Position Reports

Although I report distance with the fix I don't see anything wrong with the format in the AIM. Report the FAF inbound. In this case I believe you're referring to Mcintosh for the NDB 33 R at Midcoast. Even if you don't know their exact distance, everyone should know FAF is around 4-5 miles out. To me that's a heck of a lot more precise than someone reporting in at 10 miles SW of the field. That covers a huge area. After FAF or outer marker then make a report on final. That's when the guy on downwind or aircraft holding short start to really scan for the aircraft. If other aircraft can't see and avoid someone making those two calls, then they need to get their eyes checked.
 
JHW said:
I respond with "beech 27Y approaching (same airport) crossing over walter's hay barn, will enter the pattern over jim's trout pond.
Click to expand...

Don't laugh, but someone did that very thing at DXR a couple of months ago.
Sometimes an old time local pilot can get way too local for everyone's good.

Glenn
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Oh, OK.

BTW, what is an FAF? I hear about them, but I don't think I've ever seen one on a sectional. What do they look like?
Click to expand...

Final Approach Fix. What does 10 miles east look like? That's a pretty large area.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
No problem at all.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Some guy is blasting into the pattern head down and probably going at least twice as fast as I am. I appreciate knowing that I need to stay away until he/she/it is on the ground to avoid getting run down from behind.
Click to expand...

Why do you feel you need to stay away? He provided an accurate and reliable position as well as his type aircraft so you know his position in relation to your own.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
What do they look like? How do I spot one from the air?
Click to expand...

Yeah what does 10 miles east look like and how would I spot that from the air. Thats a vague discription. The AIM doesn't say during a practice instrument approach to find a landmark on a sectional to report inbound.

As I said already I report postion with the fix IAW AC90-66A. However, I don't think anyone making a report IAW the AIM or 90-42F is in the wrong. Oh yeah, IAW means In Accordance With.:)
 
Last edited:
I respond with "beech 27Y approaching (same airport) crossing over walter's hay barn, will enter the pattern over jim's trout pond.
Click to expand...

It's like people approaching Eagle Creek here announcing "Crossing the 56th Street bridge" (about a mile northwest of the field; in all fairness, it is the only bridge on that lake) or "the Pyramids" (three triangular buildings on the north side of Indy) . You can tell who is based here by whether they use that or not.

Of course, there's also the idiot who announces "Battle Creek traffic" when entering the pattern.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I have a reasonably good idea how far 10 miles is. But this FAF thing is an imaginary point in space that is not on any chart that I own and is used only by people who fly IFR and have the IFR charts for the IFR stuff. Why on God's green earth would you assume that "everyone" would know how far out one is?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter how far he is. If they report FAF for rwy 33 I have a narrow path to look for. Follow the path from the approach end and you'll see them. Much better than 10 miles from the airport. Cant see anyone that far out anyway. Aircraft inbound on an instrument approach aren't suppose to interrupt the normal flow of traffic anyway (AC 90-66A). So it doesn't matter what they report, they should give way to others in the pattern anyway. They should adjust speed on final to follow me or if not aligned with the runway (VOR A) they should enter on downwind behind me.

People complain about an instrument report for not being precise yet a radio isn't required in a traffic pattern anyway. At my airport I've got ultralights flying all over without radios. I just keep my head on a swivel and avoid them. That's the freedom of flight we have.
 
Velocity173 said:
Doesn't matter how far he is. If they report FAF for rwy 33 I have a narrow path to look for. Follow the path from the approach end and you'll see them. Much better than 10 miles from the airport. Cant see anyone that far out anyway. Aircraft inbound on an instrument approach aren't suppose to interrupt the normal flow of traffic anyway (AC 90-66A). So it doesn't matter what they report, they should give way to others in the pattern anyway. They should adjust speed on final to follow me or if not aligned with the runway (VOR A) they should enter on downwind behind me.
Click to expand...

What gives pattern traffic the right-of-way?
 
roncachamp said:
What gives pattern traffic the right-of-way?
Click to expand...

Part 91.113g perhaps?:
When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't, under most circumstances, the aircraft in the pattern be below the aircraft on an instrument approach? They are in my experience and besides, just barging in is kind of rude. Fly courteous is the golden rule I was taught about pattern etiquette. :yes:



Regarding position reports, see Section 7f of AC 90-66A (emphasis is my own):

f. Pilots who wish to conduct instrument approaches should be particularly alert for other aircraft in the pattern SO as to avoid interrupting the flow of traffic. Position reports on the CTAF should include distance and direction from the airport, as well as the pilot’s intentions upon completion of the approach
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
You are right. Your dick is bigger than mine. And I am the only pilot in the U.S. who doesn't know where a FAF is.
Click to expand...

I'm an instrument rated commercial pilot who probably flies more than many folks here and I agree with you 100%. Rarely have I heard people say they are at the FAF, they usually give some random intersection out in the middle of BFE and I have no idea where it is. I'm not gonna pull up an approach plate to find it, either.

I was coming in to land from the northwest at an unnamed airport, and a twin with a student from the unnamed flight school at the unnamed airport was flying an approach. This unnamed airport has a tower, but it was closed at the time. I called 5 to the Northwest inbound for landing, then the twin called and said they were at JISGO for the RNAV 13 and said they saw "blinky lights in front of them at their altitude" I, responded "For those of us not graced with intimate knowledge of all of the approaches in south Texas, where are you?" They said they were at JISGO. "WHERE ARE YOU!!!" I said again, thankfully the instructor woke up from what must have been a very restful sleep, and came back and said that they too were 5 to the Northwest. I cranked my head around looking behind me and lo and behold there was a twin that couldn't have been more than a 1/2 mile behind me. The "blinky light" was the tail strobe on my Mooney.

I talked with the instructor and the student after they landed about the merits of making position reports with a distance and direction rather than the name of a fix.
 
SteveinIndy said:
Part 91.113g perhaps?:

When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't, under most circumstances, the aircraft in the pattern be below the aircraft on an instrument approach? They are in my experience and besides, just barging in is kind of rude. Fly courteous is the golden rule I was taught about pattern etiquette. :yes:
Click to expand...

That's not 91.113(g), this is 91.113(g):

Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
Click to expand...

Why did you choose to misquote it?
 
Why did you choose to misquote it?
Click to expand...

I didn't misquote it. Can you please check the attitude at the door? You might not be intending on it but it comes across as the "I am the master of the sky. I know all things aviation". A little thought in the way you word things (on the parts of both you and Geoffrey) could avoid turning this thread into a pointless morass of the forum equivalent of posturing.

I just didn't copy the entire thing and included the part that seemed germane to the discussion at hand. Because the latter part (lower goes first) would take precedence over a person who is calling a 4-5 mile final, that is why I posted it the way I did. Someone on a base to final turn at a few hundred feet AGL is going to have right of way over the IFR flight blazing in from FAF.

That said, I will be sure to include the entire section the next time to avoid this. Sorry about that.
 
SteveinIndy said:
I didn't misquote it. Can you please check the attitude at the door? You might not be intending on it but it comes across as the "I am the master of the sky. I know all things aviation". A little thought in the way you word things (on the parts of both you and Geoffrey) could avoid turning this thread into a pointless morass of the forum equivalent of posturing.

I just didn't copy the entire thing and included the part that seemed germane to the discussion at hand. Because the latter part (lower goes first) would take precedence over a person who is calling a 4-5 mile final, that is why I posted it the way I did. Someone on a base to final turn at a few hundred feet AGL is going to have right of way over the IFR flight blazing in from FAF.

That said, I will be sure to include the entire section the next time to avoid this. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...

You did misquote it, you deleted the primary portion. Right-of-way is an issue only when two aircraft would occupy the same point in space, or nearly so. Right-of-way is not an issue between an aircraft on a base to final turn and one on a 4-5 mile final.
 
You did misquote it, you deleted the primary portion. Right-of-way is an issue only when two aircraft would occupy the same point in space, or nearly so. Right-of-way is not an issue between an aircraft on a base to final turn and one on a 4-5 mile final.
Click to expand...

I am done with the discussion since I have a feeling that no matter what I say you're just going to continue trying to pick a fight.

Have a good night and a happy new year.
 
roncachamp said:
How do you reconcile that with FAR 91.113(g)?
Click to expand...

Well this topic has come up a thousand times already. Are you saying if someone elects to skip the proper entry in AC 90-66 8 a & b (45 entry) has priority simply because they chose to save gas with a straight-in? Why don't we all do straight-ins and save the time by getting automatic priority by being on final? Also, say a VOR A (KW94) is coming into the pattern perpendicular to the downwind with a missed approach point over the runway. Other aircraft already established in the pattern would have to alter course to avoid conflict. At some point that VOR A has to bust off the approach to enter the pattern in the AIM and AC 90-66. If no one is in the pattern than do what you want. It's like flying a helicopter. If no fixed wing are in the pattern I do left traffic. If I've got airplanes around then I have to avoid the flow (by doing right turns) so I don't disrupt the pattern.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Well this topic has come up a thousand times already. Are you saying if someone elects to skip the proper entry in AC 90-66 8 a & b by maneuvering outside the pattern for the 45, has priority simply because they chose to save gas with a straight-in?
Click to expand...

I'm pointing out that the regulation states aircraft on final approach to land have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight.

How would aircraft save gas by maneuvering outside the pattern?

Why don't we all do straight-ins and save the time by getting automatic priority by being on final?
Click to expand...

Because we're not all coming from that direction.
 
roncachamp said:
I'm pointing out that the regulation states aircraft on final approach to land have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight.

How would aircraft save gas by maneuvering outside the pattern?



Because we're not all coming from that direction.
Click to expand...

Traffic pattern entry has been brought up many times before. Obviously 91.113 g trumps AC-90-66 for priority on pattern entry. I still don't believe a straight-in should allow priority for someone simply because they wanted to skip the 45. Still my point about the VOR A inbound would have to adjust their approach pattern to follow traffic already established.
 
bartmc said:
Is it kosher to use instrument approach fixes and "lingo" on the CTAF at uncontrolled airports on severe VFR days when you're out just flying approaches, alone, for the heck of it?

For instance "Podunk Airport, Piper 1234A 2.36 miles from the Whatever NDB, Flying NDB RW33 Approach,Podunk Airport"?
Click to expand...

Not really because many pilots will have no clue as to what you're talking about.
 
Velocity173 said:
Traffic pattern entry has been brought up many times before. Obviously 91.113 g trumps AC-90-66 for priority on pattern entry. I still don't believe a straight-in should allow priority for someone simply because they wanted to skip the 45. Still my point about the VOR A inbound would have to adjust their approach pattern to follow traffic already established.
Click to expand...
When I was doing IFR training I was taught that when practicing straight in approaches in a nontowered environment to always end with the statement traffic permitting, the conotation being that those in the prescribed pattern took precidence over me. Whether this was by rule of by practice I never asked but in my mind it always seemed appropriate to do. I was also taught not to use IFR terminology, as non IFR pilots would probably have no clue what I was talking about, and even IFR trained pilots may not be familiar with the waypoints, etc to know.

Essentially, it boils down to why we give position reports, it is to tell others where we are, and if we use terminology, concepts, directions, and location descriptions that are not perfectly clear to everyone else, we might as well say nothig, or just click our mike. That being said, I have had towers use landmarks, such as interstates, or the city dump as reporting points, which is okay if you know the territory, but in certain areas such as where this tower is there a number of dumps, and a huge huge number of similarly looking highways less than a mile or so apart, and to those who do not know the area it can be confusing. So not only are pilots guilty of this, but so is at least towers.

Doug
 
When I announce "Apache inbound, landing" all I can see is airplanes slamming their throttles full forward and desperately diving to get way from the airport.
It appears my efforts are finally paying off.
 
Velocity173 said:
Traffic pattern entry has been brought up many times before. Obviously 91.113 g trumps AC-90-66 for priority on pattern entry. I still don't believe a straight-in should allow priority for someone simply because they wanted to skip the 45. Still my point about the VOR A inbound would have to adjust their approach pattern to follow traffic already established.
Click to expand...

If an aircraft is approaching on a natural straight-in what is the net advantage to all concerned in requiring that aircraft to maneuver, probably several miles, to enter on a 45⁰ turn to downwind? "Right-of-way" does not mean "next aircraft to land", it's just a method of sorting out traffic that would otherwise conflict. If you're on downwind when another aircraft reports a ten mile final there's no conflict, you can fly your normal pattern and land without affecting the other operation in any way. If the relative positions are such that you and the other aircraft will conflict as you join final then that other aircraft has the right-of-way, the easiest way to resolve that conflict is for you to extend your downwind to follow.
 
roncachamp said:
If an aircraft is approaching on a natural straight-in what is the net advantage to all concerned in requiring that aircraft to maneuver, probably several miles, to enter on a 45⁰ turn to downwind? "Right-of-way" does not mean "next aircraft to land", it's just a method of sorting out traffic that would otherwise conflict. If you're on downwind when another aircraft reports a ten mile final there's no conflict, you can fly your normal pattern and land without affecting the other operation in any way. If the relative positions are such that you and the other aircraft will conflict as you join final then that other aircraft has the right-of-way, the easiest way to resolve that conflict is for you to extend your downwind to follow.
Click to expand...


Why did the FAA come out with the recommended 45 entry in the first place? Why not simply say enter at any point in the pattern is fine? How about base leg if I'm on that side? I would think they did it at non towered airports because the 45 provides a smoother transition and gives everyone a common location to be looking for traffic. Some people have noted on the other threads on pattern entry that a straight-in increases risk of a collision with other aircraft in the pattern. I don't know, I haven't done any studies on that.

I do straight-ins all the time but when I do I make darn sure I'm not affecting someone else by having them extend their downwind or adjust their speed to follow me. I simply don't believe in trying to take advantage of 91.113g.
 
Velocity173 said:
Some people have noted on the other threads on pattern entry that a straight-in increases risk of a collision with other aircraft in the pattern. I don't know, I haven't done any studies on that.
Click to expand...

'Not looking out the window' and 'failure to communicate' are what increase the risk of collision, not the absence of a '45 deg entry' (which as it requires a right turn in the pattern is illegal in and by itself despite the AC recommending it. The chief counsel recently issued an interpretation that you can't even circle with a right turn at the end of an instrument approach).
 
It's all about communication, folks, and whatever you can reasonably do to help the other poor mutts understand where you are is good.

---

It goes both ways, by the way.

My first (very first) unsupervised solo was a quick pop up to the practice area (about 10 minutes north); un-forecast rain started rolling in (ceilings were OK, in hindsight, but I was baby non-pilot, remember), so I (along with about 20 other students)started pedaling back to the field to get on the ground.

Addison is under the B, and you have to sequence in through Regional Approach, and they were busy little beavers; the weather was causing surprises all over the place. Approach tells me, "...fly heading xxx, intercept the localizer for runway one five at Addison, maintain 2,500 until advised..."

"Localizer?" Don't know about you, but my PP instruction did not include localizer use.

I told him I was a student pilot, and he then told me, "OK, Student Pilot, fly heading xxx, intercept the localizer for runway one five at Addison, maintain 2,500 until advised..."

I was pretty intimidated, but one of the other instructors (whose voice I knew) popped on and said, "Localizer's one ten point one" real fast, and that was enough for me to figure it out.

Had to fly through a pretty drenching rain inbound too, scared me silly. But, learn, I did.
 
GauzeGuy said:
You are a no-go at this station, private!

I'd much prefer "Podunk traffic, Bugsmasher 123AB on a 10 mile final for runway 15, Podunk."
Click to expand...


Me too! When I am at the uncontrolled airports that I am familiar with, I know most of the fixes and know where they are, but guess what? Sometimes I fly to airports that I am not familiar with. Your string is clear, easy to say and easy to understand for most everyone. A good thing IMHO.
 
SCCutler said:
It's all about communication, folks, and whatever you can reasonably do to help the other poor mutts understand where you are is good.

---

It goes both ways, by the way.

My first (very first) unsupervised solo was a quick pop up to the practice area (about 10 minutes north); un-forecast rain started rolling in (ceilings were OK, in hindsight, but I was baby non-pilot, remember), so I (along with about 20 other students)started pedaling back to the field to get on the ground.

Addison is under the B, and you have to sequence in through Regional Approach, and they were busy little beavers; the weather was causing surprises all over the place. Approach tells me, "...fly heading xxx, intercept the localizer for runway one five at Addison, maintain 2,500 until advised..."

"Localizer?" Don't know about you, but my PP instruction did not include localizer use.

I told him I was a student pilot, and he then told me, "OK, Student Pilot, fly heading xxx, intercept the localizer for runway one five at Addison, maintain 2,500 until advised..."

I was pretty intimidated, but one of the other instructors (whose voice I knew) popped on and said, "Localizer's one ten point one" real fast, and that was enough for me to figure it out.

Had to fly through a pretty drenching rain inbound too, scared me silly. But, learn, I did.
Click to expand...


Good read Spike! Addison intimidates me on a good VFR day. If I would have had to deal with what you described when I was still a student, they would still be trying to pry my fingers from the yoke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top