Hold entry procedure

[Sam D]

Quick version: What is the best way to figure how to enter a hold? By "best", I mean a way that will both satisfy the written requirements (i.e. answer the question correctly) and be practical in the cockpit.

Longer version: I'm pretty comfortable with the different hold entry procedures (on paper, never flown one). Most times, I can figure out the proper entry procedure (direct, parallel, or teardrop) just by making sure my situational awareness is correct and determining which way would be "easiest".

I realize the instrument flying handbook has one method. But this one doesn't seem to practical in the cockpit. There is a second method based on holding up a pencil to your DG and offsetting it 20 degrees.

I'd like to use one method that will carry me through the written AND the clouds.

Hope that makes sense! Thanks.

 

[tonycondon]

i usually dont get to big into parallel entries. reason being is because the entry puts you on the unprotected side of the hold. I just try to visualize the hold, and where im approaching it from, and decide if a direct or teardrop is more appropriate. PTS doesnt allow a failure on "incorrect" hold entry based on the DE getting you 1 degree on the parallel side or whatever so dont worry too much about it. just get established and do what looks right. having a moving map GPS ala garmin 430/530 makes visualizing the hold entry a lot easier

 

[Sam D]

Thanks, Tony. That helps put the written in perspective.

BTW -- great job to you, your fellow CFI's and the PilotCast folks on the CFIcast. Great format and content. Can't wait til the next one.

 

[tonycondon]

thanks. I cant wait either. Im excited to be included!

 

[CJones]

I just went through this whole process within the past few weeks (took and passed IR written yesterday).

As per my instructor - and it's logical to me as well - I will simply use either direct or teardrop in the 'real world'. The parallel entry puts you outside of the 'protected' area of the published hold and makes for having to actually configure for an extra 'leg'.

For the written, I simply drew it out on paper: Put a dot as the 'fix' to hold at, draw the 'bearing/radial' of fix to hold on, decide left or right turns (inbound leg terminates at fix), then draw the heading at which you are approaching the fix. After that, I would look at my 'to scale' picture and decide what the FAA would want. Direct entry is pretty easy to decide - either you're lined up to go right into the hold with little turn, or you're not. The big decision comes with Teardrop vs. Parallel. To choose between Teardrop and Parallel, choose the entry that requires less 'turning' to get to your outbound leg for entry.

Going out and actually doing holds in the air will also help get a 'picture' of how to get into the hold effectively. For a cheaper approach, get MSFS and try to fly them with a moving-map GPS.

Good luck!

-Chris

 

[CJones]

i usually dont get to big into parallel entries. reason being is because the entry puts you on the unprotected side of the hold. I just try to visualize the hold, and where im approaching it from, and decide if a direct or teardrop is more appropriate. PTS doesnt allow a failure on "incorrect" hold entry based on the DE getting you 1 degree on the parallel side or whatever so dont worry too much about it. just get established and do what looks right. having a moving map GPS ala garmin 430/530 makes visualizing the hold entry a lot easier

Dangit.. You beat me to it.... Too busy listening to those bozo's on CFI-Cast instead of typing fast.

-Chris

 

[ApacheBob]

Don't feel bad. You would be surprised at how few holds the "big boys" fly. Unless it is a direct entry, adventures sometimes occur.
If you copy the hold and read it back perfectly, still ask for a repeat if anything looks foggy. Second readback=small humility. Pilot deviation=big humility.
ApacheBob

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Don't feel bad. You would be surprised at how few holds the "big boys" fly.

You would be surprised at how many holds the "big boys" DO fly.

 

[poadeleted20]

Given the number of HPILPT's there are on instrument approaches out there, you should expect to do a considerable number of holding pattern entries during your IFR life, although you probably won't do many full race tracks beyond the entries.

BTW, the protected area on the non-holding side is plenty big enough for a parallel entry even in a pretty severe crosswind the wrong way -- you've got a couple of miles to the non-holding side.

 

[vontresc]

I haven't seen this method written up very much, but my CFII taught me a simplified method of entering a hold.

There are 2 possible headings to enter the hold. You either fly the outbound heading or the teardrop heading (outbound + 30 for standard left turns). You turn to the teardrop heading if you are within 30 degrees of it, otherwise fly the normal outbound heading. If you aren't using the teardrop heading make your second turn in the same direction as the initial turn.

This method puts you into the "correct" holding entry without having to spend too much time visualizing the entry.

Pete

 

[KennyFlys]

During my IR training, every time my CFII gave me a hold instruction I'd instantly write it out on the knee board no differently than I'd write any other piece of information. Then, I'd draw the oval and an extended line to the hold reference. I'd put a dotted line for my current course then figure how I was going to enter the hold. It worked well for me.

I did the same for all the study questions on the written. I also worked backward from the answers just to make sure both agreed. Luckily, nothing was too odd on the actual questions I ended up with.

 

[Bill]

Direct entry is self explanitory. For the non-direct entries, after passing the hold fix, if you need to turn right to stay in the protected area you're doing a teardrop entry, if you need to turn left to stay in the protected area, you're doing a parallel entry.

 

[Nav8tor]

i usually dont get to big into parallel entries. reason being is because the entry puts you on the unprotected side of the hold.

What am I missing Tony? How does a parallel entry put you on the unprotected side of the pattern?

 

[MSmith]

My instructor taught me to visualize the hold on the Heading Indicator. I see an oval on it laying on the radial radiating out from the center, with the correct turns.

In my house, the toilet paper holder is always on the left. Thus, TP for left. If the radial is in the left upper side of the HI, it's a Teardrop entry. On the right, Parallel. At the bottom, Direct. The Teardrop portion is the one tipped up for 70 degrees and the Parallel portion is tipped down for 110 degrees. For a normal, right hold it's PT.

Beyond that, I remember that Parallel entries are the only one where the turn back inbound is opposite the hold turns.

For the written, they provide a picture of a HI with the heading at the top, so it works there too.

 

[tonycondon]

Lee,

The "Parallel" part is the part I was talking about. I was under the impression that the only protected side of the hold was the holding side. Ron points out that there is also plenty of protected airspace on the non holding side so my argument apparently doesnt hold water.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Lee,

The "Parallel" part is the part I was talking about. I was under the impression that the only protected side of the hold was the holding side. Ron points out that there is also plenty of protected airspace on the non holding side so my argument apparently doesnt hold water.

Given the ability of a lot of pilots to do a correct hold, there needs to be a lot of protected space on either side.

 

[gprellwitz]

What am I missing Tony? How does a parallel entry put you on the unprotected side of the pattern?

The way I was taught to actually fly the parallel was to fly outbound on the inbound course, rather than to attempt to offset it. That way, you know you aren't drifting far into the unprotected side because you have course guidance, and can get a good read on the winds, if you don't already have one.

 

[SkyHog]

The way I was taught to actually fly the parallel was to fly outbound on the inbound course, rather than to attempt to offset it. That way, you know you aren't drifting far into the unprotected side because you have course guidance, and can get a good read on the winds, if you don't already have one.

Doesn't that provide a possible collision hazard? I thought there was a reason all holds went the same direction (at that location)

 

[Bill]

The way I was taught to actually fly the parallel was to fly outbound on the inbound course, rather than to attempt to offset it. That way, you know you aren't drifting far into the unprotected side because you have course guidance, and can get a good read on the winds, if you don't already have one.

Same here.

 

[gprellwitz]

Doesn't that provide a possible collision hazard? I thought there was a reason all holds went the same direction (at that location)

No, the direction is just to determine which is the protected side. There won't be another airplane in the hold with you at the same altitude. Don't try entering a thousand feet off altitude, though!

 

[poadeleted20]

One problem with using a teardrop when you "should" use a parallel is that the radius of a turn from an arrival track on the holding side back to the standard teardrop heading of 30 degrees to the holding side will have you starting your timing farther out from the fix (assuming you use the standard five T's and don't start messing with anything else until the turn is completed), and put you rather closer to the inbound course line when you start your turn back, virtually assuring an overshoot. If you start your timing as you start your turn, the overshoot gets even worse, although you stay closer to the fix. Plot it with drafting tools and you'll see what I mean. If you're arriving from the holding side of the inbound course with too much angle to make a direct entry, the parallel entry will make life easier.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

The way I was taught to actually fly the parallel was to fly outbound on the inbound course, rather than to attempt to offset it. That way, you know you aren't drifting far into the unprotected side because you have course guidance, and can get a good read on the winds, if you don't already have one.

That is the way it SHOULD be done. The only reason it is drawn the way it is is so the lines do not overlap.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Doesn't that provide a possible collision hazard? I thought there was a reason all holds went the same direction (at that location)

What collision hazzard? The only hazzard would be if you were way outside the protected airspace.

 

[Nav8tor]

Doesn't that provide a possible collision hazard? I thought there was a reason all holds went the same direction (at that location)

Dan, ATC wouldn't put more than one airplane in a hold over the same fix at the same altitude, so there's no collision hazard.

 

[Nav8tor]

That is the way it SHOULD be done. The only reason it is drawn the way it is is so the lines do not overlap.

Thats right, the diagrams for the direct and teardrop entries on wikipeidia, wehre I got that diagram are also shown offset.

I was also taught to fly the outbound leg of the parallel entry on the inbound course. That's why I don't see how you would be on the unprotected side if the entry is properly executed.

 

[midlifeflyer]

During my IR training, every time my CFII gave me a hold instruction I'd instantly write it out on the knee board no differently than I'd write any other piece of information. Then, I'd draw the oval and an extended line to the hold reference. I'd put a dotted line for my current course then figure how I was going to enter the hold. It worked well for me.

I'm more or less on Kenny's side of the fence on this.

The key is being able to visualize the entry. Ever notice that it's much easier to enter a published hold (like on a missed approach)? That's because it's drawn on the chart. Figure your airplane position relative to it and the choice of entry becomes relatively easy (as usual there are exceptions, people who don't understand the entries to begin with or can't visualize using pictures will have difficulty).

So, as an offshoot of Kenny's method, I draw the clearance using a visual shorthand. Here's "Hold southwest on the 220° degree radial, left turns. Maintain 8,000 feet. Expect further clearance at 0000Z."

http://www.midlifeflight.us/posted/draw_hold.gif

The arrow coming from the northwest is the general location and direction of my airplane.

That, combined with Pete's observation that the first turn will always be outbound or 30° of outbound for the teardrop has worked well for me.

Disclaimer: In addition to thinking drawing the clearance is a good method, I'm prejudiced against the methods that involve putting pencils, fingers and other body parts up against the DG. My first CFII taught me one of those. Worked fine. Then about a year after I got my IR, another CFII =insisted= that my first II had it backwards and that I had to use his method. Still not knowing enough to tell CFII #2 to stick that pencil somewhere other than on the DG, I complied, thereby confusing myself completely and making any of those systems completely useless.

 

[poadeleted20]

Dan, ATC wouldn't put more than one airplane in a hold over the same fix at the same altitude, so there's no collision hazard.

Let's just say they're not supposed to do that. There's this old story about the two airliners that spend 45 minutes in the same hold at the same altitude, 180 degrees out from each other the whole time, in the weather so they never saw each other, but I've never had it confirmed, and the two airlines named in the story were National and Eastern flying DC-7's, so the story is also rather dated.

 

[tonycondon]

i guess that would be a case when proper timing would be critical!

 

[Sam D]

Thanks again for the responses everyone. Passed the ground school exam, missing three (but none of them on holds). Now I just need to take the real written before the info leaks out of my brain and then I'll have the Astronaut written out of the way. (That's what the new regs say, right? )

The three I missed (I'm paraphrasing, somewhat):
1) You're fast but in the glide slope. What do you adjust initially: pitch, power or both? (Hint: I should have focused on "initially")
2) Rolling into a standard rate turn what's your primary and secondary instrument for bank? (Should have known this one...)
3) Refer to figure xx, what do you need to set the OBS to in order to center the needle? (It was an HSI indicating from, but upside down and I just couldn't make heads or tails, literally. Figured out the 5 degrees just went the wrong direction)

 

[tonycondon]

glad to hear you passed Sam.

 

[jesse]

You would be surprised at how many holds the "big boys" DO fly.

In a hold for 35 minutes today on a MD-80 outside of Chicago...

Now I'm just crossing my fingers that my connecting flight doesn't get canceled. It seems that they are canceling flights to accommodate the weather.

 

[KennyFlys]

Disclaimer: In addition to thinking drawing the clearance is a good method, I'm prejudiced against the methods that involve putting pencils, fingers and other body parts up against the DG. My first CFII taught me one of those. Worked fine. Then about a year after I got my IR, another CFII =insisted= that my first II had it backwards and that I had to use his method. Still not knowing enough to tell CFII #2 to stick that pencil somewhere other than on the DG, I complied, thereby confusing myself completely and making any of those systems completely useless.

Mark, great hold format alternative to my earlier version.

As for a pencil, pen or something in your hand... I was taught from the start, have it in your hand or very quickly able to grab. Odds are you'll be getting instructions at times you can't act on as quickly at the same time they spout them off. ATC may give you a descent and turn followed immediately by something like, "In ten minutes, expect a hold at zzz degrees, ABC VOR, left turns. I'll call your distance and leg." You definitely want it already on paper and not asking them again what they are. When the time comes, they are only going to tell you to execute the hold as instructed with the two bits of additional information. You'll write down the first three parts and two blank lines knowing you're expecting the two more bits of information.

Here's another one to think of off the cuff. How many fly along with not just a writing tool handy but are also constantly looking at the L Chart, being aware of what VORs or fixes are in the area? Fully expecting them to keep me away from Class B, I chose one fix and filed it then direct to a VOR before direct for the remaining 85% of my trip. But, ATC had another fix in mind and I was caught off-guard in finding it. While sounding like an idiot, he gave me a heading to proceed on. I set the bug then found the fix, inserted it in the flight plan and was fine. Their choice of fix was only ten miles later than mine but I should have been aware of it.

The rest of that trip and the three other legs over the weekend, I was tuning VORs and following my position that way while the GPS and Fred flew the plane. At night, some pilotage is even possible using L Charts. Between larger towns and airports, there are a lot of references. I'd find an airport beacon then light up the runway to verify my position in relation to the runway and its heading.

I got a bit off topic here so if someone thinks it may warrant a new thread and more discussion... squawk seven-five-zero-zero and I'll move it.