Pattern Entry

[jesse]

So I've been doing some thinking lately about the basics of flying. I've also been thinking about what I do versus what other people do.

Scenario:
You are approaching an uncontrolled airport from the east. The runway is 36/18 and you will be landing on 36 which has a left traffic pattern.


Option 1:
You enter the pattern on the midfield crosswind at traffic pattern altitude. You like this because it lets you see the entire downwind. This is how you were taught by your instructor and it seems to be an efficent way to do it. It's never failed you--why would it today?

Option 2
You enter the pattern on the crosswind at traffic pattern altitude just north of the runway. This seems like a pretty good method because you have an out. You can always turn away from the pattern.

Option 3
You fly over the pattern 500 ft (or more) above TPA. This gives you a good look at the pattern and the windsock. After you are a little ways from the airport you pull the power and start a descending right hand turn. This sets you up for a perfect 45 degree entry at TPA for the downwind. You can see the entire downwind and if there is a conflict you can simply turn away from the pattern.


My instructor taught me option 3. I never gave it much thought except for the fact that I thought it was complicated. It took more time. It seemed like a lot of work to enter a pattern. I observed pilots doing Option 1 and eventually I started to do that myself. It seemed like a pretty good idea because you didn't waste all kinds of time and you could see the entire downwind. After some more thinking I saw the flaw. I have no out. I can't turn away from the pattern if there is a traffic conflict. I could try to dive or climb but the other airplane might do the same thing.

After this I started to think about Option 2. It seemed like a good idea because I could always turn to the right away from the pattern. The problem I saw with this is that a plane can climb up into me. I'd like to avoid an airplane cutting me in half.

After thinking about how option 1 and option 2 sucked I started to think back to the way my instructor taught me. It appears to be a good deal because I can overfly and look at the windsock along with any planes that may be in the pattern. I can then turn back and enter the pattern on the 45 which gives great visibility.

The fact of the matter is I see most pilots doing Option 1. I always hear them saying it's a good idea because they can see the entire downwind. But I have to wonder if they've ever thought about it. It could put you into a really ****ty situation.

I'm thinking I'm going to start doing Option 3. It'll take me a little longer but I can get a feel for the situation.

Which method do you do and have you thought about the positives and negatives?

 

[markb5900]

I guess I have used all of them.

But I do believe you are correct that option 3 is the "best" one to use when possible. Over flying the field 500 or more above TPA really gives me the "big picture" then.

Mark B.

 

[AuntPeggy]

Option 3. Continue perpedicular to runway for 1 mile, then descending standard rate turn to the right brings you round to 1 mile 45 degree entry into downwind.

 

[KennyFlys]

Ditto on Option 3. AIM 4-3-3 doesn't exactly provide for that but there isn't anything against overflying the airport above TPA and beginning a turn a sufficient distance out before entering on a 45. Our TPA is 2300 with airport elevation at 1275. I'll overfly at 3000 which provides plenty more height above anything that might climb out under me at a rapid rate.

The only other concern I have is the adjacent runway. If prevailing winds have aircraft using 29, there may be an IFR flight inbound on the localizer for 4. They'll usually announce and circle to land for 29 but some just come straight in without any announcement. For this reason, I get sketchy about getting too close to the approach end of 4 with my nose pointed away on downwind for 29.

 

[Tristar]

To start things off, I was taught option 3 for a couple of those very reasons. You obviously are above the rest of the traffic and the "airport environment" so you can in a sense get a birds eye view of whats going on not only with wind with also ground obstructions or get a feeling of how everyone (if there is anyone) are setting up the traffic pattern. For all you know the wind could have suddenly changed and everyone is using a different runway (a worse case scenerio). Thats obviously something that should have started with the radios miles back. It gives you a comfortable time period to set up what to do next better known as keeping ahead of the airplane. If you also notice you're not just guessing how to enter the pattern but rather useing a step by step meaningfull process that yes, takes a little time, but has a purpose.

Both first steps are stupid in my opionion because of mainly traffic conflicts as you stated. Why in the world would you cross in front of an active runway at a nontowered airport? You might get lucky and never get hit but its always that next attempt that matters. Not to mention you never know what kind of airplane could be taking off out of there including fighter jets! Not to mention the little guys like ultralights which leads me to another matter of communication. I dont exactly know how you guys do it but I was also taught to call once when 5-10 miles out and then at different times including pattern entry, downwind, base, final, that kind of thing. But what you have to remember is a lot of ultralights and even some other light aircraft don't have radios at all, no transponders, or just are too lazy to tell where they're at which means there is NO way to know where they're at. This is another reason you have to stay vigilant starting at a safe altitude and should have a standard for entering traffic patterns comming from all directions. After you've crossed the runway and the traffic pattern area, then you can decend and make your turn, which I never thought about direction but maybe Jesse is correct in saying right because it gives you more space in the final entry?

A question I'd like to ask is if you did do option 3, would it be smarter to make a 45 outbound (to the right)? That way when you do you're turn it wouldn't be more than 360 degrees to enter downwind. Or would this cause it to be more difficult to spot the wind sock. Maybe its just me but it is difficult to begin with in spotting that little orange triangle especialy when the wind is light. A possible cure I guess would be to bring a airport diagram or at least a really good mental note of where its at.

 

[CJones]

The epitome of the perfect answer: "It Depends."

Honestly, I've never been flying at an uncontrolled field with more than 3-4 planes in the pattern, so working my way into the pattern has never been much of a hassle.

If it's busy, I'll listen to CTAF to get a mental picture of where all the other planes are in relation to each other and plan my entry accordingly. 99% of the time, I play the passive personality in the group and offer to 'slow to let you get ahead' or 'I'll extend to provide spacing'.

If it's not busy (the vast majority of my experiences) I'll enter in the easiest option to me (either extended base or cross-over to enter downwind, etc.). I usually don't like long straight-in's unless it's LATE at night. That RV needs a little time to get slowed for landing, and I'm too tempted to keep the speed up on straight-in approaches. ha!

One 'norm' for me is my altitude at entry. I like to be at or close to pattern altitude a mile or two out - it makes spotting traffic a bit easier, and makes transition into a busy pattern easier since I don't have to worry about someone coming in under me or me settling down on top of someone.

I'm sure I'll have holes shot all through my logic, but oh well. I post without fear.

 

[ScottM]

The only thing with overflying the field at 500 above TPA is that there is sometime highspeed (jet traffic) that flies 500 feet above bugsmasher (published) TPA. So now you could be conflicting with that traffic.

Option requires, IMHO, just as much awareness as any of the other options.

Vigilance!

I too was taught option 3, but I was also taught option 4.

Option 4 is to circle the airport well outside of the tpa and then once you get to the side where it is easiest to enter on the 45 do it.

 

[Tristar]

Okay everybody. If you need a text description of the recommended procedure and have the big (1) ASA "Flight School" book, known as the red book, refer to Chapter 30 p 340-341. It has a description of Option 3 on how to enter non-towered airports especialy when perpendicular to the runway alignment.

 

[Tristar]

The only thing with overflying the field at 500 above TPA is that there is sometime highspeed (jet traffic) that flies 500 feet above bugsmasher (published) TPA. So now you could be conflicting with that traffic.

Option requires, IMHO, just as much awareness as any of the other options.

Vigilance!

I too was taught option 3, but I was also taught option 4.

Option 4 is to circle the airport well outside of the tpa and then once you get to the side where it is easiest to enter on the 45 do it.

LOL that was an option? I thought that was just my long way of doing things! Hehe

 

[SkyHog]

I am an option 1 guy. In Canada, this is the way its done. Now I'm not one to say other countries have it better, but whoever determined that a 45 degree entry is the best option oughtta be beaten with a stick.

Midfield crosswind entry give many great reasons for success: You can see all of the upwind, crosswind, downwind, base and final while coming in. If there is a conflict, you can simply turn away from the downwind before you enter, and try again (as if you never came at all). Doing a 360 over the runway at TPA is almost a surefire way to ensure that there will be no traffic where you're spinning.

Finally, its quicker. When renting, this is a big deal, especially with the safety included above.

My problem with Option 3, which is the way it is usually taught, is that you turn you back to the pattern. I never like being that close to the pattern without seeing whats happening.

My problem with option 2 is that you might conflict with departing traffic, which leaves them with little option as they are at a low altitude and high aoa.

Option 1 is the best, IMHO.

 

[jesse]

Midfield crosswind entry give many great reasons for success: You can see all of the upwind, crosswind, downwind, base and final while coming in. If there is a conflict, you can simply turn away from the downwind before you enter, and try again (as if you never came at all).

What is the size of your ground track when you turn around? (You should know thanks to those badass turns around a point skills you were taught) How do you propose turning around? By the time you may see a little white RV or Diamond your ground track would take you into their path.

The nice thing about some of the other entry methods is you can turn *AWAY* from the pattern without having to do a 360 degree turn.

With the 45 you get the ability to turn away from the pattern by simply turning to the right. On a midfield crosswind entry you need to reverse your direction 360 degrees to get away from the pattern.

Finally, its quicker. When renting, this is a big deal, especially with the safety included above.

The increased cost is always a factor worth considering.

 

[poadeleted20]

Option 2. Gives you the best view of all traffic in the pattern and on the runway, and puts you in a position to be seen as well as see.

Option 1 puts you belly to belly with traffic staying in the pattern from crosswind and traffic entering from the 45 -- bad juju.

Option 3 puts you with your back to the pattern. Too often, Student Pilots I've flown with lose the airport after they cross it, and when they turn around, can't find it again and go blowing across the pattern at TPA.

 

[ScottM]

LOL that was an option? I thought that was just my long way of doing things! Hehe

Like Capt. Kirk and his Kobyi-ashi Maru test, I always found that sometime it is best to change the rules.

 

[EdFred]

Option 5:

45 entry to upwind. You get to see if any planes are on the runway, make a crosswind turn when you determine it is safe to do so. You never have your back to the pattern, you aren't interfering with turbine traffic, and it gives you a little bit more time to make sure no one is taking off, and you collide right off the end of the runway.

Option 6

Lazily make your way about 5 miles south of the field so you are not considered part of the traffic pattern, line yourself up for final, and get lower than everyone else, so you now have the right-of-way on your straight in approach. Ok, don't do it to cut anyone off, but if the ariport doesn't prohibit it *COUGH* HII *COUGH* the straight in has you in the pattern the least amount of time. Of course if busy it takes some coordination, and maybe just best to go with #5.

 

[SkyHog]

What is the size of your ground track when you turn around? (You should know thanks to those badass turns around a point skills you were taught) How do you propose turning around? By the time you may see a little white RV or Diamond your ground track would take you into their path.

The nice thing about some of the other entry methods is you can turn *AWAY* from the pattern without having to do a 360 degree turn.

With the 45 you get the ability to turn away from the pattern by simply turning to the right. On a midfield crosswind entry you need to reverse your direction 360 degrees to get away from the pattern.


The increased cost is always a factor worth considering.

Ground track? Use your own tactic, dude. "Am I turning step enough? No? ok, lets turn a bit more."

 

[ScottM]

Option 6

Lazily make your way about 5 miles south of the field so you are not considered part of the traffic pattern, line yourself up for final, and get lower than everyone else, so you now have the right-of-way on your straight in approach. Ok, don't do it to cut anyone off, but if the ariport doesn't prohibit it *COUGH* HII *COUGH* the straight in has you in the pattern the least amount of time. Of course if busy it takes some coordination, and maybe just best to go with #5.

Also make radio calls that you are on the approach for runway 36 so as to appear you are doing something legit.

 

[KennyFlys]

Option 6

Lazily make your way about 5 miles south of the field so you are not considered part of the traffic pattern, line yourself up for final, and get lower than everyone else, so you now have the right-of-way on your straight in approach. Ok, don't do it to cut anyone off, but if the ariport doesn't prohibit it *COUGH* HII *COUGH* the straight in has you in the pattern the least amount of time. Of course if busy it takes some coordination, and maybe just best to go with #5.

Sooooooooo.... you're the little buzzard in that blue 150 who has cut me off on short final!!!

 

[Dwight B. Van Zanen]

I am an option 1 guy. In Canada, this is the way its done. Now I'm not one to say other countries have it better, but whoever determined that a 45 degree entry is the best option oughtta be beaten with a stick.

Midfield crosswind entry give many great reasons for success: You can see all of the upwind, crosswind, downwind, base and final while coming in. If there is a conflict, you can simply turn away from the downwind before you enter, and try again (as if you never came at all). Doing a 360 over the runway at TPA is almost a surefire way to ensure that there will be no traffic where you're spinning.

Finally, its quicker. When renting, this is a big deal, especially with the safety included above.

My problem with Option 3, which is the way it is usually taught, is that you turn you back to the pattern. I never like being that close to the pattern without seeing whats happening.

My problem with option 2 is that you might conflict with departing traffic, which leaves them with little option as they are at a low altitude and high aoa.

Option 1 is the best, IMHO.

Option 1 is straight over midfield at TPA, right? So you are converging on the point where somone who is doing pattern work will cross your path on downwind at TPA, and where the guy on the 45 will be crossing your path on the turn to downwind at TPA. And then, you are crossing the path of anyone who may do a go-around for some reason and climbs out to TPA. Four converging routes from different directions and on your way to downwind seems like it increases the chance of not seeing someone fast or small or in the sun or behind a post or bug splat on your windscreen. Is that really normal in Canada? I can't see it being safe or safer, so quicker does not enter into the decision at all.

Option 2 is worded wrong. If you cross the pattern at TPA on crosswind you can be in the path of the departing traffic. But just be 3+ miles out and you are beyond the pattern and can cross and either turn to join the downwind if it is clear or turn back on the 45 when you are a little farther past the runway. People departing straight out ought to be well above TPA by 3+ miles out, or leveled off and able to see ahead. In any case you can watch the whole length of the runway and upwind as you cross even at 4 or 5 miles out, by just looking out your left window.

Option 3 is what I was taught, and what I usually do if anyone is in the pattern.

The straight-in approach by making a right turn well outside the pattern is what I see done often in the situation presented. Just be sure to be outside the pattern, because a right base turn (at a left pattern runway) within the usual pattern distance can get you a citation and suspension.

One you did not mention was done "to me" on my first supervised solo. A guy flew over about midfield above TPA, but dropped into the downwind with a descending left turn (without the descending right turn onto the left pattern 45). I was on downwind and he dropped in fairly close ahead of me. My instructor was on the radio immediately to let him know, and he turned out of the pattern to the right and joined on the 45. If he saw me, he cut it a little close. If he did not, it was just lucky he did not descent on top of me. I would have been under his nose as he came down on the pattern. I certainly did not expect him to drop in just ahead of me.

 

[gprellwitz]

Option 7. The Standard Overhead Join, as taught in New Zealand. Cross the field 500' above TPA (taking into account Scott's point about high-speed traffic) from the traffic side to the non-traffic side. Descend on the non-traffic side to TPA on an upwind, parallel to the runway, but not directly overhead. Enter crosswind. See the attachment for the "official" diagram and verbiage.

(Oh, and I was taught and usually do #3 here in the States).

 

[SkyHog]

Two people have made reference to doing maneuvers "outside" the pattern.

Where are you guys finding the lateral limits of the pattern defined? I've looked, and can't find it (neither can the NTSB, btw).

 

[gismo]

Option 2. Gives you the best view of all traffic in the pattern and on the runway, and puts you in a position to be seen as well as see.

Option 1 puts you belly to belly with traffic staying in the pattern from crosswind and traffic entering from the 45 -- bad juju.

Option 3 puts you with your back to the pattern. Too often, Student Pilots I've flown with lose the airport after they cross it, and when they turn around, can't find it again and go blowing across the pattern at TPA.

What Ron said. And WRT option 3 this doesn't work very well when there's a cloud deck less than 2000 AGL (or 1000 above the pattern whichever is lower).

As to the concern about traffic climbing into you while on the crosswind, I can say from personal experience that it is easy to see an aircraft departing while you are on crosswind long before you reach the runway centerline. If you do see conflicting traffic, you can just turn upwind (parallel to the runway) and sort it out. And that's really one of the best features of this method (the ability to turn upwind if you can't fit in right away). Sometimes I aim for the center of the airport and enter the upwind at mid-field and turn crosswind at an opportune time (but always past the end of the runway.

 

[gismo]

Two people have made reference to doing maneuvers "outside" the pattern.

Where are you guys finding the lateral limits of the pattern defined? I've looked, and can't find it (neither can the NTSB, btw).

I like to consider the size of a standard Class D as the most conservative limit. Few planes fly a downwind or final beyond 2nm though. I'd like to stay at least a mile from anyone in the pattern when "maneuvering" so 2.5-3nm is probably sufficient, but 4nm works for me.

 

[Pilawt]

Option 1 is straight over midfield at TPA, right? [snip] Is that really normal in Canada?

That's the "Standard Circuit Pattern" in Canada. See http://www.aopa.org/members/pic/intl/canada/flightrules_03.html and the diagram about halfway down that page.

I use "Option 3" when no wind information is available without flying directly overhead to see a windsock. Can't really do "Option 2" unless you already have a good notion of which way the pattern is going before you get there.

-- Pilawt

 

[AirBaker]

Option 3. Continue perpedicular to runway for 1 mile, then descending standard rate turn to the right brings you round to 1 mile 45 degree entry into downwind.

While I dont always do this, I would vote that its the better of the options.

Although, I do enjoy the straight in.

 

[SkyHog]

notice there's no upwind leg. Would really throw the guys for a loop from Pan Am Flight Academy there, since they always report their upwind legs to CTAF for each pattern.

 

[Henning]

So I've been doing some thinking lately about the basics of flying. I've also been thinking about what I do versus what other people do.

Scenario:
You are approaching an uncontrolled airport from the east. The runway is 36/18 and you will be landing on 36 which has a left traffic pattern.

Which method do you do and have you thought about the positives and negatives?

Option 4: Come in on a wide right base, call if I have radios, keep my eyes open.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I like the Canadian method. Except for user fees there are very few things they don't do better with organizing those small little planey things. (IMHO.)

 

[skyflyer8]

And WRT option 3 this doesn't work very well when there's a cloud deck less than 2000 AGL (or 1000 above the pattern whichever is lower).

It also doesn't work well if you have airplanes above you on their final approach. Where I instruct at 79C, we're just outside the Appleton (ATW) class D and almost in line with runway 3. Three instrument approaches to ATW put traffic as low as 800 feet above our pattern within a one-mile radius of our field. So if I were to overfly at TPA + 500, that would leave me as little as 300 feet of separation.

There have been some close calls between airliners and pilots at 79C. I don't do the TPA + 500 thing here.

Elsewhere, I'm not so restricted. I'll use option 3, 2, or a 45 to upwind entry. I agree with Lance that when entering on crosswind, it's usually easy to spot departing traffic.

 

[gprellwitz]

It also doesn't work well if you have airplanes above you on their final approach. Where I instruct at 79C, we're just outside the Appleton (ATW) class D and almost in line with runway 3. Three instrument approaches to ATW put traffic as low as 800 feet above our pattern within a one-mile radius of our field. So if I were to overfly at TPA + 500, that would leave me as little as 300 feet of separation.

There have been some close calls between airliners and pilots at 79C. I don't do the TPA + 500 thing here.

Elsewhere, I'm not so restricted. I'll use option 3, 2, or a 45 to upwind entry. I agree with Lance that when entering on crosswind, it's usually easy to spot departing traffic.

You teach at Brennand? I thought of flying in there last year, but the 20' wide runway kind of made me shy away. A couple of weeks, ago, though, I landed at Dwight (DTG), which is only a foot wider.

Sometimes I aim for the center of the airport and enter the upwind at mid-field and turn crosswind at an opportune time (but always past the end of the runway.

And to bring it back on topic, this sounds like it's close to the standard overhead join I posted about earlier.

 

[Bill]

After trying them all, I think I prefer option 2.

 

[Ken Ibold]

I'm an option 2 kinda guy. Generally speaking. There will be circumstances that require a different approach, but 2 is my default mode.

 

[tdager]

I generally use option 2 now, though it all depends as someone said.

However I am usually 2-300 ft above TPA on the corsswind and drop to TPA as I turn left to downwind.

 

[poadeleted20]

Option 2 is worded wrong.

I don't think so.

If you cross the pattern at TPA on crosswind you can be in the path of the departing traffic.

Since you should turn crosswind 300 below TPA, departing traffic should be 300 feet below you. However, if you enter on the crosswind, you can see the traffic rolling for takeoff, and avoid them. Even the Lears don't get to 1000 AGL by 3/4 mile past the departure end unless it's a really long runway.

But just be 3+ miles out and you are beyond the pattern

...and out of visual range of the field in MVFR conditions -- not a real good option.

 

[The Old Man]

After trying them all, I think I prefer option 2.

Ah'm wid you and Cap'n Ron. I now do almost all off side entries on the crosswind. Get to pattern alt about a mile from the centerline. Plan the crossing to be beyond the end, but close enough that departing traffic would not normally reach pattern alt. Watch the runway like a hawk for traffic (rolling aircraft are easy to see).

When you are almost to the centerline, any and all windsocks on the field will be visible (Rather than right under you on the crossover.).

If you don't like the traffic on downwind, you can turn away at any time and after a mile or so, 180 back onto the 45.

 

[sbonek]

I've always done Option 1, and it's pretty common at my home airport. It seems to give you a good view of everything that is going on, but I can see you could run into an issue if an a/c is staying in the pattern, and is turning from crosswind to downwind while I'm crossing midfield. At that point, I'm right in the middle of the airport, with no easy out.

Entering on the 45 to the upwind makes sense, but my concern is if it might cause confusion around here since I've never seen it done before. If I heard somebody call out entering on the 45 for the upwind, I might assume they called upwind, but really meant downwind.

If possible, I try to plan my entry into the airport area to make it easier to just enter on the 45 for downwind, but that isn't always feasible without spending another 15-20 minutes in the air.

Sounds like Option 2 may be a good option to consider.

 

[GaryO]

So I've been doing some thinking lately about the basics of flying. I've also been thinking about what I do versus what other people do.

Scenario:
You are approaching an uncontrolled airport from the east. The runway is 36/18 and you will be landing on 36 which has a left traffic pattern.


Option 1:
You enter the pattern on the midfield crosswind at traffic pattern altitude. You like this because it lets you see the entire downwind. This is how you were taught by your instructor and it seems to be an efficent way to do it. It's never failed you--why would it today?

Option 2
You enter the pattern on the crosswind at traffic pattern altitude just north of the runway. This seems like a pretty good method because you have an out. You can always turn away from the pattern.

Option 3
You fly over the pattern 500 ft (or more) above TPA. This gives you a good look at the pattern and the windsock. After you are a little ways from the airport you pull the power and start a descending right hand turn. This sets you up for a perfect 45 degree entry at TPA for the downwind. You can see the entire downwind and if there is a conflict you can simply turn away from the pattern.


My instructor taught me option 3. I never gave it much thought except for the fact that I thought it was complicated. It took more time. It seemed like a lot of work to enter a pattern. I observed pilots doing Option 1 and eventually I started to do that myself. It seemed like a pretty good idea because you didn't waste all kinds of time and you could see the entire downwind. After some more thinking I saw the flaw. I have no out. I can't turn away from the pattern if there is a traffic conflict. I could try to dive or climb but the other airplane might do the same thing.

After this I started to think about Option 2. It seemed like a good idea because I could always turn to the right away from the pattern. The problem I saw with this is that a plane can climb up into me. I'd like to avoid an airplane cutting me in half.

After thinking about how option 1 and option 2 sucked I started to think back to the way my instructor taught me. It appears to be a good deal because I can overfly and look at the windsock along with any planes that may be in the pattern. I can then turn back and enter the pattern on the 45 which gives great visibility.

The fact of the matter is I see most pilots doing Option 1. I always hear them saying it's a good idea because they can see the entire downwind. But I have to wonder if they've ever thought about it. It could put you into a really ****ty situation.

I'm thinking I'm going to start doing Option 3. It'll take me a little longer but I can get a feel for the situation.

Which method do you do and have you thought about the positives and negatives?

I was taught to plan my pattern entry well before I arrived at the field. Usually about 20 nm out I will begin setting up my pattern entry. In your scenario, as soon as I determined that I would be entering the pattern for 36, hopefully 20 nm out, I would adjust my course to pass about 5 nm North of the field. At that point I would angle toward the Southeast and set up for a 45 degree entry. That gives me a great view of the traffic and lots of options for setting up safe separtation.

Ron: If it was MVFR then I would consider it an emergency situation and I would use a different approach. I am not IR and I have no business flying when the vis is that bad.

 

[ScottM]

Ron: If it was MVFR then I would consider it an emergency situation and I would use a different approach. I am not IR and I have no business flying when the vis is that bad.

But you would still be legal and there might be other pilts who are a bit more comfortable in that type of WX. While applaud you for knowing your personal limit, keep in mind that you might get caught in that WX once, or that in generic terms others should take into account vis for the option 4 approach you and I called out.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Option 1 is straight over midfield at TPA, right? So you are converging on the point where somone who is doing pattern work will cross your path on downwind at TPA, and where the guy on the 45 will be crossing your path on the turn to downwind at TPA. And then, you are crossing the path of anyone who may do a go-around for some reason and climbs out to TPA. Four converging routes from different directions and on your way to downwind seems like it increases the chance of not seeing someone fast or small or in the sun or behind a post or bug splat on your windscreen. Is that really normal in Canada? I can't see it being safe or safer, so quicker does not enter into the decision at all.

You're imagining more problems with it than there actually are. There are airports where the crossswind entry is an unpublished standard - it was for one of the runways at the airport where I did my primary training. In your four converging aircraft scenario, the crosswind entry at TPA gives you as much of a view of the activity and options to avoid problems as the 45° one.

You and the guy on the 45 easily see each other (especially since his 45 ,means you're not head on) The converging guy on downwind will have hit the guy on the 45 (you said they were converging on the same spot, not I) before you get anywhere near them. And the airplane on the go-around will pass harmlessly beneath you.


The only danger is the same one as any other pattern entry - if you're not looking you will cause a problem.

Besides, unlike the 45, the crosswind entry complies with the regulatory requirement for left turns in the pattern.

 

[grattonja]

Empty airport out in middle of nowhere, or home drome where I know who's who and what's what, option 1, it's shortest and gives me an excellent view of the sock, etc.

Busy traffic pattern, fly in etc? Option 3 every time. I feel safest that way, and will probably go out a bit farther than usual before I turn onto 45, just to be sure.

In between, a couple of planes in the pattern and not hard to fit in, likely Option 2.

YMMV of course.

Jim G

 

[Dwight B. Van Zanen]

I don't think so.

I meant to say, that the crosswind entry would be better outside the pattern area for the reasons that followed.

Since you should turn crosswind 300 below TPA, departing traffic should be 300 feet below you. However, if you enter on the crosswind, you can see the traffic rolling for takeoff, and avoid them. Even the Lears don't get to 1000 AGL by 3/4 mile past the departure end unless it's a really long runway.

I said departing traffic, not crosswind. Crosswind may turn below TPA, but departing straight out will continue to climb with nose up and with limited vision straight ahead. Where they get to TPA will depend on the aircraft and the pilot. Some guys with STOL capability like to make a Vx or Vy climb as steep as they can out of the pattern. A Kitfox could be above TPA by the end of the runway. You can see them by looking down and left, but the point was they could be converging on your course and what happens if you don't see them for whatever reason? Yes, you need to be alert in the pattern anytime, but the idea of a pattern is so that ordinarilly you join a route of flight that does NOT require you to fly across the path of anyone else. Join, but not cross. All I am saying is the crosswind entry causes you to cross another possible flight path if done at normal crosswind distance. And the situation is even more complicated for the #1 (mid-field crosswind at TPA) entry.

...and out of visual range of the field in MVFR conditions -- not a real good option.

Well, we were not in MVFR conditions when I wrote the comment. In normal VFR weather you ought to be able to see the entire runway and the entire upwind from 3, 4 or even 5 miles out. As someone else said, it all depends on the conditions at the time. The fact is that 4 or 5 miles out if you can not see and be seen, you are flying in conditions that make it a problem to fly anywhere because you don't know for sure which direction other traffic may come from.

Someone asked about where you need to be to be outside the pattern area. On another thread this was discussed and a citation appeal case was referenced about a transport catagory pilot (or perhaps a cargo pilot) that made a right base turn to final at an airport with a left pattern for that runway. His defense was he made a straight-in after the turn, which is legal. The problem was he made the right turn to final within 2 NM of the runway. I think he was in a 737, which did not help his case either. The citation was upheld on appeal. The discussion of the case seemed to imply, but not state directly, that something more than 2 NM out would be OK. That seems close to me for something as big as a 737. They are ordinarilly on final for more than 2 NM, but perhaps not at this specific airport because of hills or other airspace issues. I think the deal is, be clearly beyond where anyone on the base leg could be at the same distance (or farther) from the runway than you are to avoid any potential conflict. I don't fly into airports with jets, big or small, very often; so a base more than 1.5 miles or so beyond the end of the runway is uncommon. So 3 or 4 miles beyond is outside the pattern on the approach end. I use the same distance on the departure end to define the pattern area. It would be bigger at other airports where bigger faster aircraft turn base farther out and higher.