Although you may find this hard to believe, I am wrong from time to time. Don’t be alarmed. It was a shock to me too when I first realized that I was indeed fallible.
Of course, this just puts puts me in the same category as you, and everyone else you or I know. We’re all wrong from time to time.
Thankfully, my personal superpower is this: I know I’m occasionally wrong and so I remain on guard for that possibility. That simple act of consideration makes all the difference.
This realization is somewhat comical in that it affects all of us. There really isn’t a reason to point out that I’m wrong now and then, or that you’re wrong now and then, except that much of the world’s population conducts itself as they couldn’t possibly be wrong. Maybe not ever. But certainly not about the particular point at hand, whatever that may be, whether the individuals involved have any real understanding of the issue or not.
When we stumble into the delusion that what we believe to be true is actually true, and that we know it is true because we fervently believe it be true…well, I think you can see where this is going. Nowhere.
If your primary reference is your own vision, you’re going to be a victim of hubris far more often than you wish might be possible.
History gives us a multitude of examples of this human tendency to insist on our rightness, no matter how evident our wrongness. Christopher Columbus comes to mind. He believed he’d found India, when he had in fact found the Bahamas. A careful review of the situation verifies that Nassau and Mumbai are in fact, 8,784 miles apart.
In the late 19th Century the brass at Western Union looked into their crystal ball and made the unfortunate decision not to invest in Alexander Graham Bell’s somewhat odd invention on the grounds that the telephone had too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. Oops.
Then there was that time Jason Schappert of MzeroA and I were doing pattern work in a Piper Cub off Runway 5, only to find a much bigger, heavier, higher-performance airplane going head-to-head with us to land on Runway 23. The same piece of pavement we were using, pointed in the opposite direction.
Yeah, pilots are as prone to being as wrong as anyone else. The regulations clearly say that we’re responsible to be familiar with all the information pertinent to the flight we’re making. But are we? Real life experience and oodles of video recordings tell a different story.
The first step in this particular chain of error is the mistaken belief that airports shown on VFR charts in magenta are uncontrolled. That’s not true. They are non-towered airports. Non-towered airports are absolutely, incontrovertibly, 100% without a doubt, NOT uncontrolled airports. They are very much controlled by FAA regulation, FAA recommendation, and the understanding of pilots in control of aircraft.
In the case Jason and I encountered, the airport we were at operates with a left hand traffic pattern. The first error on the part of the other pilot may well have been the assumption that non-towered equates to uncontrolled. Ergo, a pilot can fly any old pattern they want, any time they want. Left hand pattern, right hand pattern, straight in approach. Whatever, whenever, it’s all good.
No, it’s not all good. It’s actually shockingly dangerous.
Knowing that mid-air collisions are most likely to occur in good VFR conditions in the traffic pattern should wake up those who choose to disregard the standard practices designed to keep us safe. But they do not.
Why?
No traffic pattern can be managed safely if everyone who is using it decides on a whim that they’re going to depart from the standard pattern to enter from where ever they want, fly in any direction they want, and disregard the actions of other aircraft entering, leaving, or remaining in the pattern.
That erosion of safety is just as serious if only some of those operating in the pattern choose to go all wonky on us and fly their own personal dipsy-doodle pattern. In fact, if even one pilot decides to go their own way, regardless of all the documentation and training provided to prevent that exact action, we all bear a greater risk. That’s true on the ground as much as it is in the air.
Part of the reason flight reviews are required every 24 calendar months is that pilots, like all humans, develop bad habits over time. We forget things. We become lax in our methods. The flight review is a great gift in that sense. It gives us the opportunity to fly with someone who can help us identify and correct our weaknesses. Yes, we all have weak areas that need attention now and then.
As humans and as pilots, the biggest misconception of all may well be the steadfast belief that the other guy is doing it wrong. Of course we’re doing it right, because we know we’re right, because this is the way we do it, and we do it the right way…more or less.
Doing things the right way, the expected way, the responsible way, may take a bit more time now and then. It might even be downright inconvenient at times. But there is a reason for the standard operating procedures we’re encouraged to adopt.
Perhaps not all of us see that clearly in advance of the bad thing happening. Unfortunately, the lesson only becomes all too obvious right after we swap paint with another aircraft at altitude. And at that point, it’s really too late to change our ways.
Just today, I’m sitting at home listening on the scanner to the high volume of traffic coming in to a nearby, popular airport diner. Every few seconds someone is calling in left downwind or left base Runway 16.
Then, some guy calls in right downwind and right base for 16. WTH!! Left pattern is clearly publish. 20 other guys have just called in making left pattern for 16. Why does he think it’s okay to fly a right pattern in all that traffic? Captain Oblivious?
I’ve been flying for 51 years. Sad fact. That will never change.
Funny (almost) how some aircraft types are branded by pilots through fairly consistent behaviors by some of their owners.
Bonanzas were thought to be pretty hot and, owing to their cost, were popular with upper-income pilots. The “fork-tail doctor killer” was an appellation that was and was not deserved.
Mooneys are engineered to go fast and be hard to work on, due to having so much hardware fitted into the very aerodynamic form. Mooney drivers became notorious in some circles for having a “Mooney bar” that locked the pilot’s head and eyes straight ahead.
The Mooney bar has been supplanted by the “RV bar”, particularly in tandem models.
Most likely the RV-4 never knew the RV-12 was in the (facility) and he probably didn’t hightail it out of there the person talking on the radio in the RV 12 should be a little more careful they’re both at fault i’ve heard of many situations Where people forgot to turn the volume up these new radios that have automatic squelch control because a Problem there to automatic you don’t have to fidget with the squelch control and the volume you assume everything’s OK, Unicom airports with multiple runways can always be a problem Never trust the situation or relax until you’re outside the airspace And there’s always a local person that does what they want and they think they can get mad Or they have more seniority at that airport D sensitize from reality Every pilot in command needs to be at attention and said any airspace taking off or landing.
Jamie, first, thank you so much for pointing out the difference between “non-towered” and “uncontrolled”. That one always gets me going.
Second, I have had the same thing happen to me a couple of times. The scariest was the day I was taking off of 16 in an RV-12 (making appropriate radio calls, etc.) at the same time that an RV-4 was taking off on 34 (no radio calls, didn’t even respond when queried on the radio). Fortunately the RV-4 climbs much faster than the RV-12 and he went right over me. He must have known he was at fault because he high tailed it out of there and didn’t say a word to anyone.
My procedure now is to look at the far end of the runway and the run up area for aircraft or movement before pulling onto the runway. Same thing when landing.
Good article, I live on an airpark in the Northwest with an active flight school and a left-hand pattern, so have ample opportunity to observe the daily airshow. It appears that it is becoming more common to fly whatever pattern is most convenient as long as you announce your intentions on the radio. Almost daily someone will fly a right-hand pattern, straight-in approachs and right turn outs (sometimes at mid-field) are are on the increase. Seems like only about 50% of high wing airplanes do a 360 degree clearing turn in the run-up area before taking the runway.
On the positive side, the video has renewed my interest in getting an airplane CFI add on to my Helicopter CFII this winter, although I doubt that I will use my own 1945 J-3 as a trainer…..
I hope you’re not suggesting that straight-ins or right turn outs are violative of the regulations, because they aren’t, unlike right hand patterns at a left pattern airport, which are violative, as are left hand patterns at an airport with designated and properly indicated right hand patterns.
Correct, straight-in approachs are legal. Are they safe at a non-towered airport. Your call…(IFR approachs excluded)
Right turn outs in a left hand pattern:
AIM 4-3-3
AC 90-66B
FAR Part 1 Definitions (Traffic Pattern)
I agree that right turnouts immediately after takeoff are problematic (not clearly prohibited due to the use of “should”), but right turnouts after reaching pattern altitude and the end of the departure runway are clearly authorized, per your cited publications.
To paraphrase your statement and the language of the publications, though, whether to do anything non-standard may be more a safety issue than a regulatory issue, i.e., just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s safe.
Jamie,
Thanks for the excellent comments. Unfortunately my sense is that those who take the trouble to subscribe to General Aviation News are probably already more professional in their actions, and you are “preaching to the choir” to a great extent. Those who do not think that rules apply to them do not take the trouble to seek out as much information as possible in order to continue to learn and improve their piloting skills.
Also, just a few words about Columbus. He was not seeking what is now the present country of India. He was attempting to reach the East Indies, or Spice Islands, what is today mostly Indonesia. And it is a misconception that he was the only one who realized that the Earth was round, and therefore the Indies could be reached by sailing west. Educated folks from the time of the early Roman Empire knew the Earth was round, and even calculated it pretty close to the correct circumference of 25,000 miles. His mistake was that he was convinced that the Earth was much smaller than it really is, and therefore it would be shorter to sail west instead of going around the south tip of Africa. He calculated that he could reach the Spice Islands by sailing west for three months, instead of the much longer time it took to sail around Africa going east. When he bumped into the Bahamas after three months, it only reinforced his thinking that he was correct. This is a point that is often brought up when discussing safety issues. Folks will sometimes believe what they want to believe, and will try make the evidence before their eyes mesh with what they wish to be true when rational thinking would bring them to a different conclusion.
Anyway, thanks for the article. I hope that guy in the Bonanza that cut me off in the pattern at Sky Manor that Saturday a while ago reads it.
Bob
In my recent BFR the “instructor” I went up with wanted to know what flap settings I use on base to final turn. I explained that my principal was “always be descending” using half flaps to drag and the nose-up moment at a critical phase of flight. He insisted full flaps were best.
In the air he asked me to demonstrate my “half flap” base turn, so I did. I have an AoA meter so was able to show him the angle of attack in the turn using half flaps and descending to the runway. The mter remained flat (pegged).
On a second base to final I put in full flaps as he wanted and made sure he saw the AoA meter in the middle of the turn. The meter jumped to the yellow zone.
He was silent and did not give an indication that his ideas had changed. I can only hope so.
So does that mean when I’m in the backcountry in my 185 and need full flaps on base that I’m somehow doing something unsafe…beyond flying the backcountry?
Did the nose pitch up momentarily when full flaps were applied?
I also fly with an AOA, but I’m not following your problem. There’s nothing unsafe about the needle on an analog AOA gauge being in the yellow zone. But there is something unsafe about flying the pattern, especially the final leg, so fast that the needle remains pegged to the right of the green, which is what I understand you are saying. I typically slow to where the needle on my AOA gauge is in the middle of the yellow from about mid base until I level off to land. As mine is calibrated, that’s about 1.3 Vso. FWIW, per NTSB records, the single largest contributor to LOC on the ground is landing too fast.
I have never ascribed to the idea that there’s a “normal” way of using flaps. Flaps are like any other control, to be used “as appropriate” for the situation. I probably use 30 or 40 in my P172D more often than other settings, but I also often use 10 or 20 or even no flaps, especially in stiff crosswinds. So I disagree with your instructor that “full flaps were best” for all occasions, but I also disagree with your assertion that you should always use half flaps.
Perhaps your instructor remained silent because he concluded that you were going to ignore his advice, no matter how good it might have been.
“Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterward.” ~ Vernon Sanders Law
Unfortunately, in aviation the test is too often final, and irrevocable.