Course reversal - timed or distance?

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Let's say you're approaching ALMAA on a 300 heading. You'd enter the hold on a teardrop for a course reversal. The hold shows 5mile legs. My question is, what do you fly as the course reversal? 5nm leg outbound, then inbound to fix? Timed one minute outbound, then inbound to fix? Some distance less than 5nm outbound, then inbound to fix?

I had one CFII insist that regardless of how the hold is depicted, that any initial entry to a hold must be timed to one minute. Something about you're only considered established in the hold when on the inbound leg to the fix and you want to get established as quick as possible. Any subsequent legs in the hold would be based on time or distance as depicted. This CFII was wrong on a few other items of which I'm more certain, so I'm not sure how to take this. Was this CFII correct? Are there cases when it's correct and others when it's not?



RNAV RWY 13 KMTV

 

[RyanB]

It’s a 5 mile holding pattern, but nothing says you can’t make it less than that. There’s also nothing that says it has to be timed to one minute, I’m not sure where your instructor is getting that.

 

[eman1200]

Bruh fly that approach as published VFR, it’s an awesome approach over those lil mountains!

Also 5nm =5 nm.

 

[Clip4]

Based on your scenario, a simple tear drop entry is an option. So is flying the entire 5 nm.

There are situations that may require you to descend in the hold pattern and you would want the 5 mile vs 1 minute.

 

[RussR]

Actually, both the AIM and the IPH, when discussing holding entries, say "one minute", and do not discuss other options like using the charted number of miles.

So in that sense, your CFII is actually correct.

However, it also shows that your CFII probably hasn't flown a lot of real IFR, since 1) the holding entries aren't regulatory anyway, 2) every GPS I know of will fly the entry to the published distance, and 3) nobody, not ATC or any body else, actually cares how you get into the holding pattern. Heck, even the ACS doesn't require you use the recommended technique. Just that you use an "appropriate" entry.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Actually, both the AIM and the IPH, when discussing holding entries, say "one minute", and do not discuss other options like using the charted number of miles.

So in that sense, your CFII is actually correct.

However, it also shows that your CFII probably hasn't flown a lot of real IFR, since 1) the holding entries aren't regulatory anyway, 2) every GPS I know of will fly the entry to the published distance, and 3) nobody, not ATC or any body else, actually cares how you get into the holding pattern. Heck, even the ACS doesn't require you use the recommended technique. Just that you use and "appropriate" entry.

I’ve seen many discussions where people insist that a published 4 or 5 nm HILPT is actually a 1 minute hold (isn’t that the bottom line since you normally only go around once?). I simply point out that they’d better not let their autopilot fly it less they get Brashered, and suggest they write to Jepp and Garmin to let them know the database is wrong.

I suspect that if the AIM and IPH authors were informed there was a real problem here, they’d update the guidance language written before RNAV.

 

[RussR]

I’ve seen many discussions where people insist that a published 4 or 5 nm HILPT is actually a 1 minute hold (isn’t that the bottom line since you normally only go around once?). I simply point out that they’d better not let their autopilot fly it less they get Brashered, and suggest they write to Jepp and Garmin to let them know the database is wrong.

I suspect that if the AIM and IPH authors were informed there was a real problem here, they’d update the guidance language written before RNAV.

I don't understand. A 4 NM hold would only be a 1 min hold if you had a groundspeed of 240 kts. Which is possible if the wind and altitude are right (given the 200 KIAS limit below 6000 where you will mostly see 4 NM holds), but is not very common especially for instrument training airplanes.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I don't understand. A 4 NM hold would only be a 1 min hold if you had a groundspeed of 240 kts. Which is possible if the wind and altitude are right (given the 200 KIAS limit below 6000 where you will mostly see 4 NM holds), but is not very common especially for instrument training airplanes.

By "actually a 1 minute hold (isn't that the bottom line since you normally only go around once?)" I mean in effect. If one is claiming that it must be a 1-minute outbound and all you are doing is reversing course, there is no such thing as a distance hold for a course reversal. They are all timed holds.

 

[Larry in TN]

At GA airplane speeds, one-minute outbound, on a 30° offset teardrop entry, will put you in a good place for a standard-rate turn back to the inbound leg. At that same speed, it'll take around 3 minutes to reach 5nm which puts you a lot farther away from your inbound radial.

An RNAV system will fly the entry out to 5nm but it will fly a track to the correct point so your inbound turn works out perfectly. It won't fly the 30° offset.

Since this is an RNAV approach, I'd fly the RNAV track. If it was an ILS, VOR, or NDB approach, I'd fly a one-minute outbound teardrop entry.

 

[midlifeflyer]

@elvisAteMySandwich, in light of the discussion here, two related questions for you to ask your CFII. I would really be curious of the answer.

(1) If I am hand-flying this HILPT, must I disregard the GPS prompts and turn inbound in 1 minute?​

(2) If I am flying this with an autopilot, must I switch to heading mode so I don't violate the 1-minute outbound?​

The "must" is important, since your CFII is saying it's a requirement. "Should" is a matter of choice. Flying an airplane with a 90-kt approach speed, 4 or 5 NM is a long time and nothing prevents us from choosing to turn in early.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

@elvisAteMySandwich, in light of the discussion here, two related questions for you to ask your CFII. I would really be curious of the answer.

(1) If I am hand-flying this HILPT, must I disregard the GPS prompts and turn inbound in 1 minute?​

(2) If I am flying this with an autopilot, must I switch to heading mode so I don't violate the 1-minute outbound?​

The "must" is important, since your CFII is saying it's a requirement. "Should" is a matter of choice. Flying an airplane with a 90-kt approach speed, 4 or 5 NM is a long time and nothing prevents us from choosing to turn in early.

@midlifeflyer I'm not in contact with this CFII anymore. But the answer to Q1 is yes, they indicated that I should must ignore the GPS and do the one minute turn even on RNAV approaches with the GPS guiding a distance hold. For Q2, we never used the autopilot so the discussion never happened.

One thing I didn't mention, but might be important, is that the CFII was in their young twenties and time building for the airlines. They had about 1,000 hours and needed 1,500 to get picked up.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Thanks for all the replies! It helps to know that flying the normal 5nm legs is definitely an option because that's what I would expect to do. I just needed to hear from more people who've flown real world IFR.

@eman1200 I picked a random approach as an example to protect the innocent/guilty. Though you're right, it does look interesting!

 

[RussR]

One thing I didn't mention, but might be important, is that the CFII was in their young twenties and time building for the airlines. They had about 1,000 hours and needed 1,500 to get picked up.

I think that's pretty much the key. This CFII has almost certainly not flown much real IFR.

Thanks for all the replies! It helps to know that flying the normal 5nm legs is definitely an option because that's what I would expect to do. I just needed to hear from more people who've flown real world IFR.

Here's the thing though - while 5 nm legs (or whatever the published distance is) is certainly an option. But in a 172 or almost any piston airplane, it's really pretty unnecessary and ends up making you drive away from the fix for far longer than you really need to. In a 172, for example, a minute is about 1.5 nm. So that's another 3.5 nm there, and 3.5 nm back = 7 nm = about 5 minutes of extra flying. Is that a big deal? No, probably not, but it's also completely unnecessary in most cases.

It's also, as discussed, what the GPS will guide you (or the autopilot) to do. I have more than once decided I didn't really want to go out the extra distance for no advantage, so I turn in early (or engage heading mode), line up on the inbound course, and save me (and the person waiting for me to land so they can get their IFR clearance) some time. Completely legal and in fact even supported by the AIM and IFH.

Small note, though, if you do want to cut it in early - the GPS on a teardrop entry, since it's aiming for a point 5 nm away where you can make a standard rate turn back to the inbound course, will likely have selected a smaller offset angle than 30 degrees. So if you turn early, you're closer to the inbound course than you would normally be and might tend to overshoot it. Two solutions to that, of course - either don't follow the GPS's initial course, or make a slightly tighter than standard-rate turn. Either will work.

 

[TCABM]

…So that's another 3.5 nm there, and 3.5 nm back = 7 nm = about 5 minutes of extra flying. Is that a big deal? …

That’s .1 of (possible) actual.

 

[MauleSkinner]

That’s .1 of (possible) actual.

If I can get an extra .1 actual and an extra $2.50 on my paycheck simply by letting the automation control me instead of me controlling the automation, isn’t that the ultimate trifecta?

 

[Clip4]

Actually, both the AIM and the IPH, when discussing holding entries, say "one minute", and do not discuss other options like using the charted number of miles.

So in that sense, your CFII is actually correct.

However, it also shows that your CFII probably hasn't flown a lot of real IFR, since 1) the holding entries aren't regulatory anyway, 2) every GPS I know of will fly the entry to the published distance, and 3) nobody, not ATC or any body else, actually cares how you get into the holding pattern. Heck, even the ACS doesn't require you use the recommended technique. Just that you use an "appropriate" entry.

AIM 5-4-9 (page 5-4-30)
Reference the PT, “The maneuver must be completed within the distance provided in the profile view.”
Reference HILPT, says “the specified leg length / timing must not be exceeded”.

Instrument Flying Handbook (page 10-13)
Reference DME Holding, “The same entry and holding procedures apply to DME holding, but the distances (nautical miles) are used instead of time values.”

 

[midlifeflyer]

AIM 5-4-9 (page 5-4-30)
Reference the PT, “The maneuver must be completed within the distance provided in the profile view.”
Reference HILPT, says “the specified leg length / timing must not be exceeded”.

Instrument Flying Handbook (page 10-13)
Reference DME Holding, “The same entry and holding procedures apply to DME holding, but the distances (nautical miles) are used instead of time values.”

I agree with you that’s the applicable language, not the language describing timing the outbound leg of a holding pattern that is based on timing rather than distance.

 

[Clip4]

I agree with you that’s the applicable language, not the language describing timing the outbound leg of a holding pattern that is based on timing rather than distance.

I don’t know how they could make it any clearer. The “and holding” may be removed and the sentence stands on its own.

The same entry procedures apply to DME holding, but the distances (nautical miles) are used instead of time values.”

 

[midlifeflyer]

I don’t know how they could make it any clearer. The “and holding” may be removed and the sentence stands on its own.

The same entry procedures apply to DME holding, but the distances (nautical miles) are used instead of time values.”

and yet there are those who insist the 1 minute is the only proper entry.

Go figure. Personally, I think the attitude that the rules don’t make sense is at work.

 

[geezer]

If you are hand flying, the mile based limits can be used to allow refreshing your brief of obstacles near the approach path, and stepdown fix altitudes.

Maybe even noting that there are potato plant smoke stacks very near the ILS inbound.

If the weather conditions imply even a slight possibility of a missed, re read the missed instruction. At the missed point is too late to check the chart. Yes, I know you studied that before departure............ but do you remember all of it?

If you are ready for the approach, one minute is the way to go. IF. Decide while on the cruise portion of the flight which you need to do, and be ready with the correct times for the intended speed.

The Geezer never flew actual instrument with an autopilot, or instrument rated co pilot.

 

[sourdough44]

Sometimes I’ll a little embedded in the ‘do whatever it takes camp’. Those methods aren’t always delineated in the book.
As a related aside, one should be staying within the holding airspace, sorta a given. Most bugsmasher training aircraft don’t go that fast, then we have the holding airspeeds.


Say one has a serious overshooting or undershoot wind at the holding altitude, could be an issue.
Entering a hold defined by DME, one should have a way to identify and abide by that. The same can be said about entering a hold with timing.

I wouldn’t have a problem with the CFI wanting a 1 minute teardrop, I do agree, there are other ‘correct’ ways to do the entry.

 

[sonopoa]

5nm hold ? Are you flying an airbus?

Icao hold has 1 min legs. If you fly at 120 knots that is 2nm no wind