This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.
I was flying back to my home base after a trip for fuel. I announced multiple times my intentions to fly overhead midfield and make a left teardrop to enter the right downwind.
As I was making my teardrop turn I hear Aircraft Y announce that he’s entering the pattern at the right crosswind leg.
I already had a bad feeling hearing a pilot say he’s entering the pattern at the right crosswind instead of an approved pattern entry procedure.
I enter the downwind at midfield and make my call. Seconds after my call Aircraft Y announces that he is below me and said some other remark that I didn’t pay attention to because I looked off my right side and saw Aircraft Y off my right side barely below me and flying in a direction angled towards me and not parallel to the runway.
I take immediate evasive action, making a climbing steep left turn. As I climb away I noticed he banked towards me more, eventually passing under me.
He didn’t seem to think he did anything wrong. Shortly after he landed, he parked at the FBO, received fuel, and departed shortly after. I checked his flight path on FlightAware after he arrived at his destination and again he joined the pattern on a crosswind leg, which is not recommended and potentially dangerous.
Primary Problem: Airport
ACN: 1961856
My experience is that both of the FAA, recommended entries to the downwind from the other side- teardrop 500’ above pattern and cross runway and 90 degree turn at pattern— are extremely dangerous. It is very easy ti find yourself close to someone doing that, when the circular came out recommending these I tried them and almost collided. It is far safer to enter the crosswind and contrary to the ASRS’s writer post this is not prohibited by the FARS or the AIM,, the only strict guidance is to make turns in the direction of the pattern. Entering from the crosswind you see everybody and can easily break wide if needed. If you enter on the teardrop you can find yourself in a close encounter, just as the writer relates. I hope he learned from this.
The teardrop entry to downwind is probably the most dangerous pattern entry you can preform, unless you fly two miles past the downwind leg of the pattern, not the centerline of the runway prior to descending to pattern altitude. What I have observed 99% of the pilots do who use this method is to perform a teardrop and descend into the downwind at a 45-degree angle. The idea is to fly past the traffic pattern, descend to pattern altitude. If done correctly, pilots who elect to perform a mid-field crosswind to downwind, another approved pattern entry, would be at the same altitude and will have better situational awareness of the other pilot.
In this example, it sounds like the author pilot was equally at fault and willfully putting both aircraft in danger.
Absolutely correct, Mr. Warren Webb Jr.
There’s nothing wrong with entering the pattern on the crosswind at pattern altitude. It’s one of the legs of a traffic pattern and is listed in the AIM.
You think it’s safe to fly across the departure leg where there are blind spot and collision hazards from departing and go-around aircraft?
Think about using a teardrop entry to a field that has jumpers active. What could go wrong.
Every one of the these incidents involves two pilots who by chance are arriving at the pattern on a collision course, like two cars in side by side lanes that will merge into one lane. At the merger, someone has to go first with the other going second. Occasionally, of course, the two drivers could both be so boneheaded that neither gives way to the other and it results in a collision. And then one points the finger at the other! Crazy.
You hit the nail on the head Warren !! Descending into the pattern from anywhere near the airport is just plain stupid. How many midair’s have resulted from descents in the vicinity of airports, and people are STILL advocating for it.
I’m pretty sure that wasn’t me although I will sometimes use an upwind to crosswind entry from well-above pattern altitude (and I’m talking a true upwind leg here – not a departure leg – if you don’t know the difference, please look it up).
In general, I use whatever is most safe for entry into the pattern for a given airport/situation. I use the FAA AIM/circulars (e.g. FAA-H-8083-3C) as a general recommendation; it is certainly not set in stone and teardrop entries are sometimes simply not possible (e.g. restrictions due to transitioning traffic, migratory birds, terrain, and/or airspace).
I often find an upwind to crosswind entry from above the pattern altitude to be safest (500 ft or more based on whether the airport has pattern aircraft at 1500 AGL like turbine aircraft).
And even though the AIM/circulars now indicate a teardrop entry or, alternatively, a “midfield crosswind” entry, I often don’t like that when I’m approaching from the opposite side of the airport. For the teardrop, it means I’m turning my back to the airport traffic twice (once while flying past the aircraft in the pattern and then again to the aircraft on the 45 entry while doing a teardrop maneuver at low altitude). And for the “midfield crosswind” entry, it seems dumb to make that turn at midfield… I will rarely use that.
These entries also limit the amount of time I can look at the airport surface for obstructions (cars, animals, people, aircraft, spaceships, aliens, and other nefarious items).
So, this pilot handled it well (albeit a bit stuck on the AIM as set in stone).
But let’s truly keep in mind that the best entry is the safest entry based on airport conditions at the time. FAA recommendations are written by people who are simply not familiar with every situation.
Steve Krogg provides a wonderful write-up in this article:
https://inspire.eaa.org/2022/06/13/entering-the-traffic-pattern/
When you use the upwind to crosswind entry from above, doesn’t that mean you could descend onto an aircraft established in closed traffic and somewhere along the departure, crosswind, or beginning of the downwind leg?
Quite right again, Mr. Warren.
The intention of the Advisory Circular from the FAA is to have pilots entering the pattern the same way. Sure there are exceptions, and it’s not mandatory, but that doesn’t mean your entry procedure is acceptable either. In essence you’re flying what AC 90-66C states except you’re not crossing midfield crosswind and joining downwind or flying the teardrop procedure.
Well, here’s what the Handbook says: ” Entries into traffic patterns while descending create specific collision hazards and should be avoided.”