pattern entry

5hrsit

5hrsit

Well-Known Member
A question arose when an applicant was taking a commercial checkride. The AIM recommends entering the traffic pattern at a 45 degree angle to the left downwind of the intended landing runway.

What if you are already set up on a 4 or 5 mile final and there is no one else in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport?

What about flying over the airport 500 feet above pattern altitude and maneuvering "flying a teardrop" to enter at the 45 degree angle to the left downwind?

It must also be mentioned that at this flight school we were always tought from the first flight of PP, that we should enter at the 45 degree to the left downwind. But as a commercial pilot, we are now instructed to get to the airport as fast as possible as to not waste your comapny's time or money.

The examiner stated that overflying the airport and maneuvering was an unexpected and dangerous maneuver. Any thoughts?
 
I'm fairly inexperienced, but I am of the following opinion: In an uncontrolled field, you need to make a SAFE approach...whether its a midfield crosswind entry from the opposite side of the field, a downwind 45 entry, or a straight in approach it should be accepted as long as its safe and not invasive to other traffic.
 
Not to hijack, but I'll throw in another question.

If you're approaching the field in a such a way that the downwind leg is on the "opposite" side of the runway, what is the best way to enter?

1. Fly directly over the the field at TPA and execute a turn to establish yourself on downwind. (This seems like it could conflict with traffic).

2. Enter the upwind leg using a traditional 45-degree entry, and simply fly the whole pattern.

3. Deviate around the entire field, and establish yourself on a downwind using the traditional 45-degree entry.

As a private pilot, I should probably know this, but can't say I've ever run into this situation.
 
danpilot775pd said:
A question arose when an applicant was taking a commercial checkride. The AIM recommends entering the traffic pattern at a 45 degree angle to the left downwind of the intended landing runway.

What if you are already set up on a 4 or 5 mile final and there is no one else in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport?

What about flying over the airport 500 feet above pattern altitude and maneuvering "flying a teardrop" to enter at the 45 degree angle to the left downwind?

It must also be mentioned that at this flight school we were always tought from the first flight of PP, that we should enter at the 45 degree to the left downwind. But as a commercial pilot, we are now instructed to get to the airport as fast as possible as to not waste your comapny's time or money.

The examiner stated that overflying the airport and maneuvering was an unexpected and dangerous maneuver. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I don't see how overflying could be a "dangerous maneuver" permitting you were 500 feet above the field at the time you overflew. AFAIK, it's safe to fly straight in, as long as you have cleared the area for traffic, keeping in mind that there could be an airplane operating without a radio.

Holocene said:
Not to hijack, but I'll throw in another question.

If you're approaching the field in a such a way that the downwind leg is on the "opposite" side of the runway, what is the best way to enter?

1. Fly directly over the the field at TPA and execute a turn to establish yourself on downwind. (This seems like it could conflict with traffic).

2. Enter the upwind leg using a traditional 45-degree entry, and simply fly the whole pattern.

3. Deviate around the entire field, and establish yourself on a downwind using the traditional 45-degree entry.

As a private pilot, I should probably know this, but can't say I've ever run into this situation.
Click to expand...

Overfly at 500 feet, once past the traffic pattern decend to TPA make a tear drop entry to the pattern. That's probably the most simple method...
 
juxtapilot said:
I don't see how overflying could be a "dangerous maneuver" permitting you were 500 feet above the field at the time you overflew. AFAIK, it's safe to fly straight in, as long as you have cleared the area for traffic, keeping in mind that there could be an airplane operating without a radio.



Overfly at 500 feet, once past the traffic pattern decend to TPA make a tear drop entry to the pattern. That's probably the most simple method...
Click to expand...

did you mean 500' above the Traffic pattern altitude, instead? That would seem to make sense.
 
danpilot775pd said:
A question arose when an applicant was taking a commercial checkride. The AIM recommends entering the traffic pattern at a 45 degree angle to the left downwind of the intended landing runway.

What if you are already set up on a 4 or 5 mile final and there is no one else in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport?

What about flying over the airport 500 feet above pattern altitude and maneuvering "flying a teardrop" to enter at the 45 degree angle to the left downwind?

It must also be mentioned that at this flight school we were always tought from the first flight of PP, that we should enter at the 45 degree to the left downwind. But as a commercial pilot, we are now instructed to get to the airport as fast as possible as to not waste your comapny's time or money.

The examiner stated that overflying the airport and maneuvering was an unexpected and dangerous maneuver. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

straight in approaches are a sticky subject, i'm not going to say i don't ever do them, but I always try to fly a full patern when possible. The airports I fly at there is a lot of cubs/champs and stuff like that and they don't have radios, so I try to be nice about it.

I personally can't stand the teardrop entry. I fly midfield crosswind at pattern altitude, and turn directly into a downwind. This is the way my dad taught me, and his dad taught him and so on. I know flight schools love the 1500 teardrop back to a 45, but they get an extra .1 on the hobbs for it. Also, i personally don't believe in entering the pattern at the same altitude that all the turboprops and jets are at. I used to teach my students both teardrop and the direct crosswind entry, but I told them if I was them do the direct.
 
NJA_Capt said:
The ASF recommends 2000AGL if you are using the xover/270 to enter the 45. If you cross at +500 that puts you at the pattern altitude for twins and turbine aircraft.

If you are using the "alternate" entry, you cross midfield at pattern altitude.

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/sa08.pdf
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

This is the way that I was taught and taught it to my students for the most part. The airport where I instructed at was wedged in between three class D airports. The traffic pattern altititude was 500ft AGL to remain in uncontrolled airspace to allow traffic to fly over the airport into the class D airports. The "cross over the field at 2000 AGL and tear drop for the 45 degree angle" would not work at this airport. We had to cross midfield at the pattern altitude and turn left downwind. So I would say that it's a case by case situation.

Some Feds would get on to you about flying the straight in approach at some uncontrolled airports. My company recommends atleast a modified base leg.
 
If there's nobody in the pattern, a straight in is a completely safe and acceptable pattern.
 
NJA_Capt said:
If you are using the "alternate" entry, you cross midfield at pattern altitude. http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/sa08.pdf
Click to expand...

Since the ASF is not an FAA entity, their opinion isn't any more significant in my eyes than a random pilot's. Unless the "alternate entry" is endorsed by the FAA, I won't use or teach it. The AIM only recommends the 45 entry, but AC 90-66A allows a straight in as long as the aircraft gives way to other aircraft in the pattern.
 
tgrayson said:
Since the ASF is not an FAA entity, their opinion isn't any more significant in my eyes than a random pilot's.
Click to expand...

I found that article well thought out and think it'd be a great teaching reference. Just as several articles by Wally Roberts aren't necessarily regulatory in nature, they're very well examined and executed.
 
tgrayson said:
Since the ASF is not an FAA entity, their opinion isn't any more significant in my eyes than a random pilot's. Unless the "alternate entry" is endorsed by the FAA, I won't use or teach it. The AIM only recommends the 45 entry, but AC 90-66A allows a straight in as long as the aircraft gives way to other aircraft in the pattern.
Click to expand...


he's got a good point, look in the far/aim. it's very vague so don't let anyone tell you your doing something wrong
 
I'm all for straight-ins. If you feel sheepish about it, just say you're doing a practice ILS.

The Canadians teach the midfield crossover at pattern altitude. I use it at a field where there is so much activity in the area (from gliders to jets to rotorcraft to singles flying the practice ILS opposite to the active runway) that you don't want to take any chances or waste any time. This entry yields the quickest route to the runway, and if there's traffic on downwind, you can see it at once and accommodate it easily.

I wish the AIM would incorporate this entry, but even if they never do, you're making a left turn, so it's legal.
 
I usually teach my students to make the following call at an uncontrolled field: "XYZ traffic, Cessna 12345, 10 miles out for straight in runway XX, traffic permitting". That way, if there are a few people in the pattern, then we'll enter the correct way.

Jtsastre
 
If you feel sheepish about it, just say you're doing a practice ILS
Click to expand...

Seriously, how hard is it and how long does it take to do a standard recommended entry vs. all the shortcuts people are talking about. Do the AIM recommended entry and all is solved. Everybody knows where you are coming from and everybody gets in...and you waste maybe 2-3 minutes (at most) and avoid swapping paint (at least).
jtsastre said:
I usually teach my students to make the following call at an uncontrolled field: "XYZ traffic, Cessna 12345, 10 miles out for straight in runway XX, traffic permitting". That way, if there are a few people in the pattern, then we'll enter the correct way.

Jtsastre
Click to expand...
What does that tell you about your entry when you say, if there are people out there, then "we'll enter the correct way"?
 
2cents.....as mentioned above, if no one is in the pattern I don't see why not. If there is traffic in the pattern make the appropriate maneuvers to ensure separation and conform with the field pattern procedures (an extended upwind entry for example if you're on the approach end).
 
I don't think there is a "correct way" to enter a pattern. There are wrong ways, and there are illegal ways, and there are ways that violate rights of way. But, the way that the AIM recommends is just that: a recommendation. By the way, that recommendation actually violates the only FAR on the subject: that all turns have to be made to the left. Try that while you're doing an entry on the 45.

The alternatives are not about saving time, they're about safety. The Canadian entry is not only the most efficient, it's also likely to be the safest, as it minimizes descents and maneuvering in the vicinity of the pattern area. That's especially helpful where large or turbine aircraft are doing patterns at the recommended 1500 AGL. Now there's another not very brilliant recommendation for you from the AIM: having different pattern altitudes for different powerplants operating at similar speeds....
 
PDC said:
But, the way that the AIM recommends is just that: a recommendation.
Click to expand...

Don't take the fact that it's a "recommendation" too seriously; the FAA could use AIM "recommendations" in enforcement actions to demonstrate a violation of 14 CFR 91.13, Careless or Reckless operation of an aircraft. And they have.

they're about safety.
Click to expand...
Safety is about adhering to a standard, regardless of whether it's optimal (for you) or not. If I'm expecting you to enter the pattern on a 45 and instead, you're doing some more efficient (for you) but unexpected, you're compromising the safety of both of us.

Pilots that are aware of proper procedures and follow them, no matter how inconvenient, impress me with their self-discipline, professionalism, and attention to detail. Those who disdain proper procedures, or are ignorant of them, suggest to me that they apply the same carelessness to all aspects of their flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top