Hi
I did my IMC renewal recently and struggled a bit with anticipating the turn onto the inbound track back towards the fix. I wanted to hear from those who have an IR, or from a instructor, how they were taught and how they practically make adjustments on the outbound end, before turning onto the inbound track.
Besides making corrections on the outbound track, with the known wind, my method is to roll out wings level after turning onto the outbund end, and see where the ADF needed is in relation to the RBI. If the head is above the 45 degree mark then I know I need to fly straight and level a bit more, and then when the QDM is near my inbound heading, then I continue the turn inbound. Similarly, if the head is below the 45 degree mark then I know I need to roll in quickly and compensate on the inbound track.
But my instructor (on the ground) showed me a method where you anticipate where you are on the outbound end at 90 degrees, 60 degrees inbound and 30 degrees inbound. He showed me by subtracting the respective 15, 10 or 5 degree relative bearing from the fix and then adding 10 degrees for the dip error, you can work out your position in the hold from the ADF and working out the QDM (I think I have explained this properly). I am sure this mathematically makes sense, but it would be a struggle (for me) to apply this in the air and make the necessary corrections.
I quite like my 45 degree method mentioned before, but does anyone have any other theoretical or practical advice ?
I know in the real world, I'd rather use a GPS/OBS combo but I am trying to get to the standard that one day would allow me to pass an full IR practical.
Thanks PiperArcher
These are called the "gate" methods.
There are several of them kicking around.
I can't say which is best because I never did them. Well, not the "proper" ones taught by the big FTOs.
However, the gates are not tested in the JAA flight test. They are an invention of the FTO industry, to make students perform better and to improve the pass rates 
Also, the famous requirement to be established within 5 degrees of the inbound track for at least 30 secs (which is greatly assisted by the use of the gate methods) is another FTO industry invention and is/was even tested on the 170A flight test (which itself is not mandatory; once you have completed the approved IR course you can book the IRT directly with the CAA). Last I heard, the 30 secs was reduced to 15 secs and then to 5 secs, but none of these were actually ever in the JAA IRT, officially.
So whatever works for you, will be good enough.
The other thing (quite a big thing) is that while NDB holds do not need to be done with the gate methods, when you fly the "nonprecision approach" part of the IRT, you can get either a VOR or an NDB one. In modern times 
you may even get a GPS/RNAV one.
If you get the VOR one, you have a relatively easy job because you have a straight CDI presentation.
But if get the NDB one, you have the horrid RBI presentation or, if you are lucky, an RMI presentation which is a lot easier.
Whichever type of NP approach you get, you are still supposed to be within 5 degrees of the inbound track before commencing the descent from the platform altitude. So the need to be able to do reasonable NDB tracking doesn't go away, and in this case you won't have a "gate" method to help you. You just need to be a fast worker, in sorting out the wind correction! And knowing fancy hold methods won't help you much.
Thanks Peter, that is much appreciated. Yes, first time round I got 'told off' by my instructor because I wasnt agressive enough on the NP NDB approach and wasnt within the 5 degrees before descending. In fact I dont even remember the 5 degreee requirement from my reading of the IMC book, but maybe I had just forgotten.
I spent a fair bit of time on the sim after that and 2nd time round up in the air, all the NDB stuff was much better, but I wouldnt be IR standard I dont think, hence wanting to really nail it now.
You will only ever be as good as your recent currency
Your other option would be to do the IR at a certain FTO in Spain where NDB procedures are not in the flight test. They are trained but the knowledge of them not being tested means you can get really good at the other stuff.
And by the time you get around to actually doing it, this way of working is likely to be more widespread because most people who fly for real regard NDBs as a bit of a joke.
But NDBs are not going to magically disappear because loads of them are used in instrument approaches. Much of southern Europe is packed with NDB approaches. Most of Greece doesn't have an ILS, for example.
The other thing is that tracking an NDB within 5 degrees is usually illusory - because the system is not that accurate. At coastal locations in particular you can get a 20 degree error in the instrument indication (usually this is worst at about 2-3D) and the training and flight test protocol is that even though you know this is a wrong track you are supposed to track the instrument indication.
I found NDB stuff very hard, and I have an RMI!
I recently did my IR currency check ride with an examiner and this included an NDB hold. He thought I'd be stupid to use the ADF when I have a GPS with OBS mode and he'd much rather see me use that correctly than trying to chase the ADF needle.
In my installation, I had he ADF hooked up the Aspen glass cockpit so I have a nice ADF pointer in my HSI. I insisted on it because the quote on the installation work said that all navigation sources supported by the Aspen will be hooked up and the shop didn't know about the new ACU2 from Aspen yet I don't think I will ever use it but why remove a perfectly working ADF?
There is much variation.
I personally know a Swiss pilot whose JAA IRT (2011) involved an NDB procedure which, on the insistence of the examiner, was flown using the GPS.
I did actually look into doing the JAA IR in Switzerland but could not find a route to accomodate my N-reg plane, which I decided was a virtually over-riding requirement.
When I did the FAA IR, I went to the USA so could not do it in my plane anyway, but then I had my back against a wall on the options.
Today's JAA IR punters have loads of options, including this one in Greece
If you go down there, you do a VOR approach at LGKV and then an ILS at LGTS, I gather. The food is also acceptable
Thank God for GPS Overlay. The time and attention devoted to NDB approaches is completely out of proportion to their accuracy.
Whilst one should know how to do it, the Hold is not actually part of an IMC test! See note 5 on SRG1176
Whilst one should know how to do it, the Hold is not actually part of an IMC test! See note 5 on SRG1176
That is true, however I was required to hold by ATC and because I was, I got tested on it. It exposed some weaknesses on my part which I am glad I got to address, but I got rusty because my plane doesnt have a particuarly reliable ADF unit, and to be honest, I got comfortable using the GNS430.
I did my IR training on the crappiest PA28 around. The avionics were terrible and the ADF showed all theoretical errors multiplied by a factor. NDB approaches and NDB holds were terribly hard to do (the fact that it has a fixed card RMI didn't help).
My instructor gave me a very good suggestion for the check ride: put an INOP stick on the ADF. The examiner saw the sticker and said "yeah, they are rubbish, even if they work they are pretty useless, don't use it in real life, take the GPS"
