This was invented long long ago. I seem to remember it back in the 1980’s and was probably there before that. There was no offset entry in the textbooks back then IIRC. 020 would have been the line between direct and parallel although you were allowed a 5°? buffer. Which is why I wrote 025°.
gallois wrote:
As @Yeager wrote yes of course you can manouver the aircraft so as to choose your entry to a hold or racetrack providing you stay within the protected area or above TAA/MSA. This was not my argument and would have no problem with Peter doing so.
My argument was that whether it was a hold or racetrack he did not fly it as he should.
@gallois, I still do not understand what you believe was incorrect. Can you spell it out?
All IFR pilots should know what a racetrack is. It’s a common aviation term and is in English becoming “hippodrome” if you are communicating in French. I do not understand why many IR holders on here are not aware of it.
I agree with that. IFR involves lots of obscure things of dubious practical significance, but I wouldn’t have thought the racetrack was among them.
Lots of interesting discussion here. As the question was raised again to what a racetrack is, I’d say look at here (post #8 in this thread) and here (post #23 in this thread, both from @Dan) where it is shown on a respective map.
Racetrack to my understanding is a specific procedure to capture a localizer. It is somewhat similar to a holding, but the purpose is totally different. It is used quite often in Spain as an option. I flew a racetrack to Salamanca, without actually knowing that it is called like that. You have a holding over BBI. The approach procedure looks a lot like the holding just with a longer outbound leg, but with the racetrack you actually capture the localizer. See here:
UdoR wrote:
Lots of interesting discussion here. As the question was raised again to what a racetrack is, I’d say look at here (post #8 in this thread) and here (post #23 in this thread, both from @Dan) where it is shown on a respective map.Racetrack to my understanding is a specific procedure to capture a glideslope. It is somewhat similar to a holding, but the purpose is totally different. It is used quite often in Spain as an option. I flew a racetrack to Salamanca, without actually knowing that it is called like that. You have a holding over BBI. The approach procedure looks a lot like the holding just with a longer outbound leg, but with the racetrack you actually capture the glideslope. See here:
This is clear – thank you (and so it is the same as the “alternative procedure” for Cardiff that I posted above). I just was not aware that this is called a “racetrack” (I’ve asked a few other UK IR holders and they did not know it was called this either).
It is obviously ridiculous that there is total disagreement among IR holders. ATC was clearly out of order in this case.
UdoR wrote:
but with the racetrack you actually capture the glideslope
Actually, you capture the localizer 
Indochine wrote:
I’ve asked a few other UK IR holders and they did not know it was called this either
This is strange… I checked with few pilots and they all knew what it was.
Emir wrote:
Actually, you capture the localizer
But that’s what I put 
at least what I meant to put (now edited). What a luck that I already passed the exam
Peter wrote:
It is obviously ridiculous that there is total disagreement among IR holders
You mean: disagreement to the respect as what ATC said? No one (me included) seems to understand what was possibly meant by ATC in the situation that you initially depicted. We’re all puzzling and some of us (me included) have learned a small lesson here. So thank you for bringing this up.
I also have never heard of the terminology of racetrack, but that is because the vast majority of my flying is in the US, where it is not used.
ICAO PAN OPS 8168 has this definition of a Racetrack Procedure:
Racetrack procedure. A procedure designed to enable the aircraft to reduce altitude during the initial approach segment
and/or establish the aircraft inbound when the entry into a reversal procedure is not practical.
With this definition, in the US it would have either been termed an HILPT (Hold in Lieu of a Procedure Turn), or an Arrival Hold. These are charted differently with the HILPT being a bold line width verses the Arrival Hold, being a half width line. The HILPT if charted is a mandatory part of the procedure and must be flown (there are 4 specific exceptions). The Arrival Hold is only flown if ATC approves it. If this procedure was a US TERPS procedure, the hold would be termed as an Arrival Hold. That would have demanded that ATC provide specific approval to fly the Arrival Hold aka the “Racetrack Procedure”. Although there may be other types of racetracks, the one on the approach chart meets the quoted definition in that it is designed to establish the aircraft inbound when the entry into a reversal procedure is not practical. It demands that ATC provides explicit permission, so the clearance makes complete sense to those who understand the usage of racetrack terminology, that is to fly the hold once around to get oriented so that the ILS procedure can be flown.
Peter wrote:
The ATCO said “fly the racetrack to ILS13”
OKPEM is most likely a Holding.
It’s not a Race track or Procedure.
I think you flew it correctly, entered the hold at OKPEM and did one lap and then joined the approach.
