|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
What’s Wrong? Flying the RNAV 24 at Toledo in a Bonanza
Welcome to “What’s Wrong?“, an interesting twist on aviation challenge quizzes. “What’s Wrong?” works just like a real flight: You’re in an airplane, flying (or taxiing) along and there are clues to a potential problem right there in front of you—but it’s still on you to notice them and take action before it’s too late.
Here’s how it works: You’ll watch a super-short video with a quick setup for the situation and then approximately 10 seconds of the pilot’s perspective. Something is amiss. Can you find it? We’ll give you 3-5 options at the end as what is wrong, but don’t expect much help from these options. They are worded to (perhaps) give some hints—or distractions from the important issue—but they won’t give anything away
Watch the video and see if you know what’s wrong. When you’re done, choose what you think is wrong and then click through to the answer. Not only will you find out what’s wrong, but you’ll get at least one helpful tip, technique, or learning point to help if you ever face a situation like this in your real-world flying.
Watch the Scenario
What do you think is wrong?
Show Explanation
The correct answer is 2: You didn’t put in the appropriate wind correction
The GTN 650Xi’s prompt for a teardrop entry to the Hold in Lieu of Procedure Turn (HILPT) is logical given that you’re crossing FISUS from the southwest. What the GPS doesn’t know in this installation is that you had a huge headwind approaching FISUS—see your low groundspeed. That turned into a crosswind for the hold. (Some GPS and autopilot installations can take this into account, such as one with GPS Steering.)
What matters in the HILPT entry is your course over the ground, not your heading. The AWOS at Chehalis-Centralia reported a wind of 010 at 5. But that airport is 26 miles away and 6500 feet below where you are now. Had you checked the georeferenced approach chart in ForeFlight a bit later, or the GTN map page, or the TRK datafield on the GTN, you would have seen that your actual course basically paralleled the inbound heading. In fact, you accidentally flew a pretty good parallel entry. And had you ignored the GPS and turned left, this would have worked out quite well.
Instead, that right turn will create a huge tailwind and you’ll blow far into the non-holding side of the hold.
No matter what tools you use to help you hold, it’s your responsibility to ensure a safe, smooth course reversal—even if an oversight or miscalculation means you should change your plan before the hold is complete.
Want to receive more scenarios like this and weekly pilot’s tips right in your inbox? Sign up here.
For 19 years, Jeff ran many noteworthy aviation media projects with his own firm, Van West Communications, including magazines, books, videos and live seminars. Jeff previously served as editor-in-chief of IFR Magazine and co-editor of Aviation Consumer, and his work appears in AOPA Pilot, Flight Training Magazine, Plane and Pilot, and AVweb. He’s an experienced CFII/MEI with ratings for single- and multi-engine airplanes, seaplanes, and gliders. Jeff was the creator of the first pilot transition program for new Cirrus aircraft.
- What’s Wrong? Flying the RNAV 24 at Toledo in a Bonanza - August 7, 2026
- ODP Versus VCOA (Visual Climb Over Airport) - July 15, 2026
- Practical IFR: Visual Approaches - June 16, 2026
I would have spun the CDI to match my outbound heading 027 (not 050) so the CDI needle would not read reverse. Then I would spin the CDI to the inbound heading as I approached the inbound course. I disagree with the GSP selected teardrop entry of 050. That is not even correct for a no wind situation, and is made WORSE by the wind.
1. You always set the course needle to match the DTK for the inbound course, especially on an HSI. The chart said 237º but the GPS said use 239º, which the pilot did on the Bendix-King KCS-55A HSI that is coupled with the KFC-150 autopilot. This properly shows the airplane’s position relative to the course and that the airplane was staying much too close to the inbound (the GPS’ TRK also warned of this).
2. I can only presume the GPS recommended a heading of 050º when it probably meant track 050º. After flying 6 nm outbound it only puts you 0.94 nm north of the inbound course, a better distance than what was flown here, which looks like the airplane was 0.1 nm north of its inbound course at the end of 6 nm outbound.
The math:
059º-050º = 9º
SIN(9º) = 0.156
0.156 * 6 nm = 0.936 nm, nearly full-scale CDI when in the terminal sensitivity of 1 nm.
As opposed to a standard 30º teardrop heading away the inbound course:
SIN(030º) = 0.5
0.5 * 6 nm = 3 nm
Even with a tailwind push when turning inbound being 3 nm north of the inbound track at the start of the inbound turn means you’ll need some of that XW push to get back to the course.
Moral of the story: a modern EFIS/GPS cockpit will TRK the 050 outbound, so why did the Garmin GTN-650Xi use “TURN TO” instead of “TRK”?
wish there was more of a discussion on this case
I did this on my phone, which made it really hard to see the details but was pretty obvious something was wrong with the outbound turn and the ground speed on the way to the hold. As you know, the ATIS didn’t match the winds aloft and I figured that was an intentional potentially misleading data point for this test scenario so I actually did not get thrown off by that. I picked the correct option but with the tiny details on the phone screen, I felt like it was probably the best guess.. This is a good exercise. Looking forward to more of these.
I have a few additional observations.
1. Audio panel XMIT off, so pushing the PTT would not have done a thing.
2. Wrong transition altitude (COUGA would have been more appropriate for 6,300’)
3. Monitoring COM 1 and MKR, no COM 2 monitor when Centralia AWOS was being listened to. Better setup on the audio panel would be XMIT to COM 1 and at least AUTO selected for the monitor. Kill the MKR. Switch COM 2 to the CTAF and monitor it until needing to hear Centralia’s AWOS.
4. GPS commanded “turn to 050 now” for TD?! Track maybe? I can only presume the GPS recommended a heading of 050º when it probably meant track 050º. After flying 6 nm outbound it only puts you 0.94 nm north of the inbound course, a better distance than what was flown here, which looks like the airplane was 0.1 nm north of its inbound course at the end of 6 nm outbound.
The math:
059º-050º = 9º
SIN(9º) = 0.156
0.156 * 6 nm = 0.936 nm, nearly full-scale CDI when in the terminal sensitivity of 1 nm.
As opposed to a standard 30º teardrop heading away the inbound course:
SIN(030º) = 0.5
0.5 * 6 nm = 3 nm
Even with a tailwind push when turning inbound being 3 nm north of the inbound track at the start of the inbound turn means you’ll need some of that XW push to get back to the course.