Hold direct entry and speed in Skyhawk

Terence,

What Mark said. As for speed, I use 90 in a comparable plane, 80 seems
a little slow to me, but it is a matter of taste. The controller would
probably appreciate a heads-up about the speed change (here in Europe
you must inform them). Also, should you actually get a hold in earnest,
I would ask for slower immediately on the way to the hold, since the
whole purpose of the excercise is to delay me.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

I used 80K while in Oklahoma where you don't fly in the clouds in summer or
winter very often. When I moved to Seattle I switched to 90K because the 172
likes to make carb ice at 1700 rpm more than at 1900 (90K) and we flew in
visible moisture a lot up there. I didn't like flying holds with the carb
heat turned on. I'd rather use it when necessary at lower power settings.

I had an instrument student that came to me after several hours of work with
other instructors. He was adamant about flying the holds at 75K so I let him
(for a while). During one lesson where we were holding over Kitsap at some
intersection for a while, he had to keep adding power to maintain airspeed
and altitude. He finally figured out that he was picking up carb ice and
applied it full on all at once. I'm sure there weren't more than 10 or 12
revolutions of the engine while it tried to burn water, but that was the
longest "stumble" he'd ever experienced and was an object lesson in forming
bad habits.

You really should be able to fly the holds at various speeds ranging from
best endurance, to low-cruise because sometimes you need the higher speed to
avoid ridiculous wind correction angles. I really think you should plan your
hold speeds based on conditions at the time of the hold. Flight is a dynamic
thing after all.

--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 20:36:03 GMT, "Jim Carter"
wrote:

I used 80K while in Oklahoma where you don't fly in the clouds in summer or
winter very often. When I moved to Seattle I switched to 90K because the 172
likes to make carb ice at 1700 rpm more than at 1900 (90K) and we flew in
visible moisture a lot up there. I didn't like flying holds with the carb
heat turned on. I'd rather use it when necessary at lower power settings.

I had an instrument student that came to me after several hours of work with
other instructors. He was adamant about flying the holds at 75K so I let him
(for a while). During one lesson where we were holding over Kitsap at some
intersection for a while, he had to keep adding power to maintain airspeed
and altitude. He finally figured out that he was picking up carb ice and
applied it full on all at once. I'm sure there weren't more than 10 or 12
revolutions of the engine while it tried to burn water, but that was the
longest "stumble" he'd ever experienced and was an object lesson in forming
bad habits.

You really should be able to fly the holds at various speeds ranging from
best endurance, to low-cruise because sometimes you need the higher speed to
avoid ridiculous wind correction angles. I really think you should plan your
hold speeds based on conditions at the time of the hold. Flight is a dynamic
thing after all.


Great post Jim. Thanks!

Matt Whiting wrote:


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.

Besides, what's the point of flying in circles faster than you have to.
As Scotty would say, at Warp 10, we're going nowhere mighty fast.

Matt Whiting wrote:
Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen

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.

The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.

Blanche wrote:
The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.


They never will. They put you in the hold to keep you from going anywhere. Why
would they possibly want you to fly in place faster?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

I'll never forget getting dinged on my IFR checkride for not reducing
power in the hold. DE said it was to save gas and "very important". I
thought it was BS but agreed with him mightily. This was in a Skyhawk
similar plane (actually my Husky). But saving gas could be an issue as
you never really know how long you will be in the hold. I am reminded
of the ATC joke when informed that it cost $2000 to take the Boeing
around once in a hold an the ATC guy said "well, give me 6 grands
worth". ...

A hold can begin when you are told to "expect" a hold ahead.
Slow down, lean it out and be sure to tell ATC you are now
slower than your filed speed. By the time you get there,
there may not be a hold required.

But when you get into some airplanes there is a minimum
holding speed in icing conditions. So the speed should be
as slow as reasonable considering limitations, such as
autopilot limitations and fast enough to keep any ice on the
protected surfaces.



"Doug" wrote in message
ups.com...
| I'll never forget getting dinged on my IFR checkride for
not reducing
| power in the hold. DE said it was to save gas and "very
important". I
| thought it was BS but agreed with him mightily. This was
in a Skyhawk
| similar plane (actually my Husky). But saving gas could be
an issue as
| you never really know how long you will be in the hold. I
am reminded
| of the ATC joke when informed that it cost $2000 to take
the Boeing
| around once in a hold an the ATC guy said "well, give me 6
grands
| worth". ...
|

Blanche wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:
Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen

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.

The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.


You fly holds generally by time not distance, so how does flying slower
make things happen slower? A one minute leg takes one minute no matter
how fast you are flying. :-)

Matt

On Oct 16, 5:03 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Blanche wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:
Terence Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:01:40 -0700, Mark Hansen

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.

The other advantage of going a bit slower (for the time being) is having
more time to pay attention to what's going on, not being rushed when
ATC calls, etc. On the other hand, if ATC states "keep your speed up",
then that's another matter entirely.

You fly holds generally by time not distance, so how does flying slower
make things happen slower? A one minute leg takes one minute no matter
how fast you are flying. :-)

Matt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Matt, you are correct about the one minute holds. However, ATC may
reqequest you do a distance hold such as 5 mile legs.