Actual holding pattern entry.

Archimago

Archimago

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
156
Location
kprb
Display Name
Display name:
Archimago
Studying towards IFR and had a practical question about entering holds. I am aware of the three: teardrop,parallel, and direct. But how do you actually fly them when they get close to the extremities of the zones...
ie. let’s say you are holding on the 360 radial and you are flying a heading of 115 which is direct entry... but it seems like you would have to turn almost 180 degrees after getting to fix. And if you are on a heading of 285 do you turn drastically left and then immediately do your 180d right or would you just fly through it and try to time your turn to line up with the outbound leg?
Richard
 
Archimago said:
Studying towards IFR and had a practical question about entering holds. I am aware of the three: teardrop,parallel, and direct. But how do you actually fly them when they get close to the extremities of the zones...
ie. let’s say you are holding on the 360 radial and you are flying a heading of 115 which is direct entry... but it seems like you would have to turn almost 180 degrees after getting to fix. And if you are on a heading of 285 do you turn drastically left and then immediately do your 180d right or would you just fly through it and try to time your turn to line up with the outbound leg?
Richard
Click to expand...

Calm winds assumed. If you arrive at the holding fix heading 115, yes you are in the direct entry sector and yes it’s a lot of turn. 245 degrees to get around to heading 360 for the outbound leg. You just do it. The holding pattern airspace to be protected accommodates this. If you arrive at the fix heading 285 you are still in the direct entry sector. It will be a 75 degree turn to 360 for the outbound leg. This will have you paralleling the inbound leg kinda close and may lead to an overshoot when you turn right at the outbound end to get established on the 360 radial inbound. You might want to do a teardrop from there maybe using about a 20 degree cut outbound instead of 30. Somebody check my math here.
 
As @luvflyin indicated (and my math is probably worse than yours), the direct entry sector is very large and at the extreme calls for a 250 degree turn where the parallel would be only 140. The rationale is the difference in the size of the protected areas on the two sides of the holding pattern.

When you ask how do you actually fly them, do you mean for real or on a checkride with a DPE who purposely gives you that parallel/direct edge? With a GPS which draws holds and prompts the entry, or without those tools?

my personal method in real flight is, I'm a holding pattern drawer and close enough is good enough to me. So I don't worry about the exact location of that 70/20 degree line. But I know there is a bias in favor of direct over parallel so i fudge in that direction when it looks close.
 
luvflyin said:
It will be a 75 degree turn to 360 for the outbound leg. This will have you paralleling the inbound leg kinda close and may lead to an overshoot when you turn right at the outbound end to get established on the 360 radial inbound. You might want to do a teardrop from there maybe using about a 20 degree cut outbound instead of 30. Somebody check my math here.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean, if you start your standard turn at the fix, you end up too close and overshoot the inbound track. So are you saying that I could subtract 20 degrees from my outbound heading (i.e heading of 340 on outbound)?
So I just ran this in my sim. If I wait for 20 seconds and then turn it seems to work out. Is this an okay way to approach that or am I picking up some bad habits?
Also, thanks for the help!
 
jsstevens said:
You should just grab a handful of emergency brake and slide it around. Much faster.
Click to expand...
Luckily I have a canopy I can slide back in flight, That way I can stick an arm out the window to both signal my turn and to add some air braking for quicker left hand turns.
 
midlifeflyer said:
When you ask how do you actually fly them, do you mean for real or on a checkride with a DPE who purposely gives you that parallel/direct edge? With a GPS which draws holds and prompts the entry, or without those tools?

my personal method in real flight is, I'm a holding pattern drawer and close enough is good enough to me. So I don't worry about the exact location of that 70/20 degree line. But I know there is a bias in favor of direct over parallel so i fudge in that direction when it looks close.
Click to expand...

Actually all of the above but without any of the cool tools. I have a very very basic IFR platform with no GPS. And I have to pass my IFR so I don't want to pick up bad technique... at least until after the checkride...JK.
 
Archimago said:
Luckily I have a canopy I can slide back in flight, That way I can stick an arm out the window to both signal my turn and to add some air braking for quicker left hand turns.
Click to expand...
and for quicker right turns, i swivel my hand for more lift.
 
luvflyin said:
...If you arrive at the fix heading 285 you are still in the direct entry sector. It will be a 75 degree turn to 360 for the outbound leg. This will have you paralleling the inbound leg kinda close and may lead to an overshoot when you turn right at the outbound end to get established on the 360 radial inbound. You might want to do a teardrop from there maybe using about a 20 degree cut outbound instead of 30. Somebody check my math here.
Click to expand...
I learned holding patterns before IFR GPS receivers existed, so I don't worry about where I am relative to the inbound leg until I turn inbound, because when flying it with a VOR receiver, that's the only time I have positive course guidance. Once inbound, I turn to a reasonable angle to intercept the inbound course. The recommended holding entries, the holding speed limit, and the protected airspace make allowance for the overshoot.
 
Archimago said:
I see what you mean, if you start your standard turn at the fix, you end up too close and overshoot the inbound track. So are you saying that I could subtract 20 degrees from my outbound heading (i.e heading of 340 on outbound)?
So I just ran this in my sim. If I wait for 20 seconds and then turn it seems to work out. Is this an okay way to approach that or am I picking up some bad habits?
Also, thanks for the help!
Click to expand...

No. The 20 degree cut instead of 30 was about if you did a teardrop entry instead of direct. You could, and probably should consider modifications like that a bad habit while in training. Unless you have a CFI who agrees. You are experimenting with this on a sim so you will get the picture soon enough. Can you plug winds into the sim you have?
@Palmpilot gives some good scoop above in post #11. About 40% of the protected airspace in a holding pattern is on the non-holding side, so overshoots are not critical. But if you can anticipate how the wind, and how the angles you start the entry from will affect the inbound intercept, it can make life easier.
 
Archimago said:
Actually all of the above but without any of the cool tools. I have a very very basic IFR platform with no GPS. And I have to pass my IFR so I don't want to pick up bad technique... at least until after the checkride...JK.
Click to expand...
Like others I learned holds with basic VOR and even AFD. The method is the same. When I teach holds, it is on a whiteboard (real or virtual) to get a larger picture of what is going on. I think that except for the precise location of the 70/20 line, the AIM-standard approaches are obvious. Here's an example. It's a it sketchier than what I would do on a whiteboard because in this case it's a sample of how I actually copy a holding clearance. In this case, it's "hold southwest opf the VOR on the 220 degree radial, left turns. Maintain 8,000 feet. Except further clearance at 0000Z." The other arrow is the direction I am coming.

A bit of a disclaimer. Different people learn and process in different ways so this visualization tool may not work for you. Plus, you could be one for whom it's perfection or it's wrong. In either case, there are a myriad of tips and tricks to assist in choosing the proper entry. The trick is to find one which works for you and stick with it. But for those drawing works, we can put the airplane anywhere on the drawing and the official AIM-standard entry is although they might be an irrelevant 10± degrees off on the parallel/direct border.
draw_hold.gif
 
I was taught to keep holding entries simple. And like many others, I learned in the dark ages with VOR only. I, too, like to draw a little diagram to help orient me as to the holding pattern and my direction of entry. Either on paper, or virtually on the face of the HSI. (On paper if confused.)

Then the entry choice is simple: If you can fly direct, do that. No? If you can fly a teardrop, do that. No? Then fly a parallel.
Alternatively: If approaching from the holding side, fly a direct entry if possible, otherwise fly a parallel entry. If approaching from the non-holding side, fly a teardrop if possible. Otherwise fly a parallel entry.

I don't worry about memorizing the degree "cutoffs" for the recommended entries. Just choose an entry that does not have an excessive turn. There will be many cases where it is obvious which is the best choice, and other cases where either of two choices will keep you well within protected airspace.
 
I suck at math so I just do whatever makes sense and requires the least amount of heading change crossing the holding fix. That’s my real world answer. You’ll be good at it before the check ride so don’t stress.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I suck at math so I just do whatever makes sense and requires the least amount of heading change crossing the holding fix. That’s my real world answer. You’ll be good at it before the check ride so don’t stress.
Click to expand...
The only area where that is a potential issue is the area between the direct and the parallel entry discussed before. Right on the dividing line a turn to the preferred direct entry is 100° bigger than the turn to parallel. I think it's also the only one where being "wrong" actually has a chance of putting you outside of the airspace protected for the hold, if your airspeed is high enough and the wind vector strong enough from the "bad" direction.
 
I've been pleased to see pilots using the chart annotation features in ForeFlight -- any number of recent IRA applicants have drawn the hold right on the low level enroute chart where the holding fix was located. I think it's a smart way to use an EFB.

Visualization should be the goal. Like Mark stated, different people learn different ways... but make sure the path leads to visualizing the hold. Big picture SA comes in large part from good visualization techniques. Rarely do I see an applicant misinterpret holding instructions when they draw the hold. However, rote "tricks" which don't lead to a mental image of the hold and where the aircraft is located relative to it do tend to fail more often.
 
Ryan F. said:
However, rote "tricks" which don't lead to a mental image of the hold and where the aircraft is located relative to it do tend to fail more often.
Click to expand...
My rote trick rant. Actually a CFI rant and a warning to pilots who have difficulty with holds:

I was horrible at holds. I could and did screw up the simplest direct entry. To help me, my instructor taught me one of the tricks. Got me through but didn't get me to the visualization stage. Fast forward to an IPC a few years later.

CFI: how do you enter a hold?
Me: I use this trick.
CFI: no, that trick is all wrong. Use this one.

the tricks were basically identical. The only difference was, one used the inbound course, the other used the outbound course. Basically reverse images of each other. Screwed me up more than I was to begin with. I remember sitting with one of those online holding pattern visualizers with a deck of cards with basic holding instructions trying to teach them to myself, and getting most wrong.

That's why I said earlier that if you find a trick which does help you visualize, stuck with it, and why I agree completely that the trick needs to be a path to visualization.
 
midlifeflyer said:
To help me, my instructor taught me one of the tricks. Got me through but didn't get me to the visualization stage. Fast forward to an IPC a few years later.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight. You were taught a "visualization trick" that worked for years? And then let somebody turn it inside-out for you without any reason? Based on that experience and this:

midlifeflyer said:
As a light GA weekend warrior I have received exactly two ATC-assigned holds in 28 years.
Click to expand...

...you never miss an opportunity to rant at the easiest visualization "method" in the book, one that doesn't require a notepad and pencil or online plotter or removing your eyes and fingers from control of the aircraft. That's because the holding pattern, your direction of approach and entry are "imagined" right in front of you on the DG. C'mon, Mark. Airline pilots have been using this for eons, it's so easy and obvious. It isn't an abstract "trick" at all. It's doing what you do with paper and pencil mentally on the instrument panel instead of on your knee. If folks are having trouble learning it (if that's the "trick" Ryan claims applicants have trouble with), maybe they are used to memorizing answers and not used to thinking and visualizing?
 
dtuuri said:
the easiest visualization "method" in the book, one that doesn't require a notepad and pencil or online plotter or removing your eyes and fingers from control of the aircraft. That's because the holding pattern, your direction of approach and entry are "imagined" right in front of you on the DG.
Click to expand...

Like this?

Holding Entry.jpg
 
dtuuri said:
Let me get this straight. You were taught a "visualization trick" that worked for years? And then let somebody turn it inside-out for you without any reason? Based on that experience and this:
Click to expand...
Actually no. On multiple counts. It wasn't a visualization trick but rote. It helped but never got me to even a little level of understanding. And it wasn't many years at all. I was still a very, very green instrument pilot.

My claim that people learn differently (somehting it seems which is completely lost on you) is based on more than that one experience. It's also based on doing lessons with rusty pilots coming back to flying. I always ask what was your biggest problem? The answer is almost invariably holding. I'd suggest we try drawing and the response is almost always, "I never realized they were this easy."
​
...you never miss an opportunity to rant at the easiest visualization "method" in the book, one that doesn't require a notepad and pencil or online plotter or removing your eyes and fingers from control of the aircraft. That's because the holding pattern, your direction of approach and entry are "imagined" right in front of you on the DG. C'mon, Mark. Airline pilots have been using this for eons, it's so easy and obvious. It isn't an abstract "trick" at all. It's doing what you do with paper and pencil mentally on the instrument panel instead of on your knee. If folks are having trouble learning it (if that's the "trick" Ryan claims applicants have trouble with), maybe they are used to memorizing answers and not used to thinking and visualizing?
Click to expand...
You betcha. And your response is always the same - "my way is the only one true way which everyone must understand and do or they are wrong!"

I had this student once. Didn't need thumbs, drawings, imaginary lines on DGs. From the very first hold I gave him he just naturally "saw" it. Right turns. Left turns. At a OR. At an intersection. A distance from a fix. Didn't even need to write down the clearance. Just mentally processed it immediately. On a whim, I once gave him an impossible holding instruction. As soon as the words were out of my mouth, he said, "No. You can't do that." I hated him :D but I was thrilled. I can just see you as the CFI I rant about insisting he give up his natural situational awareness for holds with your technique.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Actually no. On multiple counts. It wasn't a visualization trick but rote. It helped but never got me to even a little level of understanding. And it wasn't many years at all. I was still a very, very green instrument pilot.

My claim that people learn differently (somehting it seems which is completely lost on you) is based on more than that one experience. It's also based on doing lessons with rusty pilots coming back to flying. I always ask what was your biggest problem? The answer is almost invariably holding. I'd suggest we try drawing and the response is almost always, "I never realized they were this easy."
​

You betcha. And your response is always the same - "my way is the only one true way which everyone must understand and do or they are wrong!"

I had this student once. Didn't need thumbs, drawings, imaginary lines on DGs. From the very first hold I gave him he just naturally "saw" it. Right turns. Left turns. At a OR. At an intersection. A distance from a fix. Didn't even need to write down the clearance. Just mentally processed it immediately. On a whim, I once gave him an impossible holding instruction. As soon as the words were out of my mouth, he said, "No. You can't do that." I hated him :D but I was thrilled. I can just see you as the CFI I rant about insisting he give up his natural situational awareness for holds with your technique.
Click to expand...
You, sir, are the MASTER at strawman arguments!
 
dtuuri said:
You, sir, are the MASTER at strawman arguments!
Click to expand...
Pretty easy when I'm dealing with
upload_2020-9-8_13-54-47.jpeg

Sorry my friend. I'm getting way to old to put up with constant brainless attacks.
 
luvflyin said:
What exactly does that depict? You are obviously heading 270 right now. What are your holding instructions?
Click to expand...
Just follow the instructions in the graphic.

It shows how to determine the recommended entry by finding your holding pattern's outbound course on you heading indicator while on the heading on which you will reach the fix. You don't have to worry about the orientation of the near-horizontal line unless your outbound course falls within 20° of either wing.

The heading is 270 because the heading has to be something. Doesn't matter the orientation of the heading card (as long as it is accurate. If the heading moves, the position of your outbound course also moves and it'll be in the correct sector.
 
luvflyin said:
What exactly does that depict? You are obviously heading 270 right now. What are your holding instructions?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter. Your heading is always at the top of the DG just like real life. It's the heading you have approaching the holding fix. The graphic on the left shows the AIM-standard angles to determine entries for the standard right hand holding pattern (right high = right turns). Wherever the outbound course (radial) lies using the center of the DG, that's the entry you use. For example, sticking with the left graphic (right hand turns), an instruction to "hold southeast on the 130 degree radial" is an AIM-Standard direct entry
upload_2020-9-8_16-1-31.png
 
Is this used in conjunction with a metal landing calculator? I've always just looked at hold direction and figured out the least amount of finagling needed to cross the fix and get on the inbound leg. And yeah, sometimes that teardrop entry should have by the book been parallel. But is that extra 15 degrees of turn really going to be an issue? No. No it's not.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It doesn't matter. Your heading is always at the top of the DG just like real life. It's the heading you have approaching the holding fix. The graphic on the left shows the AIM-standard angles to determine entries for the standard right hand holding pattern (right high = right turns). Wherever the outbound course (radial) lies using the center of the DG, that's the entry you use. For example, sticking with the left graphic (right hand turns), an instruction to "hold southeast on the 130 degree radial" is an AIM-Standard direct entry
View attachment 89652
Click to expand...
Don't forget the visualization part:

Midlifeflyer2.png​

When you hit the fix, you navigate to the outbound heading and there it is, how to best get there i/a/w the AIM.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Is this used in conjunction with a metal landing calculator? I've always just looked at hold direction and figured out the least amount of finagling needed to cross the fix and get on the inbound leg. And yeah, sometimes that teardrop entry should have by the book been parallel. But is that extra 15 degrees of turn really going to be an issue? No. No it's not.
Click to expand...
It's just several ways to help. Whichever helps the pilot best visualize the entry is a good thing.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It doesn't matter. Your heading is always at the top of the DG just like real life. It's the heading you have approaching the holding fix. The graphic on the left shows the AIM-standard angles to determine entries for the standard right hand holding pattern (right high = right turns). Wherever the outbound course (radial) lies using the center of the DG, that's the entry you use. For example, sticking with the left graphic (right hand turns), an instruction to "hold southeast on the 130 degree radial" is an AIM-Standard direct entry
View attachment 89652
Click to expand...

Ah ha!!
 
You can also simplify it somewhat, if you are coming from an area where you have to make a turn into it, and cannot use the DG. If you are on the same side of the Hold there are only 2 entries, PD, Parallel or Direct.
 
If you cross the fix and are inside the hold = Teardrop

If you cross the fix and are outside the hold = Parallel

If you are going with the hold/least amount of turns = Direct
 
It's funny,, it seems that 75% of most IFR courses focuses on hold entries and flying holds.. how many of these does someone have to actually fly for every 1,000 hrs of IFR flying? Maybe a handful? 500 hrs in and I've been yet to given a hold here in SoCal. Typically what they do is give you a bunch of turn vectors if they need to delay you. A much more "stressful" event is getting prepped for the approach that ATIS is giving only to have them change it on you last minute and throw some VOR A at you when you've already got the ILS dialed in and set up. More time should be focused on more "real world" IFR events, hand flying in the clouds following the needles, etc.

The obsession with hold gymnastics is peculiar.

But, to answer the question
Archimago said:
But how do you actually fly them when they get close to the extremities
Click to expand...
(A) this is an AIM standards and practices thing, not an FAA reg, and it's pretty clear as far as how to figure how to fly the hold, but it's also just a guideline.. if you're teetering exactly on teardrop vs parallel (for example) just fly the one you're more comfortable with.. in my case that's teardrop (one smooth turn in the same direction of the hold vs flying it backwards and doing your first turn opposite of the hold turns)


Ultimately the goal is to stay on the protected side flying it in the correct direction, leg length, and altitude.. that will keep you from hitting other planes holding and protected from terrain
 
I probably fly a couple of holds per year. The majority is from volume delays going into busy hub airports. A few are when the destination is below landing minimums.

I don't think that it's the frequency of holding that drives the emphasis in training, it is that when you do get a hold you really do need to know how to do it.
 
Probably the large amount of discussion surrounding hold entries and holds in general has to do with the fact that they're one of the more challenging tasks for the average instrument-rated GA pilot. If you flew holds every day (I do... or at least, I assign them and observe the results) the whole discussion would seem like overkill. But since we do them rarely in the real world the task always seems to be a bit more difficult than a lot of other "normal" IFR tasks such as flying departures, approaches, navigating on airways, that sort of thing.

I have observed that correctly demonstrating holding procedures takes a lot of mental bandwidth compared to most other ACS or PTS tasks for IRA and CFI-IA applicants. That's probably a fair reflection of the real world.

Larry's statement is the salient note on the discussion -- when you're assigned a hold, it's important you can comply with ATC instructions and not be a "drain" on the system at that moment in time. If holding procedures are required, ATC's workload is often higher than usual.
 
Tantalum said:
It's funny,, it seems that 75% of most IFR courses focuses on hold entries and flying holds.. how many of these does someone have to actually fly for every 1,000 hrs of IFR flying? Maybe a handful? 500 hrs in and I've been yet to given a hold here in SoCal. Typically what they do is give you a bunch of turn vectors if they need to delay you. A much more "stressful" event is getting prepped for the approach that ATIS is giving only to have them change it on you last minute and throw some VOR A at you when you've already got the ILS dialed in and set up. More time should be focused on more "real world" IFR events, hand flying in the clouds following the needles, etc.
Click to expand...
I try to do one of those that in every IPC and IFR checkout I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top