The first time I ever encountered salt water was an eye-opening experience. Two ideas came to me on that trip. Both were great epiphanies in my mind. Yet, both turned out to be entirely wrong.
From the rocky New England shore I stood on I could see a body of land. A substantial amount of ocean separated me from this distant place. I’d been told this was the Atlantic Ocean. My assumption was that I was seeing England and Europe. The place the Pilgrims came from so long ago.
My second assumption had to do with what I took to be my great luck at living on the side of the ocean where the waves came in. It only seemed logical to me that if the waves lapped the shore on my side of the ocean, those same waves must have started their journey on the other side, where they went out.
The benefit of this for me was very personal. I was allowed to play in the water, since the waves tended to push me towards the shore. Those poor kids in England and Europe weren’t so lucky, I reasoned. Their waves pushed out, away from shore. It would be a brave and sturdy individual who would swim on that side of the ocean. The risk of being swept out to sea would be too much for me to even consider taking a dip.
My rationale for being so galactically wrong in my reasoning mostly results from me being just four years old at the time. Over time I came to realize my assumptions, while seemingly logical, were entirely in error. Much of what I believed to be true, simply wasn’t.
Frankly, that was a lesson that had staying power. A bit of humility has served me well over the years. So well, in fact, that I have occasionally been accused of being insecure in my beliefs. It seems being willing to shift gears, consider new information, and revise my beliefs is taken by some as an indication that I lack confidence.
It is probably closer to the truth to say that I am, have been, and will probably continue to be something of an ass. I’m a persistent little bugger. Once I get an idea in my head it tends to stay there. My beliefs are strong. They’re well rooted in what I believe to be factual evidence.
A percentage of those beliefs are incorrect too. Some aren’t entirely wrong, but they are incomplete, which doesn’t prevent them from being wrong. They’re just a little less wrong than some of the other ideas floating around in my head.
Of course, I’m not alone in my wrongness. We’re all wrong about something or other. Plenty of something or others, in fact. We’re mostly in denial about our tendency to err, however. That intrigues me.
We know we’re imperfect. We know we’ve been exposed to reams of contradictory information over the course of our lives. We’re rock-solid positive the population around us is wrong on so many issues it’s virtually impossible to list them all. Yet, we’re equally sure we’re entirely correct regardless what the subject might be.
That seems unlikely, don’t you think?
The population of flat earthers is growing. These are people who believe with great intensity that all of the Earth is a flat plane covered by a transparent shield which traps our atmosphere, the sun, and the moon within its confines. This, in a time when rockets fitted with high resolution cameras launch from all over the globe every week.
A disturbingly large number of people are convinced the moon landings of the 1960s were faked. Probably by Stanley Kubrick, the producer and director behind the classic 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Set aside the nature of human beings and the need for tens of thousands of them to keep a complicated secret for decades. Or the photographic evidence of Apollo landing sites on the moon beamed back by satellites as they orbit that rocky, dusty ball in space.
Let’s not forget the very real and profoundly ridiculous belief that airplanes at high altitude are producing chemtrails. These supposed chemical and/or biological agents are allegedly designed to adversely affect or somehow control the human population of the planet.
You no doubt see these as errant beliefs. You may have witnessed rockets launch and fly into space. You may have even tracked them on their journey. Quite a number of us have flown military or civilian aircraft at high altitudes where the curvature of the Earth can be seen by the naked eye. And it is likely you understand the workings of a jet engine and meteorology well enough to know that contrails are real while chemtrails are not.
Yet there are many of us who continue to fly long straight-in approaches at non-towered airports even when there are other aircraft established in the traffic pattern. That’s not right. Even the FAA says that sort of behavior isn’t recommended. Which is really just a polite way of saying, “Hey, don’t do that.”
But they do.
So many ego-driven, unnecessarily stubborn pilots continue their instrument approach in visual meteorological conditions all the way down to the missed approach point or to touchdown, forcing VFR traffic in the pattern to bend to their will.
This, even though it would be entirely logical and undeniably reasonable to break off the approach early as if they’d broken out of the weather. They could easily join the VFR traffic pattern. A decision that would be every bit as valuable to their practice of procedures, while being far less disruptive to others. A course of action that would even be acceptable on a check ride.
When I was at my most wrong in life, I had the comfort of being able to hide behind the reality that I was just four years old. I didn’t even know how to read yet, for goodness sake. I’m still wrong from time to time, but now I know how to read. So, I do.
That is a choice that helps minimize my wrongness while simultaneously increasing my knowledge base. I recommend it highly.
Now, I think it’s time we get into the issue of the lizard people who live among us.
Your thoughts?
AOPA SAFETY ADVISOR
Operations & Proficiency No. 3
Operations at
Nontowered Airports
Going Straight
Occasionally you might be inbound to a nontowered airport on a heading that will allow a straight-in approach. Though permissible, a straight-in approach should only be used when you are certain there will be no conflict. Straight-ins should yield to other aircraft in the pattern. If another aircraft is ahead of you on base and the spacing will not be sufficient, go around by altering course to the right (on a standard left pattern), enter the upwind leg, and turn crosswind when it’s safe.
When straight-in, announce your position on a three- mile final and again on a one-mile final. Use landing lights and strobes to increase the visibility of your aircraft. Report “Dodge City traffic, Twin Cessna Three- Eight Golf, three-mile [one-mile] final Runway Three- One, Dodge City.” Nonradio aircraft should avoid straight-in approaches.
Kelly Carnighan
eCFR ContentThe Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the official legal print publication containing the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the departments and agencies of the Federal Government. The Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) is a continuously updated online version of the CFR. It is not an official legal edition of the CFR. Learn more about the eCFR, its status, and the editorial process.
§ 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.
(a) Inapplicability. This section does not apply to the operation of an aircraft on water.
(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.
(c) In distress. An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic.
(d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other’s right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories—
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, powered-lift, or rotorcraft.
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, powered-lift, or rotorcraft.
(4) An aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.
(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear.
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
[Docket 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91-282, 69 FR 44880, July 27, 2004; FAA-2023-1275, Amdt. 91-379, 89 FR 92485, Nov. 21, 2024]
Seems to me 99% of the problem stories are about aircraft using the standard traffic pattern. Personally I’m a x-country flyer and set up for a straight-in or base entry, towered or not. Blissfully 48 years without issues or forgetting to do anything while storming around in the who’s where of the traffic pattern, with pilots who often don’t even see another aircraft setting on the runway.
I think almost everyone reading here loves flying. I do as well. So, unless I’m in a hurry for a bathroom break or some other near emergency, I typically times yield the approach to others. I enjoy spending a few more seconds in the air. So what’s your hurry to get on the ground with the rest of the mere mortals? Just coordinate with the other traffic and enjoy the few additional seconds of air time.
Wow, rough crowd. I’ll dumb this down. What is the difference between announcing a 5 mile straight in and 5 miles GPS approach other that the VFR calls are less frequent. Aviate, navigate, communicate…… fly the plane, adjust your pattern accordingly.
I get more upset when flying a L-39 and some guy in a 172 is flying a bomber pattern!
You may find out when you encounter a NORDO flying a standard pattern.
I am seeing more and more aircraft making straight in approaches at my non-towered airport, where I base my airplanes. We have two flight schools and one FBO providing pilot training, which accounts for the majority of the straight in approaches. We have an RNAV and an ILS to RW18. When the pattern is saturated with aircraft a straight in approach can quickly disrupt the flow of traffic.
The way I see it, aircraft making a straight in approach off a training instrument approach should only do so if and when it will not interfere with or disrupt the flow of traffic. Otherwise they should have the mind set to break off the approach and enter the pattern along with everyone else as to not interfere with the flow of traffic.
Furthermore, pilots insist in calling their position on the approach based on the fix they are crossing, a fix published on the instrument approach. Instead, they should be calling out their distance from the runway. For those not familiar with the instrument approach the fix means nothing, and does not tells them how far out the aircraft are.
Last by not least, many flight schools have applied for and received approval for use of specific call signs, omitting make and model, which in turn makes it difficult to determine the type of aircraft on the straight in approach, or in the pattern. For example, ATP’s call sign is now Crew Check. Ohio State is Buckeye, and Indiana State is Sycamore. All well and good at a towered field but at a non-towered airport it can inhibit inflight planning and cause confusion.
Are we wrong to not indorse this sort of disregard for safety? Should we change our mind set accordingly? My answer is this, look out for yourself, fly defensively, be courteous, and remember, one can make flying as safe as they want to make it.
A re-write of AC 90-66C could clarify/help the communication issues. I’ve witnessed numerous close calls from straight in traffic not saying anything during their last 5-10 miles of flight. Thank God for ADS%B!!!
Ac 90-66C, Para 9.11.2 tells aircraft in the traffic pattern to make four radio calls during the last ~3 miles of flight (entering downwind, on downwind, on base, & on final). For straight-ins, the AC para 9.11.1 only recommends they self announce at 8-10 miles, then “coordinate” with other traffic. What I typically see is the straight-in traffic makes one call, then goes comm-silent. Maybe the FAA should recommend/require radio calls at 3 and 1 miles as an additional situational awareness for planes in the traffic pattern.
My thoughts..
Since apparently the FAA still refuses to declare “practice VFR” straight-ins “illegal”…
I also subscribe to the idea that if we combined elements of “basic courtesy”, along with “can’t we all just get along” and “use common sense”, it might actually work out.
I know, that’s probably unrealistic.
But, I also believe we helped create this ‘environment’ by passively re-enforcing the idea that managing avionics is more important than learning how to actually “fly” an airplane.
My logic:
Do student pilots, sorry “learners”, racing to
min-time their journey into an airline seat, learn…better or faster…in TAA cockpits? Have the average hours-to-solo, and hours-to-checkride decreased with the increased use of “glass cockpit” technology?
I overheard a new-ish CFI tell a (unknown to her) very ‘seasoned’ aviator, that he wasn’t a good pilot, because he didn’t know how to “activate a leg” on a G-1000.
She apparently thought that mastering technology was more important than mastering skills like…oh, I dunno…coordinated flight, straight & level, climbs, turns, descents, slips vs. skids, slow flight, stall recognition & recovery, handling emergencies (spins?), pilotage & dead reckoning, reading a sectional chart, entering the pattern at a non-towered airport, etc.
Granted, there are still a few airframes flying with old school, round-gauge 6-packs and “antique” nav/comm setups.
And we/they are probably just as guilty as taking a VFR straight-in short cut…once in a while…as anyone.
However, I can see where folks with expensive MFD & PFD configurations, or even a “Frankenstein” combo panel, absolutely need to stay proficient with the buttonology, whether they operate under VFR or IFR.
What’s the easiest way to do that? Approach every runway by following the magenta, or green, lines.
(Jamie; there’s nothing wrong with being an ass!)
Jamie – if a pattern if full (slow airplanes on upwind, crosswind, downwind, base, and final), and a Cirrus is arriving, what would be your explanation to a learner as to what all of the pilots should do?
Either take direction from the tower, if the airport is controlled, or follow the recommendations of AC 90-66C while complying with 14 CFR 91.126.
From a performance standpoint the Cirrus isn’t significantly different from a Bonanza, or a Comanche, or a Malibu. They may tend to fly a wider, longer pattern than the Cherokee or C-152 but their constraints aren’t so profound these high performance aircraft can’t be flown in proximity to others.
Thanks. In a crowded pattern, even to make a 45 degree entry, someone will have to make room for the Cirrus to squeeze in. And then you have one airplane at 100 (the standard Cirrus speed on downwind) and a bunch of others maybe 20-30 less. If the Cirrus announces a straight-in, AND the others say no problem, we’ll follow, then at least the Cirrus is not going to have a closure problem and usually it’s only a very slight extension that’s needed. That seems to me the safest way for all involved again if everyone works together.
Nice article!
You mention “So many ego-driven, unnecessarily stubborn pilots continue their instrument approach in visual meteorological conditions all the way down to the missed approach point or to touchdown, forcing VFR traffic in the pattern to bend to their will.”
Yes, the I’ve got to practice my instrument approaches includes some poor choices. But in general most of them (us) do try to pick low use airports or times of the day. And breaking off approaches, or not doing them at all right then, is sometime forgotten by a few.
I will say there are MORE VFR STRAIGHT IN landings at fields than there should be. Just takes to long to enter the pattern the preferred way is most often the excuse. This is not the practice approach group, it is the VFR guys.
Jamie, are you sure about those ocean waves? 🙂
I think it just comes down to basic courtesy and that is what seems to be lacking more and more. If you are on a practice instrument approach and there are 3 other aircraft in the pattern, break off the approach and join the pattern. If you are alone in the pattern and another aircraft is coming in on a practice approach, offer to extend your downwind to let them fly to minimums. Be the pilot to offer to do a 360 for spacing. We don’t need any more regulations or enforcement from government agencies, we just need to be more courteous to each other in the air and on the ground.
Bob: You call for all folks to be more courteous to each other. Who could disagree? The arrogant discourteous ones, of course. They’re kings of the air, and the peasants and lower classes can just get out of their way when they come by. As the old song went: “What the world needs now is love, sweet love…” True enough. But the bad apples don’t reform themselves, they just keep on keeping on. If they did in general, there wouldn’t be any need for rules, laws, and law enforcement. But there is because they don’t.
Regards/J
Bob B – thank you for that encouragement. That’s what we need, and it is the path to maximize safety.
Dave Berry has nothing on you! Another excellent article, thank you! KT
Excellent dissertation on the dynamic extremes of human nature. While your makeup is introspective, self-critical, self-aware and considerate, others are not, as you point-out. This is where the enforcement of rules and laws enters the picture after millennia of societal objection to boorish and criminal behavior. The development of Scotland Yard is instructive here.
I am not a pilot, but I have friends who are, and I follow this news service every day. I am a consulting engineer and writer. With history as a guide, it seems to me that civilian General Aviation is on the precipice of an unacceptable number of dangerous plane-to-plane encounters and the arrogant behavior causing some of those interactions. Even with all the modern avionics, see and be seen is still difficult as the overhead load on single pilots increases exponentially to the limit of mental capability.
As with other walks of life, e.g., vehicle traffic, in its inception in the 1920s was bedlam on the roads without driver licensure, insurance, traffic signals, and importantly, traffic cops. As these things came into existence and matured, one moderating force is the expensive traffic ticket with a concomitant increase in insurance premiums, and in extremely egregious cases, license suspension or revocation, and the possibility of jail for serious misbehavior, e.g., drunk driving.
As I have often written in this space, I believe it’s high time for ‘air cops’ to provide a moderating force over GA to corral the bad actors into behavioral adjustment. I can already predict the boos I will receive in the replies below, mostly by air cowboys who, like horse-mounted cowboys of yore, sang “Don’t Fence Me In” as they rode the range with callous disregard for fences and personal property along the way of their cattle drives. That behavior was brought to curb by sheriffs and possies who tried to make the whole mess more tolerable. But I don’t believe it will happen to GA until — like so many other similar issues in human life — the carnage and expense (hospital, insurance, funerals) becomes so heavy, that responsible GA pilots get together and revolt and take action in this regard. I bid APOA to step up to this plate. Time will tell.
Regards/J
Jamie, that’s Loser Talk. You’re stuck in the 1950s. Today it’s not how you play the game but whether you win or lose. Never, ever admit you were wrong. Declare victory and move on. Flood the zone with BS to confuse your enemies (remember, anyone who disagrees with you is your enemy). Make up s**t to confuse people. It’s the only way to climb the ladder today. Make people pay attention to YOU. Every man for himself. Just be sure to align yourself with the Winners who follow the above rules. Act like they act and do what they say and all will be good.
So, cut in front of anyone in the pattern. It’s survival of the fittest. Take what you deserve.
Pay attention and get with the times, Jamie.
Sadly, those are characteristics are in full display at the highest levels these days….
Oh, I was so worried you were going to tell me that Chem Trails were real… Just straight in offenders…yes, I concur that is such poor form. Yesterday, I turned short final twice in 20 minutes to find a plane pulling onto the numbers and just sitting there. No acceleration, no radio call that they were expediting, just sitting there until I called my go-around. Twice, two different students God forbid that their instructor was aboard but just as likely with the school at this field. Then I had to do a 360 for fear they would climb up into me. Do keep your eyes swiveling, poor form seems to be habit forming.
That reminds me of the time that I was landing at a non-towered field in an Aerostar, which has an approach speed of 100-110 knots. I flew a 45 degree entry to the downwind, then carefully flew base and final while following a Cessna 150 who was of course flying much slower. I extended my downwind for spacing and made numerous traffic calls while struggling to avoid stalling or overrunning the slower aircraft. It was a challenge, but was working out well. As the 152 crossed the threshold I called “Aerostar on 3 mile final”. Then, instead of taxiing off the runway, the 152 came to a full stop. I called “Aerostar on short final” but he didn’t budge. As I flew over him on the necessary go-around, I asked “why are you blocking the runway”? The fight instructor’s reply was “My student has to complete his after landing checklist”. On the runway? With traffic on short final? Are you kidding me?