Holding Question

[midlifeflyer]

If you are on the inbound course going outbound, when you turn around inbound, you may not be able to intercept the inbound course before getting back to the FAF, requiring another turn in holding to get established.

I guess. Of course you can always guess at the wind and extend the outbound to make up the difference.

btw, your reason for offsetting is my reason for preferring a teardrop when both a teardrop and a parallel are reasonable entries.

 

[nosehair]

btw, your reason for offsetting is my reason for preferring a teardrop when both a teardrop and a parallel are reasonable entries.

Bingo!
I actually turn the "parallel" into a modified teardrop to accommodate an inbound turn onto the course without all the screwing around to get "established" inbound.

Everyone keep in mind the AIM procedure is "recommended", just like the VFR no tower airport traffic pattern. You must have flexibility in your specific pattern entry, conforming to the recommended pattern entry, but deviating as needed to get configured "on downwind", or other familiar pattern position, to be able to turn "final", ready to land.

 

[poadeleted20]

In my opinion, the DE was wrong and has nothing to base his opinion on.

The DPE's POI at the FSDO said the same thing. Whether the POI did anything about that or not, I never asked. However, what the DPE was basing his wrong idea on was the picture in the AIM showing the dashed line of the parallel entry on the nonholding side of the inbound course, partly because of the turn radius from the depicted arrival heading and probably also because you can't see a dashed line superimposed on a solid line.

 

[poadeleted20]

If you are on the inbound course going outbound, when you turn around inbound, you may not be able to intercept the inbound course before getting back to the FAF, requiring another turn in holding to get established.

Even at 200 KIAS, it would take a really staggering wind to make that happen -- do the math, you'll see. But that's why the TERPS requires them to protect as much space on the nonholding side as they do -- so even if that does happen, you'll still be in protected airspace.

 

[nosehair]

it would take a really staggering wind to make that happen

It's those staggering winds that I live for. :wink2:

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I found a little tidbit in the AIM that reminded me of this thread...

As I cross GOOGL again, I turned parallel, then I cut in a little to get centered back on the LOC outbound,.. which is now backwards, but keeps me on track with the wind from my left out of the north. My CFII said I shouldn't do that, since it is a parallel entry.

It's referring to a hold in lieu of a procedure turn and not a missed-approach hold, but AIM 5-4-9a.1. says:

If an entry places the pilot on the non-maneuvering side of the PT, correction to intercept the outbound course ensures remaining within protected airspace.