More pattern police nonsense.

[SkyHog]

Lots of experienced pilots, nothing close to a consensus on pattern procedures. No wonder there are a lot of ruffled feathers on the ramp. One reason I try to use airports with a control tower.

That's a bad reason to do so. Remember that most controllers are using binoculars and relying on reported position just as much as you are when flying in (unless you limit yourself to Class B and some Class C airports). Someone mistakenly calls 10 north instead of south, and you could have a problem trusting in their separation.

 

[Gary F]

That's a bad reason to do so. Remember that most controllers are using binoculars and relying on reported position just as much as you are when flying in (unless you limit yourself to Class B and some Class C airports). Someone mistakenly calls 10 north instead of south, and you could have a problem trusting in their separation.

Remember this? http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/MidAirCollision_TowerAudio_196454-1.html

 

[David]

Extra maneuvering is a problem when it limits my ability to keep an eye on the traffic pattern.

Why not try to get set up a bit sooner?

 

[David]

The "pattern system" doesn't really define where all the other planes will be given than different airplanes are gonna fly their crosswind, downwind, and base legs in different places. Putting all the pattern entries at midfield downwind sounds convenient WRT spotting traffic but at a busy airport it would simply move the chaos to the area where planes arriving from different directions converge (while some are descending no less). IME it's far more important that pilot's entering the airspace near an untowered field do three things:

1) Be at the TPA well before reaching the area.
2) Spend most of your time looking outside
3) Use the radio if you have one (mostly by listening and calling your turns) but don't expect everyone else to do so.

All good points . I'm surprised at the number of pilots that believe they're safer flying above TPA.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

What is the etiquette when flying in the pattern (touch & goes) and the Van's group has a breakfast fly-in?~40 planes, in trail, straight-in approach? The ink was still wet on my certificate when this happened and I just found something else to do for 20 minutes as they weren't breaking up their conga line.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Why not try to get set up a bit sooner?

There is no "sooner" to get set up for that particular flight. KLNK departure lets you go practically next to the airport Jesse was visiting. I disagree with him on the utility of overflying a field (500 to 1000' above TPA) as I occasionally find it useful for orientation where there are several runways, but his approach in this case is entirely appropriate.

Local conditions, other traffic, and your particular situation should cause you to be flexible

 

[Trapper John]

What is the etiquette when flying in the pattern (touch & goes) and the Van's group has a breakfast fly-in?~40 planes, in trail, straight-in approach? The ink was still wet on my certificate when this happened and I just found something else to do for 20 minutes as they weren't breaking up their conga line.

I've never been a fan of mass arrivals. Too much diversion of attention going on. I don't know about etiquette, but going somewhere else is definitely the safe option.

 

[kyleb]

Lots of experienced pilots, nothing close to a consensus on pattern procedures. No wonder there are a lot of ruffled feathers on the ramp. One reason I try to use airports with a control tower.

To each his own, but that's pretty limiting, and largely prevents you from going to the places where fun aviation is happening.

 

[N801BH]

What is the etiquette when flying in the pattern (touch & goes) and the Van's group has a breakfast fly-in?~40 planes, in trail, straight-in approach? The ink was still wet on my certificate when this happened and I just found something else to do for 20 minutes as they weren't breaking up their conga line.

Heck..... That's easy.

Fly a tight pattern and turn base at a lower altitude. Announce over the radio your position and slip in the fact of your altitude.....

Planes lower have the right of way... They might not like it but they "should" get over it......

 

[Alexb2000]

To each his own, but that's pretty limiting, and largely prevents you from going to the places where fun aviation is happening.

That probably came out wrong if that's the way it sounded. I fly to a lot of non-towered airports, but I have had far more close calls at non-towered airports partly due to everyone doing their own thing as evidenced by this thread. That's the point I was trying to make when I said I prefer a towered airport.

If I go to a fly-in I'll land at some other airport and drive over for the same reasons.

 

[EdFred]

We all fly the correct pattern, we just enter from safer spots.

 

[SkyHog]

Remember this? http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/MidAirCollision_TowerAudio_196454-1.html

How sad, student pilot trying to do his first solo at the end, pretty much denied. That hurts.

 

[wabower]

Well, you could find a thread with all of his diagrams and copy them here.

A pattern discussion without 'dtuuri' piping in is boring :wink2: .

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Let's say it's a field with no AWOS/ASOS. Let's also say you have a GPS that can tell you what the winds are doing as you approach. If you fly a straight-in and have a landing accident, is FAA likely to ding you for not overflying and checking the wind sock/tee/tetrahedron and thereby not gathering all information available related to your flight?

No. If you got the info off your GPS, why is that any less valid than getting it from a windsock? If I'm flying a J-3, I'm gonna use the sock (or any of the other numerous clues that Bruce mentioned). If I can get it from a GPS with weather datalink or a radio or any of those other clues, great.

It doesn't matter how you get the information you need before and during flight - Just that you get it somehow. (Ask a seaplane pilot - No AWOS, no windsock, no traffic pattern but the one they make up...)

 

[flyingcheesehead]

We all fly the correct pattern, we just enter from safer spots.

Hey Ed, you got that diagram you made last time we had a pattern thread?

 

[weilke]

Well, you could find a thread with all of his diagrams and copy them here.

From what I recall it was something like this:

 

[wabower]

Did you buy your own etch-a-sketch or steal his?

From what I recall it was something like this:

 

[EdFred]

From what I recall it was something like this:

LOL. I don't think that was me. Sounds like Nick's deal.

 

[CollinLeon]

The procedure that I like is to cross over midfield at 500 ft above pattern altitude and then bank sharply into a left turn while losing 500 ft and entering the downwind leg. This allows me to see everyone that is in the pattern and if it is a bit crowded, I can go further out and merge back in if necessary. A CFI once suggested this technique to me and I have found that I like it better than the standard "enter on a 45" method.

 

[Palmpilot]

Well, you could find a thread with all of his diagrams and copy them here.

Here's one:

http://forums.aopa.org/showpost.php?p=1146659&postcount=20

 

[wabower]

Just remember that when you're nose-to-nose with the other guy on the ramp, your answer to "well why did you say to just shove it?" your answer is that you were just talking to yourself about advancing the throttle when you had to execute the go-around.

 

[poadeleted20]

The procedure that I like is to cross over midfield at 500 ft above pattern altitude and then bank sharply into a left turn while losing 500 ft and entering the downwind leg. This allows me to see everyone that is in the pattern and if it is a bit crowded, I can go further out and merge back in if necessary. A CFI once suggested this technique to me and I have found that I like it better than the standard "enter on a 45" method.

First, if you do that, you're cutting across the recommended (and in many places published) heavy/jet pattern at 500 above the light plane TPA. Second, descending into the downwind is a good way to create a serious mid-air collision hazard by descending on top of folks who not only have right of way over you but also are not expecting someone descending on top of them in the pattern. If you really want to overfly the field, I suggest you do it at 500 above the highest TPA, and then stay at least 2-3 miles outside the pattern while descending to TPA before turning back in to enter the pattern at TPA.

 

[EdFred]

Just remember that when you're nose-to-nose with the other guy on the ramp, your answer to "well why did you say to just shove it?" your answer is that you were just talking to yourself about advancing the throttle when you had to execute the go-around.

That's not my answer. Then again, I'm usually not going to be approached.

 

[EppyGA]

Lots of experienced pilots, nothing close to a consensus on pattern procedures. No wonder there are a lot of ruffled feathers on the ramp. One reason I try to use airports with a control tower.

Don't tell us you think it's the controllers job to watch traffic for you!

 

[CollinLeon]

descending into the downwind is a good way to create a serious mid-air collision hazard by descending on top of folks who not only have right of way over you but also are not expecting someone descending on top of them in the pattern

By the time I finish the turn, I'm at pattern altitude, so I've got a good view of the pattern during the turn. For many types of aircraft, I would not use this procedure, but in my Grumman, it works quite well... Plus, if there are more just a couple of planes in the pattern, I'm probably doing this a bit outside the pattern and merging in during the turn and descent...

 

[Alexb2000]

Don't tell us you think it's the controllers job to watch traffic for you!

Of course not, but they help a lot by managing traffic. Let me ask if you think a busy airport is safer with or without a tower?

 

[wabower]

Depends on who is manning the tower.

Of course not, but they help a lot by managing traffic. Let me ask if you think a busy airport is safer with or without a tower?

 

[EppyGA]

Of course not, but they help a lot by managing traffic. Let me ask if you think a busy airport is safer with or without a tower?

I've not had a problem with either. I fly out of a "D" and sometimes those guys aren't on top of things and will give you dumb instructions and you have to correct them. For me it's definitely eyes and ears whether it's towered or not.

 

[poadeleted20]

By the time I finish the turn, I'm at pattern altitude, so I've got a good view of the pattern during the turn.

Maybe in a high wing plane, and even then only maybe, but you're still doing something totally unexpected -- and that's usually a bad idea. And it doesn't fix the problem of conflicting with traffic in the 1500 AGL heavy/jet pattern.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

For a long time, I've used the entry John Deakin advocated which is to enter on crosswind. I've looked at the other methods and just don't like cutting into the middle of the pattern or crossing over high and descending into possible entering traffic or existing traffic.

So, I call that I'll be entering crosswind after monitoring. Unless someone has just lifted off and is climbing out, it's not an issue to blend in. I can see all traffic out my left window and it should all be lower unless someone is making a pass over the runway at pattern altitude. Since I enter at pattern altitude, I don't have to descend into anyone in my low wing.

I've tried a lot of different entries from the opposite side, and this is what I like. If someone is departing and climbing up, I can do an s turn or 360 to space before entering crosswind.

Best,

Dave

 

[ejensen]

For a long time, I've used the entry John Deakin advocated which is to enter on crosswind. I've looked at the other methods and just don't like cutting into the middle of the pattern or crossing over high and descending into possible entering traffic or existing traffic.

So, I call that I'll be entering crosswind after monitoring. Unless someone has just lifted off and is climbing out, it's not an issue to blend in. I can see all traffic out my left window and it should all be lower unless someone is making a pass over the runway at pattern altitude. Since I enter at pattern altitude, I don't have to descend into anyone in my low wing.

I've tried a lot of different entries from the opposite side, and this is what I like. If someone is departing and climbing up, I can do an s turn or 360 to space before entering crosswind.

Best,

Dave

+1 That's the same conclusion I reached. I've come to really dislike the mid-field entry. Had unnecessary maneuvering twice yesterday when flight school planes came charging across mid-field while I was on downwind. But then they don't even try to fit in.

 

[azure]

If I'm coming in from the opposite side of the runway from downwind, that's what I usually do too. The other reason I don't like the midfield crosswind entry is that I like to drop my gear after I'm established on downwind, but before beginning descent from TPA, and that doesn't give me enough time at most untowered fields (okay, I can think of exceptions!).

But what I do largely depends on the situation -- I'll enter on the 45, on base, on upwind, whatever seems safest and fits my plan at the time.

 

[ScottM]

First, if you do that, you're cutting across the recommended (and in many places published) heavy/jet pattern at 500 above the light plane TPA. Second, descending into the downwind is a good way to create a serious mid-air collision hazard by descending on top of folks who not only have right of way over you but also are not expecting someone descending on top of them in the pattern. If you really want to overfly the field, I suggest you do it at 500 above the highest TPA, and then stay at least 2-3 miles outside the pattern while descending to TPA before turning back in to enter the pattern at TPA.

Maybe he employs that safety phrase, ATITAPA, when pulling that stunt? B)

 

[Dan Thomas]

+1 That's the same conclusion I reached. I've come to really dislike the mid-field entry. Had unnecessary maneuvering twice yesterday when flight school planes came charging across mid-field while I was on downwind. But then they don't even try to fit in.

The mid-field entry is widely used in Canada because it gives the entering pilot a good look at the whole downwind leg.

It appears that the American standards are considerably different from our Canadian regs. For those interested:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp14371-rac-4-0-5385.htm#4-5

We often have near-misses at our uncontrolled airport due to either ignorance or arrogance. Sooner or later one starts flying defensively.

Dan

 

[CollinLeon]

The mid-field entry is widely used in Canada because it gives the entering pilot a good look at the whole downwind leg.

It appears that the American standards are considerably different from our Canadian regs. For those interested:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp14371-rac-4-0-5385.htm#4-5

Oh no! I'm flying a Canadian pattern... I'm going to have to change my position reports!

"Grumman XXX, crossing midfield at 1500, turning downwind for 09, eh"

 

[kkoran]

The mid-field entry is widely used in Canada because it gives the entering pilot a good look at the whole downwind leg.

It appears that the American standards are considerably different from our Canadian regs. For those interested:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp14371-rac-4-0-5385.htm#4-5

We often have near-misses at our uncontrolled airport due to either ignorance or arrogance. Sooner or later one starts flying defensively.

Dan

The 45-degree entry also provides a good look at the whole downwind leg. An added advantage, in my opinion, is that if there is a conflict with someone on downwind, the plane approaching on the 45 can easily turn away from the pattern and re-enter.

That said, there is nothing wrong with either method of entry. The issue is whether they can co-exist. Would you want another pilot to execute a 45-degree entry when you are crossing midfield?

 

[spiderweb]

"OK, uh, Selingsburg traffic! Yeah, I'm here, and I'm lined up, OK? Anyone in the pattern, please tell me what you're up to. I'm just going to hold the push to talk down until I'm safely on the ground, yeah? OK right. So, I'm all lined up! I can see you over there, Piper or Bonanza, so don't worry, right? Good. Oh, I'm extending some flaps now, Slingsburg traffic! Left final now, and haha my gear is down and welded! hehe. OK, I think I'm down now so I'm good. other person in the pattern--it's safe now! See you at the burger joint on field. By the way is it good? OK, I "

 

[EdFred]

The 45-degree entry also provides a good look at the whole downwind leg. An added advantage, in my opinion, is that if there is a conflict with someone on downwind, the plane approaching on the 45 can easily turn away from the pattern and re-enter.

That said, there is nothing wrong with either method of entry. The issue is whether they can co-exist. Would you want another pilot to execute a 45-degree entry when you are crossing midfield?

Except to get yourself in position for the 45, you just blinded yourself to everything thats going on behind you 75% of the time. I can turn away from the pattern from crosswind, upwind, downwind, base, and even final if I have to. Putting your back to the field makes zero sense.

 

[wabower]

My problem with being above the traffic pattern is that airplanes below my altitude are often below the horizon and therefore more difficult to see. As I get closer to the airport they are even more difficult to see. I want them suckers up at eye level, which means I have to be down at TP altitude for them to show up there.

Maybe in a high wing plane, and even then only maybe, but you're still doing something totally unexpected -- and that's usually a bad idea. And it doesn't fix the problem of conflicting with traffic in the 1500 AGL heavy/jet pattern.

 

[Witmo]

...
That said, there is nothing wrong with either method of entry. The issue is whether they can co-exist. Would you want another pilot to execute a 45-degree entry when you are crossing midfield?

Actually I would. If I was crossing midfield and an airplane called entering close in on the 45, I would turn upwind and fly past the departure end and turn crosswind so as to fall in behind the airplane now on downwind. If he called three miles out while I'm overhead the field, midfield, I'd continue and turn downwind in front of him. Even if he didn't have a radio, I know to look and clear the downwind and the 45 entry. Establishing visual separation and communicating with him and are essential. The problems I see are pilots that don't make accurate position calls or leave out essential information or do weird things without announcing what they're doing. Calling entering on a 45 without a distance call leaves one wondering if he's 5 miles out or 1 mile out. If you say you're overhead the field, midfield, everyone knows exactly where you're at and can find you that much easier than saying, I'm downwind or crosswind. I really don't care what entry someone makes as long as I know where they're at and can keep from swapping paint. If someone does the reverse orthogonal overhead from abeam Jones RV park in a radio-less Cub, it's a problem.