"Call the Tower"

[Unregistered]

Went for a $100 hamburger yesterday to a sleepy towered airport. Called the tower 15 miles out, was told to report midfield left downwind for the runway. ATIS was inop, no NOTAMs for that.

I was better set up for a right downwind. Rather than cross over what would be the area of departing traffic pretty much at their altitude a few miles out, I instead crossed over midfield and then reported my midfield left downwind, cleared to land.

As I was rolling out, tower said they needed me to call when I parked. So I asked him to standby until I could copy down the phone number, wondering what he wanted.

The tower guy explained he didn't like my pattern entry, saying that crossing over midfield at pattern altitude like that was technically a pilot deviation and present a safety hazard for departing traffic. Somewhat ironic since my specific reason for doing it was to avoid traffic, and it's a pretty standard pattern entry. He suggested that if I was better set up for a right downwind I should just say as such. That part made sense. I've not had this issue at other towered airports, but then again the main ones that come to mind where it's come up had different features around them that changed the standard entry.

He was polite enough, I accepted his critique receptively. I can see his point. I think more than anything it was a difference of convention from what I was used to compared to what he was used to.

 

[nddons]

You had 15 miles to set up for the left downwind. Why couldn't you do that? No offense, but you seem to be exhibiting anti-authority, and doing things your way could have put you into a collision with other traffic he was working. Not smart at all.

 

[frfly172]

Do you always do what you feel like rather than what your told to do?

 

[Jim Logajan]

Tell him you're Canadian?

 

[Geico266]

Yikes! Guys, he added a little extra to the equation and the tower didn't like it. That talked, came to an agreement, no harm no foul.

You did the right thing by taking the advice. Next time just let them know your intentions if you are going to deviate.

I have the tower on speed dial.

 

[Geico266]

Tell him you're Canadian?

Student works well also!

 

[bbchien]

Life works out better when you do not surprise the controller. Once in airspace in which control is exerted, you have to negotiate for what you want/need. Very basic.

 

[LDJones]

Tower controllers are pretty accommodating. Tell them what would work best for you and most of the time they're happy to accommodate. When they can't, there's usually a pretty good reason.

 

[flyingron]

The controller is full of crap. There's not PILOT DEVIATION. If he had a routing he wanted you to fly to get into the midfield left downwind, he should have stated it.

 

[docmirror]

It's exactly what I would have done. No matter where you go around, or past, or through you're going to impact some traffic, it's the nature of the beast. The bad part is that as you enter downwind, you turn to the left, and expose the bottom of your plane to the normal entry location which would block your view of incoming traffic.

I don't know what the PD the tower was talking about unless he gave you specific instructions on where, or how to arrive at midfield downwind. Once you got there, you reported as instructed. If there were other instructions you haven't mentioned, my thinking could change.

Now what I do is to overfly the airport and pattern plus 700 feet and make a right descending turn into the pattern.

YMMV, don't try this at home, objects in mirror are closer than they appear, contents of package have settled.

 

[Geico266]

Life works out better when you do not surprise the controller. Once in airspace in which control is exerted, you have to negotiate for what you want/need. Very basic.

"Ghost rider, the pattern is full."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdHBsWXaHN8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[John221us]

Why would you cross the field at TPA. You should be at least 500 feet above TPA.

 

[docmirror]

Tower said make Left downwind, you made Right downwind, that's about as cut and dry for a pilot deviation as you get!

He could have had other reasons for wanting you making left traffic, could have been planning on it and had to change other people around due to your deviation, might have lucked out with it being a slow airport.

Was it a FAA tower or a contract tower? wonder if he reported it to the FSDO?

No, he reported left downwind after crossing midfield:

"Rather than cross over what would be the area of departing traffic pretty much at their altitude a few miles out, I instead crossed over midfield and then reported my midfield left downwind, cleared to land."

I think it would have been a PD, if he reported right rather than left.

 

[wabower]

I kinda think that if the tower had wanted a "half-right/half-left" downwind he would have asked for it.

 

[douglas393]

First question, did you file a NASA report.

What I do when in a towered environment and the pattern entry does not seem to make sense is to say something to the effect of whether it is possible for me to do the entry I think is more convenient. Sometimes its a matter of a communication error, I thought I told them I was east of the field and they heard west, sometimes they have a good reason for giving me a "less convenient entry." I have never had one that made me fly over the field to enter, but I think if I did(and now I know I will) I would ask them specifically how they want me to get from where I am to where I need to be to enter the pattern. Let them think I am stupid, rather than me do something that proves to them I am stupid.

 

[Unregistered]

You had 15 miles to set up for the left downwind. Why couldn't you do that? No offense, but you seem to be exhibiting anti-authority, and doing things your way could have put you into a collision with other traffic he was working. Not smart at all.

What's anti-authority about understanding his point and learning from it? What makes you think I wasn't listening for other traffic?

Do you always do what you feel like rather than what your told to do?

Yes, always. I considered just landing without calling at all. After all, I fly an RV.

 

[John221us]

And you didn't ask for the overhead break? :wink2:

 

[NineThreeKilo]

No, he reported left downwind after crossing midfield:

"Rather than cross over what would be the area of departing traffic pretty much at their altitude a few miles out, I instead crossed over midfield and then reported my midfield left downwind, cleared to land."

I think it would have been a PD, if he reported right rather than left.

Yea, I misread that.

Im not sure that would even qualify for a PD, he said report L downwind and you did, you just did it later then he wanted.

I'd still file a NASA report.

Did he ask for your name, cert number or anything like that?

 

[docmirror]

What would a NASA report say? It presumes there was some kind of fault, error or defect. Maybe if the controller had said what the PD would be, I might consider it.

 

[douglas393]

What would a NASA report say? It presumes there was some kind of fault, error or defect. Maybe if the controller had said what the PD would be, I might consider it.

It seems whether or not there was a PD, the controller certainly had an issue with how he got into position to enter the pattern, and accused him of a PD. Whether we or the OP thinks there was one may be moot if it is reported by the controller as one. A NASA report may save him some heartache, and certainly as this thread has done at least for me, educate others.

Personally I think he was put into a difficult situation and clarification of how to get into a left downwind which required him to cross the field to enter should have been given by the controller. I wonder if some miscommunication occurred. In any case, many of the NASA reports I have read concern just this issue, the miscommunication between people that can cause the perception of dangerous situations arising, or confusion among the parties involved.

 

[bbchien]

What is it with youse guys?
Just play nice.
Don't surprise the controller.
Puffs out chest through flight suit "I am pilot in comMAND!"

Why always the need to be "da man?"
You be just flying a piston single, fer chrisakes.

Do what you want, when you want at your own field.

If your field's got federales on it, negotiate.....

 

[docmirror]

The absence of an instruction is not an instruction. Unless there's something in the special instructions for that field; i.e. "crosswind, pattern altitude entry is prohibited", which I serious doubt, there was no PD. Unless there was a given instruction on how to get to midfield left downwind, the pilot is free to navigate as s/he sees fit.

I've been vectored over the field before, and I've been told to enter on a 45 for downwind, the controller(apparently) did neither of these.

 

[Palmpilot]

What would a NASA report say? It presumes there was some kind of fault, error or defect. Maybe if the controller had said what the PD would be, I might consider it.

NASA reports are also for safety issues that are not necessarily a violation. Doing something other than what the controller expects does have potential safety implications.

 

[docmirror]

NASA reports are also for safety issues that are not necessarily a violation. Doing something other than what the controller expects does have potential safety implications.

OK, what would the NASA report say? Absence of an instruction is not an instruction. Communication is a two way street.

 

[wabower]

Absent other instructions, where is the pilot expected to enter the downwind?

OK, what would the NASA report say? Absence of an instruction is not an instruction. Communication is a two way street.

 

[Matthew]

I've had a couple of odd instructions from tower. Sometimes I'm able to figure out the reason, sometimes not. The radio works both ways, so a quick question for clarification works wonders.

Then there was that time when tower wanted me to enter the pattern on the opposite side and I wondered what was up with that. Then I realized I had reported my position as west instead of east (or the other way around).

 

[flyingron]

Why would you cross the field at TPA. You should be at least 500 feet above TPA.

SAYS WHO? If you were transiting the pattern sure, but you can not enter the pattern from 500 feet above.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

OK, what would the NASA report say? Absence of an instruction is not an instruction. Communication is a two way street.

Just state, more or less, what you stated here...


Maybe something like:
"......I was told to report L downwind, I crossed mid field for L downwind for XXX reasons, reported L downwind, the tower asked me to contact them, they said XXX on the phone. I believe the controller thought I was going to manuever for a 45 to downwind or straight into the downwind for runway XX. In hind sight I believe the controller could have given clearer instructions if he desired a particular entry"

If you get a letter or call from the FAA, I'd say I'm not able to talk right now, get their name and number, then contact a aviation lawyer.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

SAYS WHO? If you were transiting the pattern sure, but you can not enter the pattern from 500 feet above.

That's what I like to do if I'm crossing midfield, figure if someone I don't see is on upwind at TPA I'll go over them instead of through them, i get a good view of downwind to verify clear and make a decending turn down to TPA and into downwind.

 

[Palmpilot]

OK, what would the NASA report say? Absence of an instruction is not an instruction. Communication is a two way street.

Some combination of what the OP wrote and what you wrote would seem optimal.

 

[Brad Z]

Next time ask for a right downwind entry. If they refuse, ask to enter a midfield crosswind. As others said, if an instruxtion sounds weird, ask questions and if necessary negotiate something better.

 

[Jim Logajan]

To the OP:

Do I understand correctly that you flew the crosswind midfield leg as in this diagram?

(This is the standard in Canada at uncontrolled fields. Note that crossing at midfield is done at pattern altitude. Hence my joke about telling the controller you're Canadian.)

 

[nddons]

What's anti-authority about understanding his point and learning from it? What makes you think I wasn't listening for other traffic?

This:

The tower guy explained he didn't like my pattern entry, saying that crossing over midfield at pattern altitude like that was technically a pilot deviation and present a safety hazard for departing traffic. Somewhat ironic since my specific reason for doing it was to avoid traffic, and it's a pretty standard pattern entry. He suggested that if I was better set up for a right downwind I should just say as such. That part made sense. I've not had this issue at other towered airports, but then again the main ones that come to mind where it's come up had different features around them that changed the standard entry.

He was polite enough, I accepted his critique receptively. I can see his point. I think more than anything it was a difference of convention from what I was used to compared to what he was used to.

So, you thought your way to approach the pattern was more standard than what the controller had in mind, so you chose your method instead of his?

As for listening for other traffic, that's not your call. He may have had inbound IFR traffic that may not yet have approved to switch to the tower freq. Were you listening to approach control too?

 

[docmirror]

Just state, more or less, what you stated here...


Maybe something like:
"......I was told to report L downwind, I crossed mid field for L downwind for XXX reasons, reported L downwind, the tower asked me to contact them, they said XXX on the phone. I believe the controller thought I was going to manuever for a 45 to downwind or straight into the downwind for runway XX. In hind sight I believe the controller could have given clearer instructions if he desired a particular entry"

If you get a letter or call from the FAA, I'd say I'm not able to talk right now, get their name and number, then contact a aviation lawyer.

Yabut, the controllers instructions were clear, and unambiguous. "Report left downwind". Which the OP complied with.

I'm all for improving safety, which is the concept of the NASA form, but there's nothing the pilot could do to change that. If the controller messed up, or assumed something, that's not a reason for a NASA unless it caused a in-flight, or some kind of unsafe, which this one didn't.

 

[Jim Logajan]

The tower guy explained he didn't like my pattern entry, saying that crossing over midfield at pattern altitude like that was technically a pilot deviation and present a safety hazard for departing traffic.

You could have collided with departing ballons, helicopters, and rockets launched from midfield, so technically he is correct. On the other hand, except for some STOL airplanes and fancy expensive VTOL jets, it is probably the one place over an airport where you wont run into any airplanes taking off. All the high-power airplanes that seem to have outrageous climb rates also have outrageous forward speed, so by the time they get to pattern altitude they are farther down the runway than most people instinctively would guess.

So there is a reason the Canadian circuit rules are what they are. They aren't all a bunch of hosers up there, eh?

 

[Jeanie]

1500 ft. AGL is often TPA for turbine aircraft. Crossing at the normal TPA for piston singles made sense. Obviously the tower controller didn't communicate sufficiently his expectations and neither did the pilot communicate his intentions. It's good they had their chat, the pilot could've asked what that tower guy would have expected and racked it up to experience.

Honestly, I doubt there will be a need for a lawyer but maybe I'm not sufficiently paranoid.

 

[Palmpilot]

Yabut, the controllers instructions were clear, and unambiguous. "Report left downwind". Which the OP complied with.

I'm all for improving safety, which is the concept of the NASA form, but there's nothing the pilot could do to change that. If the controller messed up, or assumed something, that's not a reason for a NASA unless it caused a in-flight, or some kind of unsafe, which this one didn't.

If there is a misunderstanding between a pilot and ATC, I don't think that the lack of an unsafe result on this particular flight is a reason not to report it. It could expose a problem that could cause an unsafe result in the future.

 

[John221us]

I can think of a few instances where I have been given similar instructions. Once, coming into Reno the controller was very specific, he said to cross midfield at 500 over TPA and enter left downwind. Another time, at RHV, I was in right downwind and he suddenly had me cross over the field to left downwind on the other runway, so I did that at TPA, since that was my current altitude. CIC will frequently give me a left down wind, when I am more setup for a right and I just ask for a right and they give it (I have never been turned down by them). If I needed to cross a field, though, without explicit instructions, I would probably ask for clarification. On uncontrolled fields, I usually cross at 700 or 800 feet above TPA and then drop into downwind. Crossing at TPA could be a problem, if another plane was on a right downwind.

 

[comanchepilot]

15 miles out? Should be no big deal to cross over. If there is traffic you have your head out the window, right?

Between 15 and 4 miles you are in Tracon/Center or Class G airspace - he can ask you to do something - and there is no real reason to not do it. If you say ok and then don't do it - that's just crazy.

Inside 4 miles you are inside his airspace - your rear is his. Crossing over midfield is nutso given you are in his airspace and violating his instruction at that point . .

KISS.

 

[RotorAndWing]

If you get a letter or call from the FAA, I'd say I'm not able to talk right now, get their name and number, then contact a aviation lawyer.

Great way to turn something that is a formality into an enforcement or better yet, a 44709 ride.

Inspectors get PD's assigned to them to completed and close out. As if he doesn't already have enough to do (his inbox is always more full than the outbox) and all of his task have completion dates assigned the majority of Inspectors just want to close it out and move on.

When I got a PD such as something like this I called the pilot, discuss what happened and then ask him if he learned anything from the experience, offered some counseling and then thanked him for his time. I would have to get information to complete the ATQA portion such as last flight review, total time, etc and then close out the PTRS as informal counseling.

Be nice, admit the mistake, listen to the advice and move on.