johnh wrote:
Petaluma, CA (O69) has one if you have access to US plates. Though the approaches that are in line, more or less, are marked NoPT. That means you CAN’T fly the HILPT without explicit ATC approval – not just that you don’t need to.
So if you are cleared via CROIT or REBAS for the approach, the procedure routes are marked NoPT and as Johnh wrote, you need to request permission to fly the HILPT. However, if you are not cleared via one of those routes, then you are required to fly the HILPT at JIVLI, so direct on a track of 290 to JIVLI and cleared for the approach, you need to go around the hold once. This does not make much sense, so most likely your clearance would include the magic words “Straight In”. The approach clearance would be something like, "Maintain 2500 until crossing JIVLI, cleared direct JIVLI, cleared straight in RNAV Rwy 29 Petaluma.
The above is my home airport. It uses TAA segments and if you are anywhere in the straight in segment south of CONEL, the entire segment is NoPT and would be required to fly the straight in and not use the HILPT unless ATC approved it, so the clearance would simply be “Maintain 3000, direct CONEL, cleared ILS Y Rwy 2, Rock Hill”
In both of the above approaches, the HILPT is part of the approach and in general required to be flown because the hold is bold, unless one of the exceptions applied.
@NCYankee thanks for the explanation. It’s nice to see a bit of the French language sneaking in to US aviation phraseology.🙂
What I don’t get if I am understanding you correctly and from what @Airborne_Again has written is that you fly an entry to a HILPT/racetrack/hippodrome but you don’t have to fly it. That just seems a bit weird to me. It’s a bit like as I get older I keep entering rooms and then wondering why did.🙂
Also if the entry part is enough, why don’t the regulators just say to make a base turn within the protected area of the hold?
Otherwise what you write is pretty much the same as it is here. If you don’t need a procedure turn then you don’t do one. Many use it in lieu of a hold to lose altitude because the altitude on the procedure is set. You could of course ask for the hold to descend but then you have to get your approach clearance after the hold and you might get, well, held; as others get cleared for the approach before you.
The thin line for holds and a thick one for the hippodrome is roughly the same here. Often hippodrome are larger than holds and sometimes holds are actually inside the hippodrome. That becomes a complicated manouver especially if your IAF is marked by an NDB ie an NDB hold followed by an NDB hippodrome. We used to have a few of them here. So yes at LFAT at OKPEM it is a thin line, but with broad arrows to show it is different or more than just a hold. It could mean a different direction from a standard hold or it could mean something else. For reasons which I have explained in another thread I do not have my textbooks and Pan Ops easily to hand at the moment but I am pretty sure somewhere amongst them it says “fly the racetrack” or even “use the hold in place of a procedure turn”.🙂
gallois wrote:
From what Airborne_Again has written is that you fly an entry to a HILPT/racetrack/hippodrome but you don’t have to fly it.
The confusion in this discussion may stem from what it means to “fly the racetrack”. I understand that to mean that you fly it as intended as an initial approach procedure according to PANS-OPS. I now realise that you mean that (at least) a full circuit should be flown. Unless there is a special reason, you will only fly a full circuit if you make a direct entry. If you make a parallel or offset entry the flight path will look more like that of a base turn.
Also if the entry part is enough, why don’t the regulators just say to make a base turn within the protected area of the hold?
That’s essentially what you do in a racetrack, although you do it in a standardised way! The whole point of the racetrack as an initial approach procedure is to let you enter from any direction without having to figure out a self-positioning procedure – which you have to do with a base turn or procedure turn when you arrive from most directions.
So yes at LFAT at OKPEM it is a thin line, but with broad arrows to show it is different or more than just a hold.
There is nothing unusual with the arrows in my eyes. If you look at Dan’s Ibiza example, which has both holds and a racetrack, there are arrows such as these on both the holds and the racetrack. Also, the approach plate in AIP-France uses the word “hold” in connection with the procedure over OKPEM.
(The Ibiza example shows another interesting thing. It is common that holds and racetracks use the same fix. Usually the inbound course is the same for both, but not always. In the Ibiza case the inbound course of the racetrack is 062°, while it is 064° for the hold.)
Yes all that is possible but you still don’t explain the logic between flying the entry and not flying what you have entered into.
IIRC the standard hold is a right/left hand circuit. If it is not standard it has to be identified as such.
It’s simple. If there is a HILPT (indicated by the bold oval) then you have to fly it, unless either (a) you are arriving from an IAF on a segment marked NoPT or (b) ATC tells you not to, i.e. gives you some other clearance. I don’t see why this is complicated.
(b) applies to just about everything, e.g. I don’t think in France I’ve ever flown anything remotely like my filed flight plan – you get cleared on a handful of direct legs as soon as you talk to them.
you still don’t explain the logic between flying the entry and not flying what you have entered into.
If you are “cleared approach” upon first reaching the holding fix or later on after you have turned inbound the fix while entering the hold you don’t fly the hold and proceed with approach procedure.
If you need to lose some altitude first you need to “request descent in hold” to let the ATCO know about the delay.
While discussing hold vs. racetrack, how about another less known one:
Shuttle Procedure
A shuttle procedure is defined as a manoeuvre involving a descent or climb in a pattern resembling a holding pattern
Is this climb/descent in the racetrack?
@johnh what you have described as HILPT other than the thick or thin line is pretty much the same in France.
As you say it is unusual to fly anything like your FPL in France as ATC are normally trying to get you there in the most efficient way possible whilst doing the same for other traffic.
It is rare to get a hold these days in France unless you ask for it.
But sometimes there is a need to do something different, perhaps something we have never done before and only seen in the theory books, or Jepp student manual or buried in Pan OPs or a one liner in NCO regs. And of course procedures change regularly as does phraseology. Usually out of necessity such as safety.
In the case we are looking at here Peter says he was cleared for the ILS 13 approach via OKPEM. That’s possibly not unusual as TUKVI, although being an IAF is by special clearance. There is now no requirement for further communication between ATC and Peter or vice versa unless either pilot initiates it or ATC asks for something eg Report OKPEM. Report OKPEM inbound in the procedure turn etc, until he is transferred to LFAT tower for permission to land.
Of course they will have you on radar and they will know what they expect you to be doing.
Of course if tower is on a lunch break you can land without permission as long as you announce in French. (I think that is the case at LFAT. It is the case at many French airfields when tower is unmanned.)
If ATC had told Peter to hold at OKPEM then she would have had to cancel the previously given clearance and re clear in the hold on the inbound to OKPEM leg of the hold.
All I can say is this is how I was taught and it came naturally to me. Perhaps because I found it logical. Until Peter started this thread I was unaware that some IR pilots had never heard of racetrack or unusual turns. I am still of the opinion that the ATCO was trying to help Peter not to make an issue of something. But then as Peter writes ATCOs rarely post on forums so who knows what this ATCO was saying behind the scenes.🙂
France as ATC are normally trying to get you there in the most efficient way possible whilst doing the same for other traffic.
Quite! I’m not complaining!
It is rare to get a hold these days in France unless you ask for it.
Come to Avignon LFMV! You will get all the holds you ever want and then some. The day of my IR checkride I did a warm-up flight with my instructor and we went 12 times round the hold! And I assure you we didn’t ask for it. I would say you get a hold there at least half the time. The FAA requires you to fly one hold every six months, so by my reckoning I’m good for the next 6 years. (Yes, I do know it doesn’t really work like that).
gallois wrote:
you still don’t explain the logic between flying the entry and not flying what you have entered into.
I have – several times. The whole point of the racetrack is to get the aircraft established on the final approach course (before the FAF/FAP). Once that is done there is no need for additional circuits. You are fixating on the similarities between a hold and a racetrack while not considering that they have different purposes entirely.
Let me ask a question. Consider the Ibiza approach plate in post 23. Suppose that you have been cleared direct IBA VOR, descending to 3000 ft, on a track of 225° (i.e. arriving from the north-east). Before reaching IBA, ATC tells you “cleared full procedure ILS approach”. How do you fly?
Airborne_Again wrote:
Consider the Ibiza approach plate in post 23. Suppose that you have been cleared direct IBA VOR, descending to 3000 ft, on a track of 225° (i.e. arriving from the north-east). Before reaching IBA, ATC tells you “cleared full procedure ILS approach”. How do you fly?
When arriving to IBA fly heading 212° for 1 min, turn to heading 242°, fly until reaching D11 IBA and then turn right to intercept localizer IBI.
