens to be on the field, so
even if he didn't pick up on the change, the problem was conceptual rather
than navigational. Conceptually, if he had made the connection, it might
have helped him better understand what was expected by ATC, and maybe even
got him pointed in the direction of the NDB approach plate which depicts the
hold.

Someplace like Sacramento, where the distance between the airport and its
homonymic* VORTAC is five miles, there's actually a navigational necessity
to get it right.

* I'll probably never get to use that word in a sentence again in my life,
so I take the opportunity now.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:34:36 -0500, "John Clonts"
wrote:

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.
...

It sounds as if he probably expected you to hold at the BMQ NDB but did not
give you proper instructions per the AIM (or the 7110.65). As a minimum,
he should have given you the charted holding direction and the phrase "as
published" unless he also informed you to "expect no delay".

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"?

Well, he didn't do it correctly. And I've seen them do that using other
than holds that are published only on approach charts (which may or may not
be the chart you're looking at).

However, ATC is also supposed to issue complete holding instructions when
requested to do so by the pilot. So in your situation, I would have asked
for that, and early on.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"John Clonts" wrote
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.

Unsurprising - he didn't tell you what to do. That was improper. The
only question in my mind is this - why didn't you immediately ask for
a clarification? Why wait until you're 5 miles out?

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"?

The clearance was proper. Your GPS substitutes for an ADF in all
situations other than an NDB approach with no GPS overlay.

The WAY the clearance was issued (phraseology) was confusing at best.
The controller used nonstandard phraseology. The correct clearance
would have read:

"7nz, you're number three, cleared direct Burnet NDB, hold South as
published, expect further clearance 2125"

Hopefully that would have tipped you that the hold was depicted on the
NDB approach chart, and all would have been well.

Michael

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote in message
...

What does "cleared direct Burnet" mean? To the airport? ARP? A navaid
on the field?


The initial clearance limit at the point of departure was most probably the
airport. It may have been stated as "Burnet Municipal Airport", "Kate
Craddock Field", "Burnet Airport", "Bravo Mike Quebec Airport", or just
"Burnet", but in the US aircraft at departure are most often cleared to an
airport. When a hold became necessary the clearance limit changed, albeit
ever so slightly. The NDB is on the field and has the same name and same
identifier. Had the controller said "cleared to Burnet NDB via direct"
instead of "cleared direct Burnet", it may have prompted Mr. Clonts to
examine the NDB RWY 1 approach plate a bit earlier than he did, avoiding the
confusion about the hold entirely. It may also have prompted Mr. Clonts to
advise the controller that while he could hold at the NDB, he'd be unable to
execute the NDB approach as he had no ADF.