Houston Holding Points

Alex Handsaker · « **on:** June 20, 2010, 01:10:00 PM »

Hello all,

I am a Houston S1 and i have been told something my several people that i want to know what you think about and what was the ups and downs of the holding points. I have just memorized them 5 days ago and now they are being removed, for better flow.

The Holding Points Are as Follows:

HOLDING POINT ONE (1): FACING WESTBOUND ON TAXI-WAY ROMEO-ALPHA IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-GULF HOLDING SHORT OF TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-BRAVO. PRIMARY USE IS FOR SOUTH RAMP OF TERMINAL(S) ALPHA, BRAVO, CHARLIE AND ECHO.

HOLDING POINT TWO (2): FACING WESTBOUND ON TAXI-WAY ROMEO-BRAVO IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-FOXTROT HOLDING SHORT OF TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-BRAVO. PRIMARY USE IS FOR SOUTH RAMP OF TERMINAL(S) ALPHA, BRAVO, CHARLIE AND ECHO.

HOLDING POINT THREE (3): FACING WESTBOUND ON TAXI-WAY ROMEO CHARLIE IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-ECHO, HOLDING SHORT OF TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-BRAVO. PRIMARY USE IS FOR SOUTH RAMP OF TERMINAL(S) ALPHA, BRAVO, CHARLIE AND ECHO.

HOLDING POINT FOUR (4): FACING NORTHBOUND SHORT OF TAXI-WAY WHISKEY-WHISKEY IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-FOXTROT. PRIMARY USE IS ON NORTH-WEST RAMP AT ALPHA TERMINAL.

HOLDING POINT FIVE (5): FACING NORTHBOUND SHORT OF TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-CHARLIE, IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-DELTA. PRIMARY USE FOR NORTH-RAMP BRAVO AND NORTH-EAST RAMP ALPHA TERMINAL(S).

HOLDING POINT SIX (6): FACING NORTHBOUND SHORT OF TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-CHARLIE IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-JULIETTE. PRIMARY USE FOR NORTH-WEST RAMP OF CHARLIE TERMINAL AND NORTH RAMP BRAVO TERMINAL(S).

HOLDING POINT SEVEN (7): FACING NORTHBOUND SHORT OF TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-BRAVO IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY NOVEMBER-KILO. PRIMARY USE FOR NORTH-EAST SECTION OF CHARLIE AND ALL DELTA TERMINAL(S).

HOLDING POINT EIGHT (

: FACING SOUTHBOUND SHORT OF TAXI-WAY ROMEO-ALPHA IN-LINE WITH TAXI-WAY SIERRA-CHARLIE. ONLY USED IF IN EAST-BOUND OPERATIONS AND USING RUNWAY NINER FOR DEPARTURES.

They are used for various parts of the airport so the controller does not have to tell the person contact me when ready to taxi, they just say contact me at Holding Point whatever. It also can help the pilots cause they do not get as many taxi ways to taxi on, when they get on a HP they are already on an intersecting taxiway, like HP 3 is RC/WB. Which if you turn right and go up then left on WW you are at 15L which is a very simple taxi way, as with no HP, it is Taxi to 15L via RC, WB, WW, or WV. So it kinda reduces the taxiways on the pilots.

So from a pilot and a controllers point of view what do you think? What is a good thing to have the holding points, and the bad things of them. I am interested to see what you as pilots, and controllers think of them.

William Lewis · « **Reply #1 on:** June 22, 2010, 04:24:11 PM »

I like Hold Points and they can be used to create a flow in and out of the ramp. Since we do not control the ramp it allows the aircraft to move about a necessary to get to the assigned point of where they would start their taxi. We use Hold points at CVG but fortunately ours are published on the airport diagram. The major problem at IAH is getting the information to the pilots about the hold points. I flew out of IAH once and was given a hold point to call for taxi and a URL was in the ATIS to locate the hold point which worked well but i can see how it could be confusing to other members. Hopefully one day they can publish them on the diagram which would drastically help. Below is a clip of CVG airport Diagram with the hold points boxed in red.

[img]http://www.vzidartcc.org/training/file.php/10/CVG.JPG\\\" border=\\\"0\\\" class=\\\"linked-image\\\" /]

Harold Rutila · « **Reply #2 on:** June 22, 2010, 07:30:48 PM »

The same thing happened to us at Denver. We implemented Ramp Control a while back at DEN, but it was soon realized that it was a little bit tedious for pilots to locate the holding points. Since the points are located on the non-FAA, UAL-operated ramp, AeroNav doesn't publish them on their charts and the HPs are thus not freely available.

Jonah Zieske · « **Reply #3 on:** June 22, 2010, 10:48:22 PM »

This can be easily fixed by replacing numbers with letters.

Take SFO for example. The TMU has implemented a plan where, under periods of high traffic, holding points may be implemented. Used to, we would say, call number one at holding point 1 for taxi. Now, we just say something like "exit the ramp at M" or "taxi to holding point M" (Mike is the taxiway that the holding point is on).

I think holding points are a great idea, they just need to be tweaked a little bit.

Daniel Oordt · « **Reply #4 on:** June 24, 2010, 10:05:55 AM »

Quote from: Jonah Zieske

This can be easily fixed by replacing numbers with letters.

Take SFO for example. The TMU has implemented a plan where, under periods of high traffic, holding points may be implemented. Used to, we would say, call number one at holding point 1 for taxi. Now, we just say something like "exit the ramp at M" or "taxi to holding point M" (Mike is the taxiway that the holding point is on).

I think holding points are a great idea, they just need to be tweaked a little bit.

Why would you create new points when SFO already has designated spots located at the end of each ramp. Defeats the purpose of realism IMO.

Jonah Zieske · « **Reply #5 on:** June 26, 2010, 09:09:02 AM »

Daniel, we're not talking about SFO and what we do there...we're talking about the concept as a whole.

Daniel Oordt · « **Reply #6 on:** June 26, 2010, 12:21:35 PM »

Quote from: Jonah Zieske

Daniel, we're not talking about SFO and what we do there...we're talking about the concept as a whole.

And what you do there? Just because I'm referencing SFO doesn't mean I'm relating ZOA. As to the concept as a whole, major airports have ramp spots. Here is your answer for IAH.
[img]http://i621.photobucket.com/albums/tt299/ODTheATC/image002.jpg\\\" border=\\\"0\\\" class=\\\"linked-image\\\" /]

OD

Ian Elchitz · « **Reply #7 on:** June 29, 2010, 01:21:07 AM »

My thoughts:

1) Tough to implement on the controller side.

2) Hard for pilots to understand what you are talking about when many of them don't even use taxiway maps.

3) I fail to see the benefit gained by implementing this.

I don't mean to rain on your parade - simply scratching my head wondering what the point is.

Dave Catalani · « **Reply #8 on:** July 07, 2010, 07:45:59 PM »

Let them go. The majority of pilots will not have a clue what you are asking. At some point "as real as it gets" goes too far in the virtual world and IMHO this is one of those occassions.

Pilot
Houston

Harold Rutila · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:52:21 PM »

A related question: Why don't AeroNav charts include this type of information?

Brad Littlejohn · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2010, 01:15:21 PM »

Quote from: Harold Rutila

A related question: Why don't AeroNav charts include this type of information?

My guess is because it is part of the non-movement area that the airport authority controls, not the FAA on the whole.

As far as keeping or getting rid of them, I believe it's all scenery related. Prime example is that KLAS has their spots on the field, similar to KIAH's holding points. They are just entry points into the ramp area, and aren't depicted in the default scenery. However, they do exist in the old SimFlyer's KLAS and FSDreamTeam's KLAS sceneries. If you have them, they can be used. If not, improvise. The only problem is that pilots need to know where those spots are, relative to the scenery that they have.

I would say to keep it, as long as ZHU provides a chart or graphic on their website that depicts those holding points (for example, a blown up Airport Diagram of KIAH and pointing out where those holding points are).

BL.

Noah Bryant · « **Reply #11 on:** August 03, 2010, 09:55:32 AM »

Im strongly opposed to any SOPs that require pilots to know something that isnt freely and easily available. Just say "Contact Ground when holding short of whatever taxiway"

I get pretty annoyed when I fly at ARTCCs that require me to do things that I would only know if I went to that ARTCCs website. Sorry but it isn't realistic at all to expect pilots to go to your website before flying in your airspace.

Kenneth Haught · « **Reply #12 on:** August 04, 2010, 01:12:49 PM »

Quote from: Noah Bryant

Im strongly opposed to any SOPs that require pilots to know something that isnt freely and easily available. Just say "Contact Ground when holding short of whatever taxiway"

I get pretty annoyed when I fly at ARTCCs that require me to do things that I would only know if I went to that ARTCCs website. Sorry but it isn't realistic at all to expect pilots to go to your website before flying in your airspace.

You're right, completely unrealistic in the slightest to think a pilot would plan their flight by checking to see what information might be available from the ARTCC. After all, odds are there will be a controller handy to tell them how to set their flight up anyway...so why would they need to worry about that kinda stuff.

P.s. I am slightly mad (crazy) and take no responsibility for anything that my other personalities find amusing or witty. I also do not have a particular concern about holding points, but agree that unless it is something that is on the APD or is clearly marked in default/common scenery it's very unlikely to be successfully implemented. Even then it takes a lot of patience and consistency to have it be successful.

Daniel Hawton · « **Reply #13 on:** August 04, 2010, 05:35:50 PM »

Quote from: Kenneth Haught

You're right, completely unrealistic in the slightest to think a pilot would plan their flight by checking to see what information might be available from the ARTCC. After all, odds are there will be a controller handy to tell them how to set their flight up anyway...so why would they need to worry about that kinda stuff.

P.s. I am slightly mad (crazy) and take no responsibility for anything that my other personalities find amusing or witty. I also do not have a particular concern about holding points, but agree that unless it is something that is on the APD or is clearly marked in default/common scenery it's very unlikely to be successfully implemented. Even then it takes a lot of patience and consistency to have it be successful.

I don't consider visiting an ARTCC's website part of flight planning. I visit PUBLISHED charts, IFR/VFR supps as appropriate, view the weather along the route, and the JCS NOTAMs. That's flight planning to me. Why should I add hunting down an ARTCC's website for holding points that should be published (if in existance) on the Airport Diagram? Additionally, is it REALLY that necessary outside of events to force pilots to use such information? Is there that much traffic that the ground controller has to filter aircraft through holding points. LAX sees more traffic and is often only controlled by center (and it's much appreciated), yet, they don't have/need "holding points". I think adding stuff not on the charts is unneccessary and not realistic at all.

Kenneth Haught · « **Reply #14 on:** August 04, 2010, 07:32:38 PM »

Daniel, you completely missed the post... [!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]...but agree that unless it is something that is on the APD or is clearly marked in default/common scenery it's very unlikely to be successfully implemented...[/quote] I am not advocating use of non-published holding points. It just seems to me that many pilots on VATSIM are becoming very spoiled. They can't be bothered to even attempt to check their routing for proper altitudes, then complain to the ARTCC if they are a bit too low on a non-published section of their route (which they filed for and presumably checked beforehand). They also seem to think we are the world encyclopedia when it comes to how to do the most basic things like adjust a heading, altitude, setup the pilot client (SB/FSInn/XSB), and a thousand other minor points.

To me it is entirely reasonable to expect a pilot not familiar with an area to check the ARTCC website, it saves a lot of hassle if A) there is no controller, or there is a controller and he/she is applying standard ARTCC policies that the pilot is not familiar with. Would I say you have to check each ARTCC every time you fly...absolutely not. As long as you are reasonably familiar with the area you should be aware of any special considerations that may be needed. Like I said, if it's "NOT ON THE APD OR CLEARLY MARKED ON THE DEFAULT/COMMON SCENERY IT'S UNLIKELY TO BE SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED."

Sorry for the caps, but I assumed you missed it the first time.