Questions about safety meeting stuff

[SkyHog]

OK, I thought I'd post this separate from my other post about the AOPA Safety Seminar, since I'd like to get comments on what some of y'all think about this.

So I went to the safety meeting. That was pretty fun. It was entitled "The Last 5 Miles" and the speaker was some dude from Massachusetts. Funny guy, lotsa good knowledge.

He specifically said that he thinks that the AIM's suggestion of 45 degree entry to the downwind is a bad idea, and that he prefers a midfield crosswind entry. Interesting.

Also said that in Canada, that is a regulatory entry method.

This counts as a wings seminar. I'd kind of like to get my Phase 1 wings, just for the hell of it. I don't need a BFR, but I'd kinda like to get some wings.

 

[Michael]

what was his reasoning behind the midfield entry?

 

[Richard]

"Some dude from Massachusetts" is indicative that you were not very attentive. Perhaps that inattentiveness extends to your understanding of the mid-field crossing. (Nick, we're a tough crowd)

I believe your perception of the BFR is in error. You say you don't need it, as in not legally required, that's my point. In the Wings program you are elgible for one phase in every 12 months. One benefit of the Wings program is it exposes you to more pilots and CFIs than could be expected by a BFR. Include the FSDO folks in that last. Becoming acquainted with your area's FSDO is valuable.

While the Wings program can be in lieu of a BFR I believe a pilot should make both part of a currency program. A BFR stretched out to the max 24 month period is not enough. I'm currently in Phase 5.

 

[SkyHog]

"Some dude from Massachusetts" is indicative that you were not very attentive. Perhaps that inattentiveness extends to your understanding of the mid-field crossing. (Nick, we're a tough crowd)

Please don't take this as an act of agression in any way, but I take serious offense to that statement. I paid very close attention to the entire meeting, and the fact that you will dismiss this as a misunderstanding is insane. I didn't remember the dude's name because I didn't think that the point of the meeting was to remember some dude's name, but rather, to instead learn something about the safety aspects of flying.

I didn't take notes, as notes have almost always (except for in certain types of math classes) not done me any good.

His gist of the midfield crosswind was:

(this is not really a quote Richard, please don't claim I was inattentive by not recording the entire speech and transcribing it later).

I have never believed that the 45 degree entry to the downwind, as suggested by the Airman's Information Manual, is the safest, or even the best way to enter the pattern to an uncontrolled airport. Did you know that in Canada, the regulations state that you MUST enter using a midfield crosswind when entering the pattern from the upwind side?

The reason I don't suggest that pilots follow the FAA's suggested method of entering the pattern is that it forces you to lose sight of a portion of the pattern. By entering a midfield crosswind, you can see all traffic to the left and right as well as right in front of you.

While we're on that topic, how many of you use your callsign at uncontrolled airports? (after most of the hands go up)....Why? What does the callsign give another pilot that could possibly help them identify you visually? Nothing! I never use my callsign unless I am talking to Flight Service or an Air Traffic Controller. I'll say 'Blue Mooney" or if there are multiple Blue Mooneys, I'll find something else that is distinguishable. If I need to, I'll rock my wings and report that.

That was pretty much the gist of the whole uncontrolled airport discussion.

I am sorry if I got a little snippy there. I take flying very seriously, and for someone to dismiss my sincerity towards safety or that I was simply just there upset me.

 

[poadeleted20]

I think the "dude's" ideas are seriously off course, and I'm surprised the FSDO Inspector who should have been there if it was an official Wings seminar didn't have something to say about that. Yes, the midfield crossover is in the Canadian regs, but that doesn't make it a good idea here. And while I agree that there are dangers inherent in the 45-downwind entry (mostly due to being belly-up to traffic turning downwind off the crosswind), it is still the recommended entry here, and standardization is good for safety.

 

[SkyHog]

I believe your perception of the BFR is in error. You say you don't need it, as in not legally required, that's my point. In the Wings program you are elgible for one phase in every 12 months. One benefit of the Wings program is it exposes you to more pilots and CFIs than could be expected by a BFR. Include the FSDO folks in that last. Becoming acquainted with your area's FSDO is valuable.

While the Wings program can be in lieu of a BFR I believe a pilot should make both part of a currency program. A BFR stretched out to the max 24 month period is not enough. I'm currently in Phase 5.

I missed this (I fixated on the beginning...sorry).

I think I failed to explain the BFR thing eloquently. I am constantly training with a CFI, because I still feel that there are many things to learn. What I was intending to say was that I got my PPL in March. I'll probably have my IR before March of 2006. I am current and fly often. I don't think that I either legally or technically need a BFR. Obviously, I stand to learn a lot more than I know now, but who doesn't?

 

[Ed Guthrie]

While we're on that topic, how many of you use your callsign at uncontrolled airports? (after most of the hands go up)....Why? What does the callsign give another pilot that could possibly help them identify you visually? Nothing! I never use my callsign unless I am talking to Flight Service or an Air Traffic Controller. I'll say 'Blue Mooney" or if there are multiple Blue Mooneys, I'll find something else that is distinguishable. If I need to, I'll rock my wings and report that.

Where do they find these people?

How many white Cessna aircraft you suppose might be in the average pattern even if the pattern has only 3 aircraft in the pattern?

How does this yahoo know he's the only blue Mooney? (Okay, admittedly better odds than being the only white Cessna.)

You use your call sign because your call sign is unique to a single aircraft. If you use the aircraft call sign there can be no confusion regarding which white Cessna is turning base, or how many white Cessnas are turning base, etc.

Personally, I think you should have opted for the math class...

 

[mmthomas]

I think the "dude's" ideas are seriously off course, and I'm surprised the FSDO Inspector who should have been there if it was an official Wings seminar didn't have something to say about that. Yes, the midfield crossover is in the Canadian regs, but that doesn't make it a good idea here. And while I agree that there are dangers inherent in the 45-downwind entry (mostly due to being belly-up to traffic turning downwind off the crosswind), it is still the recommended entry here, and standardization is good for safety.

I hate to disagree with Ron, but I think I do. While standardization is good for safety, there is no real standardization on traffic pattern entry. Even if everyone used the 45 degree downwind entry, there is still no standard way to maneuver to get into position for such an entry (unless, of course, you are approaching the airport on close to the right heading). Some people fly over the airport at 500/1000/other feet above TPA altitude, then, at some varying distance from the airport do a circling descent during which, for a large portion of time, they can't see the airport, or traffic in the pattern, at all. Others use various other procedures (I remember reading one column describing a very complicated procedure based loosely on procedure turns used in IFR flight, or something like that.)

Second, not everyone uses the 45 degree entry. Some do straight in approaches when they are more convenient. Others do the midfield crossing entry precisely because it seems safer than maneuvering to do the 45 egree entry.

After studying this issue for a while, and considering the various pros and cons--and the absence of any real standardization--I will use the 45 degree entry whenever I can do so without extensive maneuvering; I will do a straight in approach only when there is no other traffic in the pattern; and on other occasions I will use the midfield cfossing method. The fact that this is an approved/required method for entry in Canada tends to confirm my view that, on balance, it is the safest when a 45 degree entry is not possible ewithout extensive maneuvering.

Further standardization in this area would be a good idea, however.

 

[Greebo]

To Ed's point, if you use a combination of call sign and model (NOT make), there can be much LESS confusion.

When I'm at a non-towered field, I say "Skyhawk 07H" not just "Skyhawk" and not just "9107H", and certainly not just "Cessna".

By identifying make AND a unique portion of your callsign, you help others (assuming they're paying attention) recognize that there may be more than one Skyhawk in the pattern.

 

[Richard]

Nick, I apologize for being so flippant and thereby causing you to be upset.

 

[Brian Austin]

To Ed's point, if you use a combination of call sign and model (NOT make), there can be much LESS confusion.

When I'm at a non-towered field, I say "Skyhawk 07H" not just "Skyhawk" and not just "9107H", and certainly not just "Cessna".

By identifying make AND a unique portion of your callsign, you help others (assuming they're paying attention) recognize that there may be more than one Skyhawk in the pattern.

I'm curious why it would make a difference if you said Skyhawk, Skylane, 421, or just simply Cessna. I'm more interested in numbers than model. If I hear "Cessna 123" and "Cessna 456", I know I'm dealing with two birds, not one.

And I've been in the pattern with TWO "Cessna 7WW" planes, too. They usually precede it with 767WW and 247WW or something. Our local FBO keeps getting their new planes with WW to match their name. Neat on the ramp but a pain in the pattern with four of us doing pattern work.

 

[Richard]

To Ed's point, if you use a combination of call sign and model (NOT make), there can be much LESS confusion.

When I'm at a non-towered field, I say "Skyhawk 07H" not just "Skyhawk" and not just "9107H", and certainly not just "Cessna".

By identifying make AND a unique portion of your callsign, you help others (assuming they're paying attention) recognize that there may be more than one Skyhawk in the pattern.

I do just like that. Model and truncated call sign with attention to use full callsign if similar callsign in on freq.

 

[Greebo]

Between Skyhawk and Skylane? Very little. Between Skyhawk and Maule and Cardinal - well, at a distance, or from behind, may be able to tell the difference more easily than you can read the tail number.

Maybe - maybe not - but its just, to me at least, a bit more meaningful than just saying Cessna ###

 

[Richard]

I'm curious why it would make a difference if you said Skyhawk, Skylane, 421, or just simply Cessna. I'm more interested in numbers than model. If I hear "Cessna 123" and "Cessna 456", I know I'm dealing with two birds, not one.

And I've been in the pattern with TWO "Cessna 7WW" planes, too. They usually precede it with 767WW and 247WW or something. Our local FBO keeps getting their new planes with WW to match their name. Neat on the ramp but a pain in the pattern with four of us doing pattern work.

Busy Part 141 schools with similar callsigns using multiples of same make/model should use an assigned flight # instead of N numbers. IFTA in KBFL does just that. Even those fer-ner students can say the 2 digit number with some clarity.

 

[Brian Austin]

Busy Part 141 schools with similar callsigns using multiples of same make/model should use an assigned flight # instead of N numbers. IFTA in KBFL does just that. Even those fer-ner students can say the 2 digit number with some clarity.

Ditto here in Phoenix. This FBO is part 61, however, and in the middle of the purchases. I'm not sure the management even recognizes it's a pain at the moment. It's not a big deal but could be later if they keep buying.

 

[Richard]

Swivel head

RE: Mark Thomas' comments of standardization.

There already exists the standardization. The reason it does not achieve the desired goal is because there is not one style of entry which fits all the time. Mark even provided an example of why it isn't followed when he said he would not make a 45 entry if it involved excessive manuevering.

The other part of that is our personal preferences or perceptions influence the method we choose to enter the patt. I know some have no problem making, as example, a long straight-in to an non-towered field. I do not wish to debate that but that is something I will avoid unless terrain or obstacles dictate.

I'm not, as John Deakin calls them, a 45 nazi, but that and the mid-field overhead is about as close to standardization as we'll get.
The surest way to ensure safety in the patt is to become familiar with the aprt surface area including obstacles and terrain, prevailing winds, and local custom. I think it unfortunate that there is such discrepancy in local customs from one aprt to another, but there it is.

 

[MSmith]

At our little untowered airport, NOBODY uses call signs. You can identify the visitors - they're the ones using callsigns.

You know what? It works. We recognize voices. My club alone has 5 or 6 Warriors, and the difference in voices discriminates them pretty well.

On those occasions where we need to know exactly who is where, we use "#2 for landing", "#2 on downwind" or something like that.

The only time that it gets confusing is when there are two people in the cockpit and both are transmitting. The change of voice can lead you to thinking there are multiple planes. In those cases, we generally ask a question and it gets resolved.

I'm not even sure that "Skylane" vs. "Skyhawk" helps much. At pattern distances, all I can see is high-wing or low-wing.

 

[SkyHog]

Well this sucks. I was expecting to get a bunch of people telling me that I should listen to the advice and that my scepticism is unfounded. I really thought that the dude that AOPA assigned to do a safety seminar that is accepted in the FAA Wings program would not be passing off poor advice. Now I question some of the other tips he gave.

At first I was a bit torn on who I should listen to, but then I remembered that I've met some of the people here, and y'all're known in my mind as being up to snuff on stuff, especially Ron and Ed. This guy was just some guy that flew commercially out to Albuquerque to give a speech at a community college.

What surprises me is that there were easily 100 people there, and no one mentioned anything during or after the presentation. I wonder if we'll have an inundation of pilots entering the pattern in a nonstandard way, or mucking up Double Eagle's VERY busy unicom with "White Skyhawk, downwind" when there are likely 5 white skyhawks in the pattern already.

.....

sorry Richard, after rereading your original post, I can see that you were not trying to offend. It appears that I need to spend a little more time waking up before hitting the boards....

 

[grattonja]

I'm curious why it would make a difference if you said Skyhawk, Skylane, 421, or just simply Cessna. I'm more interested in numbers than model. If I hear "Cessna 123" and "Cessna 456", I know I'm dealing with two birds, not one.




If I'm in the skyhawk or cutlass that I rent, a skyhawk or skylane is no big deal, about the same speeds as me. If I hear 421, I know I am looking for 2 engines and a heck of a lot more speed. Probably a bigger pattern as well. Big difference.

So I prefer to hear "skyhawk 143me" rather than just "cessna 143me".

YMMV.

Jim G

 

[gismo]

While we're on that topic, how many of you use your callsign at uncontrolled airports? (after most of the hands go up)....Why? What does the callsign give another pilot that could possibly help them identify you visually? Nothing! I never use my callsign unless I am talking to Flight Service or an Air Traffic Controller. I'll say 'Blue Mooney" or if there are multiple Blue Mooneys, I'll find something else that is distinguishable. If I need to, I'll rock my wings and report that.

I guess I disagree with your speaker then. Technically AFaIK you are required by FCC rules to give your station ID at least once in each series of transmissions. That said, I generally use only the shortened portion of my callsign (Baron 25Q) to take up less bandwidth. Personally I don't think much of the "Blue Mooney" idea as whenever I'm close enough to another airplane in the pattern to distinguish color, I'm too close. I think that "Mooney 3 echo whiskey" along with an accurate position conveys all that needs to be heard as it gives some idea as to shape and speed as well as providing a unique (most of the time) identity so I don't consider two airplanes as one. And as to the position, I think that announcing "turning left base 31" etc. works best because it defines a fairly small area of the sky and an airplane is generally a lot more visible when turning than when straight.

BTW, I thought (hope) Richard was pulling your leg about the paying attention thing.

 

[gismo]

At our little untowered airport, NOBODY uses call signs. You can identify the visitors - they're the ones using callsigns.

You know what? It works. We recognize voices. My club alone has 5 or 6 Warriors, and the difference in voices discriminates them pretty well.

I suspect that you can also identify the visitors as the ones completely in the dark about who's who in the pattern. Your voice recognition method may work well for you, but it stinks for anyone not all that familiar with the resident voices.

 

[Richard]

Ditto here in Phoenix. This FBO is part 61, however, and in the middle of the purchases. I'm not sure the management even recognizes it's a pain at the moment. It's not a big deal but could be later if they keep buying.

Yes, it is a big deal. I have several stories detailing how much of a big deal it can be. I suggest you inform WW mgmt of your concerns.

Do not presume that a busy training environment is populated with astute situationally aware pilots.

 

[Rudy]

This is weird, I have never heard anyone say anything besides there callsign in the pattern at KPTS.
I use "Cherokee 694" every time i radio in. Without hearing a type it seems to me it would be dangerous. For example:
If I hear "Skyhawk 640, 10 mi to the South inbound for landing RWY16. Then i know i have time if i am on downwind or turning base.
However if i hear "Citation 0RK,10 mi south inbound 16" I know i dont have that much time at all.
I just think it is necessary.
I don't know a whole lot about everything being new to the aviation world, this is just an opinion and a point i thoght i would throw out there.

 

[Richard]

At our little untowered airport, NOBODY uses call signs. You can identify the visitors - they're the ones using callsigns.

Does that imply NOBODY travels to other aprts? That procedure which works at your field will most likely be met with derision at other fields. Besides, it's a bad practice because it fortifies the perception that standard radio phraseology is not needed.

In our neck of the woods, the most severe traffic accidents always seem to involve one visitor and one local. Why do you suppose that is?

 

[Richard]

Well this sucks.

I'll tell you what sucks, it's your spelling.

y'all're

y'all is singular. all y'all is plural. They avoid all that awkward use of apostrophes. I just giggle everytime I have occassion to use this favorite word.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Well this sucks. I was expecting to get a bunch of people telling me that I should listen to the advice and that my scepticism is unfounded. I really thought that the dude that AOPA assigned to do a safety seminar that is accepted in the FAA Wings program would not be passing off poor advice. Now I question some of the other tips he gave.

The one time I went to one of these they presenter gave the standing-room-only crowd some very suspicious advice about navigating near thunderstorms. I debated him briefly using statistical evidence from the accident record to back up my position, but all he fell back on is "you should believe me because I have the microphone." He basically shouted me down. I have not gone back to one.

As for cross-field pattern entries, you won't catch me doing midfield crosswinds. You will find me flying a crosswind past the departure end at roughly the point where an airplane in the pattern would turn crosswind, but at pattern altitude.

 

[Greebo]

Just to clarify Richard's points:
"Y'all" - singler
"All y'all" - plerel

Gotcha?

 

[Diana]

This is weird, I have never heard anyone say anything besides there callsign in the pattern at KPTS.

Hey Rudy, you sounded good on the radio today.

Tom's radio in the TriPacer died after he took off, so that's why he couldn't hear me (or you). I had him in sight all the way to LLU and landed after he did.

Oh, and we both used the "crossing midfield entry to downwind" method at LLU. Most folks around here do it that way when approaching the airfield from the upwind direction.

 

[Michael]

Just to clarify Richard's points:
"Y'all" - singler
"All y'all" - plerel

Gotcha?

Just to clarify Chucks points:
"plerel" - plural

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I missed this (I fixated on the beginning...sorry).

I think I failed to explain the BFR thing eloquently. I am constantly training with a CFI, because I still feel that there are many things to learn. What I was intending to say was that I got my PPL in March. I'll probably have my IR before March of 2006. I am current and fly often. I don't think that I either legally or technically need a BFR. Obviously, I stand to learn a lot more than I know now, but who doesn't?

I think Richard was rassing you...
More good news:
You probably have or nearly have enough for your Phase I Wings since you train regularly with CFI. Wings requirements are broad for each of the 3 hours. The FSDO says you can use aircraft checkouts, BFRs, etc. for Wings as long as they fall into the 3 hourly requirements somehow.

Just getting your IFR is more than enough to qualify for another Wings Phase.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

At our little untowered airport, NOBODY uses call signs. You can identify the visitors - they're the ones using callsigns.

You know what? It works. We recognize voices. My club alone has 5 or 6 Warriors, and the difference in voices discriminates them pretty well.

On those occasions where we need to know exactly who is where, we use "#2 for landing", "#2 on downwind" or something like that.

The only time that it gets confusing is when there are two people in the cockpit and both are transmitting. The change of voice can lead you to thinking there are multiple planes. In those cases, we generally ask a question and it gets resolved.

I'm not even sure that "Skylane" vs. "Skyhawk" helps much. At pattern distances, all I can see is high-wing or low-wing.

Saying too little or saying too much, most errors like the omission of Type & call sign eventually cause problems.

 

[SkyHog]

hmm....funny on the y'all thing. Out here in New Mexico, as far as I can gather, "you" is singular, and "y'all" is plural. "All y'all" is redundant. Sounds like another crazy Texasism, much like "All y'all New Mexicans have taken more than your quota of water from the Mighty Rio Grande. You owe us more water than a 10 foot mule drinks at a 6 foot watering hole."

"Y'all're" to me is like "You all are," much like "y'all" is "you all" to me.

 

[DoubleD]

y'all is singular.

Thread creep here, but surely you jest. Y'all is plural, and only a Yankee would think otherwise. "All y'all" is sometimes used for emphasis.

 

[mikea]

I suspect that you can also identify the visitors as the ones completely in the dark about who's who in the pattern. Your voice recognition method may work well for you, but it stinks for anyone not all that familiar with the resident voices.

Not only that but local "customs" like the Young Eagles rally doing a right hand pattern while the rest of us go the usual left traffic to same runway. When I asked why they were on the wrong side (Gee, do ya think I should try to blend in?) I didn't get an answer. I made left traffic and WATCHED carefully for any planes coming head on on base.

If we all know what each other sounds like I guess that nobody new better show up and ruin everything at that PUBLIC airport.

 

[poadeleted3]

Thread creep here, but surely you jest. Y'all is plural, and only a Yankee would think otherwise. "All y'all" is sometimes used for emphasis.

Y'all is plural.

Y'all is also singular.

And I'm surely no Yankee.

As for the original post, I won't use the 45 if I'm approaching from the far side of the airport. I don't like overflying the airport and having to turn back. Too much turning in a high traffic area, and too much chance of losing the airport. I will enter on either the upwind or crosswind, depending on the direction I'm approaching from.

And I HATE the new fad of using just "Cessna" or "Piper" or whatever in the pattern. I've been in a pattern with 5 152s and a couple Skyhawks all calling "Cessna is (fill in the blank.) Bunch of talk, no communication cause you couldn't tell who was doing what. "Cessna 4LP" or "Skyhawk 4LP" at least lets you differentiate who is saying what, and if you've figured out who all is in the pattern. With the exceptions of NORDOs and deaf pilots, of course.

 

[poadeleted20]

Not only that but local "customs" like the Young Eagles rally doing a right hand pattern while the rest of us go the usual left traffic to same runway.

I'd like to see how they explain that "custom" in the face of 14 CFR 91.126(b)(1).

 

[Rudy]

Hey Rudy, you sounded good on the radio today.

Tom's radio in the TriPacer died after he took off, so that's why he couldn't hear me (or you). I had him in sight all the way to LLU and landed after he did.

Oh, and we both used the "crossing midfield entry to downwind" method at LLU. Most folks around here do it that way when approaching the airfield from the upwind direction.

Thanks!
I am glad that you were there to let me know where he was for sure!
We had a nice flight, it was an awesome day to be up, only .7 for me because i had to work this afternoon, but anytime i can fly is great.

I cross mid field a lot and enter downwind too, it seems like quite a few others do as well.

 

[Don Jones]

I'd like to see how they explain that "custom" in the face of 14 CFR 91.126(b)(1).

When the Navy was here at LRU last spring they did exactly that, flew right traffic while civilians flew left. It actually worked out pretty well. If there was a conflict the RDO would send the Bearcat around and let the civilian land. It made it a little easier to blend in with the much faster Bearcats as well.
Don

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Not only that but local "customs" like the Young Eagles rally doing a right hand pattern while the rest of us go the usual left traffic to same runway. When I asked why they were on the wrong side (Gee, do ya think I should try to blend in?) I didn't get an answer. I made left traffic and WATCHED carefully for any planes coming head on on base.

If we all know what each other sounds like I guess that nobody new better show up and ruin everything at that PUBLIC airport.

Whoa ! Who came up with that one ???

 

[spiderweb]

LOL--more fun with traffic patterns. Let me add some favorites:

Always land straight-in out of an IFR approach (in nice VMC), because that's what you were doing, so that's what you're doing. Sure, it can work, and is even a good idea at times, but not always. I almost had a head on on the runway with a knucklehead practcing an NDB approach and then, instead of missing, deciding to land with a 10 or 15 knot tailwind--while I was still rolling out on the runway in the opposite direction. We had heard him calling several times, and we called several times that we were landing into the wind. As he was just beginning his flare (and I was making an emergency turn towards the grass), my request finally registered that he please not run into me, and he went around.

Another one: "Cessna XXXX is 5 DME out on the GPS Alpha." Where are you? LOL--I thought I'd be more tolerant of that one once I got my IR, but if it is good VMC and you have VFR guys in the pattern (or IR guys flying VFR) they might not know what you mean.

Wait--that's not the worst IFR in VMC callout transgression. The best one I have heard was "Cessna XXXX is circling." Period. LOL!! That's helpful!