NCYankee wrote:
If there is a course reversal called a teardrop procedure that the chart depicts as a teardrop with specific outbound courses specified (looks like a base turn), then the radials and distances must be flown as charted. The teardrop procedure also looks like a base turn. So you guys have a lot more names for things than we do. :
Yes, the teardrop procedure is the same as a base turn.
Using a hold to do a course reversal is fairly common practice.
However the times I’ve had to do it (in Sweden and Germany), I was explicitely cleared into the hold, and as soon as I faced the correct direction cleared for the ILS (or STAR if on an arrival hold).
The problem there is one of phraseology. The word hold “atteinte” in French has a meaning of it’s own.
I have read the first few pages, but there are 14, so not sure if this was answered earlier.
But yesterday while I while flying over france, I heard ATC mentioned to someone « racetrack ». The context of someone wanted to do a practice ILS at dole and the controller saying they would be number 6 but we have a racetrack available. The plane said they would do some maneuvering practice and come back. But at other time the controller was giving « hold » to the other planes in line for that ILS.
I had never heard that word before either. What is the conclusion? Is it a new word for hold or it means something different?
PS: is there a way to mark an answer and access it without going through all 14 pages ?
The way I read the MUP the racetrack is part of the initial approach whereas the hold is not. If you are cleared for the approach you can use the racetrack to align yourself on course at platform altitude whereas if you are asked to hold you have not yet been cleared for the approach unless given a time EAT. The hold does not necessarily put you in position on course to continue the initial approach phase and you need permission to descend
Either way ATC can request you do something else at any stage eg slow down if possible or speed up in order to maintain separation. You then of course can answer “unable …” and ATC will have to find another way to maintain separation, which is obligatory for them.
but we have a racetrack available
They probably meant a hold but used nonstandard terminology. I don’t get who someone would be offered a “racetrack” in this scenario. If you get sent to a hold where you go round and round and round (like the bunch of French people who bought my Lexus Soarer for “drifting”) then it looks like an oval racetrack. But it is crap ATC ELP because “hold” is standard terminology for a hold.
This stuff probably doesn’t cause a problem in France because of this which was a law in France until (I am told) recently, and an AF crew will know exactly what it means.
without going through all 14 pages
You probably have a very small page size configured in your profile 
is there a way to mark an answer
This is a very important thing to know about the EuroGA forum structure. It is a link to a specific post and works regardless of thread merging or the reader’s configured page size.
Here we go again.
Racetrack is standard aviation phraseology in English. I really don’t understand why you have a problem with that.
The ICAO definition of a hold is a pattern in the shape of a racetrack.
A hold is a hold. If you get stacked over Heathrow you are in a holding pattern which is shaped like a racetrack.
A hold is not part of the initial approach procedure which begins at the IAF.
The racetrack is as I pointed out part of an initial approach procedure and is used for you to position your aircraft at platform altitude and stabilised on the initial approach procedure course.
In the particular case mentioned at Dole there is both a hold and a racetrack. For the most part they do not overlap as their inbound legs are nearly perpendicular to each other. The hold will not establish you on the initial approach procedure course and you will need clearance to descend in a hold and to leave it and progress into the initial approach procedure.
In this particular case my assumption would be that having asked for a practice ILS he was informed that there were 5 other aircraft in front. However, they were prepared to clear him for the approach if he would accept to fly the racetrack which is a way of maintaining separation without putting you into the holding pattern. I would assume that all 5 of the previous aircraft had already passed the IAF on the initial approach fix. By going into the racetrack the aircraft could not only descend to 3000ft platform altitude if necessary and establish himself on the 052° initial approach course to intermediary or FAF for the ILS.
NB not all 5 prior aircraft are necessarily doing an ILS approach.
Well I have noted on my procedure checklist that in France I could hear ATC telling me something about a racetrack.
There’s lots of non-standard phraseology in Britain for us mainland people, so I’d just keep it in mind that there’s also a different kind of phraseology in France.
Racetrack hold is an official term. So there’s nothing wrong using it. It also doesn’t help that it may not be used much outside France.
gallois wrote:
For the most part they do not overlap as their inbound legs are nearly perpendicular to each other.
Well… not exactly perpendicular holding over DO NDB has inbound course 032° while racetrack is 052°.
This thread really ought to die, but since it hasn’t…
Racetrack is standard aviation phraseology in English.
No it isn’t. It’s a word that is used on some relatively obscure ICAO document that probably 98% of pilots have never even heard of, much less read, which happens to be written in English. In the English speaking aviation world (i.e. everywhere except France and Russia) it isn’t used. Period.
Sure, if you want to fly in France, it’s used by French ATC since it’s the literal translation of the word that is used in French, so you should know it. Not disputing that. Just like if roads had ATC, you would need to know what they meant by “lock”. In English it’s called a chicane, but in French it’s called an écluse, and if you look in the dictionary, that translates as lock (the kind you find on canals). But that doesn’t mean that English speakers call it a lock.
If you get stacked over Heathrow
Unlikely to happen. Biggin, or Lambourne or a couple of others, sure. But they never stack over Heathrow. (Hey, Brits can be pedantic too).
