What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

What Was the Right Move Here?

N

nucleus

Well Known Member
When I flew into uncontrolled Aurora OR a couple of weeks ago there was an RV in front of me in the pattern who flew what looked to be about a 3 mile final. He turned from Base to Final just as I flew past the numbers on Downwind. At that moment, I was very tempted to fly my normal tight pattern and land in front of him. Time would have allowed me to get down and clear before he got to the runway. What I did do was extend my downwind to maintain spacing, but I really don't like being that far away from the runway at pattern altitude, just does not seem as safe. I also slowed way down, which I don't really like either.

My question is, what was the right move here?

1) I could have landed in front of him (doesn't seem right)

2) Turned Base at TP altitude and completed another circuit.

3) What I ended up doing, which put me well outside of gliding distance to the runway.

Thinking about this gave me new-found appreciation for my local (KBZN) controllers, they rarely have me extend a downwind for traffic. In fact, it is much more common that they have me land in front of traffic on a long final. This may be influenced by the fact that they are familiar with my tight patterns.

Thoughts?

Hans
 
Tempting and frustrating

I have been in similar situations.
I have only once or twice turned inside a second plane, and ONLY after ASKING the other pilot if it was OK with him.
To do so without asking first would be dangerous and also add fuel to the discussion going on in another thread about stereotyping RV pilot behavior.
It's dangerous because, surprise-surprise, he might decide to turn earlier than he did last time, just when you have your belly to him.
And note there is a difference between 'asking' and 'telling'. 'Telling' is safer than just doing it, but it would understandably p**s the other guy off.

Somehow many CFI's don't seem to teach the concept that a pattern should keep you within gliding range if engine dies, and should be a consistent, predictable path that everyone knows where to look when you report positions.
When one plane turns base at 2 miles (3 is usually a bit of an exaggeration) and another turns at 1/2 mile or less, where is the consistency and predictability?
 
Hans,
1. 2 way communication is always advisable
2. Judging distance and SPEED, is not an easy thing to do when your target is on your nose or only slightly nose off. He could be coming in at mach 2 with his hair on fire for a low approach
3. I would never turn inside another pilot unless I knew for darn sure I had the following items covered.... would nerver be a factor, never make him even remotely nervous considering he could be a student pilot on his first solo, and was talking to him.
4. When glide distance becomes a concern for any pilot being forced to extend, CLIMB. Never let a forced extend take your options away.

my 2 cents
 
Good idea, not always possible, but when able.....

Kahuna said:
Hans,
4. When glide distance becomes a concern for any pilot being forced to extend, CLIMB. Never let a forced extend take your options away.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting suggestion that was not really in my toolbox - I will add it. Although....
Sometimes climbing is not possible because of overlying Class C or Class B airspace. Also, climbing above the normal pattern height may make others think you are departing -- I suppose you could think of it that way anyway, you are departing the pattern, and will maneuver to do a straight-in approach once the pattern is clear.

Another not-so-subtle way to hint at your frustration is to ask the other pilot, as he motors along on downwind, if he is departing or staying in the pattern.
 
If he is lower than you and on approach, then the FARs say he has right-of-way.

Your action was probebly the best thing to do...:)
 
he might have been in the same situation...

quite possibly he had to extend his downwind for other traffic... it would really be irritating to get cut off after that...

i never have bought into the idea that there is some magic about being within glide distance of the runway while in the pattern... wide patterns are frustrating but no big deal.
 
scsmith said:
....

Somehow many CFI's don't seem to teach the concept that a pattern should keep you within gliding range if engine dies, and should be a consistent, predictable path that everyone knows where to look when you report positions.
When one plane turns base at 2 miles (3 is usually a bit of an exaggeration) and another turns at 1/2 mile or less, where is the consistency and predictability?
Click to expand...

We've been doing some approach calculations at our airpark due to a couple of recent noise complaints.

If you assume a turn to final at 500 AGL is typical, then a 3 degree glideslope (a typical VASI number) is a 19:1 glide angle with a turn about 1.8 miles from the runway threshold - in no-wind conditions - a head wind does not improve things...:)

This is a pretty low approach angle for most singles, and is typically below an engine-out glide path.

When you are turning final at 2 or more miles out you are getting well below an engine out glide slope.
 
If I had to guess I've been in this situation 200+ times in the RV. It can be frustrating but easily managed. I fly a tight pattern. Any time there's traffic in the pattern the best thing to do is anticipate the traffic in front of you going wide and slow down earlier. Seriously, its that simple. Never enter the pattern above 150KIAS and usually you can minimize your closure rate on slower traffic. I fly often into one particular airport with slow/wide traffic all the time and the instructors there do wide patterns intentionally to rack up the hobbs time.
 
Gliding distance. Really?

nucleus said:
... but I really don't like being that far away from the runway at pattern altitude, just does not seem as safe ...
Click to expand...

Apparently, we all went to the same flight school for our primary training.

KEEP YOUR TRAFFIC PATTERN WITHIN GLIDING DISTANCE IN CASE YOUR ENGINE DIES.

Until reading some recent traffic pattern safety threads, I never questioned it. Defining pattern distance from the runway solely by gliding distance is absurd, as "gliding distance" will naturally be much different for a Pitts than a C-150. Or a 747. Or an RV.

My next question was, "Why is my engine at greater risk of dying in a traffic pattern than 10 miles out? Or 20?" As one who has an inherent mistrust of things mechanical, I can't help but feel that the gliding advice was started by a nervous CFI with a similar mistrust. After all, it would be a real shame to survive a long cross-country flight, constantly looking for big, empty fields and waiting for the engine to die a sudden death, only to make it all the way to your destination airport ... and have the engine quit on an extended downwind! :eek:

It's so ingrained in me that I MUST be able to glide to the runway "just in case the engine quits" that I often tighten my pattern a bit as a result. And, when I do that, I almost always lose the stabilized approach that works best for me and I end up with a less-than-stellar landing.

Hans, I think you did right by extending your downwind, personally, and for all of the reasons already mentioned. Maybe it's time to rethink our perceived need to be able to glide to a runway ...
 
Kahuna said it very succinctly, and I agree - communications are key. Without a doubt, don't cut inside unless you have his permission.

As for gliding distance to the runway - you are going to ct almost EVERYONE off in an RV flying that tight all the time. Yes, if no one is in front of me, I like to do practice glider approaches. But in general, in a "standard sized" pattern at most airports, an engine-out RV is going to hit the ground short. I guess I have spent enough time in an instrument environment that I have already accepted that risk a thousand times.

Courtesy to all is my motto - communicating is a great way to do that!
 
Right on Don

Don is thinking straight. With traffic, I think everyone should be flying the same pattern. Otherwise how is everyone gonna know how to sequence and where to look. This glide thing is way overdone. By that logic it would be unsafe to ever leave the runway environment. Much safer to make your best fit into the pattern traffic than to worry about glide distance. Surprises me to hear anyone think otherwise.
 
aerhed said:
Much safer to make your best fit into the pattern traffic than to worry about glide distance. Surprises me to hear anyone think otherwise.
Click to expand...

This is simply not good advice to follow.

Almost 20 years ago I had a 172 I was renting quit running on downwind due to a mag problem (H2AD dual mag worn cam). Back in '03 I helped pull another 172 from a field that got totalled 200 ft from the runway when the student pilot pulled the mixture instead of the carb heat and didn't realize what he had done but was sufficiently distant where he couldn't make the runway..too wide of a pattern. Amazing he walked away from the wreck.

These practical lessons taught me in no uncertain terms that low, slow, and too far out is not a good place to be.
 
Last edited:
N8RV said:
KEEP YOUR TRAFFIC PATTERN WITHIN GLIDING DISTANCE IN CASE YOUR ENGINE DIES.
Click to expand...

Whenever I hear this I think of the "OX-5 Club", which was made up of pilots who spent time flying behind Curtis OX-5 engines. The distinguishing features of the OX-5 seem to have been high weight, low power, and a tendency to stop working while in flight. My primary instructor was a member of this club, and had made at least one forced landing behind an OX-5. She was also somewhat obsessive about keeping potential landing areas within reach, whether in the pattern or during cruise.

I have often wondered to what extent the warning to "stay within gliding distance of the runway" reflects the real failure probability of "modern" aircraft engines, versus the lore passed down from the early days of aviation?
 
Even if you ignore the gliding range bit of my calculations, the 500 ft. AGL turn to final from 2 miles out would put you below a standard 3 dregree VASI slope.

Normal approaches probably should be done at or above the 3 degree slope, rather than a "drag it in from the boonies" final...:)

Part of the "Fly Neighborly" approach.
 
As an active CFI at KUAO, I would suggest to my students to never turn final if another aircraft is on final approach. If the aircraft on final is 5 miles out and all they give is an N-number, you have no idea how fast they are moving. We have a lot of jet traffic at UAO, so 5-miles out is pretty quick for the Falcon 900EX that is based there. Always communicate with the other traffic first. If it's a C-150/172 on final, 5 miles out, than ask if you can sneak in. If you can't get in front of the traffic on final and you don't want to extend your downwind, perform a right (or left) turn and re-enter the pattern on a 45 for the downwind leg. Be sure to communicate your maneuver to ensure any other traffic on the 45 inbound knows to look for you.
 
Right 270 to base.

Been years since I've worked tower but a right 270 to base to follow traffic might work here. Keeps everyone happy and more importantly, safe!
 
Proximity to the runway

When I learned to fly in the early 70's I was taught that every normal landing was practice for an engine-out landing. The goal was to stay within gliding range of the runway not becasue the engione might quit, but because if you had to make a forced landing due to engine failure, you knew how to set up the approach so you reached the runway without help from the engine. That's not possible if you are following someone on a 5 mile final. So you maintain power and make your turns to position yourself for a landing with the proper spacing. Next time when you are alone in the pattern make that simulated engine out approach.

My 2 cents.

John Ciolino
RV-8
N894Y
 
turbosaaber said:
Been years since I've worked tower but a right 270 to base to follow traffic might work here. Keeps everyone happy and more importantly, safe!
Click to expand...

The problem with this at an non-towered airport is that you may have traffic behind you without a radio and you may get a surprise when you turn back in. Going back out and re-entering the pattern on a 45 would be the safest method.
 
1) Enter the pattern at 150 knots? I try to be closer to 100 mph.

2) No way will I follow students flying a bomber pattern just to be "consistent."
 
Not within gliding distance??

Holy cow..really? Don't fly within gliding distance of the runway just so you can be like everyone else? Huh???

No way, no how am I flying like that. I trust my machine implicitly but it is still a machine and can break. I'm not going to lawn dart myself into an oak tree because some guy wants to extend 3 miles on downwind. Every plane has its own envelope and should be flown accordingly not to some arbitrary track in the sky set by the guy who happens to be ahead of you. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm more than capable of looking left, right and in front for traffic in the pattern and in fact I find it far easier to spot aircraft with some degree of angle off the nose rather than in trail. Additionally angle off is far easier to determine speed differential as it manifests as a bearing shift. Engine failure mid-field downwind in my BD-4 due to electronic ignition failure resulted in a non-event dead stick landing to the runway only because I was within EASY glide distance which was about half the size of the standard C152 pattern. Had I flown otherwise I likely wouldn't be writing this annoying diatribe due to hostile terrain....

It was stated in a previous post - anticipate early, slow down, s-turn on downwind, do a 360, climb if it makes sense, whatever it takes to maintain an interval which allows you to fly your plane the way you need to ensure a safe landing - and by all means COMMUNICATE your intentions. The desire to be courteous shouldn't trump the need for your own safety or force you to accept more risk - radios work well for this.

The only time I have power off the idle stop from the 180 to touch down is when I screwed it up (which is about half the time).
 
N8RV said:
My next question was, "Why is my engine at greater risk of dying in a traffic pattern than 10 miles out? Or 20?" As one who has an inherent mistrust of things mechanical, I can't help but feel that the gliding advice was started by a nervous CFI with a similar mistrust.
Click to expand...

To me, the difference is that in cruise, you're generally not at <1,000 agl. At 1000 feet or less, you don't have a ton of time to evaluate options. When you're 2,3,5,10k feet you have time to figure out where is a good spot, try to restart, etc. When you're on final approach at 1000 feet and descending, if your engine quits you've got what, maybe 20-30 seconds? That's not a lot of time to make a good decision.

Is it practical to make a glide range pattern all the time? No probably not, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to if you can.

Edit: Also, lots of airports are located in areas where the runway is the only viable landing spot. Plowing into a Target or a Home Depot because some guy in a 172 likes to fly long patterns just doesn't appeal to me. Not saying the OP did the wrong thing, and certainly cutting him off just because wasn't the best either, but I don't think we should discourage people from trying to fly a pattern within gliding distance.
 
Last edited:
I'd say follow him in, staying high (delaying decent) and slowish. High to keep some energy and slow to keep from getting further from the airport. If the other aircraft is in front of you, it can't run into you.

TODR's #1 Rule of Transportation: Assume that everyone you see will somehow try to kill you; plan accordingly. Exemptions given for people that you know AND have briefed the flight/drive/ride with or are in communication with.

Rule #1 applies in the car, on the (moto)bike, behind the stick or on foot. I wish that I trusted my fellow humans more, and while I don't assume that they are going to intentionally do it, there are lots of avoidable incidents that occur. We're not in safe things like F1 or LMP cars (e.g., Bob Kubica's crash at Montreal in 07, McNish at LeMans this year), and crashes can turn out poorly.

So not pressing the issue was probably the right choice in your situation. If I were in a glider, or needed to land right now, I would have cut in front of him.

TODR
 
turbosaaber said:
Been years since I've worked tower but a right 270 to base to follow traffic might work here. Keeps everyone happy and more importantly, safe!
Click to expand...

Might be when you worked a tower, but that sounds like a very confusing move to other traffic at a non-towered field...:rolleyes:
 
Jeez Bob

These practical lessons taught me in no uncertain terms that low, slow, and too far out is not a good place to be.
Click to expand...
I never said to go low/slow, just that you oughtta try & fit the flow within reason.
 
If a student in a 172 is flying a B-52 approach, do you just follow him/her? Do you cut in unannounced? Do you request clearance to slip in between? What if it is a Lear? Do you fly "your" pattern regardless of the room he/she needs?

I, like others, was taught to stay within gliding distance while in the pattern (and had some humbling and rememberable lessons when the throttle got pulled by my CFI while a on a distant downwind). I fly very tight if I get the chance.

All that said, there are different planes, different pilots, and different situations we will encounter. It is the ability to adapt that is required of us in our skill display and judgement. There is no right answer in every situation, but for any given instance, did you make the right choice? Did everyone in the circuit know what you were doing? Did you cause anyone to have to take evasive maneuvers because of your decision? Did anyone get put in a difficult situation because of your decision? Did you minimize your own risk? Did you make your decision just for you, or did you consider GA and the folks flying at that field?

I get frustrated as much as the next guy with this issue, but the right thing to do really isn't much of a debate as far as I'm concerned. Replacing a remotely dangerous situation (wide pattern/circuit) with a more directly dangerous situation (non-standard pattern, cutting in, etc.) is a bit cutting off of the nose to spite the face.

Two cents...
 
My typical approach is to fly a 1/2 mile out downwind at 120 mph IAS, then turn at the 45? point. I recently caught **** from the tower 'cause they said I wasn't following a "standard" pattern, and that I was too close to departing aircraft. Try as I might I couldn't find anything in the AIM or FARS that said anything about how far the downwind should be from the runway, and I called them and told them that. Since they got radar they have now, supposedly, gotten extra responsibility. 'Nothing like giving a non-flying bureaucrat more responsibility!
 
elippse said:
My typical approach is to fly a 1/2 mile out downwind at 120 mph IAS, then turn at the 45? point. I recently caught **** from the tower 'cause they said I wasn't following a "standard" pattern, and that I was too close to departing aircraft. Try as I might I couldn't find anything in the AIM or FARS that said anything about how far the downwind should be from the runway, and I called them and told them that. Since they got radar they have now, supposedly, gotten extra responsibility. 'Nothing like giving a non-flying bureaucrat more responsibility!
Click to expand...

That depends where you entered the pattern. If you entered on the 45 mid field then you would be no where near departing traffic and you would be doing it by the book.......... FAR/AIM 4-3-3
 
TCONROY said:
As an active CFI at KUAO, I would suggest to my students to never turn final if another aircraft is on final approach. If the aircraft on final is 5 miles out and all they give is an N-number, you have no idea how fast they are moving. ....
Click to expand...
While true, if the "pattern" if five miles, they are not in the pattern.

In fact, the FAA states that if you are more than three miles from the airport, you are not considered to be in the pattern.

For instance, what if some joker announces he is 10 miles out for a straight in approach? Do you fly a 10 (more likely less) downwind to turn base?
 
scsmith said:
Another not-so-subtle way to hint at your frustration is to ask the other pilot, as he motors along on downwind, if he is departing or staying in the pattern.
Click to expand...

The way I do that is to ask the other pilot what his intentions are. That way I'm not suggesting anything and also gently - I hope he perceives it that way -
reminds him to have an intention. He can't merely go rambling around the sky in the pattern.

Kind of worrisome when the most common response on the radio, is "Uh...."

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top