avi8tor4life

Ok just to begin, this happened in a sim not the real airplane.

Here's the question.
If a holding pattern course reversal is depicted on the chart is it kosher to use that holding pattern to lose altitude when cleared for the approach but are way above the glideslope at the marker? The holding pattern was the only course reversal and it was at the outer marker. I was holding at 3,000 feet and was just inbound in the hold when cleared for the approach. The glideslope crossing altitude was 1900 feet and after trying to make it to that altitude I crossed the marker at 2200 feet nowhere near the glideslope. So I asked for another turn around the hold to lose altitude and was told that I was trying to have atc fly the airplane for me. So I went around the hold again (again depicted by a dark line on the plate) lost the altitude and got on the glideslope and finished the approach. Kosher?

sflpilot

If they send you to the IAF and clear you for the apch. then you have to make the reversal and continue inbound. If you need more turns in holding to descend then you would have to request it from ATC. What you did is correct. You don't want to be using unusually high rates of descent close to the ground, although it seems like you should have been able to lose the altitude in this particular situation.

avi8tor4life

I was already inbound to the FAF but was in a hold not on the approach. I was then cleared for the approach but could not make the crossing altitude. I then asked for another turn around the hold and then the instructor got on me for asking ATC to fly the airplane. So I went around again so that I wouldn't have to space shuttle the approach.

YAKflyer

You did OK....if you're not being vectored and don't bust the limits of the airspace you are cleared in, it bleongs to you until you vacate it. Much better to make another turn than an unsafe descent.

ImperialxRat

what approach was this?...just curious so I can look at the plate to get a better idea of your situation.

avi8tor4life

It was the ILS 13 at Atlantic City NJ.

SabreDriver

You absolutely did the right thing, the instructor probably just wanted to get on with the approach, and you made him/her sit there for 4-6 extra minutes and that was time he/she was not able to do something else (to you) . just my .02

duvie

First off I'd say it sounds like the person acting as ATC for this approach either dropped the ball or was trying to challenge you.

As far as I know most approaches have what are known as "approach gates." They are usually 3 to 5 miles from the FAF and serve as a point that ATC should have you on or near. The idea being that you should have a few miles to get established before things start to get more critical, I.E. configuring your A/C, tracking the glideslope, starting timers, etc. So when you say you were inbound to the FAF but not on the approach, I'm wondering if you were on charted part of the procedure or was it a hold the guy made up?

There isn't anything wrong with refusing or requesting different instructions to ensure that you maintain a controlled and safe approach, no matter who is at fault. In the real world however you may be penalized (you want an extra turn in the hold? How about five more loops?) by ATC for a lack of foresight.