Missed Approaches

Climbing to hold over an airport to wait for better weather or traffic is nearly always referenced against a VOR that is located on or very close to the airport, so you really cant get lost. Plus, theres at least one runway right below in case of any issues that might develop. Whats more, obstacle clearance is straightforward-poles, towers and trees are only so tall and you dont have to worry about encountering significant terrain rising up from the airport itself.

Elaine Kauh

Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

While many "climb-in-hold" missed approach procedures are straightforward, subtle wording variations can lead to critical misinterpretations.
The article highlights a "gotcha" scenario where "climb to X direct Y and hold" might be misread as climbing straight to altitude *before* entering the holding pattern, potentially flying into terrain, especially in complex environments like the Grand Canyon.
Such misinterpretations are exacerbated by factors like high-density altitude and the need for significant altitude gain within specific climb performance limits.
Pilots must thoroughly examine all aspects of a missed approach procedure (text, charts, and surrounding context) to ensure correct execution and avoid dangerous situations.

See a mistake? Contact us.

Climbing to hold over an airport to wait for better weather or traffic is nearly always referenced against a VOR that is located on or very close to the airport, so you really can’t get lost. Plus, there’s at least one runway right below in case of any issues that might develop.

What’s more, obstacle clearance is straightforward—poles, towers and trees are only so tall and you don’t have to worry about encountering significant terrain rising up from the airport itself. So those missed procedures that require what we know as a climb-in-hold are going to be easy to spot, right? Well, mostly…