Turning Base

[Huckster79]

As the OP I wanted to add one point. I am not discussing towered airports or airports with 10 aircraft in the pattern. My observation of huge patterns is at uncontrolled airports with just me and the other aircraft in the pattern. Now and then there might be a third aircraft. I am pondering just turning a proper base and landing ahead of them as it will have zero effect on their pattern.

yea do your best to coordinate, like others said may upset some, let them know you feel u will be no factor

 

[David Megginson]

Sure, it can be done safely. The bigger challenge is convincing the pilot ahead that you're not "cutting them off".

There's one case where cutting in ahead of someone else in the circuit is always a bad idea. Once, when I was just inside 1/2 mile final, a helicopter doing sightseeing runs cut in ahead of me, flew a 1/4 mile approach to the runway, then cut off sideways to land on the apron. That meant an automatic go-around for me, because the rotorwash from even a small heli can have the same effect as wake turbulence from a sizeable plane.

 

[whifferdill]

There's one case where cutting in ahead of someone else in the circuit is always a bad idea. Once, when I was just inside 1/2 mile final, a helicopter doing sightseeing runs cut in ahead of me, flew a 1/4 mile approach to the runway, then cut off sideways to land on the apron.

Cutting in front of an airplane established on final is illegal per 91.113(g). In no way did I advocate that. I specifically described turning base to final inside of an airplane flying a XC downwind.

 

[David Megginson]

Just out of curiosity, I did a bit of arithmetic (which I may well have gotten wrong, since I studied Medieval literature, not math, in university). Let's assume no crosswind, and that you wanted to turn 180 deg after takeoff to a 1/2 downwind without exceeding a rate one turn. What's your maximum speed?

The circumference of a circle is 2 * pi * r, but we want only a 180 deg arc, so we need half of that distance:

pi * r =~ 3.14 * 0.25 =~ 0.8

It takes one minute to finish half of a rate-one turn, so -- unless I've totally screwed up my grade-eight geometry (which wouldn't surprise me) -- you need to be flying at a maximum true airspeed of about 0.8 miles/minute, or 48 knots (or mph, depending on which kind of mile you're using) to complete a 1/2 mile wide 180 deg turn in still air without out exceeding rate one.

Even near sea level, that's too slow a climb speed for, say, a PA-28 or C172, though it would be fine for a Cub or similar.

It could work if you chose a steeper turn near sea level, or if there were a strong crosswind blowing the right direction, but I think a downwind 3/4 mile from the runway is probably the closest practical distance for typical Cessnas, Pipers, etc near sea level, and further at higher density altitudes.

 

[PaulS]

Just out of curiosity, I did a bit of arithmetic (which I may well have gotten wrong, since I studied Medieval literature, not math, in university). Let's assume no crosswind, and that you wanted to turn 180 deg after takeoff to a 1/2 downwind without exceeding a rate one turn. What's your maximum speed?

The circumference of a circle is 2 * pi * r, but we want only a 180 deg arc, so we need half of that distance:

pi * r =~ 3.14 * 0.25 =~ 0.8

It takes one minute to finish half of a rate-one turn, so -- unless I've totally screwed up my grade-eight geometry (which wouldn't surprise me) -- you need to be flying at a maximum true airspeed of about 0.8 miles/minute, or 48 knots (or mph, depending on which kind of mile you're using) to complete a 1/2 mile wide 180 deg turn in still air without out exceeding rate one.

Even near sea level, that's too slow a climb speed for, say, a PA-28 or C172, though it would be fine for a Cub or similar.

It could work if you chose a steeper turn near sea level, or if there were a strong crosswind blowing the right direction, but I think a downwind 3/4 mile from the runway is probably the closest practical distance for typical Cessnas, Pipers, etc near sea level, and further at higher density altitudes.

Yes, that is the problem. If you are flying a 50 knot pattern 1/2 mile probably works, if your flying at 90 or 100 knots, then 1/2 mile doesn't work unless you use excessive banks.

 

[brcase]

David M. got me wondering. My initial thought is 3/4 mile is about the widest pattern I like and I don't recommend standard rate turns in the pattern.

I teach about 20-30 degree banks turn normally so I will average to 25 degree bank turn. The online turn radius calculator I found says at 75 kts this is .176nm Radius. So If I just did a 25 degree bank turn from departure to downwind I would .352 nm from the runway. But I teach about a 3-5 second straight section between turns to clear your blind spots behind the wing and look for traffic. So lets say 5 seconds straight head at 75 kts, get .104nm so it appears the math would show I normally fly my downwind at .352+.104 = .456 nm or 1/2nm.

My other thought was a C-172 will glide about 1.5 miles per 1000 feet. So if I turn that calculation around and fly my base and final the same way power off. I show that turning 180 degrees with a .176 radius circle I will fly .55 nm plus my .104nm straight base leg has me flying .65 nm to line up with the runway. I calculate that in theory if I was 1000ft on downwind and neglected any reduction in glide ratio I would be turning final at 670 feet at best. This also assumes no crosswind that could be a headwind or a tailwind on base.

Just curious at 3/4 miles with standard rate turns. I show the bank angle at 12 degrees at 75kts, the turn radius is .386nm. To compliment David's calculations with no straight crosswind leg this would put me on downwind at .772nm. The distance flown I show as 1.21 nm meaning we would be lining up with the runway at 200 feet, again at best.

I find most people tend to turn final about 400 feet. My Ideal number of turning final at 670ft seems pretty good to me as it will account for additional losses due to the turning, crosswinds, in an emergency just recognizing it is an emergency. I suspect the actual turning to final number being 400-500 feet , once I have the runway made I can then add flaps, or slip as necessary. It also accounts for I might not be in the ideal position turn and line up with the runway. Since this uses pretty much my normal approach, The emergency/power off procedure mimics my motto of "make your emergency as normal as possible"

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[RussR]

Cutting in front of an airplane established on final is illegal per 91.113(g). In no way did I advocate that. I specifically described turning base to final inside of an airplane flying a XC downwind.

I realize that this is a side issue to your point, but that's not what 91.113(g) says. It says that the aircraft on final has the right-of-way. It does not say that nobody else can land before that airplane. Right-of-way is about preference IF there is a chance of one airplane delaying the other. If I'm on final, and you can "cut in front" and land without delaying me in any way, you haven't violated my right-of-way and therefore haven't violated 91.113.

Heck, I've had ATC intentionally sequence me in front of airplanes on final. Not short final, granted, but an instrument final approach in a 172 can take 5 minutes if it's windy.

 

[The-Flying-Lawyer]

They used to teach "pull the power at the numbers, and manage your energy so you can make it to the runway". That fell out of favor at least twenty years ago. Maybe longer.
I do agree that very long finals are a "thing" lately.
Maybe it's a stabilized approach thing? "This is what a stabilized approach looks and feels like. Now let's try to shorten it a little every time we fly it?"
Any instructors want to chime in?

Fairly recent pilot here (2013). My primary training and my club instructors have generally approached this somewhere in between those two extremes. Establish your stabilized descent starting at the numbers (reduce power, flaps, etc.). Once that descent is established, start the turn to base.

My primary way to control the length of my final is the shape of the base turn itself. If it takes me awhile to get the descent established or I've a got strong tailwind (on downwind), I'll fly more of a "boxy" turn to base. Otherwise, I'll use a more gradual turn such that I'm wings-level on the base leg for just a few seconds to check for traffic, adjust flaps, trim, etc. on that step. Either way, I'm using the numbers as a reference point and trying to arrive on the glideslope when I roll onto final. I hate feeling like I'm out of gliding range, so the objective is always to stay as close to the airport as I can without setting myself up for an excessive sink rate or bank angle.

This is what works for me/it depends on the aircraft/yada, yada, yada...

 

[Witmo]

Yes, that is the problem. If you are flying a 50 knot pattern 1/2 mile probably works, if your flying at 90 or 100 knots, then 1/2 mile doesn't work unless you use excessive banks.

At 100k, a standard rate turn (aka rate one or 3 degrees per second) only requires about 16 degrees of bank and yields a turn radius of 3000 ft give or take. So a 100k standard rate turn for one minute will put you 1 mile away (2x3000) from where you started the turn (no wind) going the opposite direction. Increase the bank angle to 30 degrees (not excessive in my book), fly the course reversal and end up just over .5 miles from where you started turn.

 

[Witmo]

I realize that this is a side issue to your point, but that's not what 91.113(g) says. It says that the aircraft on final has the right-of-way. It does not say that nobody else can land before that airplane. Right-of-way is about preference IF there is a chance of one airplane delaying the other. If I'm on final, and you can "cut in front" and land without delaying me in any way, you haven't violated my right-of-way and therefore haven't violated 91.113.

Heck, I've had ATC intentionally sequence me in front of airplanes on final. Not short final, granted, but an instrument final approach in a 172 can take 5 minutes if it's windy.

Just yesterday I heard a Cirrus call "short final" at least 3 miles from the end of the runway at a non-towered field. 3 miles might be short final for a 777, but a Cirrus?

 

[PaulS]

At 100k, a standard rate turn (aka rate one or 3 degrees per second) only requires about 16 degrees of bank and yields a turn radius of 1500 ft give or take. So a 100k standard rate turn for one minute will put you half a mile away (2x1500) from where you started the turn (no wind) going the operation direction. Increase the bank angle to 30 degrees (not excessive in my book) allows you to roll wings level mid way thru the turn, visually clear the downwind, finish the course reversal and still end up .5 miles from where you started turn.

Not doing the math myself, but this guy did it, and it seems line with what I surmised.

Radius of Standard and Non-Standard Rate Turns – Airplane Academy

For a standard rate turn at 100 knots, the radius of the turn is about 0.55 nautical miles. If you just continually turn without a base leg, you will need to be 1.1 nautical miles from the runway CL on downwind to end up on the CL on final. This is without wind, which will affect the distance.

 

[whifferdill]

I realize that this is a side issue to your point, but that's not what 91.113(g) says. It says that the aircraft on final has the right-of-way. It does not say that nobody else can land before that airplane. Right-of-way is about preference IF there is a chance of one airplane delaying the other.

I noted it in the context of the poster who said he had a helo land in front of him while he was on a 1/2 mile final, which caused him to have to go around. The reg applies in that case.

 

[Witmo]

Forgot to hit a button on my calculator on an earlier post so I edited it to correct the numbers. The point I was trying to make is questioning why pilots limit themselves to a standard rate turn in a vfr pattern? At 100 knots, that's only around 16 degrees of bank. I don't do 4G turns in the pattern (anymore) but I don't consider 30 degrees of bank "excessive." I tow gliders and usually use 15-20 degrees of bank and always think to myself how slow a standard rate turn is outside of instrument conditions.

 

[PaulS]

Forgot to hit a button on my calculator on an earlier post so I edited it to correct the numbers. The point I was trying to make is questioning why pilots limit themselves to a standard rate turn in a vfr pattern? At 100 knots, that's only around 16 degrees of bank. I don't do 4G turns in the pattern (anymore) but I don't consider 30 degrees of bank "excessive." I tow gliders and usually use 15-20 degrees of bank and always think to myself how slow a standard rate turn is outside of instrument conditions.

I think there are enough base to final stall spin accidents to warrant caution on turns in the patterns. You sound like an expert pilot who can handle it, which is fine. Most of us GA pilots are not, although many probably think they are, which is a big problem. The thing about stuff like this is that a run of mill pilot can get away with doing something beyond his skill level many times, but with things like pattern turn accidents, the first time it gets screwed up is usually the last.

I remember my first flight review a long time ago, I was turning in the pattern, and my instructor said to me, "ahhhh, getting pretty steep banks on those turns, that's going to bite you in the ass one day." I decided I didn't need to be a hot shot, standard rate works fine for me now, no need to save 5 seconds in a turn. I do regularly practice steep turns at altitude, they don't bother me in the least, but in the pattern, 20 degrees is plenty for me. YMMV.

 

[Jeff767]

20 AOB is a 2/10’s of a mile turn radius. It’s fine and you can fly a very reasonable pattern. What I see is way beyond that.

 

[David Megginson]

Certainly true that at a slower speed, you can exceed rate one without a steep bank angle. Vy for my PA-28-161 is 79 KIAS (80 KCAS) at max gross, which needs only about a 13° bank for rate one (add a couple of degrees if I'm climbing at 90 kt for better engine cooling).

I think a standard rate turn is still a good reference, though, because it leaves a little room for a steeper bank if the wind is blowing away from the runway, and/or you're flying a plane with higher wing loading and faster climb. So, assuming we want student pilots (especially) to limit themselves to ≤ 20° bank angles in the circuit, ¾ nm from the runway still seems like a reasonable minimum distance for the downwind, unless you're flying from a short grass strip with biplanes, Cubs, etc.

It's not a question of what experienced pilots can do closer to the edge of their envelopes. Sure, I can comfortably turn my PA-28-161 downwind well inside ½ nm, I can pull power to idle abeam the threshold and do a tight 180° glide to a landing and (on a good day) make the first turnoff a few hundred feet down the runway when I land, and I'll take it for granted that everyone else in this thread can do those kinds of pilot tricks as well. But we need a circuit/pattern that normal pilots (including students) can fly in normal flight regimes, even on their not-so-good days.

 

[Lindberg]

I noted it in the context of the poster who said he had a helo land in front of him while he was on a 1/2 mile final, which caused him to have to go around. The reg applies in that case.

I've "cut people off" before when flying a glider. Hopefully every pilot knows that gliders have right of way over airplanes, but some seem to think that if they're in the pattern first, they are good to go. I'll try to be reasonable with spacing and give airplanes room to land and exit the runway, but if they're going to fly a bomber pattern, then I'm just going to turn in, and they may see the glider sitting on the runway when they turn final.

 

[PaulS]

And I'm not saying I won't exceed 20 in a pattern turn, but if I do, I do it consciously, not as a matter of routine. There was an accident last year where one of these youtube bush guys was milling along slowly in a low pattern then turned too steeply for his speed. It took him a year to heal, it happens.

 

[Jeff767]

Just to be clear he pulled to much G for his speed. Bank angle has zero to do with stall speed.

 

[BrianNC]

Just to be clear he pulled to much G for his speed. Bank angle has zero to do with stall speed.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

At the "puppy mills", you often have 12 to 15 airplanes in the pattern. You can't fly a tight pattern with that many airplanes in it.

I tried this a few months ago and was told by a harried controller that the next landing would be a full stop.

 

[David Megginson]

Bank angle has zero to do with stall speed.

Technically, you're correct, except that if you don't increase your AoA in a steep bank on the turn from takeoff to crosswind or the turn from crosswind to downwind, you'll start descending (which is generally considered bad manners at that point in the circuit/pattern), so it's more of an academic point than a practical one.

 

[PaulS]

I tried this a few months ago and was told by a harried controller that the next landing would be a full stop.

Ask, you have to ask, at least around here. "Bugsmasher 123, requesting short approach."

 

[Witmo]

Just to be clear he pulled to much G for his speed. Bank angle has zero to do with stall speed.

I have to disagree that "bank angle has zero to do with stall speed." Bank angle is not exclusively tied to stall speed but neither is G or speed by themselves. It's unlikely you're going to increase wing loading over 1 G in the pattern in wings level flight. Pilots commonly stall in the final turn--they think they're safe because they are faster than the wing's level, unaccelerated stall speed for their configuration. Unfortunately, the unaccelerated stall speed is irrelevant when you increase the load factor by banking and pulling. Every POH I can remember has a table of stall speeds at various bank angles along with the load factor for level turns. Poor pilots use too much bank and try to slow their sink rate or square their turn by pulling harder, thus reaching and exceeding the critical AoA at a much faster speed than they realized possible. The more likely scenario is the pilot who overshoots final and banks steeply and pulls too hard--the result is the same, an accelerated stall.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Ask, you have to ask, at least around here. "Bugsmasher 123, requesting short approach."

Haha. Yes, but it was a normal approach by any reasonable standard other than the pilots being trained to fly 747 patterns at a local class D.

 

[Daleandee]

Poor pilots use too much bank and try to slow their sink rate or square their turn by pulling harder, thus reaching and exceeding the critical AoA at a much faster speed than they realized possible.

I have a LRI (Lift Reserve Indicator) and find it quite useful.

Admittedly on a landing yesterday the crosswind pushed me a bit wide for the final approach. So I just stayed with the coordinated turn a bit longer.

The way my panel is designed I have a great reference for when I'm in a 30º bank.

I had an instructor that would have us do some pretty steep banks when doing engine out practice. He made me understand that proper speed and coordination are paramount and that the airplane doesn't know if it's at 5000' or 500' when it's in a turn but it knows when it's slow and uncoordinated ...

 

[FastEddieB]

Poor pilots use too much bank...

Really poor pilots use too little bank, and end up subconsciously making up for it by rushing the turn with rudder.

Unfortunately, it can be a reflex that traps good pilots as well, and that’s where the real stall/spin danger lies.

 

[Deelee]

I was thinking of this thread yesterday as I crossed midfield, teardrop-ed in to the pattern, flew a little too close of a downwind leg due to wind, then called base 2 final at exactly 45* (go ahead, use a protractor), corrected a bit (again, wind) to get established on a 1 mile final, fought off some swirling crosswinds (from both sides at times!) and greased the landing in front of a bunch of Bonanza and Cirri at KMTV. The awed diners at Suzanne's Cafe rushed out to the ramp to see who was behind such a masterful execution of aviation. After I shut down, I was mobbed by onlookers asking for my autograph.

This pattern was flow so perfectly, they gave me a free cheeseburger and tea and nailed my picture up on the wall of heroes. After I departed, I could still hear the spectators on the ramp chanting my name.

Lessons: 1. Don't fly wide patterns. chicks dig tight patterns. 2. This will rekindle a massive debate over the safety of the teardrop. FYI nobody got hurt as a result of this yesterday. 3. Yeah, it wasn't as perfect as it felt... the wind blew me a little close on the downwind initially... 5. I'm sure i will now get 234 posts critiquing this pattern. go for it. I don't care because - 4. Suzanne's Cafe at MTV has amazing cheeseburgers... they put cheese on top of the burger, then put the bacon on and THEN put cheese on top of the BACON! Thanks to @RDUPilot for the recommendation.

 

[David Megginson]

Really poor pilots use too little bank, and end up subconsciously making up for it by rushing the turn with rudder.

Unfortunately, it can be a reflex that traps good pilots as well, and that’s where the real stall/spin danger lies.

Well, both, actually. We get stall-spins from skidded turns, where the pilot unintentionally uses inside rudder to try to keep from banking steeply, and we get stall-spins from steep turns, where the pilot unintentionally pulls back to try to keep from descending too fast.

There are two solutions we need to use together:

• keep working on pilot training and awareness
• don't put pilots in situations where they feel pressured to make tight turns in the first place

 

[Fearless Tower]

I was thinking of this thread yesterday as I crossed midfield, teardrop-ed in to the pattern, flew a little too close of a downwind leg due to wind, then called base 2 final at exactly 45* (go ahead, use a protractor), corrected a bit (again, wind) to get established on a 1 mile final, fought off some swirling crosswinds (from both sides at times!) and greased the landing in front of a bunch of Bonanza and Cirri at KMTV. The awed diners at Suzanne's Cafe rushed out to the ramp to see who was behind such a masterful execution of aviation. After I shut down, I was mobbed by onlookers asking for my autograph.

This pattern was flow so perfectly, they gave me a free cheeseburger and tea and nailed my picture up on the wall of heroes. After I departed, I could still hear the spectators on the ramp chanting my name.

Lessons: 1. Don't fly wide patterns. chicks dig tight patterns. 2. This will rekindle a massive debate over the safety of the teardrop. FYI nobody got hurt as a result of this yesterday. 3. Yeah, it wasn't as perfect as it felt... the wind blew me a little close on the downwind initially... 5. I'm sure i will now get 234 posts critiquing this pattern. go for it. I don't care because - 4. Suzanne's Cafe at MTV has amazing cheeseburgers... they put cheese on top of the burger, then put the bacon on and THEN put cheese on top of the BACON! Thanks to @RDUPilot for the recommendation.

View attachment 92669

The restaurant at MTV is open again???

 

[Deelee]

The restaurant at MTV is open again???

Yep. Was pretty crowded (in a socially distant sort of way). Couple guys with a v-tail, a Bo with tips and the nicest paint job I have ever seen... some Cirri, the usual 172s... yeah it was jumpin.

 

[Dana]

I was thinking of this thread yesterday as I crossed midfield, teardrop-ed in to the pattern, flew a little too close of a downwind leg due to wind, then called base 2 final...

What if somebody was flying an overly wide downwind as you were on the upwind or crosswind portion of the teardrop?

 

[Bill]

Really poor pilots use too little bank, and end up subconsciously making up for it by rushing the turn with top rudder

I did an intro to acro course and the instructor had me simulate this at altitude. Got the plane nice and slow, and did the base to final rudder thing. Holy crap, that inside wing dropped like a rock and spin city.

Do that once and you realize you’re dead meat if that happens at pattern altitude.

 

[FastEddieB]

I did an intro to acro course and the instructor had me simulate this at altitude. Got the plane nice and slow, and did the base to final rudder thing.

I would do this with all my students - a cross-control stall. The point was they should not be alone in the plane the first time it happens. As I was.

Hopefully instill in them that very fast forward stick and opposite rudder will work to stop rotation, where one’s natural reflexes will not.

 

[MBDiagMan]

I was thinking of this thread yesterday as I crossed midfield, teardrop-ed in to the pattern, flew a little too close of a downwind leg due to wind, then called base 2 final at exactly 45* (go ahead, use a protractor), corrected a bit (again, wind) to get established on a 1 mile final, fought off some swirling crosswinds (from both sides at times!) and greased the landing in front of a bunch of Bonanza and Cirri at KMTV. The awed diners at Suzanne's Cafe rushed out to the ramp to see who was behind such a masterful execution of aviation. After I shut down, I was mobbed by onlookers asking for my autograph.

This pattern was flow so perfectly, they gave me a free cheeseburger and tea and nailed my picture up on the wall of heroes. After I departed, I could still hear the spectators on the ramp chanting my name.

Lessons: 1. Don't fly wide patterns. chicks dig tight patterns. 2. This will rekindle a massive debate over the safety of the teardrop. FYI nobody got hurt as a result of this yesterday. 3. Yeah, it wasn't as perfect as it felt... the wind blew me a little close on the downwind initially... 5. I'm sure i will now get 234 posts critiquing this pattern. go for it. I don't care because - 4. Suzanne's Cafe at MTV has amazing cheeseburgers... they put cheese on top of the burger, then put the bacon on and THEN put cheese on top of the BACON! Thanks to @RDUPilot for the recommendation.

View attachment 92669

Those accolades are impressive. They begin to approach the level given us tailwheel pilots. Gets to be a real hassle sometimes fighting off such a massive crowd of bikinied blondes.

 

[David Megginson]

What if somebody was flying an overly wide downwind as you were on the upwind or crosswind portion of the teardrop?

I don't entirely understand what the original poster did, but crossing midfield is the standard circuit entry in Canada. Here's how it works:

• We don't have two different circuit/pattern altitudes in Canada; it's just 1,000 ft AGL for everyone.
• If you're arriving from the active side, you remain 500 ft above circuit altitude until you've crossed the runway to the inactive side, then descend to circuit altitude and turn 180 deg.
• You want to be flying perpendicular to the downwind before you get back to the runway. That way, you see the whole circuit/pattern across your windshield at once.
• You make an "overhead the field" call, then turn and join mid downwind.
• If someone's already in the downwind and potentially in conflict, you turn a bit and slip in behind or ahead of them, as appropriate (remember, you've been watching the whole circuit/pattern across your windshield since at least a mile on the other side of the runway, so you have a good idea what's going on even without listening to radio calls).

I personally find the American 45 deg entry a bit scary (slowing converging with other traffic that might be hidden at my 5:00 or 7:00), but in the end, it's probably just a matter of what you're used to. Nearly all midairs in the circuit/pattern happen on base and final, not downwind or entry, so I doubt there's a measurable safety difference between the two entry styles.

 

[Domenick]

If using a standard rate turn for both base and final, how far from the runway must one start? Say base turn at 80 kts, final at 70 kts.
Personally, my downwind separation distance is too short for much of a base leg. In general I combine base and final turns into a single 180.

 

[FastEddieB]

Personally, standard rate seems like an awfully slow rate-of-turn in the pattern.

 

[Dana]

At my home field the prevailing winds are usually out of the southwest favoring runway 17 and pushing aircraft away from the runway, so my crosswind is usually only the briefest wings level to look for traffic before turning downwind, and a longer straight portion on base because my groundspeed is lower. But a biplane presents extra challenges to visibility. OTOH, 30-45° or even more bank angle is not unusual... biplanes have so much drag I'm well above stall speed until short final.

 

[AlphaMike]

I don't entirely understand what the original poster did, but crossing midfield is the standard circuit entry in Canada. Here's how it works:

• We don't have two different circuit/pattern altitudes in Canada; it's just 1,000 ft AGL for everyone.
• If you're arriving from the active side, you remain 500 ft above circuit altitude until you've crossed the runway to the inactive side, then descend to circuit altitude and turn 180 deg.
• You want to be flying perpendicular to the downwind before you get back to the runway. That way, you see the whole circuit/pattern across your windshield at once.
• You make an "overhead the field" call, then turn and join mid downwind.
• If someone's already in the downwind and potentially in conflict, you turn a bit and slip in behind or ahead of them, as appropriate (remember, you've been watching the whole circuit/pattern across your windshield since at least a mile on the other side of the runway, so you have a good idea what's going on even without listening to radio calls).

I personally find the American 45 deg entry a bit scary (slowing converging with other traffic that might be hidden at my 5:00 or 7:00), but in the end, it's probably just a matter of what you're used to. Nearly all midairs in the circuit/pattern happen on base and final, not downwind or entry, so I doubt there's a measurable safety difference between the two entry styles.

Question. Do you have separate pattern altitudes for turbine vs light aircraft in Canada? Here, 500 ft above my circuit altitude has me crossing right in front of a King Air on downwind. That’s the part I never understood about the whole cross at 500ft above entry.