Fly In - day after reflection on idiots in pattern

Deelee said:
Maybe I am lost on this or just too new (80 hours). I read/was instructed that crossing midfield at least 500’ above pattern altitude then going a mile or two past midfield then doing a descending teardrop to pattern altitude entering downwind on a 45 deg was not only ok but preferred if on the other side of the field.

Is this wrong???
Click to expand...

No, but at many fields that will put you at the traffic pattern altitude that all the fast kerosene burning aircraft are using.
 
GLDP said:
I know my eyeballs would have a much easier time seeing a plane within a mile or two, same altitude head on...
Click to expand...
In my experience that's just wishful thinking. Maybe if one of you is flying a blimp...



GLDP said:
Here is a guy clearly on downwind and instead of passing over 500 above to descend on the dead side, she comes up says that seems like 45 degrees, I’m joining downwind.
Click to expand...
Could have happened in Canada under your rules the same way. The 45 is allowed at mandatory frequency airports are they not?


GLDP said:
By passing over and joining at circuit height you 1) See the big picture outside of the circuit 2) check windsocks 3) get a free field inspection 4) join downwind predictably at one exact spot and 5) not blast 2 miles past the circuit turn around doing a teardrop and lose all the traffic you had in sight
Click to expand...
You guys want to do that no matter which direction you arrive from. Our pilots would consider it inefficient and you'd never get them to comply. Canadians are more idealistic and deliberate, in my experience. They go for stuff like that. Btw, that number 5) is pretty much what your drawings call for too:

 
I was on a hike in the boy scouts near Yuma when we crossed the firing range while this Comanche happened to be making a gun run. We found out about the gun run when a whole bunch of security folks showed up. Apparently the front seater in the Comanche spotted us and stopped the run.

We were escorted to the nearest edge of the range and allowed to continue our hike. The scout leader that picked the location was given a number to call if he wanted us to hike in that area again.

It was cool looking aircraft to watch fly.

Gary

upload_2019-10-8_19-31-3.png
 
MuseChaser said:
Very glad to read this thread. I had a situation come up a few weeks ago that I considered posting/asking about, but was hesitant to do so thinking I may have been at fault. Still not sure, actually, but since the waters seem to be a bit murky anyway, here goes...
I was approaching a local untowered field that has a pretty busy maintenance facilty onsite..traffic isn't usually nuts, but it's not uncommon to have a plane or two in the pattern. I was approaching on a 310 deg course from my home field, which put me directly on course to enter a left downwind for 13. Made my first call 10 miles out, then 5. Heard another plane advise they were turning left base 13, no other calls, no other aircraft visible by eyeball, but one showing up northeast of the field about 5 miles out via adsb in. Looking, but couldn't see it. I made another call at 1 mile, then advised I was on left downwind for 13 when I was almost abeam the opposite end (31) of the runway, all the while watching for the traffic blip that continued to get closer w/out making a call. She finally made a call ... "cessna xxx on a 45 for left downwind 13"... about the same time I saw her. Not at all a close call, but it would have been if one of us hadn't given way. I broke off to the right (still plenty of room to do so), and told her I'd do a 360 to give her some time. She got back on the mic and smugly said "It's always best to enter on a 45." Not "Thank you."

I didn't post because I know a 45 entry is preferred, and I always do the midfield-at-500-above-tpa entry, but this time I figured, with all the radio calls I made and heard, my ability to see the entire runway and traffic in the pattern, and the fact that my course put me on a perfect left downwind anyway, I'd be safe as long as I mad my intentions clear by radio (which I did many times) and in effect be IN the pattern before anyone entered on a 45 and cut me off.

No harm done, but I didn't appreciate the smugness. Was I wrong? If so, please tell me...always trying to do things right,
Click to expand...

Again - to reference Advisory Circular AC90-66B - she is wrong on both counts:

1. There is no "preferred" entry method to a traffic pattern. There are several options, including a 45 degree entry to a downwind.
2. Anyone ENTERING a downwind on a 45 is supposed to give right of way to any airplane ALREADY ON the downwind.

Now...you did the right thing by giving way to her. Your being right would have been to no advantage as you were being scooped up out of your airplane.

Thanks for what you did.
 
I don’t even know what to think after reading all six pages of this again.

Do I:
a- overfly 500’ (or more for turbojets), fly past midfield by a few miles then enter 45 for downwind
b - enter on the crosswind
c- loop around on the dead side and enter the downwind directly
d- just say f all and do a straight in
e- only fly to towered fields and have atc tell me what to do
 
PaulS said:
She should have turned for you and she should have been making calls. That said, you did the right thing and handled it well. I would have told her she should have made a call or two further out.
Click to expand...
Arguing on the CTAF is a really terrible idea, even when another pilot says something you disagree with.
 
Palmpilot said:
Arguing on the CTAF is a really terrible idea, even when another pilot says something you disagree with.
Click to expand...
True. Plus, I'm married. I learned a LONG time ago about the best time to start an argument. Best to wait until you're alone, or at least until she's asleep, and then only whisper your thoughts so as not to wake her.
 
Palmpilot said:
Are you saying that a rectangular pattern with rounded corners is "circular"?
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying 91.126 is about turns and turns have a radius which is a circular concept, but what you say is circular too. You go "around the pattern" you don't "go arectangle the pattern".
 
For the most part a good pattern should be a oval with the downwind the only time you’re wings level, the other ends should just be a turn, downwind to a nice smooth base to final turn, same with upwind, just a nice smooth turn into the downwind.

 
dtuuri said:
No, I'm saying 91.126 is about turns and turns have a radius which is a circular concept,...
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying what you're saying. In the past, you have posted a diagram that included a flight path that was a complete circle, so it wasn't clear that you were not referring to that.

...but what you say is circular too. You go "around the pattern" you don't "go arectangle the pattern".
Click to expand...

Relevance?
 
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...

I’m reading the first paragraph in the handbook, the ”preferred method” is to enter the downwind at a 45. I read it as not saying the teardrop pattern is preferred, just that the 45 into downwind is preferred. Basically though I read it as no matter how (coming in from that side, 45, or teardrop to end up coming in at 45) it still is preferred to come in at 45 from the right. Also on the right of the page, it mentions coming in at PA from the other side should not be done I’d the pattern is busy.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
Arguing on the CTAF is a really terrible idea, even when another pilot says something you disagree with.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but her action and lack of calls caused evasive maneuvers, I would have said it if it wasn't busy, one sentence and done.
 
James331 said:
For the most part a good pattern should be a oval with the downwind the only time you’re wings level, the other ends should just be a turn, downwind to a nice smooth base to final turn, same with upwind, just a nice smooth turn into the downwind.
Click to expand...
Nope. That's a good technique for an IFR circling approach, but staying banked that long in a VFR pattern is asking for a collision at an uncontrolled airport. That goes double for the turn onto downwind from upwind. That's a good place to be run over by somebody entering on a crosswind behind you.
 
MuseChaser said:
Very glad to read this thread. I had a situation come up a few weeks ago that I considered posting/asking about, but was hesitant to do so thinking I may have been at fault. Still not sure, actually, but since the waters seem to be a bit murky anyway, here goes...
I was approaching a local untowered field that has a pretty busy maintenance facilty onsite..traffic isn't usually nuts, but it's not uncommon to have a plane or two in the pattern. I was approaching on a 310 deg course from my home field, which put me directly on course to enter a left downwind for 13. Made my fist call 10 miles out, then 5. Heard another plane advise they were turning left base 13, no other calls, no other aircraft visible by eyeball, but one showing up northeast of the field about 5 miles out via adsb in. Looking, but couldn't see it. I made another call at 1 mile, then advised I was on left downwind for 13 when I was almost abeam the opposite end (31) of the runway, all the while watching for the traffic blip that continued to get closer w/out making a call. She finally made a call ... "cessna xxx on a 45 for left downwind 13"... about the same time I saw her. Not at all a close call, but it would have been if one of us hadn't given way. I broke off to the right (still plenty of room to do so), and told her I'd do a 360 to give her some time. She got back on the mic and smugly said "It's always best to enter on a 45." Not "Thank you."

I didn't post because I know a 45 entry is preferred, and I always do the midfield-at-500-above-tpa entry, but this time I figured, with all the radio calls I made and heard, my ability to see the entire runway and traffic in the pattern, and the fact that my course put me on a perfect left downwind anyway, I'd be safe as long as I mad my intentions clear by radio (which I did many times) and in effect be IN the pattern before anyone entered on a 45 and cut me off.

No harm done, but I didn't appreciate the smugness. Was I wrong? If so, please tell me...always trying to do things right,
Click to expand...

So what she is saying if a pilot is doing touch and goes and remaining in the pattern, you have to extend your crosswind and enter the downwind on a 45 because it’s always best? I think not.

You were in the right. She, on the other hand, needs a course in common courtesy.
 
This is a good read and as a newer pilot it's good for me to hear the thoughts of more experienced pilots.

I have to say I've had very similar experiences in Class D airports... to the point where I'm slamming on the brakes to let a departure go or I call the tower back with "wouldn't you rather me extend my downwind?". so not sure being under control is much better haha. Just need to be eyes open and aware I guess.
 
dtuuri said:
Nope. That's a good technique for an IFR circling approach, but staying banked that long in a VFR pattern is asking for a collision at an uncontrolled airport. That goes double for the turn onto downwind from upwind. That's a good place to be run over by somebody entering on a crosswind behind you.
Click to expand...

I’ve found if I make cross country style straight and level legs I end up with a B52 sized pattern.

The other nice thing about making a tight pattern like what I’m describing is most weekend warriors arnt a factor as they make huge patterns and will be well outside of my pattern, I probably could do takeoff to landing before they were half way down the downwind lol
 
James331 said:
I’ve found if I make cross country style straight and level legs I end up with a B52 sized pattern.

The other nice thing about making a tight pattern like what I’m describing is most weekend warriors arnt a factor as they make huge patterns and will be well outside of my pattern, I probably could do takeoff to landing before they were half way down the downwind lol
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've never liked those wide patterns either and always did my part to keep it tight, even with students. Can we spell "power off approach"?:) At least a "minimum power approach" where possible.
 
danhagan said:
No, but at many fields that will put you at the traffic pattern altitude that all the fast kerosene burning aircraft are using.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what the DPE told me during my PPL oral: yes, the FAA has the teardrop entry as preferred but you'll be flying into the altitude and pattern (wider) that the faster/turbine planes will be using.
She recommended either flying over at pattern and join downwind or join at x-wind leg instead.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Is that the "settle down Captain Happy" one? I liked that one.
Click to expand...
No, its American Airlines at JFK, saying if they don't get cleared for runway 31, they'll declare an emergency; then they declare an emergency.
I've got to look up "captain happy".
 
James331 said:
For the most part a good pattern should be a oval with the downwind the only time you’re wings level, the other ends should just be a turn, downwind to a nice smooth base to final turn, same with upwind, just a nice smooth turn into the downwind.

Click to expand...

I don’t like the one continuous turn from downwind to final. I fly a low wing and like to get one more quick look to see if I missed someone on final. I at least roll level then back.
 
Could somebody please explain to me what all this "Teardrop" referencing and discussion is about. What are we talking about?
 
Art Rose said:
Could somebody please explain to me what all this "Teardrop" referencing and discussion is about. What are we talking about?
Click to expand...

It's basically the FAA telling us to break regulations because they are too stubborn to admit they made a bad suggestion and won't back down from it.
 
Art Rose said:
Could somebody please explain to me what all this "Teardrop" referencing and discussion is about. What are we talking about?
Click to expand...
It's the left-hand diagram in Post #229.
 
Weekend Warrior said:
No, its American Airlines at JFK, saying if they don't get cleared for runway 31, they'll declare an emergency; then they declare an emergency.
I've got to look up "captain happy".
Click to expand...

Oh, got it. The Captain Happy one was the pilot giving ground (airport not remembered) a hard time saying ground had an attitude. It was pretty funny.
 
EdFred said:
It's basically the FAA telling us to break regulations because they are too stubborn to admit they made a bad suggestion and won't back down from it.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the clarification. I would agree...

I've seen many aircraft perform this type of pattern entry, even do it myself occasionally, (much further away from the airport) but it tends to violate one very important thing that I was taught in training. Never drop in on a pattern.

Also, I fly a relatively fast airframe, and rarely, but I admit, on occasion, I have entered the pattern maybe a little too fast. My last options were to pull up and bleed some speed, or abort. If I'm not careful, I can blow 500 ft in a matter of seconds. The last thing we need is some nimrod legally flying 500 ft over the top, oblivious to the potential danger.

Sorry, 2 miles out is way to close to be dropping into pattern altitude. In my opinion, the alternate shown here is a much safer way to enter the pattern for landing. It's similar, in some respects, to an overhead to landing, gives you a good opportunity to see what might be in the pattern, the ability to compensate, and keeps you close in.

Opinion........ This "Teardrop" pattern entry method lacks some very basic safety considerations.
 
I think that any given entry can be picked apart as not ideal for a given situation. I really don't have any issue with the FAA advisory, other than the fact that so many pilots disregard it since in their opinion it is not a "good advisory". That fact alone makes it dangerous to rely on.

From this thread, it is easy to see how many different opinions there are on how to fly a pattern and what pattern to fly, as well as radio protocol to be used when entering a non-towered traffic pattern. In the 20 or so posters to this thread, there must have been 15 different opinions on the "best" way to enter a pattern / when or how to use a radio. Including me!

I will continue to try to follow the FAA advisory only because it does work most of the time and I have to assume that most new pilots will follow it since that is what is being taught now I think.
 
Art Rose said:
I fly a relatively fast airframe, and rarely, but I admit, on occasion, I have entered the pattern maybe a little too fast. My last options were to pull up and bleed some speed, or abort. If I'm not careful, I can blow 500 ft in a matter of seconds. The last thing we need is some nimrod legally flying 500 ft over the top, oblivious to the potential danger.
Click to expand...
We sure don't want any nimrods above you when you're cutting the pattern in half.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Is that the "settle down Captain Happy" one? I liked that one.
Click to expand...
I just found it too... priceless. It's either going in my sig file, or going to get a lot of use as a response to some of the more cantankerous blowhards here... ;)

Loved it.

Re/ tight patterns.. from day ONE, my CFI insisted on tight patterns. As a matter of fact, right before my solo flight, which happened without any advance notice, he just instructed me to pull off the runway. He hopped out, said, "You're making good decisions, and flying tight patterns. Go do three on your own," and shut the door. I had not idea people thought that NOT flying a tight pattern was ever good practice. His whole approach was that if you need the engine to get to the threshhold from abeam the numbers, you flew the pattern wrong.
 
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...

Then don't turn right. fly outbound on an angle that will allow you to turn left to set up for the 45. Also, hold off on descending until you are well clear of the traffic pattern. That was the only way to do it when I learned and taught it 40 years ago.

So no, I don't agree with your argument.

I'm going back to rotorcraft anyway. Screw this traffic pattern stuff...
 
Art Rose said:
Thanks for the clarification. I would agree...

I've seen many aircraft perform this type of pattern entry, even do it myself occasionally, (much further away from the airport) but it tends to violate one very important thing that I was taught in training. Never drop in on a pattern.

Also, I fly a relatively fast airframe, and rarely, but I admit, on occasion, I have entered the pattern maybe a little too fast. My last options were to pull up and bleed some speed, or abort. If I'm not careful, I can blow 500 ft in a matter of seconds. The last thing we need is some nimrod legally flying 500 ft over the top, oblivious to the potential danger.

Sorry, 2 miles out is way to close to be dropping into pattern altitude. In my opinion, the alternate shown here is a much safer way to enter the pattern for landing. It's similar, in some respects, to an overhead to landing, gives you a good opportunity to see what might be in the pattern, the ability to compensate, and keeps you close in.

Opinion........ This "Teardrop" pattern entry method lacks some very basic safety considerations.
Click to expand...

That's because it should not be flown as a teardrop. After crossing the field, a turn made to an angle that will allow an inbound path that is 45 degrees to the downwind after making a 180 degree turn (left or right, depending on the pattern) work best. the outbound track should be straight and altitude maintained until well clear of the downwind leg. It will look more like a racetrack than a teardrop.

The part about making left turns in the pattern only applies to being IN the pattern. Turn any way you need to sequence yourself into the pattern.
Once again, the crappy third grade diagram in the FAA publication is misleading and was drawn that way to fit on the page.

I agree, making a teardrop turn in the vicinity of the downwind leg as depicted in the diagram is really unsafe and all that jibber jabber is valid...

I wanted to find a nice drawing of what I am describing, so I guess it has been forgotten since the digital age...
 
IK04 said:
Then don't turn right. fly outbound on an angle that will allow you to turn left to set up for the 45. Also, hold off on descending until you are well clear of the traffic pattern. That was the only way to do it when I learned and taught it 40 years ago.

So no, I don't agree with your argument.

I'm going back to rotorcraft anyway. Screw this traffic pattern stuff...
Click to expand...
How do you make a left 45 to the downwind then?

Also according to 91.126 it does not say in the pattern it says in the vicinity (which has been ruled to be about 5 miles) and when approaching to land.
Also certificate action has been taken against those that "turn any way" to get in the pattern.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top