Why have we not switched to an oval pattern?

M

MountainDude

Cleared for Takeoff
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
1,018
Display Name
Display name:
MountainDude
Here is some more info added after the initial post:
- the main advantage of the oval pattern is low bank angles and earlier turn towards final, both of which reduce the risk of a stall
- oval patterns still have all legs except the base and crosswind. However, you can still call them while you are making the long 180 turn
- oval patterns still have downwind and same entries as the current one. You simply turn continuously from downwind to final.
- there is still a final. You don't have to start your base turn while abeam the numbers and complete the turn right over the runway. Start making the turn where you would normally make your base turn; by the time you complete it, there will be 1/4 mile final still there

Oval pattern should save many lives. Stall-spins in the pattern are responsible for many fatal accidents, and oval patterns reduce the risk, without any downsides.
Here is a recent article on the pattern stall-spins:
https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to...idents-happen-the-most-often-in-flight-phase/

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Why would oval patterns save lives? The article you posted doesn't mention them at all.

Ron Wanttaja
 
It's a lot harder to identify where you are in the pattern? Harder to communicate entry points or where you are to others in the pattern or inbound traffic? Plain and simple "this is the way it's been done for years" bias?

As far as how oval pattern saving lives, how? I don't understand that logic.

ETA: I guess Ron already beat me to that question!
 
I fly a Lancair with its corresponding higher stall speeds, greater pattern speeds and generally unforgiving nature in a slow phase of flight. On the Lancair forum changing to a continuous turn (as in doing it today regardless of the AIM) from downwind to final has been advocated by some including, I think, the leading Lancair flight training organization.
 
I guess I'm missing the point as to why an oval pattern would be safer? All things that you can do wrong in a square pattern can happen in an oval pattern.
 
Not necessarily advocating it myself, but the argument might be that an oval pattern would involve one gentler turn rather than two steeper turns at the corners.

Depending on the type of airplane and the visibility it affords, a brief, straight-and-level base leg might give a better opportunity to observe traffic on final.
 
kaiser said:
I don't like Oval pattern. On the base I need to at least level the wings and look up final (I make sure no one is coming down the pipe), then turn down final.

Just fly the appropriate speeds.
Click to expand...


In a high wing, you can lose sight of the runway while banked.

(Just one more good reason to fly low wings like the good Lord intended.)
 
123AB enter a 1 mile oval pattern for runway 2. Would any heading between 050° and 200°work or is the instruction enter the oval pattern on a heading of 090° the proper instruction?

Would an oval pattern would reduce accidents during lower visibility night conditions?

What would an oval pattern do for mid air accident statistics?
 
Other than the purposeful use of the slip in different situations, why is the concept of coordinated flight at low speeds such a difficult concept to master in the pattern?
 
What makes you think I'm not flying oval patterns already? That is, when I don't do a straight in approach.

Did you consider that oval patterns are contrary to a stabilized approach? You want to be aligned and stable on final, not in a rounding turn to approach the runway.
 
bflynn said:
Did you consider that oval patterns are contrary to a stabilized approach. You want to be aligned and stable on final, not in a rounding turn to approach the runway.
Click to expand...
For us WW2 pilots, it's recommended to fly a curved approach as our huge 1900hp engines block forward view at high AOAs. You try flying a straight in to the short field at Tatsinskaya after a harrowing bombing run on Stalingrad in a FW190, you'll understand.
 
bflynn said:
What makes you think I'm not flying oval patterns already? That is, when I don't do a straight in approach.

Did you consider that oval patterns are contrary to a stabilized approach? You want to be aligned and stable on final, not in a rounding turn to approach the runway.
Click to expand...


Well, you could be in a stable descending turn that terminates on the runway, couldn’t you? But it’s more difficult.
 
full time blind spot.... look at the recent mid air of the war birds in Dallas
periodically check your belly!
 
bflynn said:
What makes you think I'm not flying oval patterns already? That is, when I don't do a straight in approach.

Did you consider that oval patterns are contrary to a stabilized approach? You want to be aligned and stable on final, not in a rounding turn to approach the runway.
Click to expand...

The oval pattern does not end the downwind-to-final turn over the runway. If you extend your downwind 1/4 mile (just like we do today), then you will have a 1/4 mile final.
 
Brad W said:
full time blind spot.... look at the recent mid air of the war birds in Dallas
periodically check your belly!
Click to expand...
Yeah, good point - on a left base at my untowered airfield I always check to my right to see if there are any hotshots in their Mooneys making a straight-in approach. A continuous curved approach would make this difficult, especially in a low wing.
 
Half Fast said:
Well, you could be in a stable descending turn that terminates on the runway, couldn’t you? But it’s more difficult.
Click to expand...

The oval pattern does not end the downwind-to-final turn over the runway. If you extend your downwind 1/4 mile (just like we do today), then you will have a 1/4 mile final.
 
Echoing others, when I first heard of the concept several years ago, my initial impressions were, "why would it be safer to not roll out on base and look to verify there is no one presenting a conflict on final or get a good view of the path to final in a high wing?" I still haven't heard a good answer to that.

I'm also a believer that base is where most any pilot can most easily see the path to final and make corrections (even with no flight instruments to look at). I even teach it as the key point for an engine out landing. I'm not sure why I would want to take away practicing that view as a standard.
 
I can see one downside to oval patterns...initial training. Students have enough trouble figuring out the approach path with a straight final; asking them to learn how to do it on a curved approach is a bit much, especially with a high-winged aircraft. Yes, they can fly a curved approach to a one-mile final, but don't see how that's helping the general situation.

The classic stall/spin scenario is a pilot tightening his or her turn to final due to an overshoot. Seems like an oval approach would have the same situation.

As I've posted before, the base-to-final turn stall-spin scenario isn't the most prevalent in the homebuilt accidents I've looked at...about twice as many stall accidents happen on the initial climb or go-around. Don't see an oval pattern helping.

Ron Wanttaja
 
MountainDude said:
You can always level the wings for a moment to take a look. It's easy, since your bank angle is always small.
Click to expand...
Honestly, my rectangular patterns as such that the base distance is just big enough so that I can level my wings - look down final and ensure it's clear - and turn final. I might take an extra 1/2 second to set flaps, based on the airframe. No reason to be further from the airport than that.
 
Stabilizing to straight and level makes for much easier analysis of the current wind conditions, in addition to being better for students. Not interested in your oval.
 
Half Fast said:
Well, it’s simpler to apply flaps and to reduce airspeed in straight flight than in a bank. It’s easier to train a student to do one thing at a time.
Click to expand...

You just configure before you start the turn.
 
Pinecone said:
You just configure before you start the turn.
Click to expand...

Oh, are you one of the pilots that like to put all the flaps in at once? I'd read before starting training that some pilots put them in incrementally like I learned, but some like to just dump them all in and I've always wanted to talk to someone who does that and ask about it.
 
My daughter would complain that most my normal landings look like a power off 180…so I probably fly oval patterns as well…to much time flying these from the Backseat…
upload_2023-1-9_10-49-7.gif
 
SkyChaser said:
Oh, are you one of the pilots that like to put all the flaps in at once? I'd read before starting training that some pilots put them in incrementally like I learned, but some like to just dump them all in and I've always wanted to talk to someone who does that and ask about it.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it's training to be unnaturally slow on the theory that it's easier and safer and less work. But then you wind up going to another airport where you are the broken wheel doing 60 on downwind when everyone else is 90-100. Just the opposite annoyance to the HP driver who doesn't know how to slow down when joining a busy pattern.

Sometimes it's the airplane. Mooneys and Bonanzas have flaps that deploy smoothly and ultimately don't do that much in terms of added drag or pitch change when compared with a 172 or PA28, so some pilots are taught that technique as part of transition training.
 
wanttaja said:
I can see one downside to oval patterns...initial training. Students have enough trouble figuring out the approach path with a straight final; asking them to learn how to do it on a curved approach is a bit much, especially with a high-winged aircraft. Yes, they can fly a curved approach to a one-mile final, but don't see how that's helping the general situation.

The classic stall/spin scenario is a pilot tightening his or her turn to final due to an overshoot. Seems like an oval approach would have the same situation.

As I've posted before, the base-to-final turn stall-spin scenario isn't the most prevalent in the homebuilt accidents I've looked at...about twice as many stall accidents happen on the initial climb or go-around. Don't see an oval pattern helping.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
Agree with all of that. Why do we have to change the pattern shape to keep people from stalling and spinning on the base-to-final turn? Isn't that a training issue, a defect in the pilot's skill level? Dumbing things down to accommodate incompetence doesn't seem wise at all.

Maybe a better, more thorough solution to the stall/spin is to ground all airplanes. No more accidents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top