What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Suggest a better way to handle this situation:

T

TOAD

Well Known Member
Last evening I witnesses two events that I would like opinions on. I would like suggestions on how to handle them as well as what I might expect from other pilots. Here are the two events as the happened from my prospective.

I live on an uncontrolled field and most of us all know one another as well as the personnel in the FBO operating here. Conditions were clear but with a lot of haze in the vicinity. ATIS was 10 mi visibility so there was no issue there.

A high wing aircraft was taking off on runway 15 and announced departure something like:
Plane 1: ?CESSNA 123 on runway 15 taking off, Departing to the north from the downwind.?
Plane 2: ?CESSNA XYZ 2 miles to the South-East descending on the 45, landing runway 15.?
As I watched the two planes were on collision course (no laughing formation flyers). Projected collision point was about where Plane 1 was turning down wind from the x-wind.
Plane 2: ?Hey pal you just cut me off on downwind !!! :mad:?

My thoughts are two parts. First I believe that most of us here would smile and extend or do a 360 or just write this up to a new student learning. Second I would like opinions about Plane 2 and the attitude in the radio call. Do you think it was appropriate to show irritation? What would your action be from either plane? The second incident is more importation but this is the prelude to what happened later.

See second posting for the second event.
 
Second event request comments:

Winds light shifting back and forth from north to south at the airport. Runway 15 had been in use most of the evening and is written up in the directory as the preferred runway.


Piper 123 taxis out and departs runway 33. At the time the windsock was hanging limp.
On return from a half hour flight I heard:
Plane 1: ?Piper 123 reporting from Checkpoint-X landing runway 33.?
Plane 2: (in the run-up area) ?Airport-X is using runway 15!?
Plane 1: ?Piper 123 landing 33? I will be off the runway shortly?
This is what I saw I do not know exactly when plane 2 took the runway.
Plane 2: (silence)
Plane 1: down to about 100 ft AGL and 100 ft down from the threshold on final. POWERS UP
Plane 1: ?Doing a go around? and proceeds to step to the right of the runway, then climbs out just over the trees midfield to the right.
Plane 2: (came into my view midfield climbing about 7-8 seconds later) I do not know exactly when he started the takeoff roll.)

Clearly Plane 2 (the same one as in the proceeding event) should not take off into a landing aircraft... EVER!
In my opinion Plane 1 (and I know the pilot well) was being pushy. I feel the pattern should not be disrupted without good reason. Yes we could land and be off by the first exit but is that the point?
What would you as Pilot 2 say or do (if anything) for this situation. I have had a talk with the instructor but am somewhat saddened by the whole event.
 
RE: Scenario #1

The scenario is an example of what was presented at a FAA safety seminar at the Melbourne, FL a few months ago. The instructor set up his teaching point with a condition like you described. The issue was with the aircraft on the 45. The instructor pointed out that if you make your aimpoint at the center of the runway you will likely intercept the pattern just where a crosswind aircraft is turning downwind. In 45 years of flying I never noticed that. Now sensitized I make my intercept aimpoint more toward the approach end of the runway and guess what? I intercept the downwind at about midpoint. And I thought I knew everything there was to know about flying....lol
Don
 
My opinions only

Well, accidents do happen, and in these 2 cases, nothing seemed to be "accidental". :confused: Out of the 4 parties involved, 3 of them seem to have aggressive behavior. I've seen things happen before at airports when someone acts like that and it really blows my mind.

A question, though...in the first scenario you said that Plane 2 was "2 miles to the South-East descending on the 45, landing runway 15" I'm assuming it's not a right-hand pattern, so did he mis-call his position? In drawing it out on paper it seems that Plane 2 should've entered straight on the downwind from his position. If he were directly East, then he was on a 45 for downwind, left traffic, runway 15.

Anyway, I'd consider filing a report with the FAA. Personally, I'd want to handle it myself, but I learned a long time ago that if I did that everytime I saw something stupid, I'd get in a lot of fights!

Now, before a bunch of peope get bent about me recommending to "report" someone to the authorities, let me state this: I, personally, think that aggressive people have no business flying. At least not until they check their bad attitude. I don't want to end up playing chicken with someone in the sky someday because I did something that someone didn't like, so they feel the need to put our lives in danger. Secondly, unless you're willing to confront the aggressive person about what they did, you have no other real alternative...and being that they're aggressive in the first place, you might get yourself in a tussle. Sometimes, I wouldn't mind option #2.
 
i work at klax and have taxied aircraft for twelve years there and have heard many things said,funny and aggressive. i saw two 747 nose to nose on a taxi way with full landing lights at each others faces like children cause one wouldnt turn the lights off on the other this happend because one was exiting the runway the other cutting it off on the exit. i almost collided with a plane coming out of a loop in the aerobatic area once and when i finally did chased the plane, stopped after i cooled down and couldnt catch up. because i remember being so angry, that plane never anounced itself on the freq. so it tough sitting here saying agressive pilots should stay on the ground or that we cant get mad. we should learn to control and of course learn from it lets not push it. here's a funny one. l.a. ground, acft 123 holding short alpha alpha. acft 123, l.a. ground, yeah and your doing a good job at it continue holding i will call you back. see we all do it.
 
I guess I would say, what does it take to move your plane to a different airport to be based off. It seems people are really on the edge and aggressive at this airport.
But on the serious note, I would try some how to talk to them and find out their exact circumstance, if nothing urgent about their situation, then I would express my concern about their type attitude in flying.
 
According to Sigmund Freud...

There seems to be two trains of thought here.

Either a) there are several pilots with "Alpha Male/Type A" personality issues or b) there are several pilots who have an overly laid back attitude towards safety of flight.

Both types of pilots are dangerous, and difficult to talk to. When confronted, the Alpha Male will just get in your face and try to justify his actions - whether right or wrong. FAR/AIM won't change his opinion of his superior piloting skills or knowledge of the rules. On the other hand, the laid back pilot will just say "no harm - no foul", without even considering that the only reason that there was "no harm" was because someone else had to deviate from "normal" procedure to get out of his "abnormal" way.

I've had these very same discussions with pilots - there's just no way to fix their attitude without some type of enforcement action. :(
 
Sounds like too much urban driving to me. They're all afraid they'll "lose their place". I'd say to just tag em, watch em, & avoid them. If your lucky they'll punch each others ticket. Just more "cool guys" in spam cans anyway.
 
Interesting combination....

If you want to be factual and exacting to the AIM/FARs - which we all try to do, right?

Event #1.

Plane 1 should not be departing the pattern from downwind... it's not a recognized departure point in the AIM for traffic patterns -

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap4/aim0403.html

and

http://rgl.faa.gov/REGULATORY_AND_G...7c9457e4ab862569d800780551/$FILE/AC90-66A.pdf

Event #2.

The FAR right-of-way rules clearly state that a landing aircraft on final has right-of way - this is independent of wind direction, etc.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...934f0a02e17e7de086256eeb005192fc!OpenDocument

..so Plane 1 is correct, and Plane 2 should not have entered the runway.

So the regulations/guidance score is a 1-1 draw...:)

Since both events could have easily turned out bad, and any aggressive behavior does not help any pilots here - do you have a local FAA Safety Counselor you could talk to?

I'd also like to hear a Flight Instructor's view on the above comments...:)

PS

"I'd say to just tag em, watch em, & avoid them" would also be a good strategy in the mean time.
 
Alpha Male alert!!!

Hi Gil,

I guess I've never noticed the traffic diagram Fig 4-3-2 in the AIM. At my uncontrolled airport, I often hear pilots (including myself) reporting a "downwind departure to the south", or "departing crosswind to the west", or some other similar call. Seems to me to be OK, but perhaps I've been doing it wrong all this time.

I can see how a crosswind departure may put me directly in the path of the airplane inbound on the 45*, so maybe that's not such a good idea, but the downwind departure simply involves breaking out of the pattern after other traffic has merged into the pattern.

Maybe I'll have to change my method of departure...
 
So true

Both types of pilots are dangerous, and difficult to talk to. When confronted, the Alpha Male will just get in your face and try to justify his actions - whether right or wrong. FAR/AIM won't change his opinion of his superior piloting skills or knowledge of the rules.

This is so true. I am trying to be careful because I actually know both pilots and my main concern is to keep it safe and to HAVE FUN. Right now there are two mad pilots. I am hoping that by putting this out there we, myself included, can do some arm-chair flying and be prepared with how we would like to respond. As I observed and watched the events unfold, I found myself angry and saying to myself don't do that... and what did you expect. I want to prepare myself for encounters that are bound to happen. We need to be responsible for our actions. I would like some of the new pilots to be aware that there will be moments that require cool heads to be safe.

These events are not representative of daily activity at this airport. That struck me as sort of funny, no this is an unusual case. I have seen some rude and some dangerous flying but those people tend to take themselves out of the gene pool or the neighborhood rather quickly.
 
Thanks Az gila

6. If departing the traffic pattern, continue straight out, or exit with a 45 degree turn (to the left when in a left-hand traffic pattern; to the right when in a right-hand traffic pattern) beyond the departure end of the runway, after reaching pattern altitude.

Air traffic controllers et.al.
I have often wondered what your call is for an aircraft asking for a downwind departure. What do you expect? How do you instruct? What would be your preference? Should I request for a downwind departure from the pattern? Should I fly the "Standard" pattern and you vector other traffic around me as I make a turn outside the traffic pattern to the downwind?
 
DakotaHawk said:
There seems to be two trains of thought here.

Either a) there are several pilots with "Alpha Male/Type A" personality issues or b) there are several pilots who have an overly laid back attitude towards safety of flight.

Both are usually short lived in aviation. They crash and burn then you don't have to deal with them.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Scenario 1: The pilot entering the pattern must give right of way to aircraft already in the pattern.

Scenario 2: The guy can land on whatever runway he wants. If he does a go around due to his own goof up. The guy waiting to TO on 15 may choose to sneak out so he doesnt have to wait for the other guy to do a entire pattern. Not saying its prudent but thats what I think may have been the case.
 
Air Rage?

Road Rage must have spread to Air Rage.

Not surprised, there are weird, ego driven nuts everywhere and some have found their way into an airplane. I avoid them on the road and in the air like a bad disease by operating defensively. If they have to have it their way, have at it.

The only other way to deal with such insanity is with a gun and that will never do in our society - except in Texas, it's legal. :)
 
vupilot said:
Scenario 1: The pilot entering the pattern must give right of way to aircraft already in the pattern.

Scenario 2: The guy can land on whatever runway he wants. If he does a go around due to his own goof up. The guy waiting to TO on 15 may choose to sneak out so he doesnt have to wait for the other guy to do a entire pattern. Not saying its prudent but thats what I think may have been the case.
Click to expand...

I agree!

Still, it should be a lesson in patience and diligence. I try never to "judge" my fellow pilots. Given the opportunity I will gladly instruct them, but knowing my own limitations I am not immune to mistakes.
 
Your original post was along the lines of how to handle the situation. I am assuming you mean what should you do about it. Your description of the events was quite detailed but in order to suggest a method of dealing with it more needs to be known about the pilots involved.

Are they long time acqauintences, good friends, new pilot, old time pilots, idiots, or are they normally good well behaved pilots?

If they are longtime local airport residents and normally good pilots I would suggest doing nothing. They know they acted stupidly and in an unsafe manner and probably won't do it again. Everyone at some time does something dumb that ends up being unsafe at the moment and learns from their mistake.

In this case I would just leave it be unless it becomes a recurrent or common event.

Then you have to decide on talking to them or the FAA.

My experience has been that pilots who frequently put others at risk seldom listen to advice unless there is a badge behind it.
 
Downwind departure

At both airports I operate primarily from, departing from down wind is the norm. At one of the (NW Regional, 52F, home of our intrepid forum founder) Alliance Airport and Class D is to the west and if you go east or South you have Class B segments to make sure you're handling correctly. Most of my flights either go NE or NW from the 17/35 runway. When taking off on 17, continuing on crosswind and downwind then exiting NE or NW seems to provide minimal disruption to traffic flow.

All rules have exceptions but this seems like a good place to use departing form downwind. Here's a link to the map so you can see for yourself. Any suggestions?

http://www.runwayfinder.com/?loc=52F

BTW in Scenario 1 both pilots should have been announcing their position more and the plane taking off should not have turned crosswind until visual contact was made with the arriving flight. The arriving flight should have made visual contact with the departing flight and if the speeds and positions looked like conflict would happen they should have communicated.
 
One runway at my home airport specifically requires a downwind departure. Due to the surrounding airspace (other airports that have control zones, ours is uncontrolled) the departure eastbound can be straight out, but the departure from a westbound takeoff requires a climb to downwind and an eastbound departure. From there, you can call one of the surrounding zones and get clearance in if you want to do something else. It's non-standard, yes, but it's also the safest in this location.

It sounds like in scenario #2 the implication is that Plane #1 went around becuase Plane #2 "got pushy" and tried to force his active runway choice on an airplane already in the circuit. Regardless of what traffic had been doing all evening, if the circuit was empty and the windsock was limp, Plane #1 can choose his runway. An airplane in the run-up bay for a conflicting runway does not change that, it just makes it inconvenient for the plane in the run-up bay and if it's safe to do so the pilot of Plane #1 should probably try to accommodate him. But he doesn't have to.
 
Snowflake said:
It sounds like in scenario #2 the implication is that Plane #1 went around because Plane #2 "got pushy" and tried to force his active runway choice on an airplane already in the circuit. Regardless of what traffic had been doing all evening, if the circuit was empty and the windsock was limp, Plane #1 can choose his runway. An airplane in the run-up bay for a conflicting runway does not change that, it just makes it inconvenient for the plane in the run-up bay and if it's safe to do so the pilot of Plane #1 should probably try to accommodate him. But he doesn't have to.
Click to expand...

I totally agree.

There is a reason it is published as the "preferred" runway. The pilot always has the final say in what runway he chooses to use (though he may eventually find himself in a situation where he needs to "explain" why he chose something other than the "preferred" runway.
Airplane # 2 beginning his takeoff because he was on the "correct" runway was totally out of line and I think there is total justification for filling a report.

As for scenario #1...I think it is a bit more complicated. Traffic merging in a traffic pattern requires pilots to work together but it was still airplane #2 merging into the pattern that airplane #1 was already in, and he shouldn't have been doing it at the point that airplane #1 would have been making his turn to crosswind. In fact, if #1 cut him off during #1's turn to downwind, #2 must have actually been entering the pattern at the point of an extended downwind. Not a good practice.
I feel that the burden is on the pilot entering the pattern, to make what ever adjustments are necessary to merge into the traffic that is already there. It was mentioned that he reported "2 miles out descending on the 45". 2 miles is close enough to actually entering the pattern (the way some pilots have been taught to fly airliner patterns you would actually be in the pattern at two miles :eek:) that airplane #2 should have already been at pattern altitude. This is a major danger issue in traffic patterns...airplanes descending into the pattern while merging with airplanes still climbing on the crosswind leg.

my 2 cents
 
Scott.... often the local "published"...

rvbuilder2002 said:
I totally agree.

There is a reason it is published as the "preferred" runway. The pilot always has the final say in what runway he chooses to use (though he may eventually find himself in a situation where he needs to "explain" why he chose something other than the "preferred" runway.
Airplane # 2 beginning his takeoff because he was on the "correct" runway was totally out of line and I think there is total justification for filling a report.

....

my 2 cents
Click to expand...

...preferred runway is really local lore, and not actually published in any source available to non-based pilots. We don't know which airport this is, so I can't look up the official sources...:)

I disagree with your reasoning though, but I do agree with your conclusion.

I think the FAR that says an aircraft on final has right-of-way trumps any stuff about preferred runways.

We are talking about an actual FAR (91.113) here, not a non-regulatory Advisory Circular in this particular case - the take-off plane should have waited on the ground, or even exited the runway if he was already on it.

....
(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....
 
Last edited:
az_gila said:
I disagree with your reasoning though, but I do agree with your conclusion.

I think the FAR that says an aircraft on final has right-of-way trumps any stuff about preferred runways.

We are talking about an actual FAR (91.113) here, not a non-regulatory Advisory Circular in this particular case - the take-off plane should have waited on the ground, or even exited the runway if he was already on it.

....
(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....
Click to expand...

I totally agree (I think you mistook my statement for the oppose of what I was meaning to say ).
I didn't mention the requirement to yeild to landing aircraft, because it already had been. I was talking specifically about the preferred runway issue because the OP seemed to have been focusing on that.

I was meaning to emphasize that preferred was just that, "preferred". It doesn't mean any pilot is required by regulation to use that runway in any given situation and that just because another aircraft is using the "preferred" runway, that he would have the right of way.
A landing aircraft always has the right of way regardless of whether another pilot feels it is a correct runway choice or not.

P.S. Now a days it is very common for a preferred or calm wind runway to be published in airport directory's/guides for many airports (not just local folklore). Very often it is done because the airport operator is trying to work with local residents to minimize noise impact, though it is still not a regulatory requirement that a pilot follow the recommendation.
 
Last edited:
Independence has a published "preferred" runway. As Scott says, it is not regulatory but for the benefit of the adjacent town.
 
Depends on your...

sandpiper said:
Independence has a published "preferred" runway. As Scott says, it is not regulatory but for the benefit of the adjacent town.
Click to expand...

...definition of "published" just like I said earlier.

It is not mentioned in the Remarks section of the FAA Form 5010 for your airport...

http://www.gcr1.com/5010web/airport.cfm?Site=7S5

...and these Remarks are usually carried over to the Airnav web page...

http://www.airnav.com/airport/7S5

I presume we are talking about 7S5... Independence State Airport

It still falls under "local lore" if it is not officially recorded anywhere.

How would a visiting pilot know?
Your unofficial web page does not really count...:)...the one that I know you will respond with...:D

Have your airport authority (OREGON DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION per the 5010) amend their Master Record and make it official - or perhaps TOM FRANKLIN the manager can do it.
 
Gil,

Not too many people would carry around the 5010's. They might, however, carry Flight Guide or refer to AOPA's Airport Directory both of which publish the information. However, it is not published in several other publications so, you are correct, it could be done better.
 
az_gila said:
I presume we are talking about 7S5... Independence State Airport

It still falls under "local lore" if it is not officially recorded anywhere.

How would a visiting pilot know?
Your unofficial web page does not really count...:)...the one that I know you will respond with...:D

Have your airport authority (OREGON DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION per the 5010) amend their Master Record and make it official - or perhaps TOM FRANKLIN the manager can do it.
Click to expand...

Gil,
I am not sure I (we?) understand your point. Just because you found an instance where a particular airport does not have it properly published (obviously the poster didn't realize that) does not mean there isn't a lot of other airports that do. In our example case it sounded like both of the pilots were based at the example airport so we can assume that even if it was just local lore that they both new about it.

Aurora State Airport...home base of Van's Aircraft.
AirNav data can be found here

It shows the designated calm wind runway is 35.

I guess I understand your point related to the OP's original example, but we don't know what airport that is...it may have a published calm wind runway.
Still a moot point because as said before it is not regulatory...which is why I don't understand why the thread has drifted in a direction that implys it is.
 
My point was...

sandpiper said:
Gil,

Not too many people would carry around the 5010's. They might, however, carry Flight Guide or refer to AOPA's Airport Directory both of which publish the information. However, it is not published in several other publications so, you are correct, it could be done better.
Click to expand...

...that if it is in the FAA Airport Master Record it will tend to get spread to those other publications that you mention...:)

Airnav is free and seems to link to the Master Record, the other two mentioned are not...

I didn't mean to pick on you, and previously avoided cherry picking airports at random...:D

Sorry for the drift off topic... as I said, the Right-of-Way FAR trumps all - and aggressive behavior will lead to accidents, which would be one way airports get closed - you know the 6 O'Clock News and "planes raining out of the sky" lead story...:rolleyes:
 
Truth is, neither published preferred runways, local unofficial noise abatement procedures, FAR's or right-of-ways "trump" our responsibility to "see and avoid". The rule above all other rules is "thou shalt not crash"!
 
Here is an update

The airport is S36 Crest. The Pilots were a local resident and an instructor. Do I know them? Well the resident yes, the instructor no.. but I spoke with another long-time co-instructor who is now dealing with the issue. In truth this seems to be a road rage issue to me now. I feel that both pilots were and are capable of dealing with the flying side with no problem. The instructor may (probably did) have had a student up with him at the time. I always try to give any student as much leeway and encouragement as possible. I remember when... (that would be another good thread)

I posted this so that other pilots would be aware of these situations and I was looking for some suggestions of how to deal with the pilots, and how I might better handle a future situation like this. I still would like to know how ATC would like me to request and fly a downwind departure and a controlled tower field.

Here is some of what I have picked up on...
I will now make the 45 degree departure in the direction of the pattern when reaching pattern altitude... if I am confused or there is traffic close by. I knew this but it has now been driven home why this is such a good idea.
Second At my own field I have always looked for incoming traffic arriving on the 45 and will be more attentive to that in the future.
Third I will be more mindful of the frustration it causes when I change direction so I can land at my end if the field. (I live close to the numbers like one of pilots in the discussion so we think the preferred pattern always favors that direction <grin>). I do understand this somewhat more than I have let on.
Fourth I now know that there are others that would have turned this over the FAA and I share some of the reasoning given. I do not want to be flying with anyone dangerous period.

Thanks for all the input. If anyone wants to write to the proper controlled tower speak I would appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Preferred runway

I had to look this up but...
In the Airport/Facility Directory published by the FAA, Under Crest airpark (Kent) there is a remark saying:

Night Ops use Rwy 15, wind and weather permitting.

This is sort of like stating a preferred runway, but I had the wording wrong. My mistake.

I know this says Night Ops but I don't know why the instruction is there in the first place. I see no reason for it myself. There are trees all around anyway. If the runway lights disappear you are low!!!! This could be the reason for the instruction.... maybe.....

I had not looked at the instruction recently but simply know that the FBO people preferred runway 15 as it was closer to their end of the field. I know that the instructor will always land at the north given a choice. I will often land long from that direction myself just to keep everyone happy.
 
I have the solution...

All the pilots mentioned in the original scenarios should have to go through open heart surgery which requires a minimum 6 month waiting period which practically turns into 9-12 months minimum. The long waiting period of not being PIC plus the emotional trauma of "Will I ever get to fly again?" will result in pilots who have a different appreciation of their "privilege" (FAA terminology) to pilot an aircraft. Thus they will be more tolerant of other pilots' aggressive behavior and will be better citizens of the air. :)

Just my two cents...

Don

Successful open heart surgery in 2009 and now flying again!!!
 
lessons: arrival and departure from patterns

One of the sub-threads in this discussion has been proper/accepted/expected procedures for arriving and departing from traffic patterns.

I learned something I didn't know from this, but have some additional observations.

1) 45-entries. I learned something here. I went and looked up the AIM figure 4-3-2. I learned to fly at a gliderport and we always made our pattern entries from an "I.P" at approximately the point of turning from cross-wind to down-wind for closed traffic. Of course, at a gliderport, no one is doing circuits ;).
But my habits extend from that, and so I have always tended to enter inbound on a 45 that intersects at that point. I guess I have to say I see a lot of other power pilots do it too. One might argue that you are more easily seen by the airplane turning downwind if you enter at this point, whereas if you enter at a point abeam mid-field, you are approaching from a more blind point. That argument not withstanding, I will mend my ways and start entering more abeam mid-field.

2) downwind departures. Here I must differ with other posters. I routinely request and am cleared for downwind departures at tower airports, and I routinely announce and use downwind departures from uncontrolled airports.
If you think about it, this is far and away the safest direction to depart a traffic pattern. I reach pattern altitude at about the downwind turn, and continue climbing out of the pattern as I fly downwind. No other airplane would be near there, except for someone flying an overhead descending entry to downwind and even then, they are surely lower.
Certainly on a downwind departure one must be careful not to conflict with someone on a long straight-in approach -- again, I'm going to be much higher anyway. I have always thought cross-wind departures are dangerous because they create potential conflict with arriving airplanes. An arriving airplane on a 45 is going to cross paths with a cross-wind departure somewhere.
 
Not ignorance, just lack of courtesy.

even if you live at an uncontrolled field, airspace (for a little while longer at least) belongs to us all. there are recommended procedures in the AIM for arriving and departing uncontrolled fields: we all learn them as students, and they should be used - as a courtesy even if it's not required by immediate demands of safety, i.e, even if there is only one plane in the air for ten miles around. anyone NOT using them should be ready to give way to those who are. having said that, the definition of uncontrolled fields is they are UNCONTROLLED, so always watch for anybody, anywhere, when using them.

maybe you need to have a neighborhood pilots' association meeting and - besides introducing everyone there to each other - publicize, refresh, and reinforce the local procedures in everybody's minds. post a wall diagram of airplane locations in the instances you describe, on a non-attribution basis. most any pilot i know will recognize that those airplanes are not in good places relative to each other, and likely take a lesson without being lectured. (probably a bunch of people will start telling flying stories!) calling the FAA should be a last resort. we don't need them to help us keep our acts together, and besides, they are needed elsewhere.
 
the zen of uncontrolled fields...

Two points and a philosphical comment; one, I try to be as predictable as possible in the pattern of an uncontrolled field, especially if I am not a local. This includes speed, altitude, entry and exit. Second, I talk and listen, announce my position and intention at each move. ie;communicate, communicate, communicate! if the frequency is too crowded for that, maybe the airspace is equally overbooked!

The zen philosophy; I consider pattern flying to be a type of formation flying, complete with the attention and cooperation required. We are in the pattern with common, compatible and complimentary objectives. Let's be friends who play nicely with others.
 
scsmith said:
I learned to fly at a gliderport and we always made our pattern entries from an "I.P" at approximately the point of turning from cross-wind to down-wind for closed traffic. Of course, at a gliderport, no one is doing circuits ;).
Click to expand...

I got training at Skysailing at Freemont, CA before switching to Sierra Academy. Leading up to my solo, I did circuits at the gliderport. Don't let your assumptions get you into trouble.;) Overhead to teardrop entry, when I had ground school at Sierra, led me to think of pattern entry to be at the midpoint of downwind.
 
Me too at Sky Sailing, Fremont

flion said:
I got training at Skysailing at Freemont, CA before switching to Sierra Academy. Leading up to my solo, I did circuits at the gliderport. Don't let your assumptions get you into trouble.;) Overhead to teardrop entry, when I had ground school at Sierra, led me to think of pattern entry to be at the midpoint of downwind.
Click to expand...

Well, you have to admit, its pretty rare for airplanes to do circuits at a gliderport. At Sky Sailing, the standard procedure was for tow planes and othe power traffic to fly left patterns, and gliders fly right patterns. More than once I saw tow planes extend downwind to avoid head-to-head conflicts at base-to-final turn.

Nonetheless, your point is well taken - mid-field entry it is from now on. Mia culpa.
 
But glider training....

scsmith said:
Well, you have to admit, its pretty rare for airplanes to do circuits at a gliderport. At Sky Sailing, the standard procedure was for tow planes and othe power traffic to fly left patterns, and gliders fly right patterns. More than once I saw tow planes extend downwind to avoid head-to-head conflicts at base-to-final turn.

Nonetheless, your point is well taken - mid-field entry it is from now on. Mia culpa.
Click to expand...

...says to use an Initial Point (IP) for patterns.

Soar Mindens procedures http://www.soarminden.com/briefing_manual.pdf and Tom Knauff's Glider Basics book both show the IP at being opposite the mid-point of the runway on downwind... just like the AIM diagram.

I have many more glider hours than power, but regard the formal patterns for both as similar. Was your glider training different?

At Minden NV, I have seen power planes doing patterns along with gliders... depends on the power/glider mix ratio...
 
They are still at it!

I just heard this while having coffee on the patio. I think it is the same guy as in this earlier post. (The winds are calm the day is beautiful, it is a gorgeous morning, snow capped mountains in distant background)

Plane 1: Crest traffic, Cessna ABC landing runway 15. Anyone in the pattern please advise.
Plane 2: Piper XYZ in run-up area for runway 33. Aircraft are currently using runway 33. Cessna ABC, Are you practicing downwind landings?
Plane 1: Cessna ABC landing runway 15 Pilot discretion.
Plane 2: Piper XYZ holding short for runway 33. Cessna ABC we will be glad to accommodate any departure you choose.

I am still laughing.
 
TOAD said:
I just heard this while having coffee on the patio. I think it is the same guy as in this earlier post. (The winds are calm the day is beautiful, it is a gorgeous morning, snow capped mountains in distant background)

Plane 1: Crest traffic, Cessna ABC landing runway 15. Anyone in the pattern please advise.
Plane 2: Piper XYZ in run-up area for runway 33. Aircraft are currently using runway 33. Cessna ABC, Are you practicing downwind landings?
Plane 1: Cessna ABC landing runway 15 Pilot discretion.
Plane 2: Piper XYZ holding short for runway 33. Cessna ABC we will be glad to accommodate any departure you choose.

I am still laughing.
Click to expand...

was there other traffic in the pattern at this time?
 
Now your talkin'. People just gotta chill. How long a wait is it anyway, a minute and a half? Compare that to the lineup at a big airport.
 
I read through the first few posts here so I might have missed a few things. The CTAF is there for a reason and I am glad all pilots in this scenario are using it. All pilots generally have a right to use the airport as they see fit. Most scenarios are obvious as to who should be first. I tend to give priority to aircraft in the air. If you feel there is a conflict then just work with the other pilot..."Aircraft on final to 33, I am trying to depart 15, do I have time to depart first? Do you have me in sight?" If I don't recieve a favorable reply.... I just sit tight until I am sure the problem is de-conflicted.
 
Thread degrading to blog.

Danny7 no traffic at the moment. There had been traffic some 10 minutes earlier. Not at factor.

Jim - The Piper was not from Auburn. Do you have a quick witted pilot out of there also? This is actually a neighbor who is a hoot and has the best parties. The most tragic part of this is that you could get yourself cut out of some fun times with a bad attitude like that. You will have to get over here more often. Have you figured out which house is mine yet? Bring your wife My wife does not like tailgating at 130 knots either.

I enjoyed flying formation with you Saturday. Your video was neat because this is the first shot I have ever seen with me in it :rolleyes:. I would have taken pictures but I don't think the leads would have liked that. This is the first time I have been allowed out with our Cascade group. After the mini formation clinic I have a clear picture of the level we should be performing at ourselves. Ravens if you are reading. I feel like a Young Eagle kid who has just seen the light. Thanks! <g>
 
Who is entering downwind at the intersection of downwind and crosswind? This is a TERRIBLE place to enter the pattern because low wing airplanes (and even highwing) will be belly up to the on coming traffic which takes him totally out of the equation for avoiding a midair collision. So its up to one person to get it right.

The correct place to enter downwind is midfield at traffic pattern altitude on a 45 degree intercept. All applicable aircraft should be wings level at that point and have the highest possibility to see and avoid.

Aircraft established in the pattern have priority. If you cant enter the pattern without disturbing established traffic, you need to "break out" and circle around to enter with propper spacing.

Departing the pattern from anywhere other than extended centerline beyond the established traffic pattern increases the potential for an accident.

Finally, listen up on the radio. If youre not visual with departing/arriving traffic, you might want to fess up early.
 
TOAD said:
Cessna ABC landing runway 15. Anyone in the pattern please advise.
Click to expand...

I must admit that this phrase gives me air rage. Never do anything about it, but would love to reach through the mic and....... idiots.

AIM 4-1-9 g 1.

Confronting pilots typically never works, however on occasion I have made statements like. "I don't want to argue a subject, but I witnessed xyz, and it was quite an unimpressive piloting event." I have found that not pointing a finger and saying you screwed up helps break down the defense. Telling someone they disappointed you has a fair bit more effect. Always worked for my Mom.

I was pleasantly surprised with one pilot. He heard the statement, walked away, and 3 days later looked me up and said "I thought about it, and you are right. Can we talk about it? My response, "Absolutely, thanks for asking."

It has also helped that I fly for a living and have 10x the experience of the perpetrators.

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