IR checkride -unpublished holds

M

misteryan

Ejection Handle Pulled
Joined
Aug 24, 2020
Messages
62
Display Name
Display name:
misteryan
Hi all,

Can the examiner give you an unpublished hold on the IR checkride? I know they can't give you unpublished DME arcs, and I don't believe they can give you an unpublished hold either, but I was hoping someone could confirm.

Thanks,
- Yan
 
I assume they can. Just like ATC can.

What's the issue? You know how to copy and fly a hold, right?
 
I assume the can also. I have seen that as an issue when prepping some students for the checkride. They can’t just plug the hold into the GPS and fly it. But in practice I don’t recall an examiner ever doing so at least during the flight portion. They may give one during the oral to see if you understand it.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Well, my instructor gave me lots of unpublished holds when I was doing my training, We did a lot of unpublished arcs also. Don’t see why it would be a problem if the DPE decided to give one on the checkride. ATC certainly can give holding instructions any time they want.

I was doing my 6 approaches for currency through the Marine Layer at Half Moon Bay (KHAF) a few weeks ago. Another guy was doing the same thing. ATC told him to hold at GOBBS, stay within 5nm. The guy came back and asked what radial. ATC told him his choice, just stay within 5 miles. That was certainly an unpublished (and very relaxed) hold.
 
misteryan said:
Hi all,

Can the examiner give you an unpublished hold on the IR checkride? I know they can't give you unpublished DME arcs, and I don't believe they can give you an unpublished hold either, but I was hoping someone could confirm.

Thanks,
- Yan
Click to expand...

Yes, they can give you unpublished holds. Our local DPE does exactly that. I've heard there are also a few that do unpublished DME arcs.
 
Htaylor said:
Yes, they can give you unpublished holds. Our local DPE does exactly that. I've heard there are also a few that do unpublished DME arcs.
Click to expand...
See the one thing I've heard explicitly is that they cannot give you an unpublished DME arc on the checkride.
 
Whatever you get, you get. Just take your time and do it correctly.
 
Why not? It shouldn't be a problem. My instructor gave me lots of unpublished holds to practice situational awareness. Can't remember if I had one on my checkride or not, but it wouldn't have surprised me if I was asked to hold on the XXX radial of a VOR during the ride.
 
misteryan said:
See the one thing I've heard explicitly is that they cannot give you an unpublished DME arc on the checkride.
Click to expand...


If I could make a gentle suggestion, you might want to go to the actual source material instead of the “I’ve heard” method of knowledge acquisition.

The Instrument rating ACS can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/media/instrument_rating_acs_change_1.pdf

Here’s what it says about DME arcs:

d2264bb451068dcbf1a5c53c247a28a9.jpg


I don’t see anything there which would prevent a DPE from making up an arc and having you fly it. The ACS also references AC 61-98 : https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-98D.pdf which gives guidence on flight reviews. I just scanned that document, but I didn’t see anything in my brief scan which indicated that a DPE can’t give an unpublished arc.
The ACS also references FAR 61.65.

When I did my IR practical test, they were still using the PTS, so I’m not all that familar with the ACS, so I may have missed something. The point is that I would suggest that a candidate for any certificate or rating, but especially one of the more advanced ratings like the instrument, commercial, etc., learn how to find and use source material for their knowledge. You’ll be much more confident and prepared if you know the playbook that the DPE is going from.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Task V. A. doesn’t say anything about requiring published arcs.

edit: missed it by that much. ;)
Click to expand...

No, but Appendix 7 does. " [DME arcs] may be selected for testing only if they are charted and available."

Which makes sense. How often does ATC issue an uncharted DME arc? Does that ever happen?
 
RussR said:
No, but Appendix 7 does. " [DME arcs] may be selected for testing only if they are charted and available."

Which makes sense. How often does ATC issue an uncharted DME arc? Does that ever happen?
Click to expand...
yup...I thought I looked at that, but it must’ve been a different section that I misread.:oops:

edit...there’s no link for Appendix 7 in Task V. A...that’s why I missed it.
 
Last edited:
jimhorner said:
If I could make a gentle suggestion, you might want to go to the actual source material instead of the “I’ve heard” method of knowledge acquisition.

The Instrument rating ACS can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/media/instrument_rating_acs_change_1.pdf

Here’s what it says about DME arcs:

d2264bb451068dcbf1a5c53c247a28a9.jpg


I don’t see anything there which would prevent a DPE from making up an arc and having you fly it. The ACS also references AC 61-98 : https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-98D.pdf which gives guidence on flight reviews. I just scanned that document, but I didn’t see anything in my brief scan which indicated that a DPE can’t give an unpublished arc.
The ACS also references FAR 61.65.

When I did my IR practical test, they were still using the PTS, so I’m not all that familar with the ACS, so I may have missed something. The point is that I would suggest that a candidate for any certificate or rating, but especially one of the more advanced ratings like the instrument, commercial, etc., learn how to find and use source material for their knowledge. You’ll be much more confident and prepared if you know the playbook that the DPE is going from.
Click to expand...

The OP wanted to know about unpublished holds. They can be given. I don't know how to copy and paste the way youdid. I just end up with raw text that looks like crap. It's III B. on page 10. Can you post that for @misteryan
 
luvflyin said:
The OP wanted to know about unpublished holds. They can be given. I don't know how to copy and paste the way youdid. I just end up with raw text that looks like crap. It's III B. on page 10. Can you post that for @misteryan
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was reacting to his “heard they can’t give unpublished arcs”. Same thing for the holds, of course. I didn’t see anything in my quick glance in the ACS that says anything about unpublished vs published for arcs, and the holding task specifically mentions unpublished holds.

I was also trying to gently encourage the OP to seek out the primary source material himself. Much better to go there than to rely on word of mouth. Anyway, per your request, here’s the holding task.

BTW, nothing magic about how I display this. It’s a screen dump!
8e3247cf9e6ae7ee2ee06e1d288f8ff8.jpg
 
RussR said:
No, but Appendix 7 does. " [DME arcs] may be selected for testing only if they are charted and available."

Which makes sense. How often does ATC issue an uncharted DME arc? Does that ever happen?
Click to expand...

How bout that. Completely missed that. Guess the OP’s word of mouth source was correct! :) My instructor certainly gave me plenty of DME arcs that he made up on the spur of the moment. “Intercept the Modesto VOR radial xxx and fly a yy DME arc centered around the VOR from radial xxx to zzz.” Lots of situations like that. All fun. Nowdays if I’m on an approach with a DME arc, I just let George do the work. Lazy me...

3a635e293e0c61d60ef77c3effcd678f.jpg
 
jimhorner said:
How bout that. Completely missed that. Guess the OP’s word of mouth source was correct! :) My instructor certainly gave me plenty of DME arcs that he made up on the spur of the moment. “Intercept the Modesto VOR radial xxx and fly a yy DME arc centered around the VOR from radial xxx to zzz.” Lots of situations like that. All fun. Nowdays if I’m on an approach with a DME arc, I just let George do the work. Lazy me...

3a635e293e0c61d60ef77c3effcd678f.jpg
Click to expand...
Yeah, I heard it from a pretty reliable source, but I very much appreciate the specific reference.
 
jimhorner said:
Yeah, I was reacting to his “heard they can’t give unpublished arcs”. Same thing for the holds, of course. I didn’t see anything in my quick glance in the ACS that says anything about unpublished vs published for arcs, and the holding task specifically mentions unpublished holds.

I was also trying to gently encourage the OP to seek out the primary source material himself. Much better to go there than to rely on word of mouth. Anyway, per your request, here’s the holding task.

BTW, nothing magic about how I display this. It’s a screen dump!
8e3247cf9e6ae7ee2ee06e1d288f8ff8.jpg
Click to expand...

I thought about that after I posted, that you had given the the link to go find it. Screen Dump? How do you do that? Laptop, IPad?
 
luvflyin said:
I thought about that after I posted, that you had given the the link to go find it. Screen Dump? How do you do that? Laptop, IPad?
Click to expand...

ipad. But PC would also work. Just took a screen capture of the relevant page, cropped and saved the picture and then inserted the pic into the post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
It's an option. I usually assign published holds that are part of an approach or Missed, mostly so that if the applicant screws it up, they can't try to claim that they mis understood my description of the unbpublished hold.
 
I once had an examiner give me something to the effect of, “Hold northwest of the XYZ VOR 220 radial, 20-mile fix.”

He wouldn’t believe that (especially without area nav of some sort) it wasn’t a legit holding instruction.
 
ATC can give you an unpublished hold in real life. Might as well make it fair game for the test.

At least a week or two before any checkride, read the ACS all the way through and make sure you’re ready for everything in it.
 
Fwiw....DPE's are not some FAA god who know every minutiae of every rule. I was asked to do an unpublished arc on my checkride yesterday. I was surprised, but we did one in prep so it was no big deal. According to my cfii, they do them on checkrides at the 141 school as well. I suppose I could've argued, but I suspect it would've made something else harder.

Definitely be prepared for an unpublished, but also realize there's a published hold on every iap, so it's a lot easier to use one of those, especially in the interest of time.
 
Agree with all - have had an unpubliushed hold from ATC. Was told "hold 15nm south of the xyz VOR on the 180 radial, EFC, 10 min past the hour, time now xxx." I asked for 10nm legs and was given such. Slowed the airplane down to 120kts and made one lap around and was cleared onward.
 
RussR said:
Pedant alert -

Not every.

Almost every.

Example - HSD VOR RWY 18: https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2009/pdf/06749V18.PDF

(Not a charting error.)
Click to expand...

That’s interesting. I guess AIM 5-3-8(c) would apply in this case.


c. If no holding pattern is charted and holding instructions have not been issued, the pilot should ask ATC for holding instructions prior to reaching the fix. This procedure will eliminate the possibility of an aircraft entering a holding pattern other than that desired by ATC. If unable to obtain holding instructions prior to reaching the fix (due to frequency congestion, stuck microphone, etc.), then enter a standard pattern on the course on which the aircraft approached the fix and request further clearance as soon as possible. In this event, the altitude/flight level of the aircraft at the clearance limit will be protected so that separation will be provided as required.
 
Last edited:
Jim K said:
Fwiw....DPE's are not some FAA god who know every minutiae of every rule. I was asked to do an unpublished arc on my checkride yesterday. I was surprised, but we did one in prep so it was no big deal. According to my cfii, they do them on checkrides at the 141 school as well. I suppose I could've argued, but I suspect it would've made something else harder.

Definitely be prepared for an unpublished, but also realize there's a published hold on every iap, so it's a lot easier to use one of those, especially in the interest of time.
Click to expand...

I think ya outta call him on it. Look, the rules say you ain’t supposed to be giving unpublished arcs, just sign me off or I’m gonna rat you out.:biggrin:

EDIT: Disregard, I see you got it done. Congrats
 
ateamer said:
ATC can give you an unpublished hold in real life.
Click to expand...
They are quite common, actually. At least for faster, high-altitude airplanes. Typically when a route or arrival starts backing up. ATC will assign a random hold at a convenient fix on your flight plan if no published hold is readily available.
 
Larry in TN said:
They are quite common, actually. At least for faster, high-altitude airplanes. Typically when a route or arrival starts backing up. ATC will assign a random hold at a convenient fix on your flight plan if no published hold is readily available.
Click to expand...
...which is often easier than “as published”, because it’s normally “on your inbound course”.
 
luvflyin said:
Never seen that before. Do you have any idea why? It’s in the Amendment process, scheduled publication 12/02/2021
Click to expand...

Holding is required on missed approach procedures - now. But in the past, it was not - prior to 2007 it was usually (in most all cases) established, but really the only requirement was that the missed approach routing connect you back to the enroute structure, OR have holding. So in the HSD example, the IRW VORTAC is on various airways, so holding was not necessary - you could proceed along the airway to fly somewhere else or navigate back for the approach again. If the last time the procedure received a major amendment (a new "number" in the amendment, like Amdt 1 to Amdt 2) was prior to 2007, it was designed before holding was a requirement.

Obviously this causes weird situations and raises a lot of questions, which is why I think the requirement was added.

Here is the pre-2007 text from FAAO 8260.19C:

upload_2020-9-1_12-54-23.png

Here is the current text (FAAO 8260.19H):

upload_2020-9-1_12-55-16.png
 
RussR said:
Holding is required on missed approach procedures - now. But in the past, it was not - prior to 2007 it was usually (in most all cases) established, but really the only requirement was that the missed approach routing connect you back to the enroute structure, OR have holding. So in the HSD example, the IRW VORTAC is on various airways, so holding was not necessary - you could proceed along the airway to fly somewhere else or navigate back for the approach again. If the last time the procedure received a major amendment (a new "number" in the amendment, like Amdt 1 to Amdt 2) was prior to 2007, it was designed before holding was a requirement.

Obviously this causes weird situations and raises a lot of questions, which is why I think the requirement was added.

Here is the pre-2007 text from FAAO 8260.19C:

View attachment 89408

Here is the current text (FAAO 8260.19H):

View attachment 89409
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks. It's had Amendments since 2007 but guess they just didn't want to mess around with it. Doesn't really seem like it would have been a big deal, like needing an obstacle survey or Flight Check. That would have already been done to comply with "...in the latter case, ensure that holding on the missed approach course that leads to the fix is satisfactory..."
 
luvflyin said:
Ah, thanks. It's had Amendments since 2007 but guess they just didn't want to mess around with it. Doesn't really seem like it would have been a big deal, like needing an obstacle survey or Flight Check. That would have already been done to comply with "...in the latter case, ensure that holding on the missed approach course that leads to the fix is satisfactory..."
Click to expand...

Adding a holding pattern requires a flight check. In the HSD example, it has received only "minor" amendments 6 times since the last major amendment (it's Amdt 1F, so Amdt 1 was a major amendment, then 1A is a minor amendment, then 1B, etc. The next major amendment would be Amdt 2). And Amdt 1 was pretty long ago - about 20 years is my guess.

This is a local procedure to me, so I know a little more about it than one somewhere else. One of the most recent minor amendments was to renumber it from runway 17 to 18. Another recent one was to raise the segment IFI to PULTZ altitude from 3000 to 3100 due to a new antenna tower at 2046 MSL. This procedure has had the same basic design for a long time. If for other reasons it needs a redesign that meets the requirements of a major amendment, the holding pattern would likely be added at that time. And if there was a request by local pilots or user groups or NBAA/AOPA/airlines/etc to add one, it would likely be as well. But I don't hear many complaints in my flying and CFI work about "there needs to be holding here!" (likely most people don't even notice), so it stays like it is until there is a real need to update it.
 
RussR said:
Adding a holding pattern requires a flight check. In the HSD example, it has received only "minor" amendments 6 times since the last major amendment (it's Amdt 1F, so Amdt 1 was a major amendment, then 1A is a minor amendment, then 1B, etc. The next major amendment would be Amdt 2). And Amdt 1 was pretty long ago - about 20 years is my guess.

This is a local procedure to me, so I know a little more about it than one somewhere else. One of the most recent minor amendments was to renumber it from runway 17 to 18. Another recent one was to raise the segment IFI to PULTZ altitude from 3000 to 3100 due to a new antenna tower at 2046 MSL. This procedure has had the same basic design for a long time. If for other reasons it needs a redesign that meets the requirements of a major amendment, the holding pattern would likely be added at that time. And if there was a request by local pilots or user groups or NBAA/AOPA/airlines/etc to add one, it would likely be as well. But I don't hear many complaints in my flying and CFI work about "there needs to be holding here!" (likely most people don't even notice), so it stays like it is until there is a real need to update it.
Click to expand...

Yeah. No squeak, no grease. The Amendment in progress is 2 according to the IFP Gateway. Thanks for the info
 
Looks like this was sussed out with a few revolutions through the collective. Just to add a little extra commentary...

The note in Appendix 7 are the guidance which precludes the assignment of "unpublished" (for lack of better description) DME arcs during an Instrument Rating practical test. However, the expectation is that the applicant is knowledgeable about DME arcs and can fly them. This is evidenced by the fact that task V.A. "Intercepting and Tracking Navigational Systems and Arcs" remains in the ACS, so instructors need to be sure their students are proficient at this task.

In the particular part of the northeast where I conduct the majority of my checkrides there aren't any suitably convenient DME arcs for use, but when I travel I tend to look for one just to keep things somewhat unpredictable and random. I've used the DAB ILS 7L a few times over the past few years as Florida is still "home" to my heart.

Unpublished holds are, of course, fair game. Task III.B. makes that clear by referencing "standard, nonstandard, published, and nonpublished holding patterns." The ACS is your friend!

I randomize my holding instructions on every checkride so no two are the same. I've given unpublished holds, holds with DME legs, holds at an IAF on an ILS, holds on the missed approach, holds at GPS waypoints, holds directly over ground-based navaids. It's all fair game and frankly it's pretty realistic -- be prepared for any combination.
 
Ryan F. said:
Looks like this was sussed out with a few revolutions through the collective. Just to add a little extra commentary...

The note in Appendix 7 are the guidance which precludes the assignment of "unpublished" (for lack of better description) DME arcs during an Instrument Rating practical test. However, the expectation is that the applicant is knowledgeable about DME arcs and can fly them. This is evidenced by the fact that task V.A. "Intercepting and Tracking Navigational Systems and Arcs" remains in the ACS, so instructors need to be sure their students are proficient at this task.

In the particular part of the northeast where I conduct the majority of my checkrides there aren't any suitably convenient DME arcs for use, but when I travel I tend to look for one just to keep things somewhat unpredictable and random. I've used the DAB ILS 7L a few times over the past few years as Florida is still "home" to my heart.

Unpublished holds are, of course, fair game. Task III.B. makes that clear by referencing "standard, nonstandard, published, and nonpublished holding patterns." The ACS is your friend!

I randomize my holding instructions on every checkride so no two are the same. I've given unpublished holds, holds with DME legs, holds at an IAF on an ILS, holds on the missed approach, holds at GPS waypoints, holds directly over ground-based navaids. It's all fair game and frankly it's pretty realistic -- be prepared for any combination.
Click to expand...

Do you know why unpublished DME Arcs aren’t allowed during a checkride. I can’t think of a reason to bar them. Is there some history behind it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top