Pattern entries

Yeti Niner Five

Yeti Niner Five

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Mar 24, 2014
Messages
159
Location
Dallas
Display Name
Display name:
Yeti Niner Five
The diversion thread got me thinking. I'm a low-time pilot (~100 hrs). I've been taught two different methods....one by my instructor and another by my DPE.

When approaching an airfield from the opposite side of the downwind leg, what is the safest pattern entry. In other words, if the field is in a left pattern for 36 and I'm coming from the east, what's the best method to get established on the downwind leg.

Method 1) perform a midfield crossing ~1,000' above pattern altitude and do a right descending teardrop into the downwind leg, or

Method 2) approach the field at pattern altitude and observe traffic. If no traffic, cross midfield and make a left turn onto the downwind. If traffic is present, make a right turn onto the upwind leg followed by a left crosswind (traffic permitting) and then downwind. The argument being that entering a right teardrop 1,000' above the light plane TPA forces you to fly directly into and against the faster-moving traffic at their higher TPA.

I see pros/cons to both, but am curious to hear the opinion of those more experienced than me.
 
Do which ever one is easier at a specific occurrence to merge with aircraft on the downwind.
Don't worry so much about bigger aircraft at the higher pattern, bigger aircraft aren't very common at small fields and when they are there they will often just do a straight-in. Also bigger aircraft are much easier to spot, a small counterpoint is that they can be moving much faster.
 
All I know is #2 sounds like something I'll be reading about in a NTSB report someday

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
Ok 48, but why specifically? I'm looking for the good and bad of each.
 
I did not see anything in the AIM 4-3-3 about crossing over the top with a teardrop to the 45 entry or the turn upwind, crosswind, downwind maneuver. Although I was taught those maneuvers 40yrs ago, it now seems best to overfly above TPA if needed to observe a windsock. Ten fly a distance away from the airport on the chosen traffic pattern side, descend, and enter the traffic pattern on a midfield 45 entry.

The AIM does not appear to address approaching the airport from the non traffic pattern side.
 
BillTIZ said:
Although I was taught those maneuvers 40yrs ago, it now seems best to overfly above TPA if needed to observe a windsock. Ten fly a distance away from the airport on the chosen traffic pattern side, descend, and enter the traffic pattern on a midfield 45 entry.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is you end up spending a whole bunch of time maneuvering at low altitude without an ability of gliding to the airport. Also you do all that maneuvering in an area where everyone is entering the 45 so traffic avoidance may also become an issue.
 
I do number 1. 1,000 ft over the field, once 1 mile out, a descending right tear drop to the 45. Provides for a good visual of the field and any traffic.

Never done number 2. Don't like descending while in the pattern. Couldn't care less if others do it but just not a pattern entry of my liking.

Of course the overhead at 170 kts and 60 degree bank is my preferred entry.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

Popcorn-03-Scarlett-Johanssen.gif
 
Velocity173 said:
Never done number 2. Don't like descending while in the pattern. Couldn't care less if others do it but just not a pattern entry of my liking.
Click to expand...

A plain pattern altitude crosswind entry does not involve descending in the pattern.
 
Other factors may be how busy the airport is usually. I go to some airports that see few planes, I've never seen any airborne at a few. I worry more about birds & critters on the runway. I've also seen walkers along the edge of the runway.

Back to the initial question, you could adjust your approach somewhat a few miles out so your entry turn is more gradual, less belly up to potential traffic. I do like an efficient entry, but safety is 1st priority. Entering a little more in the upwind direction can beneficial, as opposed to a midfield entry.

There are a lot of variables, if one tries to list absolutes the next pilot will have a story of where that comes up short. I've also seen pilots on a left downwind when that runway calls for a right downwind, you need to be on watch for everything.

Unlike a guy I flew with recently, I like to have the airport freq in early, to get a feel for traffic in the area. I'm usually up at least 25 miles out, if I'm on ATC I listen up on #2 as able.
 
Maneuver for a straight-in.

I don't fly in a congested area, fighting over the "correct" entry, more than than I have to. THAT is dangerous.

You guys can argue all you want, FAR/AIM in hand, as you're falling to the ground after a mid-air.
 
RoscoeT said:
A plain pattern altitude crosswind entry does not involve descending in the pattern.
Click to expand...

Oh, misread. Thought he said 1,000 ft above. Well, that'll work but only if you're dealing with light or no traffic at all. Plus you're going right into the mix when you have homebuilts that can easily "zoom climb" to pattern altitude on upwind. Also, to enter the downwind at pattern altitude from the opposite side, it would be like trying to force into a pattern with little room to maneuver to adjust for others.

In the number one scenario, or at least how I do it, if I can't find a suitable gap on the 45 I can always spin another 360 until I find my hole. You can get away with that because you're not in the pattern yet.

Even the overhead while it does descend into the pattern on downwind (most cases) I believe is a safer maneuver than number 2. You're above all other traffic, you're definitely within gliding distance and you can easily adjust your break point to follow any other traffic in the pattern. Unfortunately it's frowned upon at most airports and pilot circles.
 
I prefer to descend to pattern altitude and enter on the crosswind. Gives me extra time to set up/assess at an unfamiliar field.
 
The new way of doing an pattern entry from the opposite side at our field is to cross midfield at TPA and enter on the downwind. Which I still don't care for.

I like to cross 1000' above TPA, look at the windsock, then proceed for a descending teardrop outside the TP and come in on the 45.

On x/c I'll just do a 45 to downwind or a straight in depend on traffic and my entry location.
 
I've had a few scares involving midfield crossovers at TPA, so I don't do them myself and I strongly recommend that others not do them (at least in the US -- it's the standard entry procedure in Canada). It's too easy to have three planes converging on the same point (two of them belly-up to the other two) with no good place for any of them to go to avoid the other two.

In your situation, I think the safest method is to join the crosswind leg at TPA. That gives you an excellent view of aircraft in the pattern, joining on the 45, and taking off so you can sequence yourself into the flow safely. Overflying at least 500 above the highest TPA (there may be a 1500-foot heavy/jet pattern in addition to the usual 1000-foot light plane pattern -- check the A/FD), clearing the pattern, descending to TPA, and then turning back to join on the 45 also seems a good option.
 
ARFlyer said:
The new way of doing an pattern entry from the opposite side at our field is to cross midfield at TPA and enter on the downwind.
Click to expand...

This has worked well for me for the last seven+ years. What's "new" about it?

The crossover point must be adjusted for field length, aircraft speed and bank angle; I'm usually between midfield and the end, where only a few experimentals will reach 1000' agl.

For those rare non-towered fields longer than 5000' I cross pretty close to midfield. For a 3000' field, I just enter on crosswind, since 1500' will hardly let me roll wings level and drop gear before starting to turn base, and I just don't want to hurry around the pattern.
 
It's "new" to us as our FOM procedure. The old FOM had us doing the teardrop to a 45.

I agree Ron. I don't like turning and having by belly exposed to traffic on a extended downwind and on 45.
 
Crossing midfield at pattern altitude sounds like a poor idea in the case that an airplane makes a go around on final they would be at TPA right about where you're crossing and most likely in a nose high attitude not expecting you to be there..

Coming from the east I would cross midfield about 1000 feet above TPA and have a nice wide view of the field then begin the descent as mentioned in method #1. Coming from the left my entry procedure involves a quick descent into the 45 instead of the gradual descent into it that I used to do. This allows me to get a nice wide view of the field to see the sock and to maintain safe altitude in case of an engine failure.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
In your situation, I think the safest method is to join the crosswind leg at TPA. That gives you an excellent view of aircraft in the pattern, joining on the 45, and taking off so you can sequence yourself into the flow safely.
Click to expand...

That is how I prefer doing it too. I was originally taught this method by an old crop duster who had thousands of hours in NORDO aircraft over the years. I believe this entry will give you the best view of what is going on in the airport environment, both in the air and on the ground.
 
bartmc said:
If you're in a 337, I'd just declare and go D-> to the runway. Because, chances are, the engine is overheating and about to blow up. Even if it's not, no one is going to question you.
Click to expand...

I'll keep this is mind when flying for work.
 
vdehart said:
Crossing midfield at pattern altitude sounds like a poor idea in the case that an airplane makes a go around on final they would be at TPA right about where you're crossing and most likely in a nose high attitude not expecting you to be there..

Coming from the east I would cross midfield about 1000 feet above TPA and have a nice wide view of the field then begin the descent as mentioned in method #1. Coming from the left my entry procedure involves a quick descent into the 45 instead of the gradual descent into it that I used to do. This allows me to get a nice wide view of the field to see the sock and to maintain safe altitude in case of an engine failure.
Click to expand...
This is why I thought it was a bad idea. I've done an early go around when someone pulled out while I was on final (announced of course). I was back at 1000' before midfield.
 
Yeti Niner Five said:
The diversion thread got me thinking. I'm a low-time pilot (~100 hrs). I've been taught two different methods....one by my instructor and another by my DPE.

When approaching an airfield from the opposite side of the downwind leg, what is the safest pattern entry. In other words, if the field is in a left pattern for 36 and I'm coming from the east, what's the best method to get established on the downwind leg.

Method 1) perform a midfield crossing ~1,000' above pattern altitude and do a right descending teardrop into the downwind leg, or

Method 2) approach the field at pattern altitude and observe traffic. If no traffic, cross midfield and make a left turn onto the downwind. If traffic is present, make a right turn onto the upwind leg followed by a left crosswind (traffic permitting) and then downwind. The argument being that entering a right teardrop 1,000' above the light plane TPA forces you to fly directly into and against the faster-moving traffic at their higher TPA.

I see pros/cons to both, but am curious to hear the opinion of those more experienced than me.
Click to expand...

Method 1.

Bob Gardner
 
While it's not a scary to me as the midfield crossover entry, overflying the field well above TPA then descending and turning back to join at TPA on the 45 has its own issues. The one I've seen several times with Student Pilots is that they lose sight of the airport behind them after they cross over, then when they turn around they don't reacquire it (marginal visibility makes it even harder) before they go buzzing across the pattern at TPA looking only ahead for the airport, not up the downwind for traffic, too. If the dice come up snakeyes, someone else is on the downwind, converging. :eek: That's why I push the crosswind entry as usually being the best choice when arriving from the side opposite the pattern.
 
Apparently nobody talks on the radio any more in this thread. Cross midfield at TPA and land. Communicate intentions and watch out for "that guy." Don't over think it.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
 
desertav8r said:
Apparently nobody talks on the radio any more in this thread. Cross midfield at TPA and land. Communicate intentions and watch out for "that guy." Don't over think it.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I've learned on this board that no having a radio is preferable.
 
A lot of my friends use the midfield TPA entry, and they think I'm just wasting time doing the flyover-teardrop method that I always use. I don't mind the extra time, but I don't like that I have to go a few miles out to make SURE I'm not conflicting with somebody flying a 747 downwind.

I have not really heard of the crosswind entry until this thread...I think I will try it next time I'm in that situation if traffic allows. Thanks guys!
 
bullwinkle said:
A lot of my friends use the midfield TPA entry, and they think I'm just wasting time doing the flyover-teardrop method that I always use. I don't mind the extra time, but I don't like that I have to go a few miles out to make SURE I'm not conflicting with somebody flying a 747 downwind.

I have not really heard of the crosswind entry until this thread...I think I will try it next time I'm in that situation if traffic allows. Thanks guys!
Click to expand...

Here is where you can read all about it....
http://flighttraining.aopa.org/pdfs/SA08_Nontowered_Airport_Ops.pdf

Note the FAA Version... Advisory Circular 90-66A also references the above AOPA Document (5g)
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC90-66A.pdf

While I like the Alternate method, I also like Ron's suggestion to modify it to a crosswind entry when appropriate.


Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
When I started flying I would approach from the opposite side to avoid the traffic on downwind because I was so slow in my ultra light.

Times have changed and now I'm slow in my 120kt light sport and one of the most common calls I hear is traffic on downwind at 12,000'. I have trouble with the higher and faster traffic so I am back to approaching from the opposite side where I can hide in the high terrain until there is an opening for me. Then I cross midfield above TPA and enter the downwind. This way I feel like I'm only at risk for a short time.

post-6-0-13966100-1403365044.jpg
 
What makes laugh is the folks that say they do the teardrop entry because it's safer, and then go maybe a 1/2 mile outside the traffic pattern and then whip it around like a fighter pilot.
 
desertav8r said:
Apparently nobody talks on the radio any more in this thread.
Click to expand...
Not everyone has a radio, and not everyone uses it effectively or even at all. Don't bet your plan at a nontowered airport on everyone else being on the CTAF, listening effectively, and speaking clearly and accurately.
 
Ron Levy said:
Not everyone has a radio, and not everyone uses it effectively or even at all. Don't bet your plan at a nontowered airport on everyone else being on the CTAF, listening effectively, and speaking clearly and accurately.
Click to expand...
and...What was the second part of the post you quoted?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
 
Thanks, guys. Lots of good discussion on here and I've learned some stuff as I knew I would. Like many of you, I think the right answer is a mix of airport specifics and the pilot's view of the safest option.

I like the idea of the xwind approach at pattern altitude with a sharp eye for traffic on short final, on the runway and entering the left downwind from the traditional 45. I also like the teardrop into a small field with no large/fast traffic.

None of these are perfect, but understanding the risks assocaited with each helps better understand where each may be best applicable and where to look for problems while executing one of these options.

As a side note, I love this board for these types of discussions. It's a great resource for low-time guys like me that still drinking from the proverbial fire hose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top