If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
Hello,
A couple of quick questions/calrifications: 1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy 36L missed: "...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold" I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg. Is this the correct technique for entering a direct hold or should I be intercepting the inbound radial? It seems this would result in a better pattern because of tendency to overshoot when flying direct and immediately turning. 2) What would be an appropriate holding speed in a 172? I have been using 80kts, which requires about 1700-1800rpm at 3000'. Thanks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote:
Hello, A couple of quick questions/calrifications: 1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy 36L missed: "...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold" I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg. I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to clarify. When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold. Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you approach the holding fix. If the appropriate entry is direct, then when you cross the fix, you turn to the outbound heading. Is this the correct technique for entering a direct hold or should I be intercepting the inbound radial? It seems this would result in a better pattern because of tendency to overshoot when flying direct and immediately turning. 2) What would be an appropriate holding speed in a 172? I have been using 80kts, which requires about 1700-1800rpm at 3000'. I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. Thanks. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote: On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote: Hello, A couple of quick questions/calrifications: 1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy 36L missed: "...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold" I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg. I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to clarify. When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold. Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you approach the holding fix. Duh! Of course. Thanks for pointing that out. I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel efficient). Obviously I need more practice. Cheers, Terence |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On 10/12/07 08:58, Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote: Hello, A couple of quick questions/calrifications: 1) When executing a direct entry to a hold e.g. for the KAPC LOC Rwy 36L missed: "...climb 3000' direct SGD VOR & hold" I have been flying directly to the VOR then, upon watching the to/from flag flip, I turn to the inbound course (167 deg) momentarily before executing a standard rate turn to the outbound course of 347 deg. I haven't looked at the approach plate to which you refer, but wonder if you're confusing a couple of different terms, so I would like to clarify. When told to proceed "direct" to a fix, that does not necessarily mean you will use a "direct" (versus teardrop/parallel) entry to the hold. Your entry to the hold will be dictated by the direction from which you approach the holding fix. Duh! Of course. Thanks for pointing that out. I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel efficient). Obviously I need more practice. You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits, of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught. Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say? -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/12/07 07:39, Terence Wilson wrote: I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. I was using 100, but had a little trouble maintaining a co-ordinated standard rate turn, 80 makes it a lot easier (and more fuel efficient). Obviously I need more practice. The slower speed means more crab to handle the wind also. I'd fly at least 90 in a hold in a Hawk, but if you comfortable at 80 nothing wrong with that. Matt |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
Mark Hansen wrote:
I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. Why would they care? They want you to drill holes in a little chunk of sky to kill time. They don't want you flying out of the protected chunk of sky assigned to you but what you do within it really doesn't matter. You shouldn't be competing with other aircraft within the circle... ATC will stack traffic vertically instead of within the circle itself. Remember, the prime reason to hold is to kill time... plain and simple. The reason to slow down is only to save fuel since you're not going anywhere. You could fly around at full speed if you've got the fuel to waste. -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:04:42 -0700, Mark Hansen
wrote: You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits, of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught. Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say? I'm a lapsed PP-SEL working on my BFR, then transitioning to instruments. Recently I've been stymied by weather, aircraft availability etc. so I've been using the time to study and practice in MS FlightSim. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
Remember, the prime reason to hold is to kill time... plain and simple. The
reason to slow down is only to save fuel since you're not going anywhere. You could fly around at full speed if you've got the fuel to waste. -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com Agreed. No reason to go blasting around the racetrack. You aren't going 'anywhere'. g |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On 10/12/07 14:46, Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:04:42 -0700, Mark Hansen wrote: You can execute the maneuver at any speed (within legal speed limits, of course). However, the faster you go, the more turbulent the ride may be (depending on the weather), etc. 90 seems to be a good compromise for the type of airplane. At least, that is what I was taught. Are you an instrument student? What does your instructor say? I'm a lapsed PP-SEL working on my BFR, then transitioning to instruments. Recently I've been stymied by weather, aircraft availability etc. so I've been using the time to study and practice in MS FlightSim. Congratulations on getting back to flying. Stay on the group, as there are a lot of great people here that can help. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk
On 10/12/07 14:17, Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote: I use 90. I don't know of any reason you can't use 80 if you like, other than perhaps going slower than the controllers are expecting, and messing with their timings, etc. Why would they care? They want you to drill holes in a little chunk of sky to kill time. They don't want you flying out of the protected chunk of sky assigned to you but what you do within it really doesn't matter. You shouldn't be competing with other aircraft within the circle... ATC will stack traffic vertically instead of within the circle itself. Remember, the prime reason to hold is to kill time... plain and simple. The reason to slow down is only to save fuel since you're not going anywhere. You could fly around at full speed if you've got the fuel to waste. Sorry about the confusion. I use the same speed for holds that I do for other flight around the approach area (for example, while on "base" getting vectored to the FAC), and I was thinking of these other phases. Still, you can go as slow as you want, and I didn't mean to imply that there was any requirement to the contrary. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Skyhawk vs. Mooney | Grant[_2_] | Owning | 50 | May 21st 07 05:32 AM |
Direct dial FSS phone numbers being suggested as work-around to long hold times | Peter R. | Piloting | 3 | May 15th 07 01:16 PM |
A4-B Skyhawk | Dave Kearton | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 2nd 07 01:04 AM |
Photos of 1:48 TA-4K Skyhawk | [email protected] | Restoration | 12 | February 17th 05 03:39 PM |
Skyhawk A4-K Weapons fit? | Ian | Military Aviation | 0 | February 18th 04 02:44 AM |