More pattern police nonsense.

spiderweb said:
"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 "
Click to expand...


:lol:
 
Witmo said:
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.
Click to expand...
If you call "overhead the field, midfield", everyone may know exactly where you are, but what do you do if someone responds that they are turning 45-to-downwind or midfield downwind (or both)? Or maybe you don't get a response and you don't see them until you're over the field. Too late to turn upwind.
 
kkoran said:
If you call "overhead the field, midfield", everyone may know exactly where you are, but what do you do if someone responds that they are turning 45-to-downwind or midfield downwind (or both)? Or maybe you don't get a response and you don't see them until you're over the field. Too late to turn upwind.
Click to expand...

If someone makes a good position call, I will see them and do what is necessary to avoid him. You can "what if" any scenario and end up with a midair if you don't see the other aircraft. Good comms and a good lookout do wonders. I've seen my share of clueless pilots entering on a 45 and almost running into the guy already established on downwind because he wasn't listening, looking, was distracted or all of the above.
 
kkoran said:
If you call "overhead the field, midfield", everyone may know exactly where you are, but what do you do if someone responds that they are turning 45-to-downwind or midfield downwind (or both)? Or maybe you don't get a response and you don't see them until you're over the field. Too late to turn upwind.
Click to expand...

You're not thinking 3 dimensionally. That was Khan's downfall.
 
I would also point out that not everyone has a radio, and not everyone with a radio uses it. Joining the downwind from the inside just adds one more complication (and, I believe, an unnecessary one, at that) to the problem. If you're coming from the nonpattern side, an entry to the "real" crosswind avoids what I consider unnecessary complications.
 
Palmpilot said:
One thing I try to NEVER, EVER do is argue on the advisory frequency. It's better to just not answer when people incorrectly criticize your flying.
Click to expand...

I know that I posted in one of these forums...maybe this one, but who knows?

A pilot at a local non-towered airport was constantly harassing students from a flight school based at the field about their radio procedures. One thing led to another, and the FSDO got involved. The Ops inspector told the pattern policeman that the FCC designates the Unicom frequency for specific purposes, and what he was doing did not pass the smell test. I understand that he has been quite meek on the Unicom since then.

Bob Gardner
 
David said:
Safety, no disagreement there but what about normal circumstances. Convenience trumps the recommended procedure?
Click to expand...

David, Canada teaches its pilots to cross over the airport at midfield and join the pattern from the inside...and I haven't noticed piles of aluminum or shards of composite piling up in that country. It is their "recommended." Still, pilots in the US maintain that it is unsafe to use that entry....kinda makes you wonder, right?

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
David, Canada teaches its pilots to cross over the airport at midfield and join the pattern from the inside...and I haven't noticed piles of aluminum or shards of composite piling up in that country. It is their "recommended." Still, pilots in the US maintain that it is unsafe to use that entry....kinda makes you wonder, right?
Click to expand...
Canada also requires that entry, and does not push the 45-downwind entry, and has what amounts to but isn't quite tower control at most airports with any significant level of traffic (the Mandatory Frequency business), and also has a lot fewer planes and less traffic. It's a different world up there, and the comparisons aren't valid.
 
Palmpilot said:
One thing I try to NEVER, EVER do is argue on the advisory frequency. It's better to just not answer when people incorrectly criticize your flying.
Click to expand...
I agree even though I did reply to the initial PP call, that kinda just slipped out before I could stop it.:wink2: In my defense I must point out that it was my first and last word on the matter over the air.:cornut:
 
I actually asked another aircraft to run a standard pattern instead of his straight-in approach. The airport was kinda busy, and I didn't want to see any twisted metal. And I even asked nice, for once.

I occasionally use a mid-field entry. As most of the fields I use, a jet isn't likely to land in any but the most dire emergency, and even then is almost certainly going on a little excursion. It does give a good view of the traffic, though I'll wheel around and enter on a 45 if there's anybody in the pattern.
 
gismo said:
I agree even though I did reply to the initial PP call, that kinda just slipped out before I could stop it.:wink2: In my defense I must point out that it was my first and last word on the matter over the air.:cornut:
Click to expand...

Everybody's human. The main thing is to avoid getting into an argument. My attitude on this was shaped some years ago when I heard a couple of pilots in a knock-down drag-out fight on the CTAF of an airport near here, and it was a safety hazard, because they were going at it so fast-and-furious that nobody else could get a word in edge-wise. I finally managed to get in a position report by pressing my PTT slightly before one of the combatants ended one of his transmissions. :sad:
 
As long as two objects don't try to occupy the same point in the space time continuum, it's no big deal... Violate that one rule and bad things happen...
 
Ron Levy said:
The only ways a runway can be THE active runway at a nontowered airport is if there's only one runway (and I've yet to see an airport with less than two)
Click to expand...
I almost answered saying the following:

There are some airports out there where you land one way regardless of wind and take off one way regardless of wind

And then I realized if I land on 13 I'm taking off on 31

But I posted anyway to show how dumb a quick response can be
 
Palmpilot said:
Everybody's human. The main thing is to avoid getting into an argument. My attitude on this was shaped some years ago when I heard a couple of pilots in a knock-down drag-out fight on the CTAF of an airport near here, and it was a safety hazard, because they were going at it so fast-and-furious that nobody else could get a word in edge-wise. I finally managed to get in a position report by pressing my PTT slightly before one of the combatants ended one of his transmissions. :sad:
Click to expand...

That actually happened to me once when Madison Approach got into a back and forth for over five minutes with a fella in a Cessna that kept answering calls that weren't directed to him. Don't know if the Cessna pilot couldn't hear clearly or what, but he kept answering and interrupting other traffic until Madison just got on the frequency and berated him. Meanwhile, I was trying to get down to the altitude needed to commence a GPS approach and couldn't get on the frequency; so, I went into a hold and got around once before Madison could get to me.

Hate to say it, but it took TWO folks to completely tie up the frequency.

Best,

Dave
 
elmetal said:
I almost answered saying the following:

There are some airports out there where you land one way regardless of wind and take off one way regardless of wind

And then I realized if I land on 13 I'm taking off on 31

But I posted anyway to show how dumb a quick response can be
Click to expand...

There are probably even runways that are such that you even though you physically might take off in the opposite direction that you landed, from a practical standpoint, it's not really an option...

Of course, technically, heliports are a class of airports and as such, they only have a single "runway".

The Matekane runway sure would be an adrenaline rush to take off from...

Matekane-Air-Strip.jpg
 
bobmrg said:
David, Canada teaches its pilots to cross over the airport at midfield and join the pattern from the inside...and I haven't noticed piles of aluminum or shards of composite piling up in that country. It is their "recommended." Still, pilots in the US maintain that it is unsafe to use that entry....kinda makes you wonder, right?

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Bob,
No it doesn't make me wonder. It proves my point. The Canadian pattern entry technique works not because it's better or worse but because it's what pilots expect when they enter the pattern.
 
Palmpilot said:
One thing I try to NEVER, EVER do is argue on the advisory frequency. It's better to just not answer when people incorrectly criticize your flying.
Click to expand...

I would certainly agree with that. A good policy is to make no transmission that does not pertain to the safety of flight. That includes never responding to criticism - whether deserved or not.

I've noticed that some airports are much worse than others regarding abuse of the CTAF. I think that the "one bad apple spoils the lot" theory applies.

Dave
 
cessna182b said:
I would certainly agree with that. A good policy is to make no transmission that does not pertain to the safety of flight. That includes never responding to criticism - whether deserved or not.


Dave
Click to expand...

Well . . . I think that may depend on how well your John Wayne impression sounds . . . pilgrim.
 
Ron Levy said:
As long as it doesn't compromise safety? Sure -- why not? If there isn't another plane in the pattern, why not fly a straight-in if you're arriving from that direction? If the only other traffic is turning base, and you're arriving from the nonpattern side, why not join the crosswind rather than overfly, turn around, and join on the 45?
Click to expand...

Devil's advocate: How do you know there's not another plane in the pattern? ;)
 
rottydaddy said:
As for straight-ins: not a problem when traffic allows, but announce often and accurately(!), and don't assume everyone else must yield to you because you are coming straight in.
Click to expand...

Especially the guy without a radio. :cornut:
 
jesse said:
The problem with the AIM recommended pattern entries is that it often requires a lot of maneuvering around the airport area to accomplish it and that maneuvering makes it much harder to keep an eye on the sky.
Click to expand...

Why do it near the airport? ;)
 
cessna182b said:
I would certainly agree with that. A good policy is to make no transmission that does not pertain to the safety of flight. That includes never responding to criticism - whether deserved or not.
Click to expand...

I don't see any harm in apologizing if you think the criticism is justified, however. That seems unlikely to start an argument.
 
rottydaddy said:
As for straight-ins: not a problem when traffic allows, but announce often and accurately(!), and don't assume everyone else must yield to you because you are coming straight in.
Click to expand...

Of course not everyone must yield to a straight-in arrival, there may be an aircraft in distress flying a full pattern, for example. But why wouldn't ordinary traffic allow a straight-in?
 
A couple of years ago, Easton MD (KESN) was a non-towered field (it has a tower now). I was idling down the taxiway parallel to 04-22 to go to the runway that the wind was favoring, 15-33 - the intersecting runway. All the bugsmasher traffic was in the right hand pattern for 33 and a Cirrus had just announced short final 33 when a Citation announced and began his take off roll on 22. The Cirrus announced again that he was final over the numbers for 33. They both reached the intersection at exactly the same time - the Cirrus was rolling out and the Citation had just rotated off and missed the Cirrus by less than, I would estimate, about 10'. Someone barked at the Citation by N number on the radio that he'd just narrowly missed the Cirrus and he quipped back that he'd made his call and then left the frequency.

I don't know if it's the same guy, but the year before the tower opened I had a Citation pull out right in front of me for his take off roll when I was over the airport fence causing me to have to go around.

The concern in both of these encounters, I believe, is that at non-towered fields jet aircraft are frequently released with a void time after being off the CTAF freq for several minutes. This leads to cases where there are pilots in a bit of a hurry and low situational awareness of what's happening in the pattern. You can talk about right of way all day long but there's no substitute for flying defensively in the pattern.

ESN got a tower a couple of years ago now and I believe it'll prevent what was to be an inevitable mishap because basically pilots lost situational awareness way too often there.
 
Last edited:
PittsDriver said:
A couple of years ago, Easton MD (KESN) was a non-towered field (it has a tower now). I was idling down the taxiway parallel to 04-22 to go to the runway that the wind was favoring, 15-33 - the intersecting runway. All the bugsmasher traffic was in the right hand patter for 33 and a Cirrus had just announced short final 33 when a Citation announced and began his take off roll on 22. The Cirrus announced again that he was final over the numbers for 33. They both reached the intersection at exactly the same time - the Cirrus was rolling out and the Citation had just rotated off and missed the Cirrus by less than, I would estimate, about 10'. Someone barked at the Citation by N number on the radio that he'd just narrowly missed the Cirrus and he quipped back that he'd made his call and then left the frequency.

I don't know if it's the same guy, but the year before the tower opened I had a Citation pull out right in front of me for his take off roll when I was over the airport fence causing me to have to go around.

The concern in both of these encounters, I believe, is that at non-towered fields jet aircraft are frequently released with a void time after being off the CTAF freq for several minutes. This leads to cases where there are pilots in a bit of a hurry and low situational awareness of what's happening in the pattern. You can talk about right of way all day long but there's no substitute for flying defensively in the pattern.

ESN got a tower a couple of years ago now and I believe it'll prevent what was to be an inevitable mishap because basically pilots lost situational awareness way too often there.
Click to expand...
It was events like this which led to the tower at Easton. Also, if something happens to bring an event such as described in PD's post to the FAA's attention, they'll burn both the pilot who broke the right-of-way rule and the other pilot who saw it was happening but continued the landing. The fact that you have the right-of-way isn't sufficient to keep you out of trouble (no less alive) if you see a hazard developing but continue into the situation regardless of the risk. PD's go-around was the right thing to do, and the Cirrus driver's continuation was the wrong thing to do, even if s/he had right-of-way.
 
Ron Levy said:
Because they're jerks and/or they don't know the rules.
Click to expand...

Then allow me to rephrase my question to rottydaddy; assuming everyone is following the rules, why wouldn't ordinary traffic allow a straight-in?
 
roncachamp said:
Then allow me to rephrase my question to rottydaddy; assuming everyone is following the rules, why wouldn't ordinary traffic allow a straight-in?
Click to expand...
I have no idea.

However, since it does happen, y'all be aware of that and be prepared to take appropriate action (i.e., do what it takes to avoid a collision) if someone does cut you off while you're on a straight-in. Note that if you see someone cutting you off, and you press on and cause a collision or scare someone, not only will the FAA burn the other pilot for violating the right-of-way rule, but they'll burn you, too, for being reckless and intentionally operating so close to the other aircraft as to cause a collision hazard. Refs: 91.113, 91.111, and 91.13. Or if the thought of a violation doesn't bother you, remember that being right doesn't help if you end up being dead right.
 
Last edited:
roncachamp said:
Then allow me to rephrase my question to rottydaddy; assuming everyone is following the rules, why wouldn't ordinary traffic allow a straight-in?
Click to expand...

Probably because most pilots are "Type A" personalities and believe that they are right and everyone else is wrong... Kind of like the internet, I guess... ;)

Personally, I'm pretty flexible with respect to pattern entry procedures... If someone wants to do a straight in, I don't have a problem with it and will even adjust my pattern a bit to facilitate it... I'm never so pressed for time that a few seconds extra in the pattern is going to make much of a difference to me... Fair is fair though... If there is only two of us in the pattern and the other guy is flying a Cessna 152 at 60 kts and making a pattern that covers three counties, he doesn't have any room to complain if I turn a short base and final before he has even *considered* turning base. Hell, I've seen some of these guys who fly such a large pattern that I can do that and have my plane in the hanger before he even gets *close* to landing... OK, maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but you know what I mean... Some of these guys could log cross country time considering the size of their patterns... ;)
 
roncachamp said:
Then allow me to rephrase my question to rottydaddy; assuming everyone is following the rules, why wouldn't ordinary traffic allow a straight-in?
Click to expand...

Lots of time it does, but if you have a busy pattern, or one or more student/low time/otherly unsure pilot, it might not be such a good idea. I do straight in approaches myself from time to time, but I am exquisitely sensitive to the disposition of the local traffic, and have been known to issue a forbidden phrase as a last resort. In years past I wouldn't have considered it, but these days there are so few aircraft flying in my vicinity that I have had no trouble doing such approaches when the need arises.
 
CollinLeon said:
Probably because most pilots are "Type A" personalities and believe that they are right and everyone else is wrong... Kind of like the internet, I guess... ;)
Click to expand...

That's absolute horse-****...I know that because I'm a pilot on the internet, and I know that I'm right.!:cornut:
 
JeffDG said:
That's absolute horse-****...I know that because I'm a pilot on the internet, and I know that I'm right.!:cornut:
Click to expand...

**** you. You wouldn't know your **** from a **** ******** **** ****. And that's fact, because I said so!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top