Upwind leg of Traffic Pattern
- Thread starter Trip7
- Start date
Pilot Hopeful
Well-Known Member
If safety is not an issue, why not comply with AIM guidelines and climb to 300' below TPA? Perhaps such a practice might convince other pilots and instructors to adopt the change and underscore the importance of following recommended procedures.
Practically speaking, 500' AGL might be sufficient, as might 400' AGL or even 300' AGL. However, instructing students to comply with values not supported by the AIM could be problematic and could convey a sense of carelessness or disregard for official recommendations.
As instructors, we must be careful of how our students might interpret any action. If they see that climbing to only 500' AGL saves time, they might be tempted to save time by also forgoing proper pattern entry techniques or omitting certain checklists deemed unnecessary.
Remember, the AIM provides standard operating practices intended to enhance the safety of flight. I prefer to comply with such guidelines at the expense of flight efficiency.
KQ7
Well-Known Member
What about entry into non standard traffic patterns?
flyboy6585
Well-Known Member
The AIM isn't regulatory in nature. Therefore if you want you can turn x-wind at 500 feet. Just as where you enter the pattern is advisory. I am not saying that we, as pilots, shouldn't follow the AIM, just that you don't have to follow it.
tgrayson
New Member
That's only semi-true. The behavior set forth in the AIM has been used in enforcement actions as the standard for safe, prudent, competent pilot behavior. There will have to be some underlying regulatory violation, but 91.13 is pretty much a catch-all. If you were to make an early turn and were involved in a near miss with a properly behaving aircraft on the 45, an FAA Inspector would have a good case for instigating a violation.
Trip7
Well-Known Member
Just wondering, how would FAA Inspector know you turned too soon? Or if you flew 100 feet below a cloud?
tgrayson
New Member
First, the odds are probably remote. However, enforcement actions have been upheld via testimony from people on the ground in other situations, if the NTSB thought the witnesses reliable.
At higher altitudes, an IFR may report a VFR aircraft that presented a collision risk due to unsafe proximity to clouds.
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
i've been calling the departure leg per the aim the 'upwind' leg as long as i can remember at local airports where it's where i know it's more commonly used. reason being, i feel that it's perhaps more important that i'm locally understood than technically correct with this particular verbiage. i would, however, concede that the aim is the more correct source of information. student pilots often screw-up their atc communications, but i always stress that it will improve with time. the important thing is to be understood. if atc doesn't understand the reply, they're required by far's to query the pilot and vice versa.
I think the reason "departure leg" lost out to "upwind" is because saying "departure leg" doesn't linguistically flow very well.
"Blah Traffic, Cessna 12345 climbing departure runway 12"
or
"Blah traffic, Cessna 12345 climbing upwind runway 12"
it just flows a little better. The word "departure" has a less specific meaning than "upwind" has, therefore "upwind" is a better word to describe that leg.
If I were the FAA, I'd change the AIM so the departure leg now is called the upwind leg, and whats called the upwind leg now, I'd call it the "parallel leg" or something.
"Blah Traffic, Cessna 12345 climbing departure runway 12"
or
"Blah traffic, Cessna 12345 climbing upwind runway 12"
it just flows a little better. The word "departure" has a less specific meaning than "upwind" has, therefore "upwind" is a better word to describe that leg.
If I were the FAA, I'd change the AIM so the departure leg now is called the upwind leg, and whats called the upwind leg now, I'd call it the "parallel leg" or something.
tgrayson
New Member
Doesn't this become a self-fulfilling prophecy? We do it the old way because people don't understand the new way, and people don't understand the new way because everyone is doing it the old way.
My view is that instructors should be leaders of the aviation community. When new techniques, new recommendations, new procedures or new data become available, instructors should be the first to adopt and adapt, acting as missionaries to the pilots we influence. How can we ask our students to change when we are unwilling to do so?
caliginousface
Frank N. Beans
What I teach is "Dough Traffic, Cessna 333 departing 14, left closed traffic, Dough." And we wont make another call until turning crosswind.
tgrayson
New Member
Can your theory also explain why we continue to call a "Flight Review" a "BFR", even though it hasn't been called a "Biennial" Flight Review in about ten years?
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
:yeahthat:
None of my students call the departure leg the 'upwind leg.'
Perhaps if I touch enough students phraseology, and other CFI's train proper phraseology, the trend will have changed in another 20 years. Just because we don't see immendiate results doesn't mean we dont impact the culture
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
Huh? Flows better?
Are you looking to be the Don Juan, the cunning linguist of the air?
I disagree that the words have less specific meaning, they are clearly defined. One is more commonly misused than the other and that leads to common misinterpretation - just like the phrase "any other traffic please advise." See the aim about that one too....
Anyway at least you have a suggestion about changing the name of the departure leg to something else and not disagree with the fact they are two seperate defined legs
Huh? Flows better?
Are you looking to be the Don Juan, the cunning linguist of the air?
I disagree that the words have less specific meaning, they are clearly defined.
Imagine if the FAA people decided to rename the "final" leg of the traffic pattern to the "landing" leg. Do you agree it would cause confusion if someone said "Blah traffic, cessna 12345, six miles on landing"? "Landing" already has a specefiv aviation meaning; same for "departure". I believe legs of the traffic pattern should have unique names, so when you make a call saying you're on whichever leg, people will know exactly which leg you're on without any confusion.
Honestly, what does "departure leg" have going for it other than the simple fact that it simply says so in the AIM? It's certainly not a less ambiguous term than "upwind", it's not shorter to say, nor is it widely used.
I believe the AIM should follow pilots, not the other way around, at least when it comes to things like phraseology. Why is "departure leg" even there? Did some FAA employee just make it up one day in the 1930's when the AIM was written? (or whichever stupid decade the AIM was written.) Was it at one time the common term pilots used, and therefore the AIM has it in there to reflect that fact? If so, then they need to change it...
The only time phraseology is ever a safety issue, is when everyone is using different phraseology. In this case, everyone is using different phraseology, and it's all the AIM's fault. Basically, you have 98% of the flying public calling that leg the "upwind" leg, and the other two percent using "departure". Why is the FAA trying to change the 98%, when they can just easily rewrite the AIM to "upwind"? It makes no sense to me.
Kind of like the quote from 777Forever that I used to make my sig..."Adjust or get left behind"
Are you kidding me? Really? Then again anyone that says "Stupid Decade" I really don't give much credit to their opinion on regulatory matters...
All I know is when I'm flying a traffic pattern and someone says they are upwind I'm looking somewhere completely different then the departure leg.
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
Which is what the FAA needs to do with that part of the AIM. They either need to adjust what that leg is called, or get left behind (which has already happened)
Then you must have some difficulty flying traffic patterns. I've been flying since 2003 and I have never ONCE heard anyone call the "departure leg" anything but "upwind". And trust me, I've flown to my fair share of uncontrolled airfields.