Learnt somethin' new yesterday

flhrci

flhrci

Final Approach
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
5,932
Location
Groveport, OH
Display Name
Display name:
David
Had two airplanes in the pattern at KDLZ yesterday that kept calling "upwind" in the pattern. I could not for the life of me figure this out so I had to ask them where they were.

Looked it up this morning and in the AIM, paragraph 4-3-2, there it is! The upwind leg! Duuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............

I was never taught this in the late 1990's. Is it new or am I just behind here? I have never taught or heard of this as a CFI. Now I gotta teach it to.

I have been teaching my students not to enter the pattern from the crosswind but this makes it look ok to do so. And that is what I saw one aircraft do yesterday from the ground as we were lining up to take off.

David
 
flhrci said:
Had two airplanes in the pattern at KDLZ yesterday that kept calling "upwind" in the pattern. I could not for the life of me figure this out so I had to ask them where they were.

Looked it up this morning and in the AIM, paragraph 4-3-2, there it is! The upwind leg! Duuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............

I was never taught this in the late 1990's. Is it new or am I just behind here? I have never taught or heard of this as a CFI. Now I gotta teach it to.



David
Click to expand...

Incredibly common at towered airports to be told to "extend upwind, I'll call your crosswind"

I have been teaching my students not to enter the pattern from the crosswind but this makes it look ok to do so. And that is what I saw one aircraft do yesterday from the ground as we were lining up to take off.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by that. There are many easy ways to enter the pattern.

Pretty much all the pattern entries I do and teach are either entering from: final, base, crosswind, downwind.

This is exactly what I teach for pattern entries. I believe in KISS when it comes to this subject vs the weird **** some people teach and do.

FBGw68u.png
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, not sure why you would have missed it. Want to point out there is a difference between departure and upwind - departure means you are (should be) flying over the runway, upwind should be slightly to the right of the runway.
 
I teach shifting to the right of the runway for go-around for better visibility. No issue there.

Btw, I am thinking non-towered airport here.

For pattern entry, I have never thought it safe to enter on the crosswind leg and turn onto the downwind at pattern altitude. I have found an old article on aopa.org from 1997 that addresses this as a long going debate of what is right/wrong and safe/not safe. I have been teaching my students to go-over the airfield mid-field and 1000 feet higher than pattern altitude and then descend past the downwind leg and loop back around to the 45 degree entry. At towered airports, do what they want/need you to do. Extended Base and extended finals are normal around here at towered fields.

As I think on this more, it is another tool in the pilot's "tool box" to get back into the pattern. I just did not know of it.

Jesse, thanks for the diagram but there is one in the AIM. LOL


David
 
flhrci said:
I teach shifting to the right of the runway for go-around for better visibility. No issue there.

Btw, I am thinking non-towered airport here.

For pattern entry, I have never thought it safe to enter on the crosswind leg and turn onto the downwind at pattern altitude. I have found an old article on aopa.org from 1997 that addresses this as a long going debate of what is right/wrong and safe/not safe. I have been teaching my students to go-over the airfield mid-field and 1000 feet higher than pattern altitude and then descend past the downwind leg and loop back around to the 45 degree entry. At towered airports, do what they want/need you to do. Extended Base and extended finals are normal around here at towered fields.

As I think on this more, it is another tool in the pilot's "tool box" to get back into the pattern. I just did not know of it.

Jesse, thanks for the diagram but there is one in the AIM. LOL


David
Click to expand...

The one in the aim sucks and complicates it. To each their own, but I don't teach the fly over and turn back stuff. Too complicated and IMO less safe. Plenty of ways to argue it either way.

I've never had a DPE question a student of mine entering on a crosswind.
 
jesse said:
The one in the aim sucks and complicates it. To each their own, but I don't teach the fly over and turn back stuff. Too complicated and IMO less safe. Plenty of ways to argue it either way.

I've never had a DPE question a student of mine entering on a crosswind.
Click to expand...

I do like your diagram better. it is a little more straight-forward. Thank you for the advice. I will teach what is in the AIM on this one.

Unfortunately, I am hard on myself and feel stupid missing a detail item like this. I do not remember ever being taught this in primary training. But I realize I can't know everything and CFI's are learning to.

David
 
Jesse,

May I have permission to copy your diagram and use it for instruction? :)

David
 
I was taught to enter the pattern preferably on the crosswind or downwind 45. But I enter on the upwind now and then, not very often. Taking a look at Jesse's diagram, that would be when approaching from the S/E, there is traffic in the pattern, and it works out better for spacing.
 
Upwind to cross wind to downwind,you avoid flying over the airport and trying to enter on a descending 45 for the downwind.
 
I guess I'll get run out of here if I mention a mid-field crossover to join downwind.

Taildragger pilots if they're like me don't trust AWOS or any other visual clue except the windsock or tetrahedron. So we tend to fly over and get a good look at it before we commit.

This has saved my bacon more than once. I've announced ten miles out my intentions to land on 16 for instance going by AWOS and then when I get there and see the sock I revise to 34. Don't trust machines, trust your eyes.
 
I call upwind usually only when the pattern is busy (2 or more) which is pretty common up at DLZ. Also there is often traffic coming from the north near the field heading back to OSU so an upwind call can be good in that situation also.
 
An upwind leg in shouldn't have context on a towered field (per AIM 4-3-2) as you would simply be assigned left or right traffic depending on which side of the runway you're on.

But I don't see the point of entering the pattern on an "upwind" on a non towered field. If I'm far enough out, I'll simply fall in the appropriate pattern, rather than do a whole parallel race track around the pattern, and if I have to cross the field, I'll cross at 500 over TPA midfield and teardrop to a downwind entry.
 
flhrci said:
Jesse,

May I have permission to copy your diagram and use it for instruction? :)

David
Click to expand...

sure. I always just draw it once for the student, and explain it. From there on out I make the student draw it FOR ME specific to each airport we're going to, and tell me what the entry options are, and which one they'll most likely end up using and why. Then I make them bring it with them.

I'm big on drawing things, explaining, then having students draw the same thing for me. It accomplishes a lot more than just looking at something printed.
 
Last edited:
txflyer said:
I guess I'll get run out of here if I mention a mid-field crossover to join downwind.

Taildragger pilots if they're like me don't trust AWOS or any other visual clue except the windsock or tetrahedron. So we tend to fly over and get a good look at it before we commit.
Click to expand...
I'm about 50/50 as to if I do the crosswind over the departure end or at midfield.
 
jesse said:
sure. I always just draw it once for the student, and explain it. From there on out I make the student draw it FOR ME specific to each airport we're going to, and tell me what the entry options are, and which one they'll most likely end up using and why. Then I make them bring it with them.

I'm big on drawing things, explaining, then having students draw the same thing for me. It accomplishes a lot more than just looking at something printed.
Click to expand...

I remember my cfi doing the same thing. I still find myself sketcking a quick stick-figure diagram sometimes when I'm about 10 out.
 
Let's look at Advisory Circular 90-66A instead of the AIM.

Bob Gardner
 
Sac Arrow said:
An upwind leg in shouldn't have context on a towered field (per AIM 4-3-2) as you would simply be assigned left or right traffic depending on which side of the runway you're on.

But I don't see the point of entering the pattern on an "upwind" on a non towered field. If I'm far enough out, I'll simply fall in the appropriate pattern, rather than do a whole parallel race track around the pattern, and if I have to cross the field, I'll cross at 500 over TPA midfield and teardrop to a downwind entry.
Click to expand...

An upwind entry works REAL nice at Half Moon Bay. The teardrop into the 45 points you into rising terrain (there is enough room, but it freaks people out), and traffic on nice weekends is often a bit too busy to permit a safe straight in. As you know, almost everyone arrives upwind.

The upwind also doesn't require you to turn your back on the pattern before entering it, something I find rather nice at Watsonville, for instance. That pattern can get crazy busy.
 
Last edited:
CFI not familiar with 'upwind'. Okay, well now ya know. I do wonder what other holes there are.
 
The main thing is to know the names of the legs so you can say where you are and understand where others are. Job Done!

The way you use them ends up being up to you.
 
Not new. I learned in 1995 and at that time the book (Jeppesen Sanderson) and my CFI and the AIM all mentioned the upwind leg. I don't recall looking at any ACs about patterns back then but those discuss it too.

I mention it sometimes if I go around. Occasionally I get told to, or I announce that I will, extend my upwind leg.

This is common sense, but don't sidestep "right" on upwind if there's a parallel runway on that side, as there is at KAPA depending on which of the two parallels you're landing on. Just offset away from the parallel if you must offset - and I don't usually offset unless the reason has something to do with traffic or spacing. If I just go around because I cocked up my approach then I don't offset. :D
 
An honest question from a low-time PPL: If you're crossing the field, shouldn't that be a 500' above pattern, and the preferred entry would be a descending teardrop, like this?

PreferredMethod.jpg
 
ettsn said:
An honest question from a low-time PPL: If you're crossing the field, shouldn't that be a 500' above pattern, and the preferred entry would be a descending teardrop, like this?

PreferredMethod.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what the AIM says, except it's 500 above the highest TPA (there may be more than one).

Lots of people think they know better. It's POA. Would you expect any different?

At least no one (yet) has advocated the overhead break.

I'll propose the Hammerhead Entry onto downwind. Hey, it's not illegal as long as you make all turns to the left! :D
 
ettsn said:
An honest question from a low-time PPL: If you're crossing the field, shouldn't that be a 500' above pattern, and the preferred entry would be a descending teardrop, like this?

PreferredMethod.jpg
Click to expand...

Entering on the crosswind at TPA is by far safer than that IMO. It is perfectly legal to do so.
 
The loop out on midfield is unnecessary in my laymen's opinion if it's CAVU and you have a radio.

It seems more dangerous to me than just crossing midfield and turning downwind.

Lot's of blind spots in those turns.
 
jesse said:
I'm about 50/50 as to if I do the crosswind over the departure end or at midfield.
Click to expand...

Me, too, but the deciding factor is often field length. At my previous home field (3000'), I would cross at the departure end. Places with 5000' of runway, I'll go pretty close to midfield. At Pattern Altitude. No descending into the pattern!!
 
My logic is that short of a helicopter there are no departing aircraft that will be at pattern altitude by midfield on a take off.

But they sure can be by the time they reach the thresholds.

Heck, I can do it if I do a short field and pull full alpha angle on the ascent.
 
oregonboy109 said:
I call upwind usually only when the pattern is busy (2 or more) which is pretty common up at DLZ. Also there is often traffic coming from the north near the field heading back to OSU so an upwind call can be good in that situation also.
Click to expand...

So you're the one that did it yesterday? LOL

David
 
Captain said:
CFI not familiar with 'upwind'. Okay, well now ya know. I do wonder what other holes there are.
Click to expand...

Probably a lot when no one person can know everything. I can't help it I was never ever taught that.

Working on reading the AC Bob posted.

David
 
I just took a look at my Jeppesen maneuvers handbook from which I originally learned and there is squat about an upwind leg in there. I am therefore INNOCENT for not knowing.

David
 
txflyer said:
The loop out on midfield is unnecessary in my laymen's opinion if it's CAVU and you have a radio.

It seems more dangerous to me than just crossing midfield and turning downwind.

Lot's of blind spots in those turns.
Click to expand...

I was personally taught to cross midfield at 500 over TPA and teardrop to a 45. I've never experienced any safety issues with it. If your turns conflict with potential pattern traffic, you haven't flown out far enough.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I was personally taught to cross midfield at 500 over TPA and teardrop to a 45. I've never experienced any safety issues with it. If your turns conflict with potential pattern traffic, you haven't flown out far enough.
Click to expand...
My primary CFI was a real proponent of that method, too.
 
jesse said:
Entering on the crosswind at TPA is by far safer than that IMO. It is perfectly legal to do so.
Click to expand...

Can you expand on that? I was taught the teardrop method as well and would like to understand how it is less safe. It feels like it is safer as it gives you a vantage point outside of the pattern to determine what is going on at the field (wind direction and speed, planes in the pattern, planes on the ground) and then gives you a 270 degree sweep as you maneuver to enter on the AIM recommended 45 degree to downwind.

My CFI implied that most folks are simply impatient and shortcut this method to save a tenth off the hobbs, then attempt to justify it in any number of ways, but I am more open minded.
 
flhrci said:
I just took a look at my Jeppesen maneuvers handbook from which I originally learned and there is squat about an upwind leg in there. I am therefore INNOCENT for not knowing.

David
Click to expand...

That a CFI would say this is jaw dropping. Good luck sir. Buy insurance....
 
Sac Arrow said:
I was personally taught to cross midfield at 500 over TPA and teardrop to a 45.
Click to expand...
Turbine-powered aircraft's normal pattern altitude is 500' above the piston-aircraft's pattern altitude so you're crossing over the field right at their pattern altitude.
 
jesse said:
Entering on the crosswind at TPA is by far safer than that IMO. It is perfectly legal to do so.
Click to expand...

Even though I will probably get flamed for it, I have always liked crossing mid field as anyone taking off or landing will not be at pattern altitude at mid field. In addition you have a great view of anyone entering the downwind. Also as mentioned you get a great view of the winds at the ground and who is waiting to take off or taxiing out.

I may have a short memory but do not remember being taught the 45 degree entry back in the 80's.
 
uncreative said:
Can you expand on that? I was taught the teardrop method as well and would like to understand how it is less safe. It feels like it is safer as it gives you a vantage point outside of the pattern to determine what is going on at the field (wind direction and speed, planes in the pattern, planes on the ground) and then gives you a 270 degree sweep as you maneuver to enter on the AIM recommended 45 degree to downwind.

My CFI implied that most folks are simply impatient and shortcut this method to save a tenth off the hobbs, then attempt to justify it in any number of ways, but I am more open minded.
Click to expand...

Similar to my CFI's explanation: You can use the opportunity to overfly, observe other aircraft both in the pattern and on the ground, and double-check windsocks. But, I have heard other CFIs say the downside of this maneuver is that it puts your back to the pattern for some amount of time and potentially leads to a loss of situational awareness.
 
Larry in TN said:
Turbine-powered aircraft's normal pattern altitude is 500' above the piston-aircraft's pattern altitude so you're crossing over the field right at their pattern altitude.
Click to expand...

Point well taken, but they are generally few and easy to spot at fields where this is an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top