"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message
...

"Icebound" writes:

[...]
Okay, so do I have this right:

In Canadian procedure, after a missed approach, I proceed as per the
MAP on the plate. If I reach the end of the procedure without
hearing from the controller (or being able to reach him), I do not
hold (unless a hold is explicitly indicated), but I just proceed to
my alternate. [...]

Different Canadian procedure manuals vary in their specificity
regarding this situation. Our AIP RAC 9.26 says that a hold is
implied at the end of the missed approach procedure, unless other
clearance is issued.

That's interesting, because then why is the hold explicitly specified on
some plates but not onothers (not on *most* others)? And on what track
should the "implied" hold be executed?

Or is it that the "implied" hold will be safe on any track of your choosing,
and that the plates show an explicit hold only when there is a requirement
for execution on some *specific* track???



I found no clear indication of this in our
Instrument Procedures Manual, nor the Air Regulations proper.

Anyway, in case one cannot get hold of a new clearance, the challenge
becomes picking a point at which one deems communication to have been
lost, to authorize exiting the hold and divert to an alternate. This
suggests that the US & Canadian systems are alike in these areas after
all.

- FChE