Fly In - day after reflection on idiots in pattern

EppyGA said:
Kind of wonder how the op would have handled this before he had "the panel" to look at?
Click to expand...
With the same mentality he used while handeling this situation: using all available resources to his advantage to maintain situational awareness.
 
EppyGA said:
Kind of wonder how the op would have handled this before he had "the panel" to look at?
Click to expand...

Somehow I managed. But I seem to remember pilots being a little more professional 35 years ago. I seem to see people running red lights all the time now too. Maybe I am becoming an crochety old man. I will give you that possibility.
 
Deelee said:
I think, after reading this, I am doing to stick to what I was taught and use the crossing midfield above 500’ tpa when applicable. And also to keep good situational awareness and communicate appropriately. Haven’t had a problem yet, but I am always hyper-aware of where everybody is in a pattern (that I know of).
Click to expand...

So when you overfly the field, put your back to the field, lose sight of the runway, how do you know that a couple airplanes without radios aren't now in the pattern? If you're on the "wrong" side of the field, why not fly an upwind/crosswind (not at midfield) ==> downwind ==> base ==> final and maintain situational awareness the entire time? Without an answer of "because that's what I was taught" why is overflying and losing all situational awareness better than maintaining it and keeping a visual on everything?
 
EdFred said:
No, what is insane is putting your back to all the traffic and then making a RIGHT turn when approaching to land when the regs say left turn. Also, who has the right of way when you barge in on the 45? The regs say the person to the right has the right of way. So the person on downwind has to yield to the person barging in on the 45. And you're supposed to fly behind the right of way traffic....by making a RIGHT turn to do so. Now do you see why the 45 is the stupidest way to enter the pattern? No, of course you don't.
Click to expand...
It may be insane and idiotic, but it's the entry that FAA has been pushing for decades. So it's also insane and idiotic to not expect to see pilots using it.

Being able to figure this stuff out on the fly is all part of flying at non-towered fields. Pilots who spend most of their time being told what to do are often quite uncomfortable with it.
 
bflynn said:
how the heck did a 172 climb 1000’ by mid field? When I’m by myself in the winter with half tanks, I can do it just about after passing the other end of the runway 6500’ away.
Click to expand...

My old 172 (STOL & 180 conv) could probably do it. I was always impressed with the climb capability of that little aircraft.
 
StevieTimes said:
I believe it to be safe if it is flown inverted.

That was inserted when a fella named Maverick made instructor at Miramar. He petitioned the FAA. It's a big thing; I think there was a movie about parts of it.
Click to expand...

And 30+ years later, he’s still a captain. One of life’s mysteries.
 
So the FAA hasn't suggested the 45 over other entries for decades?
 
This group...
Traffic patterns = "FAA REGS SAY YOU MUST DO X"
Any other topic = "FAA IS FULL OF IDIOTS"
 
Sinistar said:
My bad. I thought the entry (right 270 teardrop) on the left in that figure was introduced the time of the document (March 2018)
Click to expand...
That's OK, because the recommended right 270 entry is contrary to the regulations anyhow...

91.126 operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport
(b) When approaching to land at an airport
(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left

You pretty much have to make a right from the 45, but there is no excuse for not making a left 270 to get onto the 45. :)
 
Last edited:
So I guess the airplanes entering on the 45 have the right of way over aircraft on downwind. I guess if we are on downwind we are to give way to aircraft on the 45? Would that be a fair assessment?

Which way do you turn to avoid? To the right (behind) like one regulation says 91.113, or to the left like another regulation says 91.126?
 
EdFred said:
No, what is insane is putting your back to all the traffic and then making a RIGHT turn when approaching to land when the regs say left turn. Also, who has the right of way when you barge in on the 45? The regs say the person to the right has the right of way. So the person on downwind has to yield to the person barging in on the 45. And you're supposed to fly behind the right of way traffic....by making a RIGHT turn to do so. Now do you see why the 45 is the stupidest way to enter the pattern? No, of course you don't.
Click to expand...

Actually the FAA in their Advisory Circular AC90-66B advises for the aircraft ON the 45 entry to yield to traffic already on downwind. I can see, however, where this would be confusing as the rule for normal CONVERGING traffic is always to yield to the traffic to the right when two airplanes are converging. BUT....in paragraph 11.11, the Advisory states that normal right of way rules per 91.113 DO apply even in the traffic pattern. So...according to the diagram of the 45 degree entry, "normal" right of way rules to NOT apply, but as stated in paragraph 11.11 normal right of way rules DO apply in the traffic pattern.

I assume that the FAA waives the right of way rules as specified in 91.113 ONLY for 45 degree downwind entries and sticks to 91.113 for anywhere else in the pattern. But who knows if MY interpretation is correct?!

But this shows another reason why you need to be very careful when on downwind and another plane is coming in on a 45 - they definitely may believe that the plane on downwind needs to yield to them.

Bottom line in my opinion - only use the 45 or alternate method of downwind entry when there are no airplanes in the pattern or maybe one airplane on base or final. It just is not a smart entry method to use in a heavily congested non-towered traffic pattern. There could be several airplanes with different opinions of who has the right of way. Not a good situation.

Confusing as heck.
 
I swear there is always someone on the wrong frequency or stuck mic blocking it entirely.
 
Stephen Shore said:
Actually the FAA in their Advisory Circular AC90-66B advises for the aircraft ON the 45 entry to yield to traffic already on downwind. I can see, however, where this would be confusing as the rule for normal CONVERGING traffic is always to yield to the traffic to the right when two airplanes are converging. BUT....in paragraph 11.11, the Advisory states that normal right of way rules per 91.113 DO apply even in the traffic pattern. So...according to the diagram of the 45 degree entry, "normal" right of way rules to NOT apply, but as stated in paragraph 11.11 normal right of way rules DO apply in the traffic pattern.

But this shows another reason why you need to be very careful when on downwind and another plane is coming in on a 45 - they definitely may believe that the plane on downwind needs to yield to them.

Bottom line in my opinion - only use the 45 or alternate method of downwind entry when there are no airplanes in the pattern or maybe one airplane on base or final. It just is not a smart entry method to use in a heavily congested non-towered traffic pattern. There could be several airplanes with different opinions of who has the right of way. Not a good situation.

Confusing as heck.
Click to expand...

And that's exactly why I have an issue with the 45 entry with traffic already in the pattern.
 
Stephen Shore said:
What I meant was that there was no opening for a 45 degree entry to a downwind anywhere near the field. There was a solid line of planes on a left downwind. The reason for the long line of downwind planes was that the Young Eagle flights were being routed to a waypoint four miles south of the field and then brought back on a long straight downwind back to the field. There were 6-8 of those planes constantly in the pattern and then the fly-in traffic also. There was no way for anyone to break in to the downwind on a 45 anywhere near the field.

I was not aware of the Young Eagle routing until after I landed. However, from seeing the traffic on my panel as well as visually, I knew that there was no way to enter the pattern by overflying the field and then coming back in on a 45 degree entry from the downwind side. I could see from the traffic that there was a long line forming south of the field for a long left downwind entry into the pattern.

I have been flying a long time and have seen my fill of hijinks in the pattern, but what I saw yesterday was beyond compare. And a straight entry into an event like this while "legal" was idiotic and almost cost some kids their lives.
Click to expand...
What a cluster. So essentially because everybody was doing something non-standard, one person couldn't make a standard, recommended entry? God I love towered fields. That actually sounds like a generally dangerous situation. I would've just left. Had a friend almost get t-boned on final at fly-in a few weeks ago. Not worth the risk IMHO.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
Using the panel to get a good overview of the entire traffic picture, including all the planes more than 2 miles away (which are basically impossible to see unless you are lying to yourself) = success in this case. He didn’t crash or cause any incidents.
Click to expand...
The entire traffic picture that has ADSB-out, you mean. You don't get the entire traffic picture with ADSB.
 
EdFred said:
Seems that one of the figures (and the stupidest one) posted above is in absolute and direct contradiction with 14CFR91.126 (assuming left traffic)
(§91.126 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace.)
(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without an operating control tower in Class G airspace—
(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right;

Also note that it doesn't say just the turns in the traffic pattern, but in the vicinity.

Please tell me how entering on the 45 and making a RIGHT turn into the pattern is the same as making a left turn?

What's also stupid about the 45 entry: Lets spend all this time approaching the airport, getting a visual on a bunch of planes in the pattern, put it all together in our heads, and then turn our back to the ***-**** airport losing a visual on everything that's going on. There has been certificate action against pilots who made a right to final within 5 miles, and yet the FAA in all their "wisdom" says to do exactly that while even CLOSER to the airport. And we have idiots defending the practice. (Just keeping in theme with the thread title)
Click to expand...
Coulda been a class E field. Just sayin'. And the FAA-recommended 45 entry to the downwind requires a right turn.
 
EdFred said:
So the FAA hasn't suggested the 45 over other entries for decades?
Click to expand...
That's not what was said. You said:

EdFred said:
...what is insane is putting your back to all the traffic and then making a RIGHT turn when approaching to land when the regs say left turn.
Click to expand...
Lindberg then said:

Lindberg said:
...but it's the entry that FAA has been pushing for decades.
Click to expand...
So I said:

dtuuri said:
FTFY:

Not true without proof.​
Click to expand...
Putting your back to traffic is a 270° "teardrop" entry and has not been "pushed by the FAA for decades."
 
GLDP said:
Honest question - why is the teardrop and 45 degree entry the ‘preferred’ method? That’s simply not something we really use up here in Canada and by having three different entires it’s opening up the door to traffic being all over the place.

Crossing over midfield at pattern altitude and joining directly seems like a safer entry to me. The pilot flying midfield can see the runway better as they are 500ft lower. They can see the big picture left and right while adjusting their speed to enter the downwind. The pilots in the downwind can easily see traffic off their left at the same altitude and expect them to join the circuit. The ability to see them on the left at the same altitude is key.

Doing the teardrop to the 45 entry the pilots flying midfield at 1500 can’t see what’s happening below as well and now have to join at the 45 where the pilots in the downwind can’t see them as easily off their right. If a pilot in the downwind sees them off their right they might not know whether that pilot entering the pattern actually sees them or not so it may create a conflict, much like driving at a merge point and you both don’t know whether the other person will yield or not.

To further create issues the pilots entering the downwind at patten altitude in example one now need to yield to not only the people in the downwind but also need to look further out to yield to those on a 45 entry.
Click to expand...
Except that in a low-wing you wouldn't be able to see anyone on the downwind or approaching it from the other side.
 
EdFred said:
So when you overfly the field, put your back to the field, lose sight of the runway, how do you know that a couple airplanes without radios aren't now in the pattern?
Click to expand...
By turning around to face the airport and making an angled entry into the pattern with a few miles of lead time to give you plenty of opportunity to take a full and complete view of the entire pattern-side of the airfield.

You just won't give up, will you?
 
dtuuri said:
That's not what was said. You said:


​
Lindberg then said:


​
So I said:


​
Putting your back to traffic is a 270° "teardrop" entry and has not been "pushed by the FAA for decades."
Click to expand...
91.126 says left turns unless otherwise marked. The overfly and set up on the downwind to the 45 suggests right turns in direct violation of 91.126. The entry on downwind from 45 is also right turn. FAA has basically been saying violate the regulations for decades.
 
EdFred said:
And that's exactly why I have an issue with the 45 entry with traffic already in the pattern.
Click to expand...
Why is there traffic in the pattern that hasn't made a 45-degree entry to the downwind as recommended?
 
mryan75 said:
Coulda been a class E field. Just sayin'. And the FAA-recommended 45 entry to the downwind requires a right turn.
Click to expand...

(a) Unless otherwise required by part 93 of this chapter or unless otherwise authorized or required by the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the Class E airspace area, each person operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class E airspace area must comply with the requirements of §91.126.

Perhaps reading the regs would help curb the appearance of committing acts of dumbassery.
 
Last edited:
mryan75 said:
By turning around to face the airport and making an angled entry into the pattern with a few miles of lead time to give you plenty of opportunity to take a full and complete view of the entire pattern-side of the airfield.

You just won't give up, will you?
Click to expand...

Except now you lost sight of the cub doing pattern work that just took off. Would have seen him the whole time if you entered an upwind.
 
mryan75 said:
Except that in a low-wing you wouldn't be able to see anyone on the downwind or approaching it from the other side.
Click to expand...

You wouldn’t need to see anyone approaching from the other side if the 45 degree entry wasn’t a thing. See where the issue is? You have three lines of planes potentially converging in one spot - midfield downwind. In Canada if you are approaching from the circuit downwind or active side you’d fly overhead above pattern height by 500ft descend on the upwind of dead side of the circuit turn around and cross back over midfield and join downwind at circuit height. I still think it’s a safer entry. Planes on downwind can see you easily while they are looking at traffic in the downwind and on base and final. They can also possibly see your landing lights or strobes as they are in front and to the side.
 
The rules under 91.126 are circular, but pilots have loved rectangular patterns for eons. So, the FAA has simply decided not to "consider" the turn from circular to rectangular a violation. Midfield is the optimum entry spot to minimize the chance of aircraft merging at different altitudes (even though the drawing in the AIM is incorrect and has been for, well, decades now), so I don't get the angst here. Personally, I favor midfield entries on a 45 at either the downwind or upwind legs or a straight-in at sleepy airports while maintaining a good lookout and as slow a speed as possible. That base leg traffic can show up quick from behind a windshield post.
 
GLDP said:
You wouldn’t need to see anyone approaching from the other side if the 45 degree entry wasn’t a thing. See where the issue is? You have three lines of planes potentially converging in one spot - midfield downwind. In Canada if you are approaching from the circuit downwind or active side you’d fly overhead above pattern height by 500ft descend on the upwind of dead side of the circuit turn around and cross back over midfield and join downwind at circuit height. I still think it’s a safer entry. Planes on downwind can see you easily while they are looking at traffic in the downwind and on base and final. They can also possibly see your landing lights or strobes as they are in front and to the side.
Click to expand...
So, what's your answer to my calm wind scenario:

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...-idiots-in-pattern.121859/page-3#post-2808385
 
dtuuri said:
...Note that the NTSB found the cause of the midair at Plano McKinney, TX was due to the "Alternate Entry" in the Advisory Circular. There will be more to come, IMO.
Click to expand...
I think that people tend to overlook the note that says "Yield to the preferred 45° and downwind traffic" in the depiction of the alternate entry.
 
mryan75 said:
The entire traffic picture that has ADSB-out, you mean. You don't get the entire traffic picture with ADSB.
Click to expand...

Yes. Obviously. I think I stated in an earlier post that you use your eyes, ADSB In, and ATC (IFR flight plan or VFR flight following). Even when under ATC control, your primary responsibility is visual separation. ADSB is not different. But it is a great way to gain situational awareness that otherwise is not possible. And over the past few months as we get closer to January 1, it is getting more relevant.
 
dtuuri said:
So, what's your answer to my calm wind scenario:

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...-idiots-in-pattern.121859/page-3#post-2808385
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that there could be a mid-air conflict with two planes converging the same exact time? If so, the same exact thing could happen if they are both planning to cross 500ft above to go do a 45. This really isn’t an issue up here. Many of the busier non towered airports have a CFS statement that makes one side of the runway a right downwind. That way there is always a circuit side and dead side. It makes it so much easier with no conflict because you all join midfield at circuit height from one direction. Planes in the downwind have their eyes always on the field and expect traffic entering at a certain place. Less busy airports with no direction, maybe it’s an issue but two licensed pilots should be able to figure it out between themselves.
 
IK04 said:
Some impatient jackhole decided they didn't need to fly in a manner to enter the downwind on a midfield 45 and it made it all the way to an FAA publication. Saying the Canuckistanis do it doesn't make it right.
Click to expand...
If I understand it correctly, the Canadians have the advantage of one consistent set of procedures that apply in their country, instead of the two conflicting procedures shown in the FAA's figures shown above.
 
It was just such a fly-in at KHYI that made me very, very glad I sprung for the TIS transponder and made me a big advocate for ADSB. These days I avoid those kinds of fly-ins as there are simply too many folks that don't care about standard procedures or using the radio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top