Every pilot owes their safety and security in some part to the predictable actions of their fellow pilots in flight.
If only for reasons of self-preservation, it is entirely reasonable to conduct yourself as expected.
Certainly, the FAA would like to believe your behavior is a reflection of your respect for its authority and wisdom. And that may be the case. But living to fly another day is an exceptional incentive, too.
I mention this because all too often we encounter behavior in the air that is counter to what we expect, and that injects a level of risk into our aerial activities that is both unnecessary and unappreciated.
Case in point: While preparing to depart my home field to do some pattern work, I pressed the push-to-talk and announce my impending lift-off and my intention to remain in the pattern.
Another pilot called to say he was overflying the field and would enter a “right teardrop for a left downwind” to that same runway.
I didn’t see the other aircraft, but wasn’t particularly concerned as he would be overhead, above pattern altitude, and would depart the pattern to position himself for a 45° entry to a mid-field downwind. At least that was my assumption based on his radio call.
I was wrong.
With a light breeze almost directly on my nose, my lift-off was fine. While I know the numbers for Vy, I climbed at an airspeed slightly higher than best rate of climb. I don’t use that speed all that often, as I prefer a cruise climb when it’s appropriate for improved visibility over the raised nose of the airplane.
At 300 feet below pattern altitude I turned crosswind, then made a downwind turn when I’d moved a sufficient distance from the runway. This put me at pattern altitude flying parallel, but in the opposite direction of the runway in use.
I do these specific things for a very simple reason: The Aeronautical Information Manual tells me to. Specifically, it says: “If remaining in the traffic pattern, commence turn to crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300 feet of pattern altitude.”
As for the definition of the downwind leg, the AIM has this to say: “A flight path parallel to the landing runway in the opposite direction of landing.”
And so it was that while I established myself on the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, things got interesting and considerably less enjoyable.
As I released the push-to-talk after announcing my downwind leg, the airplane that had called just as I began my takeoff roll announced he too was on downwind. That seemed odd. How could he have flown over the airport, left the traffic pattern, descended to pattern altitude, and entered the pattern ahead of me without me seeing him at all?
More curiously, how could he have done all that in the time it took me to climb to pattern altitude?
I called and asked if he had me in sight, thinking he might be behind me. He didn’t. I asked for his altitude and position relative to the airport, since I couldn’t pick him out on the downwind leg ahead of me. He responded that he was at 1,400 feet, descending to 1,000 feet, on the downwind.
Now I was getting worried. I’m flying a high wing airplane at 1,000 feet on downwind. His position report has him above me along the same line of flight, in a low-wing airplane, and he’s descending.
This is not good. My mind ran through a short series of options as I passed mid-field, and then I saw him. He was ahead of me, to my right, beyond the approach end of the runway, and slightly higher than I was. His nose was pointed right at me.
If we’d been landing on Runway 18, my heading would have been approximately 360, give or take a couple degrees for wind correction. That’s the downwind leg of the pattern. His heading was something in the neighborhood of 230°.
“I’ve got you,” I announced on the CTAF. “That’s not the downwind.”
It’s possible my tone of voice revealed my annoyance with the other pilot’s errant position report and remarkably unconventional pattern work.
The other pilot keyed his mike and chuckled in response, “Oh, this isn’t the downwind, huh?”
Then he turned onto a highly modified base leg and continued to land ahead of me.
The other pilot chose to stay in the pattern, so I terminated my flight after landing and watched his performance. His takeoffs were solid, but he turned crosswind at approximately 200 feet, well before reaching the departure end of the runway.
He controlled the airplane well, but he was pioneering a traffic pattern of his own design. That’s not good for any of us.
Downwind is not a state of mind. It’s a position report that indicates a specific location. Like a driver using turn signals to improve safety by communicating his or her intentions to other drivers, the position reports a pilot gives only improve safety if they’re accurate. If they’re not, they actually degrade safety.
This is a clear but unfortunate example of why flight reviews are so critical. Any one of us could fall prey to this same sort of sloppy flying if we let ourselves develop bad habits and continually reinforce them.
We all have lapses of memory and areas of operation we’ve become a little fuzzy about over the years. There is a remedy for that, however.
The AIM is there for any of us to read, anytime. There are CFIs who would be happy to fly with you and help you brush up on your skills and knowledge. That goes for the lowest time sport pilot as well as for the highest time ATP.
The pilot I encountered didn’t do what he’d indicated his intentions were. He wasn’t where he said he was. Worse, he didn’t really seem to care.
But he was flying in the pattern with other traffic. It doesn’t take a genius to see this scenario could easily lead to a very impressive but tragically posthumous ground school lesson in collision avoidance.
I’d prefer to avoid that outcome if at all possible.
The traffic pattern is always a place to keep your head outside. Same as over navaids. Places where other airplanes tend to congregate. We cannot be our brothers keeper, but we can be our own. Very few walk away from a midair collision.
My understanding is Downwind is just that. It runs parallel to the active in the opposite direction. It starts in the pattern when turning from the Crosswind. It finishes when we turn on Base. Most pattern altitudes are flown at 1,000′ agl. What is so difficult about that.
Radio calls are nice and mandated at some airports. What happens when there is a pilot unfamiliar with the field? And we should always take into account NORDO machines. They do exist!
Best to keep your head outside, and have your passengers do the same.
Safe flying.
No room for Cowboys here! Safety an reporting our positions following standard reporting points. Safety is paramount! See an be seen!! So we can all live an fly another day!!
??Capn Bags
For a non-towered system that has worked for me for 50+yrs contact NZ CAA and get a copy of their poster which gives a good pictorial presentation of circuit positions etc.
Amen my Brutha!, Correct position reporting an following standards at uncontrolled fields is paramount for all to see an be seen!!
Bags??
This has been a pet peeve of mine. Pilots not reporting their actual position in the pattern and descending on the downwind leg. I was tought downwind was abeam the numbers I’m landing on. (Cessna 12X down wind tells me exactly where to look). downwind should be announced as such; entering on a 45, turning from crosswind, entering downwind, etc. At least people in the pattern will have an idea where to look. B-52 patterns are a subject for another day.
Descending in the pattern, again, is incredibly dangerous. I was tought, descents begin approximately abeam the numbers you intend to land on not before. Pattern altitudes are published. What is so difficult about all of this?
And, announcing a position is not permission. Uncontrolled airports are exactly that. Aircraft with no radios share the same airports. If you see something, get it out there.
Stu, Is the third line maybe a typo? Color me ignorant, but I thought “Downwind” was anywhere along the line, parallel and opposite direction of landing. Such as, “midfield downwind rwy 30”. I have always considered myself on down wind anytime after turning off of the crosswind leg. I do, however, stand ready to learn and be better.
Tim, If you think about it, the leg is the down wind leg the position is down wind when you get to the end of the leg. In my example abeam the numbers you plan to land on or when you begin the base turn. If I announce I’m down wind, where would you look?
Thank you for your response and clarifying your point of view. I guess I have to admit in response to your query, that I would start looking someplace about midfield. While I do see your point of view as technically correct, in the regard that you are downwind (of the airport) at the point abeam or just past the numbers. However, were a person follow the same logic in announcing their position, they would not announce “final Rny XX” until they were on the ground.
I may be doing it wrong, but I announce as I am entering the various legs, not as I am about to leave one. Normally entering on the 45, that will be announced as “midfield, down wind, Rwy XX”. If I happen to be doing pattern work, which is rare, I would announce announce as soon as I turned off of cross wind onto “the downwind Rny XX”.
The discussion has helped me to see that not everyone is on the same page, as far as announcing their position. I need to be more descriptive of my position, so that I am not misunderstood.
You have gotten my curiosity up. I will do a bit of polling in my conversations with fellow pilots and get a bit of consensus and hopefully learn to be a better pilot.
Thank you for your point of view.
Tim
The AIM’s guidelines are clearly to call entering each leg (see Table 4-1-1 and Traffic Pattern in the glossary). This should better allow resolutions between aircraft leaving the crosswind and entering on the 45, between entering base and an aircraft on final, and between one entering final and one entering the runway. The downwind is not a specific point but a leg that extends from the crosswind leg to the base leg. The sooner we know of another’s position the better. If unable to call when entering a leg, it may be prudent to add more information. Calling at the end of the leg (esp final which would be in the flare) caught my attention too.
Part of the point of making the call as you turn is your aircraft is far easier to see in a turn.
Tim,
Position reporting is all about accuracy and standardization. Entering down wind is specific. Add to that where, mid field, upwind or crosswind. Down wind is abeam the approach end, base is within gliding distance of the runway, for light singles. Turning final and short final are all specific points, or places for other pilots to look. If there is a vague reporting place its where the base leg is initiated. That depend on the pilot. As I noted earlier, I believe it to be within gliding distance of the runway for the little stuff we fly. Straight in approaches are for lazy and inconsiderate people especially when there is a lot of activity. Entering on a base is ok if the airport is not busy as it gives an opportunity to look for others in the pattern. It’s all just simple rules of the road and being a little considerate.
I too always announced, as taught, when entering the leg. Abeam the numbers on downwind leg was when I pulled back the throttle to the appropriate rpm and set up for downwind to final.
Correction please. Downwind to base not crosswind.
We have all had these incidents, no way avoid it. You can hope everyone follows conventional wisdom and the rules but that is a hope based on fantasy. I fly the pattern most times to most airports, almost always fly the pattern 99.99% of the time at uncontrolled airports to be consistent and hopefully be where people will look. But we all make mistakes from time to time so we all must be looking outside as much as we can.
The only time I have been close to a midair was at a weekend busy non towered near my home field.
One incident involved a restored B17 with no radio. The guy literally flew across the approach end of the runway from a half pattern altitude climbing and turning. I didn’t see him under me as I descended to pattern altitude on approach and then suddenly he appeared on my right flying away from the airfield. My radio calls either not responded to by him, or he had no radio.
One of the worst ‘stupid pilot tricks’ is the guy who crosses midfield at pattern altitude (supposed to be pattern plus 500 feet) and ‘drops’ into the pattern at a 90 degree angle trying to beat the traffic to the base turn. Or that same guy who enters the pattern on the base leg from elsewhere once again trying to beat traffic on the downwind.
In AOPA’s Safety Advisor, Operations at Nontowered Airports, the midfield entry from the upwind leg side of the airport at pattern altitude is mentioned as an option as long as you “yield to the preferred 45 degree and downwind traffic, then turn downwind”.
This is actually the only approved entry in Canada for non-towered or non-MF airports. Nothing scarier than than an N numbered aircraft making 45 degree entries up here with no one understanding what they are doing. Moral of the story is to read up on the procedures applicable to where you are flying and follow them.
I’m from Canada and noted that as the biggest difference: here the standard arrival at non-towered airports is to descend on the upwind side, then cross midfield at circuit “pattern” altitude and join downwind at 90 degrees… There are some aspects I like better about each of them, but as noted the main thing is that everyone is on the same page.
Check the most recent version of the FAA “Airplane Flying Handbook” 2017 chapter 7 page 5. You will see the FAA shows the 45 entry to the downwind and the midfield crosswind as acceptable ways to enter the pattern. We can argue all day about who likes which one best but there is no argument that the FAA is publishing both.
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/media/09_afh_ch7.pdf
Also AC90-66A was recently cancelled and replaced with AC90-66B which includes substantial updating in its content and also now includes the same diagram you mentioned is found in the Airplane Flying Handbook.
The scary thing is I would be willing to bet every one of us has experienced multiple examples of other pilots creating an unsafe situation, most by either arrogance or lack of common sense.
One example is we had 4 aircraft giving Young Eagle rides taking off on 05. A sky diving plane was up, an CFI and student pilot and a few others thrown in for good measure. Busy Saturday morning.
Then some guy calls he is shooting a practice ILS on 23, straight in! Gets about a mile away and calls he is doing a missed approach and proceeds to fly at pattern altitude opposite every other aircraft.
This a perfectly legal thing to do. Its called “circle to land” and is accomplished at the MDA for the circling approach. Happens all the time when there are limited approaches to a particular airport. See and Avoid!
It may be technically legal, but in VMC it is blatantly unsafe, thoughtless and stupid!
Pilots operating actual or simulated IFR at an uncontrolled airport have absolutely no priority over pilots operating VFR at that airport (unless in “emergency” condition). So pilots operating VFR in VMC at that airport can reasonably expect that ALL traffic (including simulated AND ACTUAL IFR traffic) will not descend below published traffic pattern altitude until reaching an appropriate position in traffic pattern relative to landing runway.
If a pilot is flying actual or simulated IFR instrument approach in VMC to “circle to land” minimums that are below published traffic pattern altitude, that pilot should adopt the published traffic pattern altitude as “circle to land” minimums for this approach, break off the approach early enough to join the current traffic pattern without potentially disrupting aircraft already established in the traffic pattern, and make turns to conform to the published turn-direction for that traffic pattern.
If you need to fly an approach to “circle-to-land” minimums that are below TPA, go find an uncontrolled airfield with appropriate approach that is NOT a beehive of activity (there are plenty around every metropolis if you are willing to fly 50NM each way as part of your IFR training or proficiency flying); or request it at a controlled airport!
Jeff said he did a missed approach, not a circle to land.
Jeff thinks we should keep our heads on a swivel and expect the unexpected.
As you say, the AIM is just a recommendation. To be accepted or rejected by each. If I don’t always follow each and every recommendation I guess I don’t have any right to get upset when a fellow aviator chooses to do so also.
Such as the fellow that entered the pattern at or about the same time as you.
I hate to tell you Jeff but the AIM, as well as Advisory Circulars and other FAA publications which specifically say they are “Advisory in Nature” have been upheld in Courts and other venues as gospel. If it says it, you’d better do it. Most times, it doesn’t matter but get in a bind and … the outcome won’t be in your favor.
I always fly the pattern (VFR) even if I am the only plane in the pattern. One might miss another
aircraft without an electric system in the pattern. If I see someone deviating from the normal
pattern I always assume they are having some kind of emergency. Be flexible and give them room,
it is better than being dead right.
This column brings up a topic that’s been festering in me for some time. About a month ago I had a similar incident with a dumb ass making a straight in approach at KMRY. This clown offered to give me a lesson on FAR’s. After landing I approached the jerk thinking perhaps he was new to the area and hoping to share information on the airport traffic pattern. I got the same results you did! A total lack of understanding common safety practices that put us both at risk.
I was flying with a student pilot and suggested to him that no one is totally useless, they could always be used as a bad example!! I mention the airport in hope that this person might read the column and responses and improve his outlook on safety and common courtesy.
According to AC90-66A, straight-in approaches are not prohibited but may be operationally advantageous. The only caveat is the straight-in pilot should maneuver and execute the straight-in approach without disrupting the flow of traffic in the pattern. It adds that pilots in the pattern should be alert for straight-in approaches.
In other words, the pilot accepts a very large responsibility for S & A, and 100% of the liability for barging into the pattern in a non standard entry?
John, What do you mean by ‘S & A’? I didn’t want to guess and a pilot friend didn’t know either. Thanks.
“See and Avoid”
Thank you. I suggest John read AC90-66A. These are comments taken directly from it – not an opinion.
I had a similar incident.
I was flying back to an airport making announcements starting at about 8nm out stating location altitude and intent to enter a 45 to downwind to the pattern. The airport was fairly busy, but by the time I got there, there were only 3 aircraft in the pattern besides me. I thought my timing was pretty lucky as I was about 4 miles outside of the downwind one aircraft announced they were on final for full stop, 1 aircraft was on downwind announcing that they would taxi back for spacing and a CAP 182 was on base. I started my 45 in and decided I would most likely end up behind the CAP aircraft and made the necessary radio calls. Just before 3 miles from the runway the CAP airplane calls they are now on downwind. Except they weren’t. They flew right in front of my nose at 3 miles from the runway. I stated I guess I would follow the CAP on the wide downwind and turned in to stay behind them. Except that did not end the issues and the CAP aircraft was about 200 feet below pattern altitude at midfield and was flying at 70 knots on the downwind. Something you do not expect a 182 to be doing. So I had to S turn to stay behind them and after flying a ridiculous 3 mile pattern I gladly landed.
I went to speak to the CAP pilot after the flight and said “that was a pretty big and slow pattern out there huh?” He stated that it was fine he was letting the kid fly the plane and didn’t see any issue with it, besides we were all watching out for him. I just walked away as I felt talking to him more wasn’t going to me anywhere in making him consider he may have been doing something unsafe.
Long story short keep your eyeballs peeled, don’t trust in the radio, and try your best to follow standard procedures.
Jay, I agree with you but there are those on this thread who will insist vehemently that a radio is absolutely essential to safe flight yet we can see from the examples sited that the radio is useless as a position reporting tool unless the pilot is reporting his position accurately and according to some recognized standard terminology. In the traffic pattern at uncontrolled airports it’s essential to LOOK OUTSIDE while you fly a traffic pattern that is conventional and expected by others in the area at the same time.
My home field is uncontrolled and at one time or another Ive seen all the scenarios described here. Let’s face it, there are inconsiderate, ignorant, inexperienced pilots out there and you have to see them to avoid them. The radio is part of the collision avoidance tool kit but it does not guarantee anything. As long as NORDO ops are legal and some airports are uncontrolled the reality is SEE AND AVOID and standard operating procedures are essential. Having said that there are days, when no one else is talking in the area, that I’ve been known to do an overhead approach to land just for fun but my head is outside the cockpit all the time while doing this, looking for the NORDO traffic, or the guy who isnt talking just because he doesn’t have to. To some that would put me in the arrogant, inconsiderate idiot category. If so, guilty as charged.
What about on a 10,000 foot runway in a high climb rate airplane? Are we still expected to not turn to cross wind before we reach the departure end of the runway?
What if we are behind some Yahoo that does not turn cross wind until he is a mile past the departure end of the runway? Are we to simply string the pattern out until it counts as a cross country flight?
Or do we cut in front of him and risk raising his ire?
Good point Jeff, but I am always amazed by the pilots that don’t turn base until they are so far from the end of the runway that there is no way they could make it back if they had any kind of engine trouble.
It just seems like common sense to keep it close at both ends.
Questions like these are exactly why the AIM shares recommended procedures, not regulatory requirements. There is no way to make a rule that fits all airports in all places at all times. But we’re not talking about a 10,000 foot runway in a high climb rate airplane. And we’re not talking about a Yahoo who doesn’t turn crosswind until he’s a mile past the departure end of the runway.
There are exceptions to every rule and ever recommendation. But they are exceptions. The conditions and recommendations discussed here reflect normal operations under normal conditions without any need to invoke exceptions.
Given that, what do you think, Jeff? Should we follow the AIM under normal conditions, or disregard it in all cases because it isn’t universally applicable?