Arrival Holding Patterns

Modification Date: 08DEC2016

Revision: 0.0
ATA 34 - NAVIGATION
Scope: ALL AIRCRAFT

Briefing Owners:

Nick Rose
nicholas.rose@gulfstrem.com

Justin Maas
justin.maas@gulfstream.com

The information contained herein is advisory only in nature.

All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns
Representative Scenario
• Deer Lodge, Montana (38S) offers a single
RNAV (GPS) approach.

• Due to a variety of factors, the holding

SE
pattern at Coppertown VOR (CPN) is needed
LU by a majority of arriving traffic.
NA

• When loading this approach into the Flight

Management System using the CPN
TIO

transition, no holding pattern appears:

GA
VI
NA
OR
TF
NO

Large Cabin (left) and Mid Cabin (right) CDU

images show no holding pattern and CPN.

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns

What kind of hold is it?

• Before going further, it must be

realized that the hold at CPN is
considered an “Arrival Holding
Pattern.”

S E • Per FAA AIM 5-4-32, some approach

L U charts have an arrival holding pattern
ONA depicted at the IAF using a “thin line”
ATI holding symbol. It is charted where
V IG holding is frequently required prior to
R NA starting the approach procedure so
FO that detailed holding instructions are
T not required. The arrival holding
NO pattern is not authorized unless
assigned by Air Traffic Control.

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns

Why isn’t the holding pattern at CPN depicted?

• During the investigation of this behavior, the

Introduction to Jeppesen Navigation Charts
was consulted. It states that “heavy-weight
tracks indicate holding/racetrack is required”
notwithstanding ATC radar vectors.

• Although the hold at CPN is not a heavy-

weight pattern, this is not the primary reason
that the holding pattern is not retrievable. For
example, all missed approach holding
patterns are not heavy-weighted and are still
in the FMS navigation database.

L US E
N A
V IGATIO
NA
OT FOR
N
Heavy-weight and non heavy-weight holding patterns

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns
Why isn’t the holding pattern at CPN depicted?

• The FAA’s Instrument Flight Procedures

Information Gateway was then consulted.

• This website contains source documents

used for data validation of coded instrument
flight procedures (and even upcoming
procedures, such as those at KSMO).

• After retrieving the Terminal Instrument

Procedures (TERPS) form for this approach, it
was revealed that CPN is defined via ARINC
424 as an Initial Fix (IF) and Track to Fix (TF)
path terminator. Holding patterns are coded
as HA/HF/HM (see Appendix A for ARINC 424
Path Terminator review).

• The only reference to the arrival hold is:

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns

Additional Issue

• If the hold were to be manually programmed,

the charted Jeppesen procedure currently
lacks helpful information.

• Per FAA AIM 5-3-12, RNAV/DME holding

SE
patterns require a leg distance to be provided.
LU This information is provided on the FAA chart
(7NM, upper left image) but not on the
NA

Jeppesen chart (lower left image).

TIO

• Although one could argue that the hold is

GA

based on a VOR and not RNAV/DME and

therefore only requires timed legs, this would
VI

increase workload if transitioning from above

NA

14,000’ to below 14,000’ (1.5 minute versus 1.0

OR

minute leg times, respectively).

TF

• Jeppesen has been notified of this issue.

NO

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns

Conclusion/Takeaway

• Arrival holding patterns are generally not

codified as retrievable patterns in FMS
navigation databases based on ARINC 424

SE
codification.
LU
• If manually entering such holding patterns,
NA

use vigilance to ensure correct input/ensure

terrain clearance. It may be wise to consult
TIO

the approach’s FAA Terminal Procedure to

GA

ensure all hold information has been

reviewed.
VI
NA

• NBAA has provided valuable

recommendations to the Aeronautical
OR

Charting Forum concerning the application of

TF

arrival holding patterns and recommended

NO

chart verbiage.

• Jeppesen Aviation Notices and Alerts.

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
All Aircraft | Arrival Holding Patterns

Appendix A - ARINC 424 Path Terminator Review (from

FAA Instrument Procedures Handbook, Chapter 6)

Rev 0.0 | For Reference Only - Not FAA Approved/Use in Conjunction with AFM
to be followed and the criteria that must be met before
the path concludes and the next path begins. Although
there are 23 leg types available, none of the manufactured N
G
database equipment is capable of using all of the leg types. LE seg ext
F me
nt
Pilots must continue to monitor procedures for accuracy

R
and not rely solely on the information that the database
is showing. If the RNAV system does not have the leg type

ARC
CENTER
FIX

Previous
segment
Figure 6-7. Constant radius arc or RF leg.
Figure 6-5. Initial fix.

demanded by procedures, data packers have to select one

or a combination of available lleg types to give the best
approximation, which can result in an incorrect execution
of the procedure. Below is a list of the 23 leg types and
their uses that may or may not be used by all databases.

Figure 6-8. Course to a fix or CF leg.

TF LEG
Unspecified position

DF LEG

Figure 6-6. Track to a fix leg type.

• Initial fix or IF leg—defines a database fix as a point

in space and is only required to define the beginning Figure 6-9. Direct to a fix or DF leg.
of a route or procedure. [Figure 6-5]
• Track to a fix or TF leg—defines a great circle track
over the ground between two known database
fixes and the preferred method for specification of
straight legs (course or heading can be mentioned
on charts but designer should ensure TF leg is used
for coding). [Figure 6-6]
• Constant radius arc or RF leg—defines a constant
radius turn between two databases fixes, lines
tangent to the arc, and a center fix. [Figure 6-7] Figure 6-10. Fix to an altitude or FA leg.
• Course to a fix or CF leg—defines a specified course
to a specific database fix. Whenever possible, TF legs

6-6
 should be used instead of CF legs to avoid magnetic DME distance that is from a specific database DME
variation issues. [Figure 6-8] NAVAID. [Figure 6-12]
• Direct to a fix or DF leg—defines an unspecified track
starting from an undefined position to a specified

 
FC LEG
080° 
9 NM

Figure 6-14. Course to an altitude or CA leg.

Figure 6-11. Track from a fix from a distance or FC leg.

D 10 
fix. [Figure 6-9]

090° 
CD LEG 

080° 
 
FD LEG
D 
10

Figure 6-15. Course to a DME distance of CD leg.

 

0°  g 
07 xt le
Figure 6-12. Track from a fix to a DME distance or FD leg. 090°  Ne
CI LEG 
• Fix to an altitude or FA leg—defines a specified track
over the ground from a database fix to a specified
Figure 6-16. Course to an intercept or CI leg.
altitude at an unspecified position. [Figure 6-10]

• From a fix to a manual termination or FM leg—

defines a specified track over the ground from a
database fix until manual termination of the leg.
[Figure 6-13]

1
Figure 6-13. From a fix to a manual termination or FM leg. CR 20° 
 LE
G
170° 

• Track from a fix from a distance or FC leg—defines

a specified track over the ground from a database
fix for a specific distance. [Figure 6-11]
• Track from a fix to a distance measuring equipment
(DME) distance or FD leg—defines a specified track
over the ground from a database fix to a specific Figure 6-17. Course to a radial termination or CR leg.

6-7
 • Course to an altitude or CA leg—defines a specified • Arc to a fix or AF leg—defines a track over the ground
course to a specific altitude at an unspecified at a specified constant distance from a database
position. [Figure 6-14] DME NAVAID. [Figure 6-18]

 
0°  eg
07 xt l
090°  Ne
VI LEG 

Figure 6-21. Heading to an intercept or VI leg.

• Heading to an altitude termination or VA leg—

defines a specified heading to a specific altitude
termination at an unspecified position. [Figure 6-19]

Figure 6-18. Arc to a fix or AF leg.

• Course to a DME distance or CD leg—defines a

specified course to a specific DME distance that is
from a specific database DME NAVAID. [Figure 6-15]
Figure 6-22. Heading to a manual termination or VM leg.

• Heading to a DME distance termination or VD

leg—defines a specified heading terminating at a
specified DME distance from a specific database
DME NAVAID. [Figure 6-20]

1
Figure 6-19. Heading to an altitude termination or VA leg. VR 20° 
 LE
G
170° 

• Course to an intercept or CI leg—defines a specified

course to intercept a subsequent leg. [Figure 6-16]
• Course to a radial termination or CR leg—defines a
course to a specified radial from a specific database
VOR NAVAID. [Figure 6-17]

Figure 6-23. Heading to a radial termination or VR leg.

• Heading to an intercept or VI leg—defines a

D 10 
specified heading to intercept the subsequent leg
at an unspecified position. [Figure 6-21]

090° 
VD LEG 

Figure 6-20. Heading to a DME distance termination or VD leg.

6-8

8°
01
PI
063°
Figure 6-24. Procedure turn or PI leg.
• Heading to a manual termination or VM leg—
defines a specified heading until a manual
termination. [Figure 6-22]
Figure 6-25. Racetrack course reversal or HA, HF, and HM leg.
• Heading to a radial termination or VR leg—defines a
specified heading to a specified radial from a specific
database VOR NAVAID. [Figure 6-23]
• Procedure turn or PI leg—defines a course reversal
starting at a specific database fix and includes
outbound leg followed by a left or right turn and
180° course reversal to intercept the next leg. [Figure
6-24]
• Racetrack course reversal or altitude termination
(HA), single circuit terminating at the fix (base turn)
(HF), or manual termination (HM) leg types—define
racetrack pattern or course reversals at a specified
database fix. [Figure 6-25]
The GRAND JUNCTION FIVE DEPARTURE for Grand Junction
Regional in Grand Junction, Colorado, provides a good
example of different types of path and terminator legs
used. [Figure 6-26] When this procedure is coded into the
navigation database, the person entering the data into the
records must identify the individual legs of the flightpath
and then determine which type of terminator should be
used.
The first leg of the departure for Runway 11 is a climb
via runway heading to 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL)
and then a climbing right turn direct to a fix. When this is
entered into the database, a heading to an altitude (VA)
value must be entered into the record’s path and terminator
field for the first leg of the departure route. This path and
terminator tells the avionics to provide course guidance
based on heading, until the aircraft reaches 6,000 feet,
and then the system begins providing course guidance
for the next leg. After reaching 6,000 feet, the procedure
calls for a right turn direct to the Grand Junction (JNC)
VORTAC. This leg is coded into the database using the path
and terminator direct to a fix (DF) value, which defines an
unspecified track starting from an undefined position to a
specific database fix.
Another commonly used path and terminator value is
heading to a radial (VR) which is shown in Figure 6-27
using the CHANNEL ONE DEPARTURE procedure for Santa
Ana, California. The first leg of the runway 19L/R procedure
requires a climb on runway heading until crossing the I-SNA
1 DME fix or the SLI R-118, this leg must be coded into the
database using the VR value in the Path and Terminator
field. After crossing the I-SNA 1 DME fix or the SLI R-118, the
avionics should cycle to the next leg of the procedure that
in this case, is a climb on a heading of 175° until crossing SLI
R-132. This leg is also coded with a VR Path and Terminator.
The next leg of the procedure consists of a heading of 200°
until intercepting the SXC R-084. In order for the avionics to
correctly process this leg, the database record must include
the heading to an intercept (VI) value in the Path and
Terminator field. This value directs the avionics to follow
a specified heading to intercept the subsequent leg at an
unspecified position.
The path and terminator concept is a very important part
of airborne navigation database coding. In general, it is not
necessary for pilots to have an in-depth knowledge of the
ARINC coding standards; however, pilots should be familiar
with the concepts related to coding in order to understand
the limitations of specific RNAV systems that use databases.
Path and Terminator Limitations
How a specific RNAV system deals with Path and
Terminators is of great importance to pilots operating
with airborne navigation databases. Some early RNAV
systems may ignore this field completely. The ILS or LOC/
DME RWY 3 approach at Durango, Colorado, provides an
example of problems that may arise from the lack of path
and terminator capability in RNAV systems. Although
approaches of this type are authorized only for sufficiently
equipped RNAV systems, it is possible that a pilot may elect
to fly the approach with conventional navigation, and then
6-9