Newbie holding questions

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

I'm not Steve, but ... what if the controller does not issue the clearance
beyond the current limit? If your radios are still working, you should
hold, right?


If your radios are still working you should query the controller as you near
the clearance limit.

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...

7110.65P, Paragraph 4-6-1 c


Thank you Tim,

So, from what I read, if I get from ATC, no delay, then I won't be holding
and simply proceeding on to the next fix in my route that I have been
cleared to. I won't be required to enter a holding pattern as there is no
delay.


Right. Apparently you didn't bother to read that subparagraph when I
provided the reference a week ago.



I will keep sticking to my statement, as I have come across nothing to
contradict the fact, if I am put in a hold where I am required to fly in a
circle, enter a hold via tear drop, parallel or direct entry, there should
be an EFC issued by the air traffic controller.


Correct, and to my knowledge nobody has said anything contrary to that in
this thread.

On 01/11/06 09:16, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

I'm not Steve, but ... what if the controller does not issue the clearance
beyond the current limit? If your radios are still working, you should
hold, right?


If your radios are still working you should query the controller as you near
the clearance limit.



Obviously. I thought the issue was what if no update is forthcoming from ATC.
For example, if the frequency is too busy.

If you have a clearance limit (which is not your destination airport) and
your radios are working, and you've reached the clearance limit fix, and
you've been unable to get a new clearance limit from ATC, then you'd better
hold.

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Obviously. I thought the issue was what if no update is forthcoming from
ATC. For example, if the frequency is too busy.


That implies a high traffic area. You don't tend to find nonradar methods
used in high traffic areas, you tend to find radar in those areas.



If you have a clearance limit (which is not your destination airport) and
your radios are working, and you've reached the clearance limit fix, and
you've been unable to get a new clearance limit from ATC, then you'd
better hold.


Why? The controller said no delay was expected, he analyzed the traffic
situation and resolved a problem with a paper stop. He anticipated clearing
me beyond that point before I reached it. There could be traffic following
me at the same altitude. If I enter a hold where none was anticipated I
could be creating a problem where none exists.

On 01/11/06 10:22, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Obviously. I thought the issue was what if no update is forthcoming from
ATC. For example, if the frequency is too busy.


That implies a high traffic area. You don't tend to find nonradar methods
used in high traffic areas, you tend to find radar in those areas.



If you have a clearance limit (which is not your destination airport) and
your radios are working, and you've reached the clearance limit fix, and
you've been unable to get a new clearance limit from ATC, then you'd
better hold.


Why? The controller said no delay was expected, he analyzed the traffic
situation and resolved a problem with a paper stop. He anticipated clearing
me beyond that point before I reached it. There could be traffic following
me at the same altitude. If I enter a hold where none was anticipated I
could be creating a problem where none exists.



But unless the controller clears you beyond that fix (which in this case,
he did not) and you're not following the Radio Failure procedures (which
in this case you are not) then you must hold.

Are you suggesting that when cleared to a fix that is not the destination
airport, that you never need to hold at that fix unless ATC comes back and
specifically tells you to?



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

But unless the controller clears you beyond that fix (which in this case,
he did not) and you're not following the Radio Failure procedures (which
in this case you are not) then you must hold.


If the controller hasn't cleared me beyond the fix before I reach it I will
query him. When I do so he will either clear me beyond it or issue an EFC.
If he doesn't respond it means I've had a radio failure and I will comply
with FAR 91.185 which tells me not to hold.

On 01/11/06 10:48, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

But unless the controller clears you beyond that fix (which in this case,
he did not) and you're not following the Radio Failure procedures (which
in this case you are not) then you must hold.


If the controller hasn't cleared me beyond the fix before I reach it I will
query him. When I do so he will either clear me beyond it or issue an EFC.
If he doesn't respond it means I've had a radio failure and I will comply
with FAR 91.185 which tells me not to hold.

So it's impossible that the controller could be too busy to answer you, or
that he got up to get some coffee?


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA

But unless the controller clears you beyond that fix (which in this case,
he did not) and you're not following the Radio Failure procedures (which
in this case you are not) then you must hold.

If you are cleared to a fix and "expect no delay", how does that differ
from having an EFC time that exactly matches your arrival at the fix?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

So it's impossible that the controller could be too busy to answer you, or
that he got up to get some coffee?


Pretty much. How busy he's gonna be in the near future can be predicted by
the number of active and proposed strips sitting in front of him. He ain't
gonna take a coffee break without being relieved by another controller.

On 01/11/06 11:03, Jose wrote:
But unless the controller clears you beyond that fix (which in this case,
he did not) and you're not following the Radio Failure procedures (which
in this case you are not) then you must hold.

If you are cleared to a fix and "expect no delay", how does that differ
from having an EFC time that exactly matches your arrival at the fix?

Jose

It is my understanding that these apply only when there is a two-way radio
failure. If the radio is still working, these are meaningless (other than,
perhaps, as an aid to planning).

I think a lot of the confusion in this thread may have to do with the difference
between what the FARs tell you to do, and what can be expected in the real world.

My interest has been in the rules, but that may not be what the OP was looking
for.

In the real world, you'll probably never get to that fix without getting another
clearance limit unless there is a radio failure (as Steven says, if I can be
allowed to paraphrase just a bit). However, I think the rules are there to help
us understand what to do when that doesn't work out (and to pass FAA knowledge
tests and oral exams ;-) )


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA