Straight in entry to the traffic pattern.
- Thread starter gtpilot
- Start date
He would be incorrect.
MikeD says that flying a straight-in is perfectly appropriate, but must be done at proper times and with the same amount of caution that any pattern would involve. With a straight-in, IMO you have more visibility of what's going on all around the airfield. That, and a straight-in can be very convenient depending on how you're approaching the field. Now for the "proper times" part of the equation: I caveat my comments by saying that I'll perform a straight-in at an uncontrolled field if traffic is very light, and if in my judgement, there won't be any undue problem to traffic already around the airport. For instance, if there's only two or three planes in the pattern, comms are good between all persons, etc; then I don't have a problem making life easy for me, or someone else making life easy for themselves. I'm not gonna waste time and fuel at (for example) an airport with no one around (or few around) by maneuvering to enter on a 45. Straight-in will work fine, or overhead break if I feel like flying a pattern or need to check the windsock/tetrahedron. I won't, however, perform a straight-in if there's a ton of traffic tooling around the pattern, where my entry just might conflict with normal flowing final-turn traffic. That's just not a prudent thing to do. In that event, I'll remain at pattern altitude and enter via the overhead break, so I'm clear of all base to final traffic, then break into the appropriate downwind, or carry straight through if that's not possible. If in the beginning I'm not conveniently aligned with the runway, then I wouldn't maneuver for a straight-in, but just enter via the appropriate 45 entry.
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
And you can take that to your IP.
MikeD says that flying a straight-in is perfectly appropriate, but must be done at proper times and with the same amount of caution that any pattern would involve. With a straight-in, IMO you have more visibility of what's going on all around the airfield. That, and a straight-in can be very convenient depending on how you're approaching the field. Now for the "proper times" part of the equation: I caveat my comments by saying that I'll perform a straight-in at an uncontrolled field if traffic is very light, and if in my judgement, there won't be any undue problem to traffic already around the airport. For instance, if there's only two or three planes in the pattern, comms are good between all persons, etc; then I don't have a problem making life easy for me, or someone else making life easy for themselves. I'm not gonna waste time and fuel at (for example) an airport with no one around (or few around) by maneuvering to enter on a 45. Straight-in will work fine, or overhead break if I feel like flying a pattern or need to check the windsock/tetrahedron. I won't, however, perform a straight-in if there's a ton of traffic tooling around the pattern, where my entry just might conflict with normal flowing final-turn traffic. That's just not a prudent thing to do. In that event, I'll remain at pattern altitude and enter via the overhead break, so I'm clear of all base to final traffic, then break into the appropriate downwind, or carry straight through if that's not possible. If in the beginning I'm not conveniently aligned with the runway, then I wouldn't maneuver for a straight-in, but just enter via the appropriate 45 entry.
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
And you can take that to your IP.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
If you're 5 miles out and already lined up with the runway, it doesn't make sense to enter on the downwind. Odds are any other pilots in the pattern will EXPECT you to make a straight in, so making maneuvers to enter the downwind would be worse than the straight in. Also, think about controlled airspace. In this same situation, unless there is a TON of traffic that has to be sequenced, you'll get "cleared straight in" from ATC.
bike21
9-5 Ruins Lives
[ QUOTE ]
However, it is up to you to merge with the traffic already there.
[/ QUOTE ]
[on soapbox]
Yes indeed! Keep this in mind...I have been cutoff way too many times by jack*&ses doing straight-ins and other odd things when myself and others were already well-established in the pattern. I've even been cut off by an instructional flight that entered directly on a base (when there were at least 4 in the pattern already!) Remember, those already in the pattern have the right-of-way....this is not to say I won't extend my downwind to help someone out, but i've seen way too many pilots just keep truckin' in on that straight-in and not care about everybody else. Perhaps i'm a bit jaded from these poor decision makers, but I prefer the good 'ol 45.
I say...straight-ins are only OK when not a soul is in the pattern or when predicated otherwise (instrument approaches, some mountain airports, demonstration for a lesson, etc.) I also disagree with the statement that you can see more on straight-ins.
I teach to execute the standard 45 entry for numerous reasons....
- its expected
- the AIM says to do it (don't tell me its not regulatory)
- i've never cut anyone off by doing so or created a dangerous situation
- leave the straight-ins for IFR traffic
- its a more predictable approach and easier set-up (think about your poor students)
- it allows you to get a better visual on traffic
- whats easier to spot? - a plane wing-up in the pattern or a lone sillouette (sp?) on a long final?
- burn more gas? c'mon most of us rent 'wet' anyway and its only a few extra minutes at most to swing around the airport
....and let me say again that the straight-in is not necessarily evil, but should only be used on rare occasions.
[off soapbox]
Cheers!
However, it is up to you to merge with the traffic already there.
[/ QUOTE ]
[on soapbox]
Yes indeed! Keep this in mind...I have been cutoff way too many times by jack*&ses doing straight-ins and other odd things when myself and others were already well-established in the pattern. I've even been cut off by an instructional flight that entered directly on a base (when there were at least 4 in the pattern already!) Remember, those already in the pattern have the right-of-way....this is not to say I won't extend my downwind to help someone out, but i've seen way too many pilots just keep truckin' in on that straight-in and not care about everybody else. Perhaps i'm a bit jaded from these poor decision makers, but I prefer the good 'ol 45.
I say...straight-ins are only OK when not a soul is in the pattern or when predicated otherwise (instrument approaches, some mountain airports, demonstration for a lesson, etc.) I also disagree with the statement that you can see more on straight-ins.
I teach to execute the standard 45 entry for numerous reasons....
- its expected
- the AIM says to do it (don't tell me its not regulatory)
- i've never cut anyone off by doing so or created a dangerous situation
- leave the straight-ins for IFR traffic
- its a more predictable approach and easier set-up (think about your poor students)
- it allows you to get a better visual on traffic
- whats easier to spot? - a plane wing-up in the pattern or a lone sillouette (sp?) on a long final?
- burn more gas? c'mon most of us rent 'wet' anyway and its only a few extra minutes at most to swing around the airport
....and let me say again that the straight-in is not necessarily evil, but should only be used on rare occasions.
[off soapbox]
Cheers!
[ QUOTE ]
btw - i'm not condeming the straight-in or those who do it, like I say, I exercise this method as well once in awhile. but probably 90% of the time I am heading for the 45
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't go that far, but I generally agree with you. See below:
[quote
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
[/ QUOTE ]
The one limiting factor is "prudent decision making" and "SA", something lacking in far too many pilots tooling around the skies and the traffic patterns of America.
btw - i'm not condeming the straight-in or those who do it, like I say, I exercise this method as well once in awhile. but probably 90% of the time I am heading for the 45
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't go that far, but I generally agree with you. See below:
[quote
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
[/ QUOTE ]
The one limiting factor is "prudent decision making" and "SA", something lacking in far too many pilots tooling around the skies and the traffic patterns of America.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the AIM says to do it (don't tell me its not regulatory)
[/ QUOTE ]
Um, technically it isn't.
[ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]Ah! "The AIM isn't regulatory." #1 of the "Top Three Aviation Regulation Fallacies and Half-Truths"
Go against it and cause a problem and you just might find out the other half.
[ QUOTE ]
the AIM says to do it (don't tell me its not regulatory)
[/ QUOTE ]
Um, technically it isn't.
[ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]Ah! "The AIM isn't regulatory." #1 of the "Top Three Aviation Regulation Fallacies and Half-Truths"
Go against it and cause a problem and you just might find out the other half.
bike21
9-5 Ruins Lives
[ QUOTE ]
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cool cool...keep in mind too that for us (the CFI) it is relatively easy to be in the right seat and assisting our customers in safely completing the straight-in. (or anything else)
Consider that its much harder for them to keep total SA and juggle everything (checklists, setup, decsending, etc) when we are not there to offer assistance/grab an extra radio call to keep things safe.
I always try remember this when I know exactly where every airplane is in the pattern and their tail numbers, but my customer only knows about 2 of them or so.
As a reality check, I like to get out solo once in awhile and remind myself that its not quite as easy as simply observing from the right seat and making wise cracks.
Helps me be more patient in the airplane sometimes!
Point is, there's nothing wrong with a straight-in if exercised with the same prudent decision making and SA that you'd have with any other pattern.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cool cool...keep in mind too that for us (the CFI) it is relatively easy to be in the right seat and assisting our customers in safely completing the straight-in. (or anything else)
Consider that its much harder for them to keep total SA and juggle everything (checklists, setup, decsending, etc) when we are not there to offer assistance/grab an extra radio call to keep things safe.
I always try remember this when I know exactly where every airplane is in the pattern and their tail numbers, but my customer only knows about 2 of them or so.
As a reality check, I like to get out solo once in awhile and remind myself that its not quite as easy as simply observing from the right seat and making wise cracks.
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
I will have to respectfully disagree with those that think that the AIM isn't regulatory. If it isn't, are Advisory Circulars?
Alchemy
Well-Known Member
I taught my students to always do a mid-field flyover at Pattern altitude + 1000 ft, look at the windsock, fly outbound on a 45 for two miles, do a 180, and enter the downwind on the 45. This takes a little more work but I've never had an examiner complain about it.
However, if one day a student got tired of doing this, and asked me why they couldn't just enter the downwind without going out for a 45 if they were in a good position to do so, or even if they could make a straight in, I told them fine, as long as they didn't think it would conflict with traffic.
The point is, if someone takes the time to exercise good judgement I really don't care what kind of pattern entry they make outside of a checkride type environment. On checkrides, I strongly reccomended that they stick to the book since you never know what kind of mood your examiner will be in. That's why we practiced the flyover-45 method most of the time, although it does have it's weanesses....
just my 1.05
However, if one day a student got tired of doing this, and asked me why they couldn't just enter the downwind without going out for a 45 if they were in a good position to do so, or even if they could make a straight in, I told them fine, as long as they didn't think it would conflict with traffic.
The point is, if someone takes the time to exercise good judgement I really don't care what kind of pattern entry they make outside of a checkride type environment. On checkrides, I strongly reccomended that they stick to the book since you never know what kind of mood your examiner will be in. That's why we practiced the flyover-45 method most of the time, although it does have it's weanesses....
just my 1.05
BoilerPilot2007
Well-Known Member
If you enter the pattern on a 45 everytime, you won't be chided at by some for doing it "wrong." So, I teach it that way. 45 entry, every airport, everytime, no matter what the level of traffic.
[ QUOTE ]
If you enter the pattern on a 45 everytime, you won't be chided at by some for doing it "wrong."
[/ QUOTE ]
Just because some may chide you doesn't mean they're right.
[ QUOTE ]
So, I teach it that way. 45 entry, every airport, everytime, no matter what the level of traffic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
If you enter the pattern on a 45 everytime, you won't be chided at by some for doing it "wrong."
[/ QUOTE ]
Just because some may chide you doesn't mean they're right.
[ QUOTE ]
So, I teach it that way. 45 entry, every airport, everytime, no matter what the level of traffic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
[ QUOTE ]
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
[/ QUOTE ]
Im with ya on this Mike. I teach all ways to enter the pattern whether its 45, straight, upside down midfield, backwards, military style, spin entry, etc... and it varies with each airport some of which doing the proper thing can put you in a very bad situation.
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
[/ QUOTE ]
Im with ya on this Mike. I teach all ways to enter the pattern whether its 45, straight, upside down midfield, backwards, military style, spin entry, etc... and it varies with each airport some of which doing the proper thing can put you in a very bad situation.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
[/ QUOTE ]
Im with ya on this Mike. I teach all ways to enter the pattern whether its 45, straight, upside down midfield, backwards, military style, spin entry, etc... and it varies with each airport some of which doing the proper thing can put you in a very bad situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agree. The point is, it's not one size fits all. There's more than one right answer to the traffic pattern concept. It all just depends.
[ QUOTE ]
Not into teaching your studs the concepts of flexibility and judgement?
[/ QUOTE ]
Im with ya on this Mike. I teach all ways to enter the pattern whether its 45, straight, upside down midfield, backwards, military style, spin entry, etc... and it varies with each airport some of which doing the proper thing can put you in a very bad situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agree. The point is, it's not one size fits all. There's more than one right answer to the traffic pattern concept. It all just depends.
gtpilot
Well-Known Member
Had an interesting thing happen today - Fuel started leaking into the cabin onto my arm. To save time, we entered onto a right base directly (normally a left pattern). My student (pre-solo) was initially suprised and had trouble with the pattern but was glad for the experience. It also provided a good opening to discuss the 'regulatory' characteristics of the AIM.
dakovich
Well-Known Member
i agree in what you're saying. you've got to show students more than just the "right" way of doing things. and when i say "right" way, i'm refering to how we as teachers sometimes think our personal way is the only way kind of thing. that "its done this way and no way else" mentality. even if you're totally correct in what you're teaching you've got to teach students to expect the unexpected.
i teach, and require, that they only use the 45 entry during their time with me. but i also teach them what other ways people might and will enter the pattern. just with everything else i teach i always give multiple sides of the story. i give the way i would like to see something performed, what others may want to see (other CFIs, or examiners), and also what they may see other people(other pilots) perform.
i teach, and require, that they only use the 45 entry during their time with me. but i also teach them what other ways people might and will enter the pattern. just with everything else i teach i always give multiple sides of the story. i give the way i would like to see something performed, what others may want to see (other CFIs, or examiners), and also what they may see other people(other pilots) perform.