Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 20; Flight Crew Total 2000; Flight Crew Type 1500
Situational Awareness
Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Practice ILS in VMC. Talking to HGR Tower but outside their Class D. Responsible for own separation. We were aware of glider activity in the vicinity but all had previously been below 4;000 MSL. Was inbound in the published hold to the IAF (HAIGS) at the published altitude (4;000ft) centered on the localizer. Safety observer spotted glider under tow at same altitude nearly opposite direction right at HAIGS intersection. Started evasive action but had to climb and turn left as glider was banking slightly left into our path. Did not appear that tow plane ever deviated. Tow plane not using landing lights and it was difficult to see the two white aircraft on a white background at nearly a head on aspect angle. My landing lights had been on continuously. This was my fourth practice Runway 27 ILS and there had been two other aircraft also in the same instrument pattern in the prior hour.Very surprised that the soaring club based [at a nearby airport] is operating directly in conflict with the published instrument approach; was not coordinating with HGR tower or Potomac approach (although they are outside the HGR class D); was not monitoring the HGR tower or Potomac frequencies that would provide situational awareness to their glider operations; not operating the tow plane with their landing light on; nor did they seem to have any situational awareness about numerous ILS aircraft that had been operating on the published instrument approach for hours.
Aircrew encountered a tow aircraft with glider attached while practicing an ILS approach. Evasive action was taken. Tow aircraft flew through holding fix for the ILS.