Busted IFR Checkride

[Jon Kraus]

Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
More to follow...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA Argggg...

[Bob Gardner]

Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering that you
will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding in real life
(not counting doing it to stay current), you got the important stuff behind
you.

Bob Gardner

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
> that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
> I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
> decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
> I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
> me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
> first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
> feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
> busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
> back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
> back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
> More to follow...
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL
> Student-IA Argggg...
>

[Jon Kraus]

Thanks Bob... I figured the same thing... I hear that most people have
never been asked to hold anywhere... how about you? JK

Bob Gardner wrote:

>Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering that you
>will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding in real life
>(not counting doing it to stay current), you got the important stuff behind
>you.
>
>Bob Gardner
>
>"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
>>pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
>>that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
>>I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
>>decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
>>I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
>>me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
>>first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
>>feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
>>busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
>>back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
>>back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
>>More to follow...
>>
>>Jon Kraus
>>PP-ASEL
>>Student-IA Argggg...
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

[Bob Gardner]

Two times stick in my memory: Holding at the Kallispell, MT VORTAC one night on the way into Helena, and holding on the Battleground, WA VORTAC on the way into Portland International. They wouldn't be memorable if it the weather had been nice.

Bob Gardner
"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message ...
Thanks Bob... I figured the same thing... I hear that most people have never been asked to hold anywhere... how about you? JK

Bob Gardner wrote:

Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering that you
will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding in real life
(not counting doing it to stay current), you got the important stuff behind
you.

Bob Gardner

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...

Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
More to follow...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA Argggg...

[Andrew Sarangan]

I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
for the recency experience and the checkride? Also, why are the entry
procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
procedure would have caused an accident?







"Bob Gardner" > wrote in
news:llYhc.4783$YP5.441855@attbi_s02:

> Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering
> that you will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding
> in real life (not counting doing it to stay current), you got the
> important stuff behind you.
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> "Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
>> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn
>> fustrated that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the
>> airport... Then I thought to myself "what are you going to do there
>> pout?" :-) I then decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride
>> and get it out of the way. I did OK... not great but passable...
>> This DE made it pretty easy on me... He was telling me about his IFR
>> checkride and him busting on his first attempt too... He busted on
>> the holding pattern too so I didn't feel that bad.. He now has
>> 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his busted IFR checkride so I
>> figured why should I... Now I just need to go back up with my
>> instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go back up with
>> the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done... More to
>> follow...
>>
>> Jon Kraus
>> PP-ASEL
>> Student-IA Argggg...
>>
>
>

[Peter R.]

Jon Kraus wrote:

> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that..

What doesn't kill you will only serve to make you stronger.

Sorry about the bust, but good job pulling yourself out of the "feel
sorry for myself slump" into which you almost slid.

BTW, to answer your hold question: FWIW, after flying about 350 hours
IFR (most of those hours were not IMC, mind you) in a spam can in the
busy Northeast US, I have yet to have a hold assigned. Perhaps it was
the fact that I flew most of those hours in a C172 where ground speed
was often measured with two digits, not three. ;-)

--
Peter

[Jon Kraus]

Allen,

Basically just nerves mostly... A couple of things contributed to that.
One was that I agreed to be this DE's first IFR checkride... that being
so, we had the FAA examiner with us examining him... My oral was 3 hours
long and this about wiped me out... He asked me everything under the
sun... I survived this but the weather took a turn for the worse so we
didn't go up after the oral portion. I was on my way home after the oral
when some turned their car right in front of me and before I could stop
I clipped their back end... First damn accident I have been in in 15
years or so... It kinda shook me up a little but I didn't think it was
too bad... This morning we were to do the flight portion of the
test... I had everything set up for my clearance and was told after take
off to intercept V305 and head north. I was then to to hold at the WELDO
intersection... I was thinking cool I have done exact thing several
times... What I didn't realize is that V305 is real close to V96 and I
had tuned in the wrong redial on the OBS... When things didn't start
centering when they should have I began to double check and caught my
error.. By the time I determined what was wrong I had blown through the
intersection and that threw me for a loop... I got confused and that is
when the DE said that it was an unsat maneuver... Really no excuses...
I blew it and will take responsibility... Look for my post next
Wednesday that I passed the recheck :-)

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA
A Lieberman wrote:

>Jon Kraus wrote:
>
>
>>Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
>>pattern big time and that was that...
>>
>>
>
>Hey Jon,
>
>Appreciate your post. I am getting closer to that time.... What part
>of holding did you bust, timing? Entry? Suggestions for my check ride
>to come down the road???
>
>Allen
>
>

[David Brooks]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Jon Kraus wrote:
>
> > Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> > pattern big time and that was that..

> BTW, to answer your hold question: FWIW, after flying about 350 hours
> IFR (most of those hours were not IMC, mind you) in a spam can in the
> busy Northeast US, I have yet to have a hold assigned. Perhaps it was
> the fact that I flew most of those hours in a C172 where ground speed
> was often measured with two digits, not three. ;-)

As I said recently, fly approaches into a popular untowered airport enough
times, and you'll get held while the controller tries to confirm the guy
before you really landed. For extra credit, do that in IMC. Don't mentally
block the unexpected hold instruction and keep motoring on, or the
controller will have to patiently deliver you back to the fix. No, never
happened to me, not even in training, no siree.

Jon, you're almost there. Hang in.

-- David Brooks

[Hankal]

>hanks Bob... I figured the same thing... I hear that most people have
>never been asked to hold anywhere... how about you

I only have my IFR ticket for two years and had to hold twice.
Hank

[Roy Smith]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote:

> I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
> received a holding clearance only once in my life.

I get them once in a while around New York. Sometimes it's for flow
control, but sometimes it's to meet LOA's. Departing HPN to the
northeast, you typically get vectors to Carmel VOR. There seems to be
an LOA which requires you to cross Carmel at or above 5000 before being
handed off to the next controller. On a hot summer day, sometimes I
can't make 5000 and I get to climb in a hold until I do.

Oddly enough, I've never gotten "cross CMK at or above 5000" as part of
my clearance, but if I'm not at 5000 by the time I get there, I can
pretty much count on getting a hold.

As often as not, the holding instructions (whether for the CMK climb or
for anything else) will be something like "just give me a couple of left
360's right there". I would suggest not trying to demonstrate one of
those on a checkride, though :-)

> Why are they required for the recency experience and the checkride?

I suspect in part because they're used so infrequently. Things you
don't do very often are the things you tend to forget and thus need to
practice.

> Also, why are the entry procedures so important?

In theory, if you don't use the proper entry, you may stray out of the
protected airspace. However, the protected airspace is so large
compared to the turn radius of a spam can, it's usually not a real
problem.

On the other hand, a lot of the published en-route holds around New York
have notations like "max holding speed 210 kts" (obviously not a problem
for you or me). I can only assume that the limit the holding speed so
they can reduce the size of the protected airspace. In a situation like
that, using the correct entry may indeed be important.

[Matt Whiting]

Jon Kraus wrote:
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
> that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
> I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
> decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
> I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
> me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
> first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
> feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
> busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
> back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
> back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
> More to follow...
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL
> Student-IA Argggg...
>

He's right, don't sweat it. I've never yet flown a holding pattern on a
real IFR flight. Well, I flew a holding "pattern" over DC one evening
on an IFR flight into Washington National, but it was VMC and the hold
consisted of flying circles over a spot the controller told me to fly
around! So my circles around a point training for my private was of
greater use than my holding pattern instruction. :-)


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
> received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
> for the recency experience and the checkride? Also, why are the entry
> procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
> procedure would have caused an accident?

My instructor told me I needed to learn the proper entries to keep the
DE happy, but in the real world the issue was to remain on the protected
side of the pattern and within the distance limits of the fix.


Matt

[Peter R.]

David Brooks wrote:

> As I said recently, fly approaches into a popular untowered airport enough
> times, and you'll get held while the controller tries to confirm the guy
> before you really landed.

Good point. Most of my IFR flights have been to towered airports.

--
Peter

[Andrew Sarangan]

A Lieberman > wrote in
:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>> Also, why are the entry
>> procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect
>> entry procedure would have caused an accident?
>
> My guess on this question is....
>
> You don't bump into someone in the soup doing a proper entry.
>
> The proper entry makes it so that ATC can anticipate / predict your
> next move, knowing how the entry to the hold from your direction of
> travel.
>
> Just like working in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, you would
> want people to enter the pattern appropriately to keep things neat and
> orderly.
>
> Don't want some one doing a right hand pattern at a left hand pattern
> airport....
>
> Allen
>

I can understand that a recommended entry will keep things neat and
tidy. But that can't be the reason for requiring holds for recency
experience. It's got to be something more important than that. A hold
ranks way up there with an instrument approach when it comes to
currency.

A VFR traffic pattern is not a fair comparison because the traffic
pattern could packed full of airplanes bumper to bumper. That can't be
the case under IFR. I am not sure what kind of separation is used by ATC
when in a hold. It can't be that close because the turn radius depends
on the aircraft speed. During the outbound turn from the holding fix, a
Citation will go past the holding fix much farther than a 172.

[[email protected]]

A Lieberman wrote:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
> > Also, why are the entry
> > procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
> > procedure would have caused an accident?
>
> My guess on this question is....
>
> You don't bump into someone in the soup doing a proper entry.
>
> The proper entry makes it so that ATC can anticipate / predict your next
> move, knowing how the entry to the hold from your direction of travel.

From ATC's perspective, there is lots of protected airspace for a holding
pattern, unless you are holding at max speed (almost never less than 200
knots).

The entires are part of the criteria design to assure that you don't depart
protected airspace.

Some folks never get holds. Other, especially those who use the IFR system
often, get lots of holds. Most of them are direct entries, however.

Holding entries and figuring out the proper side is a great tool for an
examiner or inspector to determine whether the applicant has a good feeling
for what it is all about.

[Roy Smith]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote:
> I am not sure what kind of separation is used by ATC
> when in a hold. It can't be that close because the turn radius depends
> on the aircraft speed. During the outbound turn from the holding fix, a
> Citation will go past the holding fix much farther than a 172.

Of course. All this is covered in TERPS

http://av-info.faa.gov/terps/directives%20page.htm

If you read the chapter on holds, you will know more than you ever
wanted to about how these things are figured out. Faster airplanes are
allotted more protected airspace.

[John R. Copeland]

"Peter R." > wrote in message =
...
> David Brooks wrote:=20
>=20
> > As I said recently, fly approaches into a popular untowered airport =
enough
> > times, and you'll get held while the controller tries to confirm the =
guy
> > before you really landed.=20
>=20
> Good point. Most of my IFR flights have been to towered airports.=20
>=20
> --=20
> Peter
>=20

You'll often see holds for traffic at some towered airports, too.
Places like Hailey, Idaho (Sun Valley's airport) are situated in a box =
canyon.
Hailey is far below Salt Lake Center's radar coverage, and there's only
one way in and back out, so only one IFR aircraft will be operating at a =
time.
In VMC, Hailey tower advises everyone, coming and going,
"Remain to the right of the highway".

South Lake Tahoe, California, comes to mind as another place like that.
(Except of course there's no highway up the middle of lake Tahoe :-)

Before Aspen got their radar, the situation there was similar, also .
It used to be considered courteous for Aspen arrivals to cancel IFR
as soon as the field was in sight, so a departing aircraft could be =
released.
---JRC---

[A Lieberman]

Jon Kraus wrote:
>
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that...

Hey Jon,

Appreciate your post. I am getting closer to that time.... What part
of holding did you bust, timing? Entry? Suggestions for my check ride
to come down the road???

Allen

[Richard Hertz]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
. 158...
> I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
> received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
> for the recency experience and the checkride?


People could say that about learning to do full approaches - many places you
get vectors all the time. In fact, my instructor joked that the pilots in
my area were so poorly prepared that they should be issued a "Long Island
Radar Vector" rating.

A hold is a pretty basic maneuver - if you can't do it you have no business
with an instrument rating.


Also, why are the entry
> procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
> procedure would have caused an accident?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Bob Gardner" > wrote in
> news:llYhc.4783$YP5.441855@attbi_s02:
>
> > Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering
> > that you will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding
> > in real life (not counting doing it to stay current), you got the
> > important stuff behind you.
> >
> > Bob Gardner
> >
> > "Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> >> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn
> >> fustrated that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the
> >> airport... Then I thought to myself "what are you going to do there
> >> pout?" :-) I then decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride
> >> and get it out of the way. I did OK... not great but passable...
> >> This DE made it pretty easy on me... He was telling me about his IFR
> >> checkride and him busting on his first attempt too... He busted on
> >> the holding pattern too so I didn't feel that bad.. He now has
> >> 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his busted IFR checkride so I
> >> figured why should I... Now I just need to go back up with my
> >> instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go back up with
> >> the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done... More to
> >> follow...
> >>
> >> Jon Kraus
> >> PP-ASEL
> >> Student-IA Argggg...
> >>
> >
> >
>

[Jon Kraus]

This DE is actually a very nice guy... He just had to do what he had to
do... I was too far outside of PTS and that gave him no choice... I know
he wants me to pass and next time I'm sure I will... He called me later
in the day to see how I was and let me know that even though busting a
checkride is is an ego deflation it is not the end of the world... He is
even cool enough to not charge me for either the initial checkride or
the retake because I agreed to be his first IFR exam... He has a ton of
Private Pilot exams behind him but I am his first Instrument ride.
Actually the FAA examiner was very nice too.. She said she felt bad that
I failed too and that she thought that her being there might had
contributed to my "case of the nerves". I don't think so at all... I
basically just plain ****ed up... No more no less.. I appreciate
everyone support on this... I knew you all would understand... Thanks
again. Jon

A Lieberman wrote:

>Jon Kraus wrote:
>
>
>
>>Basically just nerves mostly... A couple of things contributed to
>>that. One was that I agreed to be this DE's first IFR checkride...
>>that being so, we had the FAA examiner with us examining him... My
>>oral was 3 hours long and this about wiped me out...
>>
>>
>
>Holy cows Jon, your luck must be like mine except I had a DE that had
>zillions of examinations behind him and he was accompanied by an FAA
>examiner for my VFR license. I am not sure if you have been following
>my progress, but you, at least fared out better, as I busted the oral
>part! I didn't even get to fly.
>
>It was brutal, as just like you, I spent a good 2 1/2 hours just on the
>oral. I was told that because the FAA examiner was in with us, he had
>to be STRICTLY by the book. The retake was much more relaxed (without
>the FAA examiner) and of course covered things that I missed. Simple
>things in retrospect, but I knew my nerves took over on me. DE said
>next time I come out, I am looking to pass you. He felt bad, I could
>really tell.
>
>
>
>>This morning we were to
>>do the flight portion of the test... I had everything set up for my
>>clearance and was told after take off to intercept V305 and head
>>north. I was then to to hold at the WELDO intersection... I was
>>thinking cool I have done exact thing several times... What I didn't
>>realize is that V305 is real close to V96 and I had tuned in the wrong
>>redial on the OBS... When things didn't start centering when they
>>should have I began to double check and caught my error.. By the time
>>I determined what was wrong I had blown through the intersection and
>>that threw me for a loop... I got confused and that is when the DE
>>said that it was an unsat maneuver... Really no excuses...
>>
>>
>
>Like you said, it's nerves, and call it the human factor. Knowing you
>had done it before, you should pass with flying colors the next time
>Weldo intersection comes in your future. The whole process is nerve
>wracking!
>
>
>
>>and will take responsibility... Look for my post next Wednesday that I
>>passed the recheck :-)
>>
>>
>
>Look forward to this!
>
>For me, I am just beginning the cross country part of my training.
>Saturday will be my first CC (MBO to MEI). My choices of approaches are
>very limited, as I don't have an ADF and only have a VFR only GPS in my
>plane. So for my 3 approaches on my examination, would be VOR, ILS and
>LOC approaches. I have a DME, so that can be used in the mix (DME Arc).
>My instructor has been making me do back course approaches into JAN,
>which I have to keep saying, pull the needle in, pull the needle in.
>Really sensitive approach I have been told and experienced. So far, I
>have 72 approaches into MBO, JAN and HKS. I think my instructor is
>looking for a "change" :-))
>
>As far as holds, he has had me try three different times. One time, it
>was brutal as it was 10 seconds out bound, and 1 minute 30 seconds
>inbound due to the winds aloft. We got it on the third go round.
>
>Again, good luck on your retake. Sounds like you've been there, so it's
>a matter of doing it, and not needing "luck"
>
>Thanks for replying!
>
>Allen
>
>

[A Lieberman]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

> Also, why are the entry
> procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
> procedure would have caused an accident?

My guess on this question is....

You don't bump into someone in the soup doing a proper entry.

The proper entry makes it so that ATC can anticipate / predict your next
move, knowing how the entry to the hold from your direction of travel.

Just like working in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, you would
want people to enter the pattern appropriately to keep things neat and
orderly.

Don't want some one doing a right hand pattern at a left hand pattern
airport....

Allen

[Cecil Chapman]

Well, Jon, it's clear to me that you must have done a LOT of things right
for the ride, since the holding pattern was the only thing that nipped you.
I know ya feel disappointed and there's not much to say, other than to point
out that you took what most of the instructors I've spoken to, is one of the
hardest rides. I swear I'll never understand why it's only an 'add-on'
rating to the Private (so-to-speak) when it seems that it should be a
complete 'ticket' in itself.

Adding the final touches to your holding pattern technique, should be a lot
easier, now that you can devote your time with your instructor just working
on holding patterns (i.e., since you passed all the rest, there will be no
need to practice them again for the follow-up checkride).

If I don't pass my Instrument checkride the first time, I hope I can do as
well as you did - that is, do well on everything except one small item.

Really, man,,, in the scheme of things you did REALLY good and you'll be on
'easy street' on your next ride 'cause you'll only have one thing to do and
you'll do it well!

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL
Student-IASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
> that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
> I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
> decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
> I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
> me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
> first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
> feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
> busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
> back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
> back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
> More to follow...
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL
> Student-IA Argggg...
>

[A Lieberman]

Jon Kraus wrote:

> Basically just nerves mostly... A couple of things contributed to
> that. One was that I agreed to be this DE's first IFR checkride...
> that being so, we had the FAA examiner with us examining him... My
> oral was 3 hours long and this about wiped me out...

Holy cows Jon, your luck must be like mine except I had a DE that had
zillions of examinations behind him and he was accompanied by an FAA
examiner for my VFR license. I am not sure if you have been following
my progress, but you, at least fared out better, as I busted the oral
part! I didn't even get to fly.

It was brutal, as just like you, I spent a good 2 1/2 hours just on the
oral. I was told that because the FAA examiner was in with us, he had
to be STRICTLY by the book. The retake was much more relaxed (without
the FAA examiner) and of course covered things that I missed. Simple
things in retrospect, but I knew my nerves took over on me. DE said
next time I come out, I am looking to pass you. He felt bad, I could
really tell.

> This morning we were to
> do the flight portion of the test... I had everything set up for my
> clearance and was told after take off to intercept V305 and head
> north. I was then to to hold at the WELDO intersection... I was
> thinking cool I have done exact thing several times... What I didn't
> realize is that V305 is real close to V96 and I had tuned in the wrong
> redial on the OBS... When things didn't start centering when they
> should have I began to double check and caught my error.. By the time
> I determined what was wrong I had blown through the intersection and
> that threw me for a loop... I got confused and that is when the DE
> said that it was an unsat maneuver... Really no excuses...

Like you said, it's nerves, and call it the human factor. Knowing you
had done it before, you should pass with flying colors the next time
Weldo intersection comes in your future. The whole process is nerve
wracking!

> and will take responsibility... Look for my post next Wednesday that I
> passed the recheck :-)

Look forward to this!

For me, I am just beginning the cross country part of my training.
Saturday will be my first CC (MBO to MEI). My choices of approaches are
very limited, as I don't have an ADF and only have a VFR only GPS in my
plane. So for my 3 approaches on my examination, would be VOR, ILS and
LOC approaches. I have a DME, so that can be used in the mix (DME Arc).
My instructor has been making me do back course approaches into JAN,
which I have to keep saying, pull the needle in, pull the needle in.
Really sensitive approach I have been told and experienced. So far, I
have 72 approaches into MBO, JAN and HKS. I think my instructor is
looking for a "change" :-))

As far as holds, he has had me try three different times. One time, it
was brutal as it was 10 seconds out bound, and 1 minute 30 seconds
inbound due to the winds aloft. We got it on the third go round.

Again, good luck on your retake. Sounds like you've been there, so it's
a matter of doing it, and not needing "luck"

Thanks for replying!

Allen

[Jack Allison]

Bummer Jon, sorry to hear that...but it sounds like you did the right thing
continuing the ride. Yep, in the long run, it's not going to matter. Hope
you nail the holds next time.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

[Jon Kraus]

Thanks for the kind words Cecil... I'm really over the being bummed out
part.... Hell that didn't even last 24 hours... I am anticipating
passing the retest on Wednesday and will let everyone know.. Thanks
again...

Cecil Chapman wrote:

>Well, Jon, it's clear to me that you must have done a LOT of things right
>for the ride, since the holding pattern was the only thing that nipped you.
>I know ya feel disappointed and there's not much to say, other than to point
>out that you took what most of the instructors I've spoken to, is one of the
>hardest rides. I swear I'll never understand why it's only an 'add-on'
>rating to the Private (so-to-speak) when it seems that it should be a
>complete 'ticket' in itself.
>
>Adding the final touches to your holding pattern technique, should be a lot
>easier, now that you can devote your time with your instructor just working
>on holding patterns (i.e., since you passed all the rest, there will be no
>need to practice them again for the follow-up checkride).
>
>If I don't pass my Instrument checkride the first time, I hope I can do as
>well as you did - that is, do well on everything except one small item.
>
>Really, man,,, in the scheme of things you did REALLY good and you'll be on
>'easy street' on your next ride 'cause you'll only have one thing to do and
>you'll do it well!
>
>
>

[Dave Butler]

Some good guesses, but I think I can suggest some better ones...

A Lieberman wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>
>>Also, why are the entry
>>procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
>>procedure would have caused an accident?
>
>
> My guess on this question is....
>
> You don't bump into someone in the soup doing a proper entry.

ATC is not going to assign holds to two aircraft at the same holding point at
the same altitude. So unless "improper entry" includes an altitude bust, I don't
think this is a problem.

>
> The proper entry makes it so that ATC can anticipate / predict your next
> move, knowing how the entry to the hold from your direction of travel.

I don't think ATC can see well enough (or cares) what kind of entry you perform.

>
> Just like working in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, you would
> want people to enter the pattern appropriately to keep things neat and
> orderly.
>
> Don't want some one doing a right hand pattern at a left hand pattern
> airport....

I think a better answer is that doing the prescribed entry gives you the most
margin for error while keeping you inside protected airspace. If you're buzzing
around in a C172, your turn radius is tight and there's plenty of protected
airspace, and you can screw up the entry big-time and still stay protected. If
you're flying at the limits of holding airspeed, and the wind is blowing, and
you're a little sloppy with your navigation, and you do the wrong entry, it may
put you outside protected airspace.

Dave
Remove SHIRT to reply directly

[[email protected]]

Dave Butler wrote:

> Some good guesses, but I think I can suggest some better ones...
>
>
> ATC is not going to assign holds to two aircraft at the same holding point at
> the same altitude. So unless "improper entry" includes an altitude bust, I don't
> think this is a problem.

I'll give you something better than guesses. Controllers working traffic don't
care, perhaps, but their managers do. There are holding patterns in the New York
and Washington Center areas that are so close to each other, that speed is limited
to 200 knots above 6,000 to keep the patterns from overlapping. Improper entires,
at least in jets, could cause an aircraft to go into the other pattern's airspace.
This was demonstrated in holding pattern criteria meetings. Radar doesn't help,
because radar service is usually terminated in these busy patterns due to multiple
merging targets.

>
>
> >
> > The proper entry makes it so that ATC can anticipate / predict your next
> > move, knowing how the entry to the hold from your direction of travel.
>
> I don't think ATC can see well enough (or cares) what kind of entry you perform.
>

That's right, they can't see well enough to help out in conjested airspace.

>
> >
> > Just like working in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, you would
> > want people to enter the pattern appropriately to keep things neat and
> > orderly.
> >
> > Don't want some one doing a right hand pattern at a left hand pattern
> > airport....
>
> I think a better answer is that doing the prescribed entry gives you the most
> margin for error while keeping you inside protected airspace. If you're buzzing
> around in a C172, your turn radius is tight and there's plenty of protected
> airspace, and you can screw up the entry big-time and still stay protected. If
> you're flying at the limits of holding airspeed, and the wind is blowing, and
> you're a little sloppy with your navigation, and you do the wrong entry, it may
> put you outside protected airspace.

In a Cessna 172, no doubt about it. But, the instrument rating is not a rating ride
limited to 172's.

[2Poor2Fly4Real]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message =
...
| Jon Kraus wrote:
|=20
<snip>
| Knowing you had done it before, you should pass with flying colors the =
next time
| Weldo intersection comes in your future.
<snip>

I don't mean to throw icy, bone-chilling cold water on Jon's hopes (if I =
ever get back into flying, I'll be working on my own IR, after all!), =
but this assumes the DE will use WELDO for the re-test. Is the DE =
obligated to use a different intersection? Or is that strictly the DE's =
discretion?

I'm sure you know, Jon, that you shouldn't spend 40 hours between now & =
Wed flying fixes at WELDO, lol! This is more just a curiosity question.

TIA!

Mike T.
--=20
When I had Money, I could fly.
Then I got Married...then we got a Mortgage...then we had a Munchkin.
She has three Ms, I have none. I'm...
2Poor2Fly4Real

(remove "nospam" from address for direct replies)

[Mark Astley]

Jon,

Busted rides occasionally happen, and from the numerous posts, it looks like
you're coping just fine. But if you need further cheering up, here's how my
instructor busted HIS ride:

He started off with the easy stuff, tracking to a VOR. However, he missed
the flag switching from TO to FROM, and just kept on tracking. Apparently,
it was a fairly calm day so that little course correction was necessary,
otherwise trying to keep the needle aligned may have clued him in
(eventually). Anyway, the DE let this go on for about 10 minutes or so
before suggesting they do a 180 rather than circle the globe on course. The
rest of the ride went off without a hitch.

blue skies,
mark


"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
> that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
> I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
> decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
> I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
> me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
> first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
> feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
> busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
> back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
> back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
> More to follow...
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL
> Student-IA Argggg...
>

[Michael]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote
> I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
> received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
> for the recency experience and the checkride? Also, why are the entry
> procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
> procedure would have caused an accident?

Interestingly enough, this topic constituted the bulk of my CFII oral.

First off, I agree with you - holds are pretty rare in the real world,
and in the stuff we fly there is, for all practical purposes, no way
to leave the protected airspace. Thus the official reason for
learning holds is bogus.

However, there are two reasons why they are important - one
operational, one training.

First the operational reason - holds are sometimes used for course
reversal on approaches in lieu of procedure turns. In such a case,
you are expected to do only the hold entry. Further, for your own
good you need to be well established on the inbound course before
crossing the fix. Finally, when this is done, the reason the hold was
chosen over the PT was to keep you out of airspace or obstructions.
So the bottom line is holding is not important until it it. Still,
there are other items that fall into that category (for example IFR
departures from VFR fields) that are not covered at all.

The training reason is the more compelling - good holding requires
good situational awareness. In fact, the hold is the best test of
situational awareness on the checkride. If you don't know where you
are, where you are going, and what the wind is doing you will not make
a good entry.

I doubt there have been too many cases where a bad hold entry killed
someone (it would have to take some very special circumstances) but
poor situational awareness is probably the number one killer in IFR
operations.

Michael

[Barry]

> Well, Jon, it's clear to me that you must have done a LOT of things right
> for the ride, since the holding pattern was the only thing that nipped
> you...
>
> Adding the final touches to your holding pattern technique, should be a lot
> easier, now that you can devote your time with your instructor just working
> on holding patterns (i.e., since you passed all the rest, there will be no
> need to practice them again for the follow-up checkride).

First of all, I don't mean to be critical of Jon, his instructor, or others
who have posted on this thread. However, I don't necessarily agree with the
recommendation to just brush up on holds and then take the checkride again.
When I was a new CFI working at a Part 141 school, I had an instrument student
who was a nice guy and serious pilot, but had a little more trouble than most
getting all the IFR stuff together. Eventually, we completed the syllabus.
On his final stage check, he messed up the NDB approach but was OK on
everything else. We reviewed the ADF, he redid the NDB part of the stage
check and passed, and I signed him off for the check ride, which he then
failed for something unrelated to ADF. At that point, I realized that when
he blew the NDB approach, it wasn't a problem with the ADF, but a general
problem with situational awareness and keeping on top of things. After quite
a bit more instruction, he eventually passed.

Based on this experience, I caution Jon to make sure that his bad holding
pattern is not a symptom of other, more general problems. Remember that the
checkride is not comprehensive, but just a spot check; the fact that many
things went well doesn't prove that everything is OK. If Jon's CFII is an
experienced instrument instructor and has a lot of instrument rating
endorsements under his belt, then he will probably know if Jon's problem on
the checkride was just a glitch. In this case, it might be OK to just review
holds, and then complete the checkride. However, if the CFII has little
experience, or if he is experienced and not completely confident in Jon's
proficiency level, then I suggest spending at least several hours reviewing
all elements of the PTS, possibly with a more experienced instructor. Sure,
at this point you mainly want to get the checkride behind you, but make sure
that you're not ignoring a warning that the holding pattern might be giving
you.

Good luck.

Barry

[Greg Esres]

<<I caution Jon to make sure that his bad holding pattern is not a
symptom of other, more general problems. Remember that the checkride
is not comprehensive, but just a spot check; the fact that many things
went well doesn't prove that everything is OK. >>

Very wise advice.

But that assumes that the goal of the student and instructor is
something different from just passing a checkride. ;-)

[Jon Kraus]

My CFII is the chief flight instructor at our school and has many years
experience instructing... He knows I am ready for the checkride or he
wouldn't have signed me off... He knows that I just screwed up and
that is all... Basically I wanted to write my account of the busted
checkride to let people know that is isn't the end of the world... Far
from it... Just another learing experience... No more no less... Funny,
I lost not one minutes sleep over it last night :-) Thanks for the
advise... JK

Barry wrote:

>>Well, Jon, it's clear to me that you must have done a LOT of things right
>>for the ride, since the holding pattern was the only thing that nipped
>>you...
>>
>>Adding the final touches to your holding pattern technique, should be a lot
>>easier, now that you can devote your time with your instructor just working
>>on holding patterns (i.e., since you passed all the rest, there will be no
>>need to practice them again for the follow-up checkride).
>>
>>
>
>First of all, I don't mean to be critical of Jon, his instructor, or others
>who have posted on this thread. However, I don't necessarily agree with the
>recommendation to just brush up on holds and then take the checkride again.
>When I was a new CFI working at a Part 141 school, I had an instrument student
>who was a nice guy and serious pilot, but had a little more trouble than most
>getting all the IFR stuff together. Eventually, we completed the syllabus.
>On his final stage check, he messed up the NDB approach but was OK on
>everything else. We reviewed the ADF, he redid the NDB part of the stage
>check and passed, and I signed him off for the check ride, which he then
>failed for something unrelated to ADF. At that point, I realized that when
>he blew the NDB approach, it wasn't a problem with the ADF, but a general
>problem with situational awareness and keeping on top of things. After quite
>a bit more instruction, he eventually passed.
>
>Based on this experience, I caution Jon to make sure that his bad holding
>pattern is not a symptom of other, more general problems. Remember that the
>checkride is not comprehensive, but just a spot check; the fact that many
>things went well doesn't prove that everything is OK. If Jon's CFII is an
>experienced instrument instructor and has a lot of instrument rating
>endorsements under his belt, then he will probably know if Jon's problem on
>the checkride was just a glitch. In this case, it might be OK to just review
>holds, and then complete the checkride. However, if the CFII has little
>experience, or if he is experienced and not completely confident in Jon's
>proficiency level, then I suggest spending at least several hours reviewing
>all elements of the PTS, possibly with a more experienced instructor. Sure,
>at this point you mainly want to get the checkride behind you, but make sure
>that you're not ignoring a warning that the holding pattern might be giving
>you.
>
>Good luck.
>
>Barry
>
>
>
>
>
>

[John R Weiss]

Now that you got the "bust" over with, you can relax, take your review ride with
your instructor, take the recheck ride with the DE, and then start learning how
to fly IFR (remember -- a ticket is merely a "license to learn")! Most pilots
will bust a ride some time in their lifetime; you just got yours out of the way
early!

While holding may be infrequent, it usually comes up at an inopportune time when
it does come up. So, it's worth keeping up your skills. I've recently had to
do a "360 for spacing" on approach into HKG, and have had to hold a couple times
at Point Reyes on arrival into SFO (B747). Also, holding is a good technique
when you're not quite ready to start an approach IMC; just ask for a turn or 2,
and get yourself prepared after established.

Once you get more comfortable flying IFR and IMC, the holding will become much
easier. Take advantage of every opportunity to practice!

"Jon Kraus" > wrote...
> Thanks Bob... I figured the same thing... I hear that most people have
> never been asked to hold anywhere... how about you? JK

> Bob Gardner wrote:
>
>>Not a biggie. Life goes on. Sorry that it happened, but considering that you
>>will spend an infinitesimal amount of time actually holding in real life
>>(not counting doing it to stay current), you got the important stuff behind
>>you.


>>"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
>>>pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
>>>that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport...

[Andrew Gideon]

wrote:

> Holding entries and figuring out the proper side is a great tool for an
> examiner or inspector to determine whether the applicant has a good
> feeling for what it is all about.

I think that this is significant. When I could get a hold instruction and
know how I'd enter it w/o a lot of work, my brain was more prepared for
IMC. Think of it as a mind-stretching puzzle which exercises situational
awareness.

- Andrew

[Andrew Gideon]

Mark Astley wrote:

> Anyway, the DE let this go on for about 10 minutes or so
> before suggesting they do a 180 rather than circle the globe on course.
> The rest of the ride went off without a hitch.

It sounds like a failing in the DE's instructions, if he wasn't clear enough
to indicate ahead of time that they shouldn't circumnavigate the globe.

- Andrew

[Martin Kosina]

> First the operational reason - holds are sometimes used for course
> reversal on approaches in lieu of procedure turns. In such a case,
> you are expected to do only the hold entry. Further, for your own
> good you need to be well established on the inbound course before
> crossing the fix. Finally, when this is done, the reason the hold was
> chosen over the PT was to keep you out of airspace or obstructions.
> So the bottom line is holding is not important until it it. Still,
> there are other items that fall into that category (for example IFR
> departures from VFR fields) that are not covered at all.

Good point, screwing up an enroute hold is rarely a big deal, but IFR
departure procedures often prescribe identical orbiting procedures
(even if they are not called "holds") that really do keep you out of
the weeds, sometimes with not very big margins. If you get messed up
there, I'd say head straight back to the navaid while climbing and try
to sort it out.

I only became really aware of published IDP's and the various TERPS
issues after reading Wally Robert's site, my own instrument training
did not emphasise this too much, which is a bit scary in retrospect...

[Dave Jacobowitz]

Hey, try not to sweat it. Not passing a check ride
is not a big deal. You take it again.

I blew my PP checkride the first time around. I flew
fine, but exercised poor judgement by flying too close
to a cloud. I believed I was outside the 1000/500/2000
rule, but he didn't, and that was that. I don't blame
the DE for failing me.

I think the hardest part of the whole episode was
looking my instructor in the eye, telling him how I
busted. He knew I was ready, I just f**'d up.

When I took my IFR checkride, my instructor once
again admonished me that "these things are really
harder on the CFII than they are on the student."
I did not want to screw up, and luckily, this time
around I did not.

I did make some mistakes on the checkride. One of
which was flying on a vector right through the FAC
on a partial-panel VOR-A approach to TCY. I was
behind the plane, had not dialed in the OBS as
quickly as I should have, when I did, the needle was
already on the wrong side.

I caught the problem right away, correcting right
away, and said so out loud. The rest of the approach
was sloppy by my standards, but within PTS limits.
Still, the DE could have failed me right then and
there. He elected not to. Luck.

There's just something about checkrides.

-- dave j
-- PP-ASEL, IA
-- jacobowitz73 --at-- yahoo --dot-- com

Jon Kraus > wrote in message >...
> Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
> pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
> that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
> I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
> decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
> I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
> me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
> first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
> feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
> busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
> back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
> back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
> More to follow...
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL
> Student-IA Argggg...

[Cecil Chapman]

> Based on this experience, I caution Jon to make sure that his bad holding
> pattern is not a symptom of other, more general problems. Remember that
the
> checkride is not comprehensive, but just a spot check; the fact that many
> things went well doesn't prove that everything is OK. If Jon's CFII is an
> experienced instrument instructor and has a lot of instrument rating
> endorsements under his belt, then he will probably know if Jon's problem
on
> the checkride was just a glitch. In this case, it might be OK to just
review
> holds, and then complete the checkride. However, if the CFII has little
> experience, or if he is experienced and not completely confident in Jon's
> proficiency level, then I suggest spending at least several hours
reviewing
> all elements of the PTS, possibly with a more experienced instructor.
Sure,
> at this point you mainly want to get the checkride behind you, but make
sure
> that you're not ignoring a warning that the holding pattern might be
giving
> you.

This is a VERY good point, though it would be more accurate to say that
performing a holding pattern truly involves a heightened level of
situational awareness - I think,,,, more so, than most of the instrument
flying skills.

Thankfully, though we are dealing with Jon and most of us know that he has
it all together and that he just 'brain faded' a bit when it got to the
holds. Actually, upon re-reading his account, he had to be exhausted
halfway through his checkride,,, I'd say there was even more pressure on him
than in a 'normal' checkride experience.

Good observation/point, though... very good!

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL
Student-IASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Michael]

wrote
> In a Cessna 172, no doubt about it. But, the instrument rating is
> not a rating ride limited to 172's.

It kind of is, though. Oh, I don't mean literally - but the lowest
published holding speed (other than STOL) that I've ever seen is 180
kts. I can't think of ANY airplane that won't COMFORTABLY hold at 120
kts or less that you will ever be able to fly without
insurance-mandated type-specific training, including instrument
training. Strictly speaking, since an instrument ride in a single
engine airplane always gets you an instrument rating limited to single
engine airplanes, and since the single engine jets all require type
ratings or LOA's anyway, it's not even an insurance issue. For all
practical purposes, there is no need to test an applicant taking an
instrument ride in a C-172 or equivalent on proper holding entries,
because he's not getting a rating that will allow him to fly IFR in
anything where they matter.

The only thing that really matters is that he can become reasonably
established on the inbound course before crossing the fix a second
time, and that only matters for approaches where the hold is the
published course reversal. Even that is somewhat questionable, since
he can always take a second trip around the hold to get established if
absolutely necessary.

Let's face it - the only real reason for teaching and testing the
holding entries is to develop and test for situational awareness.

Michael

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Jacobowitz wrote:
> Hey, try not to sweat it. Not passing a check ride
> is not a big deal. You take it again.
>
> I blew my PP checkride the first time around. I flew
> fine, but exercised poor judgement by flying too close
> to a cloud. I believed I was outside the 1000/500/2000
> rule, but he didn't, and that was that. I don't blame
> the DE for failing me.
>
> I think the hardest part of the whole episode was
> looking my instructor in the eye, telling him how I
> busted. He knew I was ready, I just f**'d up.
>
> When I took my IFR checkride, my instructor once
> again admonished me that "these things are really
> harder on the CFII than they are on the student."
> I did not want to screw up, and luckily, this time
> around I did not.
>
> I did make some mistakes on the checkride. One of
> which was flying on a vector right through the FAC
> on a partial-panel VOR-A approach to TCY. I was
> behind the plane, had not dialed in the OBS as
> quickly as I should have, when I did, the needle was
> already on the wrong side.

I'm just refreshing myself on the regs getting ready to re-enter flying
after several years off, but I seem to recall that you could have
something like 2/3 or so needle deflection before you are out of
tolerances on VOR tracking. Unless you had FS deflection, I don't see
why the DE would have or should have failed you.


> I caught the problem right away, correcting right
> away, and said so out loud. The rest of the approach
> was sloppy by my standards, but within PTS limits.
> Still, the DE could have failed me right then and
> there. He elected not to. Luck.

On my instrument ride, the day was very windy giving moderate turbulence
down low and probably a 40K wind higher up. It took me about 3 circuits
to get the holding pattern nailed on both wind correction angle and
timing, but the DE saw that I was getting it closer each time and that
was all he cared about. I think demonstrating good judgement and good
situational awareness is much more important than holding the needle
centered all the time.


Matt

[Jon Kraus]

As usual Cecil well stated ... :-) I sure don't know about "having it
all together" but it sure looks good on paper !!! My CFII was on
vacation this week so I called him to tell him of my gloom adn doom... I
could tell by his comments that he was just shaking his head and kinda
laughing knowing that I really can do this "flying thing"... I go up
with him on Monday and get rechecked on Wednesday... Thanks again Cecil
for the kind words.... Hopefully I won't have to be kind to you when you
take your test. :-) JK

Cecil Chapman wrote:

>This is a VERY good point, though it would be more accurate to say that
>performing a holding pattern truly involves a heightened level of
>situational awareness - I think,,,, more so, than most of the instrument
>flying skills.
>
>Thankfully, though we are dealing with Jon and most of us know that he has
>it all together and that he just 'brain faded' a bit when it got to the
>holds. Actually, upon re-reading his account, he had to be exhausted
>halfway through his checkride,,, I'd say there was even more pressure on him
>than in a 'normal' checkride experience.
>
>Good observation/point, though... very good!
>
>
>

[Jon Kraus]

Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said hold
wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in the
big picture.... Thanks again. JK

Mark Astley wrote:

>Jon,
>
>Busted rides occasionally happen, and from the numerous posts, it looks like
>you're coping just fine. But if you need further cheering up, here's how my
>instructor busted HIS ride:
>
>He started off with the easy stuff, tracking to a VOR. However, he missed
>the flag switching from TO to FROM, and just kept on tracking. Apparently,
>it was a fairly calm day so that little course correction was necessary,
>otherwise trying to keep the needle aligned may have clued him in
>(eventually). Anyway, the DE let this go on for about 10 minutes or so
>before suggesting they do a 180 rather than circle the globe on course. The
>rest of the ride went off without a hitch.
>
>blue skies,
>mark
>
>
>"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>Took my IFR checkride today and busted... I screwed up the holding
>>pattern big time and that was that... At first I was so damn fustrated
>>that I told the DE that I just want to head back to the airport... Then
>>I thought to myself "what are you going to do there pout?" :-) I then
>>decided to go ahead with the rest of the ride and get it out of the way.
>>I did OK... not great but passable... This DE made it pretty easy on
>>me... He was telling me about his IFR checkride and him busting on his
>>first attempt too... He busted on the holding pattern too so I didn't
>>feel that bad.. He now has 14,000+ hours and doesn't worry about his
>>busted IFR checkride so I figured why should I... Now I just need to go
>>back up with my instructor once, do the freakn' holding pattern... Go
>>back up with the DE... do the freakn' holding pattern and be done...
>>More to follow...
>>
>>Jon Kraus
>>PP-ASEL
>>Student-IA Argggg...
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

[Andrew Sarangan]

Jon Kraus > wrote in
:

> Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said
> hold wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
> racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in
> the big picture.... Thanks again. JK
>

When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern. The
outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a crosswind.

[David Brooks]

> On my instrument ride, the day was very windy giving moderate turbulence
> down low and probably a 40K wind higher up. It took me about 3 circuits
> to get the holding pattern nailed on both wind correction angle and
> timing, but the DE saw that I was getting it closer each time and that
> was all he cared about. I think demonstrating good judgement and good
> situational awareness is much more important than holding the needle
> centered all the time.

Me similar. I got blown right across the inbound track on the first
outbound. Luckily I caught it and my SA recovered enough that I was quickly
back on the inbound course. The only thing he dinged me for was not using
the localizer for added SA on an NDB hold (I was trying to do the NDB hold
without "cheating", I guess).

-- David Brooks

[Stan Gosnell]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote in
. 158:

> When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
> The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
> crosswind.
>
Why? After the first lap, you should know where the wind is and make
appropriate heading corrections to maintain some semblance of a racetrack
pattern, and you should usually have some idea of the winds, anyway.

In real life, though, nobody cares what the pattern looks like, as long as
you stay in protected airspace. I try to keep it as oval as possible,
though, just out of pride.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On 22 Apr 2004 23:59:48 GMT, Andrew Sarangan > wrote:

>I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
>received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
>for the recency experience and the checkride? Also, why are the entry
>procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
>procedure would have caused an accident?

The only requirement for a holding pattern is to stay within the protected
area. Getting to the holding fix and turning the shortest way to remain
within the protected area can be a simpler (and acceptable) method of
getting into the hold than the "recommended" procedures.

From the IR PTS re: holding procedures: "Explains and uses an entry
procedure that ensures the aircraft remains within the holding pattern
airspace for a standard, nonstandard, published, or nonpublished holding
pattern."

So far as it's usefulness, just a few days ago I missed an approach into my
home base because the ceiling was below minimums. The missed approach
procedure included a holding pattern. My plan was to hold for a 1/2 hour
and then try the approach again. If that didn't work, I would be off to my
alternate. Of course, my fairly new CNX80 made holding pretty simple. The
box even adjusted the holding pattern size (and shape) to account for the
winds!


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Roy Smith]

Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
> Of course, my fairly new CNX80 made holding pretty simple. The
> box even adjusted the holding pattern size (and shape) to account for the
> winds!

How does it know what the wind is?

My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio,
but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours behind
box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.

[Teacherjh]

>>
> When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
> The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
> crosswind.

Why will[ the hold not be a race track pattern]? After the first lap, you
should know where the wind is
<<

Because the round parts will be different radii. You hold constant rate, but
are blown downwind. So, one half circle is little, the other is big.

Jose



--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Andrew Sarangan]

Stan Gosnell > wrote in
:

> Andrew Sarangan > wrote in
> . 158:
>
>> When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
>> The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
>> crosswind.
>>
> Why? After the first lap, you should know where the wind is and make
> appropriate heading corrections to maintain some semblance of a
> racetrack pattern, and you should usually have some idea of the winds,
> anyway.
>
> In real life, though, nobody cares what the pattern looks like, as
> long as you stay in protected airspace. I try to keep it as oval as
> possible, though, just out of pride.
>


If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you want
to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind correction on
the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on both ends of the
holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to the inbound.

[Matt Whiting]

David Brooks wrote:
>>On my instrument ride, the day was very windy giving moderate turbulence
>>down low and probably a 40K wind higher up. It took me about 3 circuits
>>to get the holding pattern nailed on both wind correction angle and
>>timing, but the DE saw that I was getting it closer each time and that
>>was all he cared about. I think demonstrating good judgement and good
>>situational awareness is much more important than holding the needle
>>centered all the time.
>
>
> Me similar. I got blown right across the inbound track on the first
> outbound. Luckily I caught it and my SA recovered enough that I was quickly
> back on the inbound course. The only thing he dinged me for was not using
> the localizer for added SA on an NDB hold (I was trying to do the NDB hold
> without "cheating", I guess).

Yes, it is hard to know what any given DE wants to see. My DE is a
corporate pilot at the company I work for. He was very open while on
the ground about what he wanted to see and told me that he needed to see
each PTS item performed using only the navaids appropriate to each item,
however, he would also ask questions during the ride about what I would
do if an approach like an NDB had an ILS to the same runway also. I
told him I'd use the localizer and marker beacons as additional
confirmations of the NDB and time, and that seemed to be what he wanted
to hear. I felt at ease with him right from the oral part of the test
on through, so if I wasn't sure what he wanted to see, I just outright
asked him. I didn't try to read his mind. And if something didn't go
the way I wanted it to go, I talked out loud about what was wrong and
what I was doing to correct. He seemed to have no problem with that at
all. I talked my way through all three circuits of the hold and kept
saying what I was doing each time and why so that he also didn't have to
try to read my mind.

However, I've heard tales of examiners that really didn't care for
pilots who did that. I guess you just have to try to understand your
DE, just like you had to figure out what any given college professor
wanted to see on tests and papers.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Stan Gosnell wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan > wrote in
> . 158:
>
>
>>When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
>>The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
>>crosswind.
>>
>
> Why? After the first lap, you should know where the wind is and make
> appropriate heading corrections to maintain some semblance of a racetrack
> pattern, and you should usually have some idea of the winds, anyway.

Because of the effect of the wind during the turns. If you fly the "off
the holding course" leg parallel to the holding course, then you will
end up either turning either too short or crossing the course on the way
back. The fly a true race track pattern with a cross wind component,
you would have to fly variable bank turns as we all did when practicing
turns around a point in the wind while practicing for our private. This
is REALLY hard to do when you can't see the ground!


> In real life, though, nobody cares what the pattern looks like, as long as
> you stay in protected airspace. I try to keep it as oval as possible,
> though, just out of pride.

But if you do this in a stiff crosswind, you will end up having to make
one of the turns at a greater than standard rate and the other at less
than standard rate in order to roll out on the holding course each
circuit. I believe that is why the normal recommendation is to double
your inbound wind correction angle on the outbound leg (assuming you are
holding towards the station). This will give you a nonparallel outbound
course, but will allow both of your turns to be closer to standard rate.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
> On 22 Apr 2004 23:59:48 GMT, Andrew Sarangan > wrote:
>
>
>>I never understood why holding patterns are so damn important. I have
>>received a holding clearance only once in my life. Why are they required
>>for the recency experience and the checkride? Also, why are the entry
>>procedures so important? Is there any example where an incorrect entry
>>procedure would have caused an accident?
>
>
> The only requirement for a holding pattern is to stay within the protected
> area. Getting to the holding fix and turning the shortest way to remain
> within the protected area can be a simpler (and acceptable) method of
> getting into the hold than the "recommended" procedures.
>
> From the IR PTS re: holding procedures: "Explains and uses an entry
> procedure that ensures the aircraft remains within the holding pattern
> airspace for a standard, nonstandard, published, or nonpublished holding
> pattern."
>
> So far as it's usefulness, just a few days ago I missed an approach into my
> home base because the ceiling was below minimums. The missed approach
> procedure included a holding pattern. My plan was to hold for a 1/2 hour
> and then try the approach again. If that didn't work, I would be off to my
> alternate. Of course, my fairly new CNX80 made holding pretty simple. The
> box even adjusted the holding pattern size (and shape) to account for the
> winds!

That is definitely cheating! :-)


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Roy Smith wrote:
> Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
>
>>Of course, my fairly new CNX80 made holding pretty simple. The
>>box even adjusted the holding pattern size (and shape) to account for the
>>winds!
>
>
> How does it know what the wind is?
>
> My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio,
> but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours behind
> box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.

Seems like it would have to have an internal compass or some other
source of heading information to do this trick.


Matt

[Dave Jacobowitz]

Matt Whiting > wrote in message >...
> Dave Jacobowitz wrote:
> > I did make some mistakes on the checkride. One of
> > which was flying on a vector right through the FAC
> > on a partial-panel VOR-A approach to TCY. I was
> > behind the plane, had not dialed in the OBS as
> > quickly as I should have, when I did, the needle was
> > already on the wrong side.
>
> I'm just refreshing myself on the regs getting ready to re-enter flying
> after several years off, but I seem to recall that you could have
> something like 2/3 or so needle deflection before you are out of
> tolerances on VOR tracking. Unless you had FS deflection, I don't see
> why the DE would have or should have failed you.

I think it's a judgement call. Yes, it was within the deflection
allowed on the PTS during an approach. However, I didn't even
know where I was relative to the FAC prior to twisting the
OBS appropriately, and then it took me, maybe five seconds
to mentally accept the fact that I was past where I wanted to
be. So, it was a short loss of situational awareness,
which he could have failed me for.

> On my instrument ride, the day was very windy giving moderate turbulence
> down low and probably a 40K wind higher up. It took me about 3 circuits
> to get the holding pattern nailed on both wind correction angle and
> timing, but the DE saw that I was getting it closer each time and that
> was all he cared about. I think demonstrating good judgement and good
> situational awareness is much more important than holding the needle
> centered all the time.

Ah, I've heard several people say that a windy day is better
for a checkride because it's hard for a DE to know the
difference between pilot-induced and weather-induced
sloppiness. I think there might be something to this, but
only people who have tried it both ways can know for sure.

;)

-- dave j

[[email protected]]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

>
> If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you want
> to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind correction on
> the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on both ends of the
> holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to the inbound.

Your collective "we" doesn't include all of us. ;-) If your churning along at
200 or 230 knots, standard rate is useless. It then becomes a 25-degree bank
achieved. In fact, that is what the writer of the holding pattern criteria
presumed, because the criteria were rewritten in 1963 to account for military
and transport jet operations.

Little biddy puddle jumpers have more airspace than they could ever use. ;-)

[Bob Moore]

Andrew Sarangan wrote

> If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
> want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
> correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on
> both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to
> the inbound.

Gee...thanks for the explanation Andrew, and to think that for all of
these years, for a one minute pattern, I've been teaching that one
should *triple* the drift on the outbound leg. We taught it that way at
PanAm long before the FAA changed the AIM as follows.

From AIM 5-3-7

(c) Compensate for wind effect primarily by drift correction on the inbound
and outbound legs. When outbound, triple the inbound drift correction to
avoid major turning adjustments; e.g., if correcting left by 8 degrees when
inbound, correct right by 24 degrees when outbound.



Bob Moore

[Andrew Sarangan]

Bob Moore > wrote in
. 8:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote
>
>> If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
>> want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
>> correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns
>> on both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound
>> parallel to the inbound.
>
> Gee...thanks for the explanation Andrew, and to think that for all of
> these years, for a one minute pattern, I've been teaching that one
> should *triple* the drift on the outbound leg. We taught it that way
> at PanAm long before the FAA changed the AIM as follows.
>
> From AIM 5-3-7
>
> (c) Compensate for wind effect primarily by drift correction on the
> inbound and outbound legs. When outbound, triple the inbound drift
> correction to avoid major turning adjustments; e.g., if correcting
> left by 8 degrees when inbound, correct right by 24 degrees when
> outbound.
>
>
>
> Bob Moore
>

OK, now I'm confused. If you triple the correction, wouldn't the inbound
turn be less than standard rate? What am I missing here?

[Stan Gosnell]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote in
. 158:

> If you have a crosswind, you can't maintain a racetrack shape if you
> want to do standard rate turns. That is why we double the wind
> correction on the outbound. The goal is to make standard rate turns on
> both ends of the holding pattern, not to keep the outbound parallel to
> the inbound.

It won't be a perfect racetrack, true, but I said "some semblance of a
racetrack", as the original poster was talking about one that didn't
resemble a racetrack at all. I don't try for perfect standard rate turns,
I try for keeping a general distance from the inbound course, usually using
less than standard rate on the turn into the wind. If the turns are
somewhat less or more than standard, I don't care. With GPS, this is all
easy enough. If you're doing NDB holding, then you have no idea what shape
your pattern is, and at least I don't care. Blindly applying all rules of
thumb all the time isn't something I advocate.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Stan Gosnell]

Matt Whiting > wrote in
:

> Seems like it would have to have an internal compass or some other
> source of heading information to do this trick.

It has to know your heading and airspeed. Knowing this, calculating the
wind is trivial. Most boxes require the pilot to input this information,
because the normal airspeed and heading indicators don't have electric
output. With new glass cockpits, this information becomes available to the
boxes.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 20:54:39 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

>How does it know what the wind is?
>
>My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio,
>but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours behind
>box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.

I don't know that it knows the winds. But it knows the ground track and
ground speed. It probably assumes a constant airspeed and makes
computations that way. It was interesting seeing the *shape* of the
holding pattern (as drawn on the screen) change.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On 24 Apr 2004 16:09:14 GMT, Stan Gosnell > wrote:

>Matt Whiting > wrote in
:
>
>> Seems like it would have to have an internal compass or some other
>> source of heading information to do this trick.
>
>It has to know your heading and airspeed. Knowing this, calculating the
>wind is trivial. Most boxes require the pilot to input this information,
>because the normal airspeed and heading indicators don't have electric
>output. With new glass cockpits, this information becomes available to the
>boxes.

There's no input for either. I'd guess for holding patterns it's able to
make computations based on known GS and track; and probably it assumes a
constant airspeed.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:54:16 -0400, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

>That is definitely cheating! :-)

And no apologies!!


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[John R. Copeland]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message =
...
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 20:54:39 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:
>=20
> >How does it know what the wind is?
> >
> >My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio, =

> >but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours =
behind=20
> >box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.
>=20
> I don't know that it knows the winds. But it knows the ground track =
and
> ground speed. It probably assumes a constant airspeed and makes
> computations that way. It was interesting seeing the *shape* of the
> holding pattern (as drawn on the screen) change.
>=20
>=20
> Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

The Windows simulator for the CNX80 also changes the shape
of the hold if you alter its simulated speed during the hold.
Is that reasonably faithful to what you noticed in flight?
---JRC---

[Bob Moore]

Andrew Sarangan wrote

> OK, now I'm confused. If you triple the correction, wouldn't the inbound
> turn be less than standard rate? What am I missing here?

Well...ignoring the turns for the moment, using the same drift
correction for the outbound leg as used on the inbound leg (with
an opposite sign of course) would result in parallel tracks. This
is one times the inbound drift (1x). Now, for a one minute pattern,
there are two standard rate turns, each requiring one minute to
complete. The distance blown off during each of the turns is the
same as one would be blown off during one of the one minute strait
legs, requiring an ammount of drift correction on the outbound leg
for each of the turns equal to the ammount used for the one minute
strait leg. All adds up to be three times (3x) the inbound drift
correction.

Yes, even the old AC 61-27C, Instrument Flying Handbook had it wrong.

Bob Moore

[Bob Moore]

Bob Moore > wrote

> Well...Now after spell checking.."amount and straight"

Bob Moore

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
Bob Moore > wrote:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote
>
> > OK, now I'm confused. If you triple the correction, wouldn't the inbound
> > turn be less than standard rate? What am I missing here?
>
> Well...ignoring the turns for the moment, using the same drift
> correction for the outbound leg as used on the inbound leg (with
> an opposite sign of course) would result in parallel tracks. This
> is one times the inbound drift (1x). Now, for a one minute pattern,
> there are two standard rate turns, each requiring one minute to
> complete. The distance blown off during each of the turns is the
> same as one would be blown off during one of the one minute strait
> legs, requiring an ammount of drift correction on the outbound leg
> for each of the turns equal to the ammount used for the one minute
> strait leg. All adds up to be three times (3x) the inbound drift
> correction.
>
> Yes, even the old AC 61-27C, Instrument Flying Handbook had it wrong.
>
> Bob Moore

The only problem with that is it assumes that tripling the wind
correction angle triples the drift correction. For small angles, that's
a reasonable approximation (it's saying that sin(x) = x), but it falls
apart for big ones.

In a 90 kt spam can, a direct 25 kt crosswind requires a 15 degree WCA
inbound, which would mean a 45 degree WCA angle outbound. You don't
often see a 25 kt crosswind on the runway, but it's not uncommon at 3000
AGL where you might be holding. A jet holding at 180 kts will need half
the WCA you do at 90 kts.

So, yes, triple is better than double, but even better in a slow
airplane is asking the controller for longer legs! 2 minute legs will
let you fly double the inbound WCA on the outbound leg, and 3 minute
legs will make it even easier. Even easier than that is to ask for 5 or
even 10 DME legs, assuming you're so equipped (gotta love GPS).

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 18:13:32 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
> wrote:

>The Windows simulator for the CNX80 also changes the shape
>of the hold if you alter its simulated speed during the hold.
>Is that reasonably faithful to what you noticed in flight?

I've not done that with the simulator. One of these days I'll have to play
with it. In flight, I also occasionally received messages as to what
outbound course to turn to. For example, the outbound course track was
146°, but I would get a message to turn to 154°.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 18:13:32 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
> > wrote:
>
> >The Windows simulator for the CNX80 also changes the shape
> >of the hold if you alter its simulated speed during the hold.
> >Is that reasonably faithful to what you noticed in flight?
>
> I've not done that with the simulator. One of these days I'll have to play
> with it. In flight, I also occasionally received messages as to what
> outbound course to turn to. For example, the outbound course track was
> 146°, but I would get a message to turn to 154°.

Outbound course or outbound heading?

[Andrew Gideon]

Roy Smith wrote:

> My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio,
> but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours behind
> box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.

Nice club. Where's this, again?

- Andrew

[Roy Smith]

In article e.com>,
Andrew Gideon > wrote:

> Roy Smith wrote:
>
> > My club has the CNX-80 in four of our planes now. It's a cool radio,
> > but there is certainly a learning curve. I've got about 25 hours behind
> > box now, and havn't learned everything there is to know about it yet.
>
> Nice club. Where's this, again?
>
> - Andrew

White Plains. www.wfc-hpn.org.

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 18:05:19 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

>Outbound course or outbound heading?

Course. The wind was from the west.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Snowbird]

Jon Kraus > wrote in message >...
> Thanks Bob... I figured the same thing... I hear that most people have
> never been asked to hold anywhere... how about you? JK

On my first flight as PIC under IFR, I was #3 for the approach into
a non-towered airport in Center airspace. No radio comms with Center
once you start to descend inbound from the FAF, have to cancel on the
ground through FSS. Layer from about 1000 AGL to 4000 AGL.

Think I had to hold? Oh, yes, and let's not get sloppy either,
planes over and under me.

I think it all depends upon where you fly. If you're flying all the
time into airports where radar conditions permit vectors to final,
seems a lot of controllers just send you all over the sky instead
of issuing holds (though I think you'll still get 'em if the weather
is truly bad).

OTOH, if you're flying a lot where vectors to final aren't an option
but the airport sees a fair bit of traffic, holding shouldn't come
as a shock any time the wx makes an IAP necessary. I'll be surprised
if I go through the year without another hold.

And frankly, I'd rather just hold than get vectored all over creation,
told to circle a couple times, that kind of thing. If I hold with an
EFC time and I lose comm, I know where I am, what I'm supposed to
do, and when I'm supposed to do it.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Michael]

(Martin Kosina) wrote
> IFR
> departure procedures often prescribe identical orbiting procedures
> (even if they are not called "holds")

And sometimes they are. I've seen DP's with instructions to 'climb in
the hold' and should have mentioned that one as well.

> that really do keep you out of
> the weeds, sometimes with not very big margins. If you get messed up
> there, I'd say head straight back to the navaid while climbing and try
> to sort it out.

At normal climb speeds for certified singles, if you just head for the
holding fix and fly standard rate turns around it with some effort
made to keep the navaid in the center, you're not going to leave the
protected airspace.

> I only became really aware of published IDP's and the various TERPS
> issues after reading Wally Robert's site, my own instrument training
> did not emphasise this too much, which is a bit scary in retrospect...

Unfortunately, your situation is far from rare.

Michael

[Dave Butler]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> Jon Kraus > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said
>>hold wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
>>racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in
>>the big picture.... Thanks again. JK
>>
>
>
> When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern. The
> outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a crosswind.

Bless you, Andrew. I was about to jump in and say the same thing. The idea that
holding patterns are supposed to be racetrack-shaped is commonly held and is a
source of difficulty in doing holds well.

I'm not an instructor of any kind, but I've been instrument rated for a few
years and have flown as safety-pilot with a lot of different instrument pilots
doing holds for currency.

I often see pilots trying to make the outbound leg parallel to the inbound leg,
and it just doesn't work that way when there's a wind blowing across the inbound
course. Pilots with GPS seem to be particularly prone to this error.

Think about the turn radius on the downwind turn versus the turn radius on the
upwind turn, and you'll see why the outbound and inbound legs can't be parallel.

Dave
Remove SHIRT to reply directly.

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>> Jon Kraus > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Funny Mark.... my DE busted his IFR ride on the hold too... He said
>>> hold wasn't even close to being racetrack shaped or anywhere near the
>>> racetrack :-) Like others have said this doesn't mean anything in
>>> the big picture.... Thanks again. JK
>>>
>>
>>
>> When you have a crosswind, the hold will not be a race track pattern.
>> The outbound should not be parallel to the inbound if there is a
>> crosswind.
>
>
> Bless you, Andrew. I was about to jump in and say the same thing. The
> idea that holding patterns are supposed to be racetrack-shaped is
> commonly held and is a source of difficulty in doing holds well.
>
> I'm not an instructor of any kind, but I've been instrument rated for a
> few years and have flown as safety-pilot with a lot of different
> instrument pilots doing holds for currency.
>
> I often see pilots trying to make the outbound leg parallel to the
> inbound leg, and it just doesn't work that way when there's a wind
> blowing across the inbound course. Pilots with GPS seem to be
> particularly prone to this error.
>
> Think about the turn radius on the downwind turn versus the turn radius
> on the upwind turn, and you'll see why the outbound and inbound legs
> can't be parallel.

Well, they COULD be, but it would be a lot of work and you couldn't use
standard rate turns. You'd have to turn at a very slow rate upwind and
very fast downwind!


Matt

[Journeyman]

In article >, Dave Jacobowitz wrote:

> I did make some mistakes on the checkride. One of
> which was flying on a vector right through the FAC
> on a partial-panel VOR-A approach to TCY. I was
> behind the plane, had not dialed in the OBS as
> quickly as I should have, when I did, the needle was
> already on the wrong side.
>
> I caught the problem right away, correcting right
> away, and said so out loud. The rest of the approach
> was sloppy by my standards, but within PTS limits.
> Still, the DE could have failed me right then and
> there. He elected not to. Luck.

Not luck. In my experience, most examiners give you one mulligan,
unless they think you're otherwise marginal.

Despite this, IME, most people crash and burn (not literally, I hope!)
on at least one checkride in their lives. I failed the IFR checkride
first time around despite getting my mulligan. Went back, did a bit
more practice, then passed. It builds character.


> There's just something about checkrides.

There sure is.


Morris (oh, no, not another character-building experience)

[David Megginson]

John R Weiss wrote:

> While holding may be infrequent, it usually comes up at an inopportune time when
> it does come up. So, it's worth keeping up your skills. I've recently had to
> do a "360 for spacing" on approach into HKG, and have had to hold a couple times
> at Point Reyes on arrival into SFO (B747). Also, holding is a good technique
> when you're not quite ready to start an approach IMC; just ask for a turn or 2,
> and get yourself prepared after established.

Here's another nice holding trick that my IFR instructor taught me. If you
are concerned about (unforecast) ice in a cloud layer that you have to climb
through, or if you have to fly over water directly after takeoff, ask for a
climbing hold at a navaid close to the airport (it's called a "shuttle
climb" in Canada, but I don't think the U.S. has a term for it) until you
either get above the clouds or get to a safe gliding altitude for flying
over the water.

If you do start picking up ice during the climb, you'll be either lined up
for an approach (if you're holding over the IAF) or right over the airport.

I think that this is a normal IFR departure procedure for some airports in
mountain country, but I have no mountain flying experience.

To the original poster, I am very sorry to hear that you busted the first
part of the checkride, but you should be proud of yourself for going on and
finishing (and passing everything else). You've proven to yourself that if
something goes wrong in a real-life flight some day, you won't get
distracted and fall to pieces, but will keep focussed and finish your flight
safely: that might be a lifesaver.


All the best,


David