What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Canadian VFR Patterns

Feetwet

Active Member
I had heard that in Canada the common VFR approach to a landing pattern at an uncontrolled field was from the upwind side, across the airfield center to the downwind. This seems to be born out by the following info found on the internet:

http://www.langleyflyingschool.com/Pages/Canadian%20Aviation%20Regulations.html#Uncontrolled%20Airports

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Publications/en/TP11541/PDF/HR/TP11541E.pdf

It also appears from these links that the standard US 45 is OK, and just about any other approach to these airports is also OK. I couldn't quite tell if the arrow from the approach end was showing a straight in or an overhead pattern. Am I reading this right, or is the actual situation different? Canadian comments Please - and thanks.
 
Interesting Canadian documentation requirements at the first link too.

Documents on Board Aircraft

It is required that the following be carried on board aircraft: flight crew licences, including Medical Certificate and radio licence; Certificate of Registration and Certificate of Airworthiness (including annual inspection report); aircraft and pilot radio licences; aircraft Journey Log (when it is planned that an aircraft will land and shut-down at an airport other than the airport of departure).

The Pilot Operating Handbook, interception orders , and aircraft weight and balance report must also be on board.

The Pilot Operating Handbook must be accessible to the pilot at his or her station.



Can one of our up north members also say if these apply to visiting US aircraft?
 
Email

If you send me your email, I can send you the two pdf charts for uncontrolled and controlled airports that will make it very easy for you. It comes from transport Canada.

Cheers,


Don
 
First of all, thanks for bringing this up. In Canada we have a problem at uncontrolled airports with aircraft that use non-standard circuit entries (we call them circuits aka patterns).

While most of the offenders are commercial operators flying straight-in approaches, often we get American visitors who are unfamiliar with the procedures.

For uncontrolled non-MF airports, the first link (Langley Aero Club) is very definitive and it shows the proper procedure. There are only two proper methods: the crosswind midfield entry; and the direct downwind entry if "the pilot has ascertained without any doubt there there will be no conflict with other traffic..." (TC RAC 4.5.2)

If the airport has an MF advisory service, other circuit entries are allowed.

So, for example, if you are approaching the uncontrolled Parksville/Qualicum airport (CAT4), you would cross midfield, then turn downwind for the active. Of course, the commercial operator there violates this procedure by flying straight-in approaches, and departing the opposite way!

If you approach Nanaimo airport (CYCD), which has an FSS (advisory) service, they will help you choose whichever method you prefer, as long as it agrees with their recommendation! Once the FSS is closed, however, you use the first method.

Basically it comes down to this... if no official agency on the ground is assisting you, fly the first method.

You can download the Canadian AIM here.

Good luck!
 
Interesting Canadian documentation requirements at the first link too.

Documents on Board Aircraft

It is required that the following be carried on board aircraft: flight crew licences, including Medical Certificate and radio licence; Certificate of Registration and Certificate of Airworthiness (including annual inspection report); aircraft and pilot radio licences; aircraft Journey Log (when it is planned that an aircraft will land and shut-down at an airport other than the airport of departure).

The Pilot Operating Handbook, interception orders , and aircraft weight and balance report must also be on board.

The Pilot Operating Handbook must be accessible to the pilot at his or her station.



Can one of our up north members also say if these apply to visiting US aircraft?

Old information, here's your answer: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp15048-menu-5859.htm

However, it is not quite definitive, so use this: http://www.aopa.org/Flight-Planning/Canada
 
Last edited:
So, for example, if you are approaching the uncontrolled Parksville/Qualicum airport (CAT4), you would cross midfield, then turn downwind for the active. Of course, the commercial operator there violates this procedure by flying straight-in approaches, and departing the opposite way!

We had the same problem in Australia, so the regulator changed the rules to make straight-ins standard too :)

In truth, virtually any circuit join is fine, on any leg of the pattern. Just be smart, communicate, look out, and give way to anyone who is already established.

Figure 3 on page 10 here has the skinny: https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/pilots/download/nca_booklet.pdf

We've all seen gloriously incandescent internet arguments about the merits of joining on the 45, and it bemuses us that you USA folks fetishize it so much. :) The purpose of the circuit pattern is a visual judgement aid to help you put the airplane on the ground in the specific location where you want to put it, without hitting anything else. If you achieve that, it's all good, and everything else is secondary.

- mark
 
Last edited:
It also appears from these links that the standard US 45 is OK, and just about any other approach to these airports is also OK.
Caution: For an ATF airport (aerodrome traffic frequency) where there is no ground station talking to you (ie. a fully uncontrolled airport) this is not correct. The ONLY approaches allowed in that case are the midfield approach to downwind, or the straight in to downwind if you can be certain that there will be no conflict.

For an MF airport (mandatory frequency) where there is a ground station providing guidance, a 45 approach is acceptable.
 
Caution: For an ATF airport (aerodrome traffic frequency) where there is no ground station talking to you (ie. a fully uncontrolled airport) this is not correct. The ONLY approaches allowed in that case are the midfield approach to downwind, or the straight in to downwind if you can be certain that there will be no conflict.

For an MF airport (mandatory frequency) where there is a ground station providing guidance, a 45 approach is acceptable.

My experience at Lethbridge, AB was that the ground station operator was almost acting like a tower controller and any approach would have been acceptable if it fit in with other traffic.

The use of NavCanada paid "Unicom" operators was interesting and a good safety idea.
 
My experience at Lethbridge, AB was that the ground station operator was almost acting like a tower controller and any approach would have been acceptable if it fit in with other traffic.

The use of NavCanada paid "Unicom" operators was interesting and a good safety idea.

Unicom, or FSS is advisory only, legally speaking. Some of them seem to think they can give orders, but they can't.
 
not unusual, and pilots act the same too!

As many towered fields become MF after a certain time, ( positive control becomes 'advisory' as I unnerstand it), lots of pilots forget, and make the same calls, waiting for instructions, so the 'advisor' often gives runway in use, traffic, and taxi directions like they were a 'controller'......then...." taxi at your discretion.." and that type of verbage.
 
Thanks

Good Info. I had misread the transport Canada link and thought all the blue arrows were applicable for ATF fields, where in fact only the two green ones were. So at completely no radio ATF fields the only unrestricted entry is from the upwind midfield, the downwind entry being restricted to a non-interference basis.

So if flying vfr entry patterns anywhere in Canada, a good general rule is to plan on the upwind midfield approach, and only deviate from that if there is a common radio frequency in use and you can declare your "deviate" approach on that frequency.

I don't think this is common knowledge in the US, and it probably should be. I have occasionally done the upwind midfield approach at US unicom fields and do like it, since it gives a good view of the downwind spacing of other aircraft, and if there is no room to slot in on the downwind, I just continue straight on thru and join the 45.

Thanks guys.
 
Good Info. I had misread the transport Canada link and thought all the blue arrows were applicable for ATF fields, where in fact only the two green ones were. So at completely no radio ATF fields the only unrestricted entry is from the upwind midfield, the downwind entry being restricted to a non-interference basis.

So if flying vfr entry patterns anywhere in Canada, a good general rule is to plan on the upwind midfield approach, and only deviate from that if there is a common radio frequency in use and you can declare your "deviate" approach on that frequency.

I don't think this is common knowledge in the US, and it probably should be. I have occasionally done the upwind midfield approach at US unicom fields and do like it, since it gives a good view of the downwind spacing of other aircraft, and if there is no room to slot in on the downwind, I just continue straight on thru and join the 45.

Thanks guys.


Good reasoning, although by definition even ATF fields do have designated radio frequency that all traffic will use. In practice, we are very used to listening and watching for traffic taking shortcuts, particularly straight-ins and joining on base. Even though this is often done with considerable disrespect and lack of courtesy to other traffic, it is something we are on guard for. Although it may seem counterintuitive to American pilots, the one thing that would really take us by surprise (in my personal experience, anyway) would be someone joining on the 45, as it really is not a commonly used approach here.

In any case, at any non-MF uncontrolled field, using basic VFR common sense and making sure other traffic knows your intentions and your position will usually result in drama free arrivals, whatever entry to the pattern you use.

Come on up; we're friendly!
 
I had a conflict last summer at Sechelt-Gibsons. I had performed the standard crosswind midfield approach to turn downwind when an American pilot announce a straight-in, which was a conflict.

I advised him that the standard approach was a crosswind midfield, but that I would extend my downwind if he wanted to land straight in. He said thanks, and proceeded to fly the crosswind approach.

So everything worked out due to good communications and common courtesy.

Note that this would have been a conflict in either country!
 
This is a good thread thanks OP. Having landed on a few Canadian fields I entered 45 degrees to DW to some and to others I used "non standard" entries as well. Guilty but there was nobody in the air to conflict with. Gerry, now I know the proper procedure at your field might use soon. :)
 
This is a good thread thanks OP. Having landed on a few Canadian fields I entered 45 degrees to DW to some and to others I used "non standard" entries as well. Guilty but there was nobody in the air to conflict with. Gerry, now I know the proper procedure at your field might use soon. :)


That would be a very welcome visit, Vlad! By the way, my wife is a really, I mean really, good cook. Just sayin'...
 
nice diagrams, almost useless

Just a data point; lots of good info here, but add some mountains, rivers, cel towers, bird sanctuaries, mink farms etc. and most of the theory goes out the window!
In my limited experience here in the interior of BC, almost every field is an 'exception' for some part of the circuit, wind direction, or time of day. I guess that's why they publish the CFS, and some airport have more than one page!

still following the basic 'rules' is great. ........ if you can, orbit at 5 miles, listen and observe what others do, even the bad examples are good to learn from...not to mention gives you time to learn the landmarks and reporting points they use, that are seldom obvious to the uninitiated.
caveat: Local Guys still call........... 'over the xxxxxxx'............ 10 years after it's been demolished!

Another example, I went for a nice flight over Victoria BC with a local, and no more that 3 minutes in, I was totally and hopelessly lost. The tower said something like 'report over the tip of xxxx isalnd', well, all 32 little islands looked exactly the same to me, each with a tiny lighthouse or beacon.
Floatplanes owned the first 500', and jets and commuters 1500' and up. Looked more like controlled chaos than a control zone to me! :)
 
Last edited:
The Australian way includes overflying at above pattern height towards the dead side of the strip, then descending and turning to join mid downwind usually.
 
So what happens in Canada when an RV pilot does an Overhead approach?

Is the airplane confiscated and the pilot jailed?;)
 
So what happens in Canada when an RV pilot does an Overhead approach?

Is the airplane confiscated and the pilot jailed?;)

At uncontrolled airports, the best way is a downwind break. Cross midfield in formation, turn downwind, reduce speed then do a 180 degree 6 second break to final at the perch. At that point we are in stream and technically no longer a formation.

Because other aircraft may be unfamilier with this manoeuvre, after the break we will make individual radio calls such as 'XYZ number 3 of 6 RVs downwind turning final for runway 07' and so on. This improves the situational awareness for other aircraft.

The overhead break, on the other hand can lead to problems... Other aircraft in the circuit or NORDO aircraft may not understand the manoeuvre which leads to conflicts. Midfield at circuit height is not the best place to be with other traffic arriving.
 
The Australian way includes overflying at above pattern height towards the dead side of the strip, then descending and turning to join mid downwind usually.


Exactly what I have been doing at my airport for 28 years, and how I was originally taught to do arrivals. Further to flyboy1963's point, our airport has a lefthand circuit for one runway direction and righthand for the other, which means that the "dead side" is always the same side. Actually makes things very simple; if arriving from the direction of the dead side, just fly crosswind at pattern altitude, check the wind sock on the way over, and turn left or right onto the appropriate downwind. If arriving from the pattern side, overfly 500 ft higher, descend on the dead side, and join from crosswind. Having the "exception" (in this case righthand circuits for runway 31) actually makes arrivals much simpler.

Toobuilder: I haven't seen people doing many overhead breaks, but I may have seen the odd low approach with a 180 pullup into the downwind, which, in my opinion is the absolute best way to get an RV down to approach speed without the risk of the dreaded shock cooling (the horror...) while getting a really, really good look at the windsock at the same time. Safety first, kids. I may have been indoctrinated in the many fine qualities of the low approach by a former military pilot who may have once owned an RV8. Maybe;) As for landing in jail, Transport Canada has had so much of its budget cut that unless someone files a specific complaint, enforcement is more of a rumour than a real threat at this point at most smaller airports in the country.
 
Exactly what I have been doing at my airport for 28 years, and how I was originally taught to do arrivals. Further to flyboy1963's point, our airport has a lefthand circuit for one runway direction and righthand for the other, which means that the "dead side" is always the same side. Actually makes things very simple; if arriving from the direction of the dead side, just fly crosswind at pattern altitude, check the wind sock on the way over, and turn left or right onto the appropriate downwind. If arriving from the pattern side, overfly 500 ft higher, descend on the dead side, and join from crosswind. Having the "exception" (in this case righthand circuits for runway 31) actually makes arrivals much simpler.

Toobuilder: I haven't seen people doing many overhead breaks, but I may have seen the odd low approach with a 180 pullup into the downwind, which, in my opinion is the absolute best way to get an RV down to approach speed without the risk of the dreaded shock cooling (the horror...) while getting a really, really good look at the windsock at the same time. Safety first, kids. I may have been indoctrinated in the many fine qualities of the low approach by a former military pilot who may have once owned an RV8. Maybe;) As for landing in jail, Transport Canada has had so much of its budget cut that unless someone files a specific complaint, enforcement is more of a rumour than a real threat at this point at most smaller airports in the country.

Actually, my example was based on lessons learned from an actual incident leading to a conflict reported and investigated by Transport Canada. Turns out that the C172 was flying a 500 foot circuit to save fuel! How's that for a non-standard operations? The formation flight ended up in conflict and both the C172 instructor and the formation team were found to be in conflict with SOP And received a strong tsk tsk. BTW the C172 Instuctor claimed that is was 'his' airport and he could do what he wanted!
 
Some distant memory tells me that Canadian regs say to be at pattern altitude some miles distant from the circuit altitude. Yes/No? On this point, the notion of descending anywhere in the circuit is an invitation to us low-wingers to drop onto a lower high-winger, each nearly invisible to the other, a classic type of collision on final.

Interesting thread to a Yank. There's a whiff of overzealous regulatory imposition (TC investigates conflicts!?) when on this side of the line there's a suggested pattern but no requirement other than see and avoid and some right-of-way rules.

John Siebold
 
Further to flyboy1963's point, our airport has a lefthand circuit for one runway direction and righthand for the other, which means that the "dead side" is always the same side. Actually makes things very simple; if arriving from the direction of the dead side, just fly crosswind at pattern altitude, check the wind sock on the way over, and turn left or right onto the appropriate downwind. If arriving from the pattern side, overfly 500 ft higher, descend on the dead side, and join from crosswind.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but here in BC, I don't think i've seen an uncontrolled airport where this isn't the case... All circuits being to one side of the airport. It makes for very standard and predictable patterns for people to approach the airport... Assuming everyone reads their CFS before arriving...
 
Entry to the circuit is always at circuit altitude, but I don't recall any regulation that says you have to be at the altitude x miles out.

As for TC investigation, it was driven by a CADORS filed by the flight school (like a NASA report). TC tracks any incident, sometimes very minor ones, for statistical purposes. For example, 'tower controller was late arriving at work'! Snowflake may have more info on this.... I think he was with the formation involved at the time.

Update: Here's link to the report. Please note that the information contained are depositions, not facts! Also, formation flight lead is ex-RCAF with 50+ years of flying experience, SFC lead rating.
 
Last edited:
... Assuming everyone reads their CFS before arriving...


I only wish we all could safely make that assumption Rob! I can't count the number of times I've seen people fly a lefthand downwind to the runway that is specified as using a righthand pattern at our airport. Unfortunately, there are a couple of local users that do it to save time as well (skydivers and spray planes, although of course the sprayers fly that downwind at about 100 ft, so...). Very frustrating.
 
I only wish we all could safely make that assumption Rob! I can't count the number of times I've seen people fly a lefthand downwind to the runway that is specified as using a righthand pattern at our airport. Unfortunately, there are a couple of local users that do it to save time as well (skydivers and spray planes, although of course the sprayers fly that downwind at about 100 ft, so...). Very frustrating.

It would be nice if the Canadians put the traffic pattern direction on their VFR charts...:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top