francisco collazos
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2021
- Messages
- 499
- Display Name
Display name:
ciscovet
Is there a general rule to side stepping in a go-around event? Left, right, opposite side of the pattern, same side of the pattern?
Crash in Arizona (Marana, Feb 19, 2025)
- Thread starter Goprodious
- Start date
AvNavCom
Pre-takeoff checklist
Well, you wouldn't want to side-step into opposing-direction traffic on the downwind, which just leaves the option of side-stepping into the upwind.
Rene
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2024
- Messages
- 334
- Display Name
Display name:
Rene
And, for some reason that escapes me, only slightly more than half of the fields that I fly into around here have left-hand patterns.
Last edited:
tlglenn
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,003
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona, United States
- Display Name
Display name:
Ted
And sidestep enough to be able to view the runway environment while keeping an eye out for any traffic flying the upwind leg.
skyking3286
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2012
- Messages
- 469
- Display Name
Display name:
skyking3286
Discussion reminds me of the OSH discussion that ended up saying that Lancairs and other high wing loading, high speed aircraft should use the Warbird Island approach sequence. Which makes sense to me, since Ron pointed out the speeds are very similar.
Gilbert Buettner
Cleared for Takeoff
Since the pilot usually is in the left seat, it is easiest to keep the runway in sight by sidestepping to the right. It is not necessary to be as wide as you'd be on downwind.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
Having yet another safety enhancing tool at your disposal , in addition to windows, obviously seems to be somehow offensive to you given that you are proud of not having or using it …
What part of the country? And are there a lot of hills or some other reason why they have Right Traffic?
Not a big deal to have Right Traffic, but is does seem unusual to have 50% of your airports with RT. Oh... How many airports are we talking here?
Rene
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2024
- Messages
- 334
- Display Name
Display name:
Rene
As has been stated by many far more experienced people than I, ASD-B did not / could not / would not have prevented this tragic accident. ASD-B was / would have been more "noise" in the pattern. A place where eyeballs need to be gazing o-u-t-s-i-d-e the w-i-n-d-o-w-s. There is no magic. Just people who must use fundamental a-i-r-m-a-n-s-h-i-p to safely m-a-n-e-u-v-e-r around other k-n-o-w-n traffic in the pattern.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
Eyes were gazing outside the windows, many words spoken with vigorous confirmations being offered multiple times … and now 60+ people are dead.. so you were saying ?
Btw. I was not referring to what happened on that night but rather your personal gleefulness of not using ADSB as if it was some kind of perverted badge of honor …
Rene
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2024
- Messages
- 334
- Display Name
Display name:
Rene
Which thread are you responding to? While the loss of the two who perished in Arizona was tragic for those involved and those who knew them / loved them, it was two, and that is what this thread is discussing. Two aircraft in a pattern. Two aircraft with pilots that were aware of the presence of each other.
One of my pet-peeves is the blind reliance on technology to "save us" rather than on fundamentals.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
Yep, wrong thread but pretty much the same conclusion … we need every tool at our disposal and our overall safety is an aggregate of individual measures, especially including technology … as it is much easier to improve algorithms and devise new ways of augmenting our senses rather than relying on evolution ( as awesome as it is ) to get us there in another 10 million years …
Rene
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2024
- Messages
- 334
- Display Name
Display name:
Rene
Up around Lake Michigan and the south shore of Superior. Of the nine "alpha-numeric" airports I frequent four have right hand patterns. There aren't any big hills that I can see which would generate a L-H on Rwy 19 and a R-H on Rwy 01. The funniest explanation I've heard is that it was (ever frugal) Wm. Piper's idea and meant to even-out your rudder cable stretch. The bigger "three letter" airports - which I try to avoid are all left-hand.
R-H is no big deal.
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 7,165
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
I trust that no pilot is using ADS-B in blind reliance on technology for traffic avoidance but there is wisdom in the phrase: "better to have it and not need it ... "
AV8R_87
Cleared for Takeoff
Some poeople stated the contrary, but you only listened to the opinions that lined up with yours.
A Lancair would probably not expect a 172 to climb to his go-around altitude that fast (I wonder if the 172 tried to climb fast in an attempt to get out of the way). Yet that would've been an easy thing to spot on a traffic display.
Does the Lancair have a window on the bottom?
Does the 172 have a window on the top?
How could they have seen each other, once the Lancair decided to maintain runway heading on his go-around?
By the way, I don't think that was a capital mistake on his part. It's a good lesson for us to learn from, but most CFIs teach the student to maintain runway heading during a go-around.
You still haven't done your homework. Sit in your plane, move around a reasonable amount (as allowed by a properly secured harness) and determine how much of the space around you is obstructed. Let us know.
The fundamentals have been proven to not be 100% foolprof.
Do you also rely on the "fundamentals" of driving safe and not having a crash, therefore not wearing your seatbelt and disabling the airbags in your car? Why should you rely on technology to save you? Did you also remove the ABS?
Some of us fly at uncontrolled airports with more than 120 average daily operations. That's average. Remove night time, cold weather, IMC days, add the weekend factor, and that can easily translate into a lot of days with double that. That's 20 operations per hour, on average, or one every three minutes. Peak times of the day will increase that. You can easily see 6-8 aircraft in the pattern at the same time, with your head on a swivel trying to locate them all based on mediocre position calls, all in a rather cluttered visual environment. And none of them are flying the same pattern. At that point, a smart pilot will use every single tool available to him, while not fixating on any particular one.
How many daily operations happen at your airfield?
What is the point of this writing style? You're the only one in this thread writing like that.
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 7,165
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
Had four buzzing around today as I did the engine warmup/runup at an uncontrolled field. One plane appeared a bit confused as to which runway to use as the winds had shifted & were nearly calm so the in use runway appeared to be up for grabs. There were radio calls being made but it was a glance at the ADS-B screen that confirmed four planes in the vicinity but the radio confirmed that only three were making traffic callouts (perhaps the other one was on another frequency).
All that said to point out that using the eyeballs, radio, and ADS-B readout helped to put everything together quickly.
skyking3286
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2012
- Messages
- 469
- Display Name
Display name:
skyking3286
I can't believe that someone thinks that you should be looking at display on short final in this case. . . It was indeed a mistake not to sidestep to the right, this isn't a go around, it's a traffic avoidance maneuver. I have never seen a go-around where you stayed on runway heading with planes in the pattern/runway. Always sidestep. Go-Around is different with planes on the runway, in this case the only safe option is to side step if unclear about traffic to keep them in sight. 99% of my flying is at untowered field.
wanttaja
En-Route
Unless having it is a distraction from looking outside the airplane. Airplane makes position call, pilot in another airplane with an ADS-B In display has their head down, wondering why their $$$$ gizmo doesn't show the airplane, or is trying to figure out which plane is which, etc.I trust that no pilot is using ADS-B in blind reliance on technology for traffic avoidance but there is wisdom in the phrase: "better to have it and not need it ... "
I sometimes wonder if that's what happened at Watsonville. Whether the twin pilot had his head down, trying to spot the "offending" Cessna on the fishfinder.
Ron Wanttaja
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
This is a losing argument … while ADSB may not be perfect at this point, arguing against technology is like arguing for replacing radars in military planes with “looking outside of the airplane” because fish finders are just a distraction …
Rene
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2024
- Messages
- 334
- Display Name
Display name:
Rene
Try re-reading what I wrote. I said some, you say some, neither of us is saying everyone.
Lancairs and 172s are inanimate objects. (I'm not being flippant here, I have a point.) Machines cannot think. Humans can think. (And /or they can make excuses if they don't die as a result of not thinking.) Two or possibly four people were involved in making (or failing to make) decisions that caused a fatal accident. What would any of thoise people learned from a screen inside the cockpit?
The Lancair had apparently already made one go-around after coming up (too closely) behind a slower (different) 172. Are you suggesting that it was "news" that other aircraft were in the pattern? Eyes need to be on the aircraft, not on a screen inside the cockpit. Sure, use the screen outside the pattern, but once a "target" (an unfortunate word choice in this instance) is close eyes need to be on it.
Gee, you got me there. This tragedy was unavoidable. I should sell my taildragger because a stump or a dog might be in front of it and there is no way that I can taxi without being able to see over the cowl. Or . . . I could move my head and upper body, move my airplane around . . . instead of trusting that if I can't see it without moving everything is fine . . . especially if I already know a stump or dog is on the field.
P.S. If I had to choose between clean windows, seatbelts, or airbags in my car . . . it would be clean windows. They help you avoid a crash.
Last edited:
wanttaja
En-Route
Gimme a system that gives me a verbal call-out like a co-pilot would. Best of both worlds. Seems like AI should work for this.
Oh, and my airplane is worth $10k. Make sure the system is affordable.
Ron Wanttaja
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 7,165
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
I believe it's simply another tool that needs to be available to use but properly doing so is the key. I certainly hope that when planes are close that pilots are using the
w-i-n-d-o-w-s (couldn't resist) with their best eyeballs doing a proper scan outside.
RyanShort1
Final Approach
Ok, because of what I emphasized in bold from your quote, I'm just going to say this once and bow out of the thread. I think we all need to take a step back and take a deep breath and look in the mirror. I am decidedly on the side of using all available tools, including eyeballs, but we need to be realistic about our own opinions and the value of our contribution to the conversation. This is not to say that we don't have natural rights to free speech, and First Amendment blah, blah, blah, but it's just my comment on the way many of us on the forum feel the need to express ourselves.
For myself, I'm going to say that I generally place a significantly higher value on the posts of those who I know have higher quantities of time, quality of experience, and breadth of experience as well - such as more types and varieties of aircraft flown, etc. If you, for instanced, have a relatively narrow window of experience in your Vagabond and a few other planes, it's easy to think that you have some skewed thoughts as to how someone in a Lancair with different experiences and background might perceive the aviation world around them. Even more than that, your particular bit of experience doesn't help you relate well to the higher speeds that our turbine pilots deal with, and the delayed reaction time to the small windows they have to recognize and react to a threat.
It's easy to get wound up and frustrated when others disagree with your own point of view, but when you feel yourself getting uptight, take a deep breath and remember the old, wise meme...
Last edited:
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
What seat are you in. Left or right. The point is to see the traffic. Right side is typically the best side.
AV8R_87
Cleared for Takeoff
You are being pedantic, I hope. The alternative is not as good.
That, after losing visual contact with each other (for whatever reason), they were converging on the same altitude. Something that none of them probably expected.
I wonder how you came up to that conclusion. It was potentially unexpected that the 172 would climb that quicky to the Lancair's altitude.
You see, this is where you are borderline trolling.
Are you telling me that you induce 20-30 degrees of sideslip, 30-45 degrees of roll and another 30 degrees of pitch change every 10 seconds or do to cover some of the blind spots? Because that would be the biggest load of fresh manure ever delivered. Nobody flies like that, not even the NORDO cubs at my field. Especially on final, where the goal is to be stabilized.
You yawing back and forth on the ground has nothing to do with it, that's not how you fly.
Those planes ended up, in the course of a maneuver, in a position where they couldn't see each other. They don't have windows on the top/bottom. And (as I also stated above) the Lancair probably didn't expect the 172 to climb to his altitude thst fast.
You still haven't answerered a couple important questions:
1. How much can you see from your plane vs how much it blocked by the airframe, including normal head/body movements? Nobody twists their necks like an owl every 10 seconds.
2. How many average daily operations happen at the alphanumeric fields you fly? How many aircraft use the pattern at once on a good day?
As I said earlier, I had a few instances in which no amount of contorting or reasonable maneuvering would've saved me from being rear-ended. But a traffic display that I glanced at (but not fixated on) did.
We have a great deal of aviation freedom in the US, which is great. But that can result in some loose flying, where not everyone is on the same sheet of music.
I'd rather use a bit of extra tech to prevent the holes on the Swiss cheese from lining up, instead of what I saw in the UK a few years ago, where a grass field had a control tower, and you had to ask for permission to start the engine.
Nobody asked you to make that choice. The choice was on using the car's safety equipment. You're just trying to deflect from not having a good answer. It's ok to admit you don't have one.
There's a reason why the FAA mandated TCAS on larger aircraft. They understand the limitations of see and avoid. You should read some of their studies.
Last edited:
AV8R_87
Cleared for Takeoff
Avare on an old Android tablet (or Foreflight on an ipad if you're splurging), coupled with a home-assembled Stratux receiver. Both of them will generate aural traffic call-outs based on received ADS-B data. Bluetooth into the audio panel (if you're that fancy), or build a cable that routes the audio to a mic jack. Probably <$500 total cost, especially if going for the Android/Stratux route.
There are several apps that give you voice traffic alerts, airspace warnings etc..and they will keep getting better. I have my app running on a cheap Android 8 inch tablet or on the phone and use it in everything from the Cub to the C210. Are they perfect, no. But neither are my eyes, so I use both.
Fred
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Do you have to?