Canadian holding procedures

"Icebound" wrote:

[...]
The MAPs that don't specify a hold... seem to (always?) put you in at
altitude and into a position suitable for a second approach.

Somebody needs to confirm whether that is on purpose so that you can
begin the second approach immediately??? (in the absence of
instructions to the contrary, of course)

It may be just a coincidence. Recall that being cleared for the
approach does not authorize multiple tries (in case one doesn't break
out), just one. The default procedure, as exemplified in the
lost-comm (or too-low-for-radio) rules, is to head off to one's
alternate. The MAP has to be a point whence one can do that, so it
has en-route-level obstacle clearance just like an initial fix.

- FChE

"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message
...
... Recall that being cleared for the
approach does not authorize multiple tries (in case one doesn't break
out), just one. The default procedure, as exemplified in the
lost-comm (or too-low-for-radio) rules, is to head off to one's
alternate. The MAP has to be a point whence one can do that, so it
has en-route-level obstacle clearance just like an initial fix.



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. Otherwise, I
WILL hear from the controller... for a new approach clearance, or other
instructions.

? ? ? ?

"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. 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

"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 would some plates specify the hold
explicitly and others (most others) do not? And what track would you hold
on?

Or do they only specify the hold explicitly when it has to be on a specific
track, and otherwise it is safe to choose your own 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

"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

Our AIP RAC 9.26 says that a hold is
implied at the end of the missed approach procedure, unless other
clearance is issued. I found no clear indication of this in our
Instrument Procedures Manual, nor the Air Regulations proper.

OK, that would make sense. There has to be a concept of a clearance
limit and some sort of a default action to take there. When commencing
an IAP, the limit is the MAP, *not* the alternate airport, I would
think.

Not all these situations are lost-comm, either, the controller could
just be busy for a while, giving someone a long clearance, missed the
call on a congested frequency, etc. It can take just a few minutes to
execute a simple missed in a faster airplane. An expectation to start
right back up into the enroute structure without the benefit of little
breathing room to sort things out would be highly inpractical, IMHO.

I think there may be a general misunderstanding in this thread. You
have to distinguish between two different scenarios. 1) Approaches in
controlled or uncontrolled airspace WITH communication to ATC; and 2)
Approaches in uncontrolled airspace WITHOUT communication to ATC.
Both scenarios assume uncontrolled airports, i.e. no tower, radio or
RCO (remote controlled outlet) on the field (in those cases there's
always someone to talk to and get missed approach instructions or
instructions after the missed is commenced).

1) You are at one time on the way to the airport high enough to talk
to ATC. ATC clears you for *AN* approach (this is the correct
phraseology; which approach you do is up to you). YOU ensure terrain
and obstacle clearance from then on using the information on the
approach plate both for the actual approach and for the missed (e.g.
YOU decide if you need a shuttle hold etc.). The missed will get you
back in contact with ATC. Your clearance limit is the last fix in the
missed approach instruction. You WILL be able to talk to ATC by then;
otherwise follow lost comm. procedure. It's the same in the US: At
or before the missed hold you will talk to ATC or go lost comm., only
that there is very rarely a missed hold in Canada (and then only for
terrain in mountainous areas).

2) This may be a concept unknown in the US: In Canada, you can do a
complete IFR flight in IMC or VMC without ever talking to ATC or
without ever getting a clearance, including take off, cruise, approach
and missed. All that's required is that you are in uncontrolled
airspace, squawk 1000 in low airspace, ensure terrain and obstacle
clearance, talk to the required MFs (mandatory frequencies) and
broadcast all your intentions on 126.7. In this case, you do what you
have to do and on the missed, go wherever you can land. Should you
have to enter controlled airspace, contact ATC and get a clearance.
You can NOT enter controlled airspace without a clearance if you are
not VFR.
That's it - no more, no less. On the missed, you either talk to ATC
(or you follow lost comm. procedures) or you are uncontrolled and on
your own.

Gerd

As another poster said correctly (that's what I kinda meant by lost
comm. procedures) refer to AIP RAC 9.26 where there is a whole list of
holding options if you don't get hold of ATC before reaching the
missed approach holding fix. But - as in the US - you cannot hold
forever and then it's off to the lost comm. procedures.

Gerd

....
That's it - no more, no less. On the missed, you either talk to ATC
(or you follow lost comm. procedures) or you are uncontrolled and on
your own.

That is a good point (many people who learned to fly IFR in the lower
48 and southern Canada don't think of it that way, but the airspace
system is designed to allow instrument flight from takeoff to
touchdown without ever talking to anybody). But I think the
discussion was not largely misunderstood, the basic question was what
is the clearance limit at the end of an IAP in *controlled* airspace,
and besides Frank's reference to the AIP, this has gone unanswered.
Is it the MAP, at which point you enter either a published or standard
holding pattern, or the alternate airport ?

Sorry, not to nit-pick, but this is a real scenario - I just missed an
approach, got busy reconfiguring the airplane and I am reaching the
"climb-to" altitude 0.5nm from the MAP with its *depicted* racetrack
pattern at 120 knots. The frequency is congested and I can't get a
word in. What should I do in Canada ?

....
That's it - no more, no less. On the missed, you either talk to ATC
(or you follow lost comm. procedures) or you are uncontrolled and on
your own.

That is a good point (many people who learned to fly IFR in the lower
48 and southern Canada don't think of it that way, but the airspace
system is designed to allow instrument flight from takeoff to
touchdown without ever talking to anybody). But I think the
discussion was not largely misunderstood, the basic question was what
is the clearance limit at the end of an IAP in *controlled* airspace,
and besides Frank's reference to the AIP, this has gone unanswered.
Is it the MAP, at which point you enter either a published or standard
holding pattern, or the alternate airport ?

Sorry, not to nit-pick, but this is a real scenario - I just missed an
approach, got busy reconfiguring the airplane and I am reaching the
"climb-to" altitude 0.5nm from the MAP with its *depicted* racetrack
pattern at 120 knots. The frequency is congested and I can't get a
word in. What should I do in Canada ?