Vref wrote:
I listened to the mp3 some reassurance is not bad it seems and he didn’t get the official clearance for the approach
The mp3 recording belongs to similar situation in this thread where Peter got cleared ILS13 via TUKVI at the end.
I was referring to the original post where Peter was given ‘racetrack to ILS13’ misleading clearance and silence when querying. He did well: crossed OKPEM, turned around, flew the approach.
Destinatus wrote:
It’s unneccessary 4 minutes of flying around the hold
sure I didn’t mention that
So you do as cleared: cross OKPEM
I listened to the mp3 some reassurance is not bad it seems and he didn’t get the official clearance for the approach … 
Vref wrote:
Peter should have flown in my opinion a parallel entry over OKPEM then outbound on 139 for 1 minute and fly back with a right turn to OKPEM and request if he was cleared for the approach when turning inbound OKPEM.
It’s unneccessary 4 minutes of flying around the hold (in addition of pilot deviation of flying it without clearance).
If I remember correctly, Peter got his approach clearance shortly before OKPEM where he was previously cleared to fly to. So you do as cleared: cross OKPEM, turn around (using the hold as protected space to do so by flying its parallel entry), fly the approach.
Peter wrote:
daily VFR usage
Annex 4 that is ;-) Aeronautical Charts
There used to be 10 years ago or so a eurocontrol task force task force to have the 1/500.000 (VFR) charts harmonised.
https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2020-01/guidance-material-for-aereonautical-chart.pdf
That resulted in some progress.
However for the IACs is to Annex 4 which is poor …for e.g. for a holding synoptic not anything on publishing magnetic tracks inbound outbound:
open for harmonisation
I think that’s an extremely polite way of saying that the AIP plates are often crap – because they are published by each country only reluctantly and only to comply with ICAO data promulgation obligations.
The same has been said for stuff in daily VFR usage – example.
slowbird wrote:
direct racetrack from OKPEM to the ILS, this is presumably what she asked you to fly and was quicker than what you ended up doing.
That’s not correct IMHO’, you don’t have track guidance. I noticed on several AIP plates they don’t publish the inbound or sometimes outbound course for track guidance on the plate next to the holding symbol but its noted in the RNAV holding box (the 139 you need to figure out yourself :-) ). This is open for harmonisation I would think. On the Jepp plate you can see it as obvious part of the hold. So you easily can program it in the navigator (left turn inbound course 319 -1 min) and fly in LNAV or fly it manually if needed. I think the controller made it confusing and unfortunately Peter should have flown in my opinion a parallel entry over OKPEM then outbound on 139 for 1 minute and fly back with a right turn to OKPEM and request if he was cleared for the approach when turning inbound OKPEM. In the GNX it computes the hold itself based on the input.
Do you mean this one?
This is the Jepp one. Can you please point out where the AIP one shows a “racetrack” but the Jepp one does not?
The way the AIP plate is drawn is misleading and could be interpreted (by a complete amateur, however) as this
It’s not on the Jepp plates but if you look on the Eurocontrol French plate in the AIP there is indeed a direct racetrack from OKPEM to the ILS, this is presumably what she asked you to fly and was quicker than what you ended up doing. Now why it’s not on the Jepp plate who knows.
172driver wrote:
Nope again. Sorry, @A_A, the word ‘racetrack’ in the AIM refers to the pattern of a hold, NOT to the procedure being discussed here, which doesn’t exist in the US.
Ok. You’re FAA IR holder, not I. I just find it curious that this quote from the AIM “Some of the options are the 45 degree procedure turn, the racetrack pattern, the teardrop procedure turn, or the 80 degree ↔ 260 degree course reversal.” mentions four options with the exact same terminology as the four options in the PANS-OPS figure from post 138, yet one of them means something else in the AIM case.
Nope again. Sorry, @A_A, the word ‘racetrack’ in the AIM refers to the pattern of a hold, NOT to the procedure being discussed here, which doesn’t exist in the US.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Anyway, this is EuroGA, isn’t it?
Sure, but as we can see quite a few European pilots aren’t familiar with it either.
