"New" holding procedures

[Easy Street]

[:8]

A few questions for all the IREs out there. Several UK military airfields now have TACAN holds which specify joins via the inbound radial or the outbound fix only.

1) Is it correct that civil rules have always specified this technique for joining holds that are defined by a fix? So was it only the military that performed Sector 1, 2 or 3 joins onto a fix-defined hold?

2) I have heard some people say that Sector 1, 2 and 3 joins are becoming history. Is this true? My reading of the ICAO rules leads me to believe that those joins still apply where the hold is defined by the navaid itself.

3) If we no longer need to navigate accurately directly to a fix (because we can join a radial and track it to the fix, or track directly towards the navaid), is there any longer a need for the black art of 'point-to-point' navigation based on the tail of the RMI pointer? If so, that will be a hard one for the crusty old generation of QFIs to let go!

4) The fastest holding speed (in non-turbulent conditions) under ICAO seems to be 230kts. Is there a reference somewhere that permits routine holding at 250kts in PANS-OPS, MIPS or TERPS holds? I'm aware of the HPMA specification but that only applies to specifically-labelled procedures, which I have seen in some European countries but not in the UK.

[/:8]

[BEagle]

1) Yes.

2) No, they are not becoming history.

3) Point-to-point TACAN is fine for pilot navigation in Class G airspace, but not for holding procedures.

4) 250KIAS is OK above FL200, or in turbulence with ATC approval, or in certain circumstances associated with airways holding. See the table in the FIH ('yellow book').

The technique of attempting to fly point-to-point to join a place/bearing/distance fix was always something which used to cause arguments! Particularly when the fix was very close to the TACAN itself. The USAF had a good rule of thumb which said that if DME (in miles) was less than height (in thousands of feet), you couldn't trust it. E.g. if trying to join a 260/3 fix at FL40. The requirements for TACAN joins at a place/bearing/distance fix should be the same as for VOR/DME place/bearing/distance fixes, which are stated in the FIH thus:

For holding on a VOR/DME fix, the entry track is limited to either the VOR radial, DME arc, or alternatively along the entry radial to a VOR/DME fix at the end of the outbound leg, as published.

DME Arc Entry.

Having reached the fix the aircraft shall enter the holding pattern in accordance with either the Sector 1 or Sector 3 entry procedure. Note - A DME arc entry procedure is specified only when there is a specific operational difficulty which precludes the use of other entry procedures. Entry Procedure for VOR/DME and TACAN Holding.

If an entry radial to a secondary fix at the end of the outbound leg of a VOR/DME and TACAN holding pattern is specified (Figures 2 and 3), Sector 1 and Sector 2 entries are not authorized. The holding pattern shall be entered directly using the published entry radial or the Sector 3 entry procedure. Having reached the fix, the aircraft shall be turned to follow the holding pattern.

Note: Where a special entry procedure is used, the entry radial is clearly depicted.

Yet crusty old 'point-to-point' TACAN gurus used to attempt to use such fixes as if they were actual beacons. When I took over as IRE, I insisted on the correct procedures as per the FIH - which some old duffers thought "made things too easy"......:rolleyes:

The FIH used to provide an excellent summary of the requirements. I presume it still does?

[Easy Street]

Yes, it is still there in the FIH. The fact that the military procedures use TACAN fixes rather than VOR/DME fixes has probably encouraged people to believe that these paragraphs do not apply to them.

Until the current overhaul is complete, the majority of military airfields still have a hold defined by a fix, with no outbound entry radial specified. Where no DME arc entry is specified, I now understand that these holds should only be entered on the inbound radial. I'm at a loss to know why the sector joins to fixes have been so religiously taught at every stage of training - my BFT, AFT and OCU instructors all actively penalised 'fudging' the join to achieve a sector 3, when it appears all along that that was the only permitted course of action!

[VinRouge]

Probably because the training system struggles to determine the capacity level of the student without resorting to inane techniques that arenas from best practice. Mdr winds during flight? Sod off, think I will china graph them on my map before I launch thanks.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Unfortunately, too many people seem to have misunderstood the new holding procedures, and spent up to three years shambling around without direction or purpose...

[Easy Street]

The 'old' military holds are depicted by AIDU thus:

http://s16.postimage.org/mm0cwv62d/Hold2.png

The presence of the sector markings (150/330) implies that even AIDU expected the sector joins to be flown. No wonder everyone disregarded the direction in the FIH. The new holds are shown thus:

http://s10.postimage.org/mv6drxbyx/hold5.png

and they come with explicit instructions in the notes that e.g. "hold entries are restricted to the 072 radial inbound and via the 286 radial / 10 DME outbound". It is almost like the rules are having to be written on each TAP in order to get the recalcitrant to follow correct procedures!

I think it's clear why so many are confused right now. I think some definitive instruction needs to be issued by CFS, to the tune of "the procedures in the FIH are the law and apply to all TACAN holds", to accompany the revised procedures!

[BEagle]

A typically daft hold. OK if using some system overlay which eliminates slant range errors, but as published, an aircraft with basic TACAN holding at FL80 on a low pressure day would actually see a range of about 3.4 miles when overhead the 3d fix..... If the pilot waited until he/she saw 3.0 miles before turning, he would in fact be at 0.5d beyond the fix, thanks to slant range error......

Why so high / close?

The old Valley Point Alpha is perhaps a legacy of Gnat days when it could set up as a TACAN offset point as 220/14, giving 'pseudo-overhead' indications at the fix - hence it would be possible to make sector entries? Although anyone risking such a comment in those days would probably have found themselves on a one-way train to Oakington PDQ!

I have an old 'Jet Instrument Approach Chart' for Valley, dated 5 Aug 1954. Initial approach to overhead the CR DF ('Homer' on 110.98 Mc/s) not below 12000 ft. Track outbound on 020° to 'half initial approach altitude plus 2000 ft, then turn left and fly inbound to make good a track of 190°. Then a 'check altitude' of 2000 ft followed by a minimum approach altitude of 600 ft.... Variation was 11°W, so it must have been quite sporting trying to get in on RW 14 on minima.....:eek:

[Dan Winterland]

Wot BEagle said. Except for a couple of minor points:

Q1: A hold defined by a radial/DME distance should ony be entered along the radial/localizer or a published DME arc. Was always so, regardless of civil/military. Except the the RAF IREs who liked to prove they were better than everyone else liked to insist on fix joins from any angle.

Q2: No - as you said. As nearly every pilot with the exception of a few flying steam driven aircraft on manually selected Navaids on tests will be flying with a FMC where a hold is entered with a couple of button pushes. All joins are easy.

Q3: No point - aprat from tests and the RAF where everything has to be hard. But as BEagle said, you won't be doing point to point in real life - you aren't allowed as most procedures in real life are RNAV procedures these days.

Q4: The max hold speed can be defiened by PANSOPS/TERPS or national variations. But if you want to hold at a higher speed for operational reasons, just ask. If above and within MSA, you will be safe.

[BEagle]

....Except the the RAF IREs who liked to prove they were better than everyone else liked to insist on fix joins from any angle.

Well, I never insisted on you doing that on the '10, Dan! A certain D**k E***s tried to insist on such bolleaux when I was doing my retread course after UAS days. He then went to the galley to make some tea and was suprised to note that I was positioning to join along the defining radial (this was pre-FMS days), rather than aiming at f*** all with f*** all! Of course it helped having been the squadron IRE on a previous tour, so after a 'discussion' he accepted my view.

Mind you, the CAA were even kinder. My 'observed' IR on the '10 included a radar vectored ILS at Lyneham on RW25, then an NDB join, hold and asymmetric NDB on RW26 at Brize. But instead of insisting on a direct transit, followed by an appropriate sector entry and join, the IRE was perfectly happy to allow me to poke off north, then turn to join on the precise sector 3 holding course...:ok: Nice chap!! A shame that such things are no longer possible though...:uhoh:

[Dan Winterland]

Sorry BEags - I should have emphasised that I wasn't referring to ALL the RAF IREs. If I recall correctly, my last IRT in the RAF was with you - with a CAAFU examiner on the jump seat. Snake had kindly drawn the hold on the ND for me and I entered it with a sector three join down the inbound radial. You and the CAAFU examiner said nothing!

[BEagle]

I think so, Dan! 30 Mar 2000 in ZA148?

Some IR though - 5:30 including 6 prods for me as it was an AARI check on another pilot as well. Then back for your IR, then his? CAA Examiner seemed to enjoy himself!

[Dan Winterland]

That's it! Seem to remember I started it in the RHS, then it was my AARI check on MH to requalify him, then his IRT. Then I finished my IRT in the LHS. Can't be many pilots around who have done their initial IRT from both seats. the CAAFU guy had never seen AAR. Might have helped my score!

[llamaman]

Prize for dullest thread of 2012? The crazy world of holding, IRTs and AAR - bonkers!

[BEagle]

Not as boring as all that helicopter stuff you used to post about, llamaman.

No-one is forcing you to discuss holding procedures, so perhaps you might wish to $od off elsewhere?

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

Insert desired holding point into FMS.
"/H".
Insert inbound radial.
Choose L or R for direction of hold.
Execute.
Simples!

[Willard Whyte]

The last nav at waddo who gave a sh1t about this sh1t no longer gives a sh1t, I can say with a fair degree of certainty.

(It's not sh1t, but I spent too long banging my head against the nearest solid object when my 'suggestions' on procedural work were ignored in favour of a tourettes like response from the front seats of "radar vectored ILS" to the ATC question of what approach we'd like.)

[VinRouge]

unfortunately, despite the pointlesness of manually flown holds, (and flying a type that flys an fms hold, to be followed by my next type flying fms holds) the caa still give a $hit about examining holds on the cpl(ir), so a few of us on here may be interested in finding out areas where the mil thinks it knows more than it does.

[Al-bert]

Thank you gentlemen. You've reminded me why I don't miss flying! :*

[BEagle]

I'm quite sure you don't miss the clattering vibration, squalor and hemorrhoids of your sort of 'flying'....

So feel free to leave this thread to those professionals who are interested in the correct techniques for flying holding procedures.

[Al-bert]

Whatever turns you on Beagle, I say again whatever........and btw, it's haemorrhoids Beagle, a pain in the arse, like holding patterns.
Perhaps you should leave big words and sarcasm to the professionals? :E

[wiggy]

Trouble is Beags, (and I know as an ex IRE I'm about to utter heresy), there's a danger of turning things into art forms that are not worthy of the same.

For many of us now the now approved method of entering the hold, even with a CAA checker sat behind you in the sim, as well as your company's own approved examiner (as happened to me recently, deep joy) , is to select where you want to hold in the FMC, type the inbound Course and whether it's a left or right pattern in the box and execute........and in all honesty in the real world when the chips are down ( yes, even in the States :sad:) as long as your join keeps you in the protected area they really don't care about how you do so.................

It may not help people pass the CPL IR and I know what has to be taught has to be taught, but ..............

[BEagle]

...there's a danger of turning things into art forms that are not worthy of the same.

I couldn't agree more, wiggy! My aim was always K.I.S.S. when teaching applied instrument procedures. Whereas some of the stuff spouted by old Varsity QFIs and the Kidlington dinosaurs who tried to make the NDB hold an art form with their 'gates' etc..... "Remember, the NDB is a non-precision system" was my mantra.

One old duffer used to have some complicated trigonometrical solution for working out the time to turn after the overhead at the limits of Sector 3 joins. To which the rest of us would say "Just count a couple of crocodiles, turn, then restart the watch when you go abeam. Then refine it when you're next inbound to the beacon!"

I have to say that teaching this stuff was not my favourite activity!

[VinRouge]

Trouble is Beags, (and I know as an ex IRE I'm about to utter heresy), there's a danger of turning things into art forms that are not worthy of the same.

Shame no-one told cfs this otherwise we would have been point to point for a sector 3 when the royal flying corps invented holding!

[Easy Street]

I can safely say that no RAF FJ or basic training types can enter a hold by punching buttons on a FMS. Therefore the manual way of doing it is of some small interest to a few of us! BEagle, thankyou for your patience in answering; with any luck a bit more KISS will be forthcoming from the CIREs out there when the 'new' holds are universally applied.

All IRT candidates out there, particularly those in the clutches of 22 Gp - join your next hold straight in and if the IRE pulls you up on it, point him at the FIH! The holding revolution starts here! :p

[Courtney Mil]

Point to point to the fix. Use the appropriate turn for the sector. Apply 4 x the drift on the inbound leg. I think that's what I tought as an IRE. Not hard.

Give me a PAR any day.

[ExAdvert]

Er... isn't it 1x the drift inbound & 3x drift outbound? At least that's what I was taught & what I used on my civvie IR a couple of weeks ago (& the examiner seemed quite happy).

Standing by to be corrected & chastised for being a saddo...:rolleyes:

[Courtney Mil]

Sounds like it would work.

[BEagle]

Knowing that old bugger Courtney, I suspect his '4xdrift inbound' was a spoof....;)

If not, it was utter bolleaux!

[Courtney Mil]

Beags,

Never said this before, but I have to pick you up on a point of order. The phrase you were looking for is "Complete and utter balleaux".

Apart from that, 4 x the drift was the taught technique on the F4 IRE course in January 1985. That said, I never saw anyone use it. The REAL technique was fly the headings on the plate and fudge it on the inbound leg to hit the fix.

You couldn't do it in a jet that didn't tell you drift and you didn't need to in a jet that did. Hence, you're absolutely right, is was complete and utter bolleaux.

Anyway, am I right in thinking the approved technique for flyers of airliners is:

4 across on the inbound leg?:E

As ever,

Courtney

[BEagle]

Anyway, am I right in thinking the approved technique for flyers of airliners is:

4 across on the inbound leg?

Nope, it sure as $hit isn't, you little rascal!

Apply 1 x drift inbound (when you think about it, you fly the heading which corresponds to the inbound track, so it's just like normal pilot navigation).

Because you fly the 2 turns at 25° AoB or Rate 1 (whichever needs less bank), no drift compensation is used during the minute-ish of each turn. So, to compensate, 3 x drift outbound is used, so that hopefully after turning back inbound you'll end up pretty well on the defining inbound course.

I used to hate this stuff!

At least TACAN holds are also defined by DME, so you don't have the added mental faff of the '4 minute hold' for which to try to compensate.....

[Courtney Mil]

Chuckles quietly. Is 25° AoB a rate one turn? Exactly?

OK 4 down then. That's always an easy one in the DM.

I didn't invent the technique, but what's the difference. Four elemnts to the hold, so somewhere you have to a add 4 x the drift. To be honest, I can't defend this way of doing it, re my previous post. If you've got good kit, you don't really need to worry about it. And let's face it, eve the F3 could cope with that on its own.

But when the kit's broken or the Co's finish the crossword, I'll bet my idea will work.

If anyone ever bothered with it.

If I have any more good ideas, I'll let you know. :ok::ok::ok::ok:

[BEagle]

If you've got good kit, you don't really need to worry about it.

Well, quite so - you just programme the hold into the FMS and command the jet to enter....

1 x drift inbound, 3 x drift outbound worked in both the VC10 and the Piper Cherokee.

As for the AoB which gives Rate One, it's θ = arc tan 0.0027463 V, where V is the TAS in knots. So at 210KTAS it would be 30°, hence you'd use 25° for the turns. Whereas at 90KTAS, Rate One would be 14°, so that's what you'd use. At 170KTAS, Rate One equates exactly to 25° AoB....

:rolleyes:

[Courtney Mil]

Knowing the RAF's commitment to making everything as hard as possible (just to prove you can do it), I'm surprised they let you use FMS on IRTs. Just the turn needle and E3B :E