When should pilot join holding pattern?

[jungping]

Suppose you are being radar vectored to ILS final approach course, runway 09.
The initial approach fix(IAF) of the ILS approach is at 14 nm west of airport, and there is a holding pattern depicted at IAF(west direction). And you are at 40 nm southeast of airport(e.g. 140 radial 40 nm from the airport).
Now you are cleared to direct to IAF, and also cleared for ILS approach runway 09.
My question is what you will do when you reach IAF? You will proceed ILS approach or you will join holding pattern then when you pass the IAF the 2nd time you proceed ILS approach?
Under what circumstances should pilot join holding pattern and then proceed ILS approach?(exclude altitude too high)

[TopBunk]

In my view, you have been cleared laterally to the IAF and then the ILS. Laterally that is what I would do. Vertically, you may not yet be cleared to a low enough level to successfully complete the vertical profile.

Two scenarios then result:

(1) You request and obtain appropriate levels to perform the manoeuvre, so do it.

(2) You aren't given the appropriate levels and still have communications, in which case
a. firstly manage the energy equation - ie slow down to allow a later (but still safe) descent profile to capture the g/s from above

b. discuss with atc a mutually agreeable course of action (radar vectors back to final, an orbit for sequencing, take up the hold or follow the lateral profile inc the g/a)

If case of comms failure, follow the local procedure, which may well vary from airport to airport and country to country, and will usually involve going to a holding fix and completing a procedural letdown within so many minutes of EAT at holding fix.

Just my thoughts...

[the dean]

if you are being vectored for the ILS you are not going to be '' cleared to the IAF ''.

if you are cleared for '' ILS approach runway 09 ''...then you are cleared for the approach..!!:confused:

you are not going to the hold unless you are instructed to do so but if you have already been cleared for the approach then thats it unless for some reason ATC needs you to break off the approach...in which case you will recieve instructions.

the dean

[jungping]

Sorry, I'll just add one more condition.
Suppose the published recommanded level at IAF is 3000ft, and you have already been cleared to descend to 3000ft and you have no problem at all to reach 3000 before IAF.

[jungping]

if you are being vectored for the ILS you are not going to be '' cleared to the IAF ''.
The controller maybe vector you for a while(e.g. for sequence reason), then when separation is no problem, he may instruct you to "Direct to IAF, Cleared ILS RWY09 approach." Are they contradictory?

[Clandestino]

If I understood correctly, one would be cleared for ILS approach with intercept angle approaching something like 150°. Quite unacceptable according to my ops manual which prohibits self-positioning for approach and restricts maximum intercept angle to 90°but not closer than 12 Nm to threshold. Depending on holding turn, paralel or offset entry would be required to align with LOC.

Check your OM, anyway.

[jungping]

Quite unacceptable according to my ops manual which prohibits self-positioning for approach and restricts maximum intercept angle to 90°but not closer than 12 Nm to threshold.
If you are at 190 radial 40 nm from IAF, intercept angle being 80 degrees now, is it acceptable, then?

[the dean]

jungping,

lets not get confused.

forget what radial you are on....if you are being vectored then this will continue until normally the last vector you get will be for a 30 degree intercept...anything like your example would be too big a heading change (depending on how far you are out ) and not normal to allow you to intercept the localizer yourself without further guidance from radar.

if you are cleared for the approach this will only be given when you are about to capture the localizer or are already on it and then you are cleared for the published approach right to the ground. you may be told to call the marker just to remind approach or tower where you are..

the IAF is normally a term used more with non percision approaches as a reporting point rather than with a precision approach.

perhaps i misunderstand your question...

the dean.

[jungping]

No, you understand my question correctly.

So, it's a matter of intercept angle? As long as the intercept angle is within 30 degrees, the clearance "Direct to IAF, Cleared ILS approach" is OK, and beyond 30 degrees, it's inappropriate or mistaken?

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

In an effort to further confuse the issue::::

You are under radar control.
You are cleared to the IAF.
You are cleared for the ILS.
You are inbound on the 140 radial and the beacon is to the west of the field.
Therefore::::
Fly to the beacon.
Execute the no delay or alternate approach and let down according to the procedure.
(This might usually be..overhead the beacon, outbound,still air, for one minute, left or right hand procedure turn, as published, 45 seconds still air, inbound for the ILS intercept?)
If in doubt, query your intended actions with ATC.
Seems logical enough from this arm chair.
:)

[jungping]

cavortingcheetah,
I'm not sure if you are joking. My english is not very good.

Do you mean the pilot should make a procedure turn (or join holding pattern?) first and then proceed ILS approach?

[PicMas]

hmm...
A few points.
Radarvectors and "cleared to IAF". I understand this clearance as own navigation to the fix, but minimum vectoring altitude applies. This would be in a circumstance where MSA was higher than 3000'.

If you are cleared ILS, you are cleared to do everything depicted on the approach chart. That means (subject to various local regulations) arriving within 30degrees of final approach course, you intercept and join the localizer.

The holding in question, is it really a holding? My guess would be a race-track alignment procedure, that you are required to perform when arriving outside 30 degrees of FAC.

On the Jeppesen chart... Is the holding depicted as a thin or a bold line?

Happy easteregg hunting!!

[jungping]

PicMas,

The MVA is 2000ft, so it's not a problem.

Do you mean if it is a holding pattern, then the pilot can proceed ILS approach after passing IAF (1st time)? And if it is a race-track alignment procedure, the pilot should make a prcedure turn first and after passing IAF the 2nd time, then proceed ILS approach?

[PicMas]

What set of rules do you fly under?
If they follow recommendations from doc8168, and no other instructions are published on the approach chart, you can intercept a the initial segment (begins at IAF) at a max angle of 90 degrees. (120 degrees for nonp.)
Furthermore, just because there is a holding pattern depicted over the IAF does not mean that you must "take a turn in the hold". If you need to align yourself it's regarded as a racetrack.
So to answer your question:
Doesn't matter if its racetrack or holding, it depends on your TRACK to the IAF, if nothing is published and you are within 90degrees you can pass the IAF and the proceed inbound. If a "For arrivals with in 30 degrees of yadda yadda..." is published then you must arrive with in 30 degrees OR use the course reversal depicted - may be a racetrack or a procedure turn.
In the case where there may be doubt, I would probably add a "direct inbound" or "IAF outbound" in the R/T as appropriate - just to keep the controller in the loop.

[jungping]

PicMas,

Sorry for my reply this late.
Frankly, I was hoping someone else can reply first.

I'm actually a radar controller, not a pilot.

From my experience(it's about 20 years), no pilot will take a turn in the hold in the scenerio of my example. (The intercept angle is no doubt more than 130 degrees.)

In all these years, Just recently, only one pilot did question me about whether he should take a turn in the hold since the intercept angle was over 30 degrees. Since I did not know the correct answer, so I revectored him to final approach course, to escape his question.

I think you are probably right. But I'm still wondering why only one pilot ever questioned me about it, and all other pilots didn't hesitate to proceed ILS approach after passing IAF.

Thanks for your reply.