camorton
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2018
- Messages
- 227
- Display Name
Display name:
Craig Morton
This is exactly the mindset of the guy flying the 340 at Watsonville last year.
91.126(b)(1) - Yes, Virginia, it is regulatory.
- Thread starter pburger
- Start date
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
You're not asking the FAA to make sense now, are you?
k9medic
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2018
- Messages
- 901
- Display Name
Display name:
ATP-H, CMEL, CSEL, CFI/CFII Airplanes and Helicopters
Got it. All overhead breaks will be left turn...
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,217
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
Duh. Right side up or upside down is the only decision needed.
Hmmm...... There's another idea. I suppose one could legally fly a right-hand pattern by making left turns while inverted. After all, one man's left is an inverted man's right, correct?
k9medic
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2018
- Messages
- 901
- Display Name
Display name:
ATP-H, CMEL, CSEL, CFI/CFII Airplanes and Helicopters
Don’t forget. Three rights make a left…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ed Haywood
En-Route
Depends. When turning inverted, you roll left and push to turn right.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
But two rights make a wrong ... or something.
I thought they made an airplane. Or something.
Larry in TN
En-Route
They would strictly apply it in a highly pedantic manner.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
No it wasn't. Nice try though.
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2019
- Messages
- 1,154
- Display Name
Display name:
Initial Fix
agree - I've seen, and been the recipient of this behavior with folks thinking they can just "announce" a straight in with 3-4 folks already in the pattern. Worse is when they "announce" their position over a known point and are nowhere near there. Sadly, not much will change their behavior.
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,717
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
Well ... it might be argued that the 45º to downwind is the entrance to the pattern but not really part of the pattern. This is proven by the fact that when we do pattern work we don't fly out and do the 45º entry.
OK, it's late and I'm making this stuff up as I go along ...
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,092
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
91.126 doesn't use the word "pattern," it says when approaching the airport.Well ... it might be argued that the 45º to downwind is the entrance to the pattern but not really part of the pattern. This is proven by the fact that when we do pattern work we don't fly out and do the 45º entry.
OK, it's late and I'm making this stuff up as I go along ...
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,717
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,092
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
You wouldn't consider the turn from a 45 degree entry leg to the downwind leg to be in the vicinity of the airport?I'll take "in the vicinity of an airport" for 500 Alex ...
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,717
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
Well ... please define for me what (distance) is meant by "when approaching to land at an airport"? Admittedly this stuff from the FAA is a bit ambiguous so we get to make it up as we go along. As such I should be able to claim that a traffic pattern is in the vicinity of and airport and the entry leg isn't.
dbahn
Pattern Altitude
If I recall correctly, the administrative judge has the authority to determine what constitutes the "vicinity or the airport". I "think" I remember a determination in Alaska where for an airliner that was five miles, based on the approach speed of the aircraft rather than just the absolute distance.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,217
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
On my instrument checkride, the DPE had me fly the LOC 30 circle to land 12 at an untowered airport with traffic in the pattern.
At the MAP it was a right turn at 800AGL to left traffic for 12, fitting in nicely with the flow, albeit 200’ below the guy turning base. Thankfully, he exited the runway before I crossed the threshold. At 50 AGL, the DPE directed a go around and we departed straight ahead to set up for the last approach at the homedrome.
Lots of comms in plain language explaining what we were going to do and it was non-event for everybody involved.
Or when they announce their position as an IFR fix that VFR pilots in the pattern have no clue where it is.
ateamer
Pattern Altitude
“Okeechobee, traffic, Cessna 1234A, RNAV 5 at FINLO.” Turned out to be a several hundred hour private pilot who flies just enough approaches to be current on paper.
A couple days later:
“Okeechobee traffic, Bizjet 4567B, straight in 5, landing in three minutes.” He gave ETA updates at two minutes, and at one minute added they were on a two-mile final. Career pilot at a multi-aircraft 135 operation.
Larry in TN
En-Route
That is the case I was referring to earlier with regard to the opposite direction turn to a straight-in final.
14 CFR 91.126(a) starts with, "General. Unless otherwise authorized or required,..." By complying with a published instrument approach procedure you were "otherwise authorized". You then completed the circle-to-land using the specified direction-of-turns.
wanttaja
En-Route
I highly respect such a pilot, and am happy to accommodate high-performance aircraft as long as the pilots give us plenty of warning about what they need.
A couple of months back, there was a guy on downwind, about a mile past the end of the runway, that announced he was going to do a 360 for spacing behind a helicopter than was on a quarter-mile final. Didn't make a single radio call during the 360. This is with at least two planes behind him on downwind. Next radio call he made was cussing out the guy who'd cut onto base early and landed just behind the helicopter, before he'd even completed the 360.
Right-hand 360, of course, so he was in violation of 91.126.
Ron Wanttaja
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,717
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
Hold on a minute ... 91.126 (b) states, "When approaching to land" so if I'm just doing pattern work, going missed, or doing an inspection pass (recently we've had a lot of water) and have no intention of landing then "all turns of that airplane to the left unless ... " doesn't apply to me ... ??? 
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,217
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
Yeah, just pointing out that .1DME can be pretty close to the vicinity of the airfield for turning not to the left.
And that’s kind of the underlying misunderstanding when a regulation is not taken in full context of operations being conducted.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
360 for spacing in the pattern is idiotic. Violates numerous principles of collision avoidance. Who teaches that stuff?
John Collins
En-Route
I think that if the approach procedure was conducted under IFR, then the circling direction is both "required" as well as "authorized" by the CFR 97 regulation that incorporates the approach procedure. OTOH, if it was a practice approach, conducted under VFR, I would think that one would fly the circle at the pattern altitude and in the pattern turn direction to be both safe and legal.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,092
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
That opinion is kinda weak. "The AIM isn't regulatory, but it and an AC says you should do a 45, and we have always believed it is legal, so therefore it's legal."
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Keep in mind who wrote it.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,217
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
For context, it was clear and a million but we launched on an IFR flight plan under the DPEs name and got ATC clearance to the approach. We cancelled IFR at the IAF and discussed pattern altitude vs circling altitude. DPE direction was do it at the circling mins altitude.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,092
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
They're supposed to interpret the regulations, not make up ones that don't exist. IOW their opinions should have a basis in law, not "because we said so."Keep in mind who wrote it.
Last edited:
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Which is not necessarily bad. I love it when people think that a turbine aircraft should squeeze into a pattern with 3-4 folks already in it when their landing speed is often greater than the cruise speed of those in the pattern.
Communicate, and make it work.
FWIW, sometimes I'll announce a straight in "if it works" and then someone will pipe up that hadn't been talking before who is in the pattern and flying the pattern turns out to be a better plan, in which case I'll fly the pattern.
Communicate, and make it work.
In many ways, the "fly overhead and do a teardrop to the 45" causes more conflicts than flying straight onto one of the other legs of the pattern.
Communicate, and make it work. (Is there an echo in here?)
There was a Southwest pilot violated for making a right dog-leg onto a 3 mile final, so the best information we have is that the FAA considers 3 miles out to be "in the vicinity of the airport". But it's ambiguous enough to ensure that they'll violate you if they want to, so your job is to fly well enough, and be nice enough to them, that they don't want to.Well ... please define for me what (distance) is meant by "when approaching to land at an airport"? Admittedly this stuff from the FAA is a bit ambiguous so we get to make it up as we go along. As such I should be able to claim that a traffic pattern is in the vicinity of and airport and the entry leg isn't.
Larry in TN
En-Route
Yep. I can fly a pattern but many GA pilots wouldn't recognize it as a pattern. 210kt on downwind, 190kt on base, 170kt on final slowing to a target speed often in the mid-150s. (My record is a target of 165kts) We usually join final at, or beyond, 5mi from the runway, even on a visual.
Yeah, that's likely inside of my downwind and the 500' above GA TPA is my TPA.
These days, there are plenty of options for an accurate "X miles straight in runway YY" without having to add up leg distances.
Usually when a turbine aircraft makes a radio call most seem to realize a straight in is reasonable for that aircraft; not so for my little Lancair. I run into this all the time in the Lancair. Seems many think because it's small it flys the same as most small airport airport traffic and shouId just join the back of the conga line. I think I'm closer to small turbine aircraft pattern size and speed than typical small airport traffic pattern size and speed. I was trained to enter pattern at 140 kts, turn base at 110 kts, and turn final at 100 kts. Even these relatively slower numbers don't mesh well with typical pattern traffic.
IMO, the misnamed "teardrop" has always had issues, but these days it seems worse. I realize that the newish name is intended as a shorthand description, but I think calling it "teardrop" is a big part of the problem. Pilots often fly it as a descending "teardrop" turn to downwind rather than as a midfield cross above the pattern to fly well beyond the pattern, descend, and and then return on a 45. Couple that with 152s doing 737 patterns....
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Usually it seems to be done at 1500 AGL (which is usually pattern altitude for twin/turbine aircraft, so already creating a conflict) and then flown at that altitude over to midfield downwind, with a descending teardrop onto a short 45 to the downwind.
If I'm flying to a field with no other traffic in a piston aircraft, I follow about the same method as @EdFred which I think he made into a picture a while back... Maybe he'll post it. Flying a turbine, generally I'd maneuver for a 3-5 mile final, though in some cases it still ends up the same, entering the crosswind or base legs coming from the side or downwind if opposite.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,092
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
The midfield cross has issues as well. I've always favored entering the crosswind over the DER, and never regretted my decision. I have regretted others trying to a midfield cross for the opposing runway and almost T-boning me when I was already in the pattern.
wanttaja
En-Route
Actually, I'd rather get a "minutes" callout than one based on distances. One can look at slant range, trying to figure out where "five miles" is, or get an actual estimate of the time when a conflict may occur.
Had a guy give a "XXX miles out on straight-in" call a few years back. That was his last call. When I was ready to turn base, I saw a glint about two miles south of the airport. Stared at it a moment, then called "Where is that straight-in traffic."
Turns out he was just touching down. I was more concerned on avoiding conflict with the straight-in, and without a regular position call, had to guess based on worst-case scenario. So I was looking at entirely the wrong location.
To me, the biggest problems with straight-ins and 360s in the pattern is that the pilot is abrogating his requirement to see and avoid other traffic. The straight-in is coming straight-in, and other aircraft are expected to maneuver around him. Ditto with 360s; visibility from cabin aircraft is mostly lousy, and they're just depending upon the kindness of strangers to prevent a conflict.
I've told this story before, but in my NORDO days, I once followed an aircraft on final who decided to do a 360. I waved gaily at him when he flew by at the 180-degree point of his circle.
Again, I have no squawk about high-performance aircraft, turbines and the like, flying straight-ins. As long as they tell us what they're doing.
Ron Wanttaja