Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: L30.TRACON, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D HND
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I'm writing to report the challenging nature/difficulty in making visual approaches in a jet to Runways 35L/R at Henderson Exec Airport (HND); where terrain is a prominent factor as close as a 3-mile final approach.  Compliance with ATC spacing instructions can leave the pilot and airplane in a position where neither of the options for trying to land straight-in are particularly good options:  Maneuver in proximity to high terrain; knowing in advance that you will be facing the prospect of repeated GPWS warnings as you try to visually get into a position to make the final approach as stable as possible; or; remain high until well clear of the foothills; but face the prospect of a 'chop and drop' close-in final approach; which is neither stable nor desirable.Our afternoon arrival was in excellent VMC conditions.  HND was landing 35L and 35R. I have been into HND a few times; and from several years ago I remembered the terrain issues to the south; so I made it a special point of emphasis prior to top-of-descent to brief the SIC that I intended to maintain visual separation with the terrain and expected we would be dealing with the GPWS while maneuvering to get the airplane in a position to fly a stable final segment.We did not fully fly our filed STAR; but instead we were vectored SW of LAS and eventually turned inbound on an E-NE vector on what looked like a 10-15 mile left base leg.  This initial vector looked promising; as I thought it might allow for a close-in base to final; which I considered preferable to having to navigate the mountains to the south of the airport.  However; as we got inside of 10 miles; approach control instructed us that Tower wanted us to 'widen out more to the east; and square the base turn to final...cleared visual approach 35L.'  This instruction basically put us in the position of having to navigate the mountainous terrain on our left base; with a turn to final at approximately 5-6 miles.  I set the autopilot to descend for 5;000 MSL (approximately 2;500 AGL above touchdown elevation); but I knew that I would have to get the airplane down to a lower altitude before rolling out on final; or else be faced with either a 'chop and drop' situation or needing to ask for a circling approach over the airport in VMC.I opted to hand fly the airplane and visually maneuvered between the saddles of some higher peaks as I transitioned from left base to final.  I was able to gradually descend another few hundred feet as I was flying this portion of the approach; but the GPWS had become active with constant terrain cautions; as expected.  I was able to keep the terrain in sight at all times while maneuvering; maintaining a 500-700 foot margin on the radar altimeter over the path I was flying.  Beyond dealing with the GPWS audio until we cleared the highest points; I did get the airplane into position to fly a stable final segment and land.  Everything transpired pretty much how I thought it might; starting from the descent briefing all the way to touchdown.  But I walked away from the airplane not feeling satisfied; thinking there has to be some better way to set up and coordinate visual approaches to 35L/R.  Of course; the pilot always has full responsibility to maintain terrain avoidance on visual approaches; but where difficult topography exists; such as south of HND; some extra assistance from ATC in the form of additional vectoring and/or coordination with the local tower could go a long way in helping to better manage visual approaches to 35L/R at this airport.When we were instructed to contact the tower; the approach controller was appreciative of our cooperation in squaring the base as instructed; but I am left wondering if he realized that making me deal with the high terrain on extended final made flying the visual approach that much tougher.I've already decided that if I am put into a similar situation at this airport in the future; I am not going to consider either of the two aforementioned solutions to try and make it straight-in on a visual approach.  Going forward I will opt to negotiate a circling approach in the traffic pattern with the controller(s) instead of battling issues with terrain or excessively steep final approach considerations.  It may make things a bit more complicated for the controllers and traffic flow; but I think this course of action is really the safest alternative of the lot.




Synopsis: Air taxi Captain reported that several terrain warnings were received while on a visual approach to HND airport while flying through mountainous area. Reporter stated that due to the challenging nature of the area; straight-in visual approaches are difficult.