So There I Was...

[Kyle Boatright]

....on my first post-engine inspection flight. The plan was to stay within
gliding distance of the field, "just in case", so I launched, made a wide
circle of the field, while climbing to 3,000' AGL. When on what was more or
less an extended crosswind, I made a descending 135 degree left turn and
called "Cartersville traffic, Experimental NXXX 2 miles southeast, inbound
on the 45 into the downwind for 19" (or something like that).

And the guy who'd been giving position reports from a different zip code
"NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is on
a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots". I look down and am clipping along
at 170 knots and am a mile from entering the downwind. That's very fast for
me in that relative position to the field, but I was dumping the altitude
I'd held in reserve since it was a post-maintenance flight. As I turn
downwind and announce, a C-172, which I know to be an instructor with
several students announces that he's departing and dawdles onto the runway.
So I extend for spacing from him and call my base turn.

Of course, the guy who was on the 180 knot straight in comes back with "You
understand there is an aircraft on short final"... I'd been looking for him,
and there he was, above my visual horizon, and on the other side of the 300'
hills that are a couple of miles North of the field. So I say "Yep", turn
final, and as I'm crossing the threshold, he announces "Meridian NXXYY is
going around".

Which leads to the age old question... Was there a better approach I should
have taken? My sense is that per the FAR's (altitude being the key factor),
I had precedence for landing. Also, my sense is that he was the one who was
smoking along all the way to short final and he could have meshed with the
existing traffic (me) if he'd pulled the throttle back a bit. Instead, he
probably burned an extra 5 gallons of Jet A on his go-around...

Yeah, I know... I'm hard headed too, but I don't see where flying a faster
airplane and calling a long, long, straight in approach means the other
aircraft in and around the field need to defer to you... Heck, my airplane
is faster than 90% of the GA fleet, and I'd never do that intentionally.

Oh, yeah. The post-maintenance flight went well. I had a surprising
experience once and that has made me pretty cautious on post-maintenance
flights.

KB

[Crash Lander[_1_]]

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
. ..
> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is
> on a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".

Just thinking out loud here. Not trying to be a smart arse, and no, I've
never had this happen to me - yet!
At 180kts and 9 miles out, that means he'd be at the field in 3 minutes.
He's not in the pattern as such, so he can't see what's where. You're still
on downwind when he calls, so I'd have extended my downwind by a minute to
allow him through. Also, if you could see him a couple of miles to the North
when you turned base, at 180kts, he's on top of you in under a minute, so
it's obvious he's going to need to go around. Having said all that though,
you're right. If he pulled the throttle back a bit he could have saved
himself the go around.
Were any words exchanged once you were both on the ground?
Oz Lander

[Kyle Boatright]

"Crash Lander" > wrote in message
...
> "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is
>> on a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".
>
> Just thinking out loud here. Not trying to be a smart arse, and no, I've
> never had this happen to me - yet!
> At 180kts and 9 miles out, that means he'd be at the field in 3 minutes.
> He's not in the pattern as such, so he can't see what's where. You're
> still on downwind when he calls, so I'd have extended my downwind by a
> minute to allow him through. Also, if you could see him a couple of miles
> to the North when you turned base, at 180kts, he's on top of you in under
> a minute, so it's obvious he's going to need to go around. Having said all
> that though, you're right. If he pulled the throttle back a bit he could
> have saved himself the go around.
> Were any words exchanged once you were both on the ground?
> Oz Lander

Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either. I
just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic. All
he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending my
pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield to
someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
formal or informal.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
> evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
> like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either. I
> just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic. All
> he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending my
> pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
> maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
> didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield to
> someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
> formal or informal.


I don't see how he can claim any pattern rights from 9 miles out. He was taking
a chance and he knew it. Everybody who flies a long straight in knows he's
cheating a bit and may well get called on it and have to enter the pattern
properly after all.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Crash Lander[_1_]]

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
. ..
>As far as extending my pattern, you're right that it was an option.
>However, I was on a post maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the
>field, which meant I didn't want to fly a big pattern.

Fair enough too.

> Also, I didn't think I needed to yield to someone who didn't seem to be
> playing by the "rules of the road", whether formal or informal.

I never trust anyone to keep me safe but me. If he wants to push through, I
say let him, and live in the knowledge you've flown the safe flight. So what
if he gets down first. You've spent an extra precious minute doing what we
love most, and that's flying, not landing! ;-)
Oz Lander

[Maxwell]

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>> Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
>> evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
>> like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either.
>> I
>> just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic.
>> All
>> he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending
>> my
>> pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
>> maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
>> didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield
>> to
>> someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
>> formal or informal.
>
>
> I don't see how he can claim any pattern rights from 9 miles out. He was
> taking a chance and he knew it. Everybody who flies a long straight in
> knows he's cheating a bit and may well get called on it and have to enter
> the pattern properly after all.
>
>

I'm with you, Mort and Kyle both. Granted, sometimes you have to go above
and beyond the call in the interest of safety, but the guy was just wrong.
From a controlled field with clearance, a nine mile final can be considered
standard procedure. And if he was a jet, that's probably what led him to
make such an approach. But at an uncontrolled field that's nonsense. He
should have started adjusting, or making other plans when he hear Kyles
call. From nine miles out, he could have just as easily ran down upwind leg
and flown a full pattern.

[Jules]

Well don't feel bad, he was being an idiot. He thinks he can do that
because he is watching traffic on his tcas. He is just assuming
everybody has a working transponder. If he is such a good pilot he can
try joining the vfr circuit.

If you mentioned a nordo plane, that would get his attention.

Good thing you spoke up.

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> ...on my first post-engine inspection flight. The plan was to stay within
> gliding distance of the field, "just in case", so I launched, made a wide
> circle of the field, while climbing to 3,000' AGL. When on what was more or
> less an extended crosswind, I made a descending 135 degree left turn and
> called "Cartersville traffic, Experimental NXXX 2 miles southeast, inbound
> on the 45 into the downwind for 19" (or something like that).
>
> And the guy who'd been giving position reports from a different zip code
> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is on
> a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots". I look down and am clipping along
> at 170 knots and am a mile from entering the downwind. That's very fast for
> me in that relative position to the field, but I was dumping the altitude
> I'd held in reserve since it was a post-maintenance flight. As I turn
> downwind and announce, a C-172, which I know to be an instructor with
> several students announces that he's departing and dawdles onto the runway.
> So I extend for spacing from him and call my base turn.
>
> Of course, the guy who was on the 180 knot straight in comes back with "You
> understand there is an aircraft on short final"... I'd been looking for him,
> and there he was, above my visual horizon, and on the other side of the 300'
> hills that are a couple of miles North of the field. So I say "Yep", turn
> final, and as I'm crossing the threshold, he announces "Meridian NXXYY is
> going around".
>
> Which leads to the age old question... Was there a better approach I should
> have taken? My sense is that per the FAR's (altitude being the key factor),
> I had precedence for landing. Also, my sense is that he was the one who was
> smoking along all the way to short final and he could have meshed with the
> existing traffic (me) if he'd pulled the throttle back a bit. Instead, he
> probably burned an extra 5 gallons of Jet A on his go-around...
>
> Yeah, I know... I'm hard headed too, but I don't see where flying a faster
> airplane and calling a long, long, straight in approach means the other
> aircraft in and around the field need to defer to you... Heck, my airplane
> is faster than 90% of the GA fleet, and I'd never do that intentionally.
>
> Oh, yeah. The post-maintenance flight went well. I had a surprising
> experience once and that has made me pretty cautious on post-maintenance
> flights.
>
> KB
>
>
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> And the guy who'd been giving position reports from a different zip code
> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is on
> a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".

At this point did you know he was a Meridian?

If so, I'm with you. That guy can fly a 90 knot final, so for him to
be calling out a final approach at 180 knots is just absurd.

If, on the other hand, you didn't know what type of airplane it was
(and your narrative, above, doesn't specify) I'd have extended my
downwind. Just in case it was a Gulfstream or some other fast jet.

Either way, the other guy was wrong, and you were right. But there's
"right", and then there's "dead right"....

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Kyle Boatright]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> And the guy who'd been giving position reports from a different zip code
>> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is
>> on
>> a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".
>
> At this point did you know he was a Meridian?

No, I didn't. I actually *thought* he was a Bonanza because of
transmissions from a nearby field. I'm not sure, but he may not have
mentioned his aircraft type until the go-around.

>
> If so, I'm with you. That guy can fly a 90 knot final, so for him to
> be calling out a final approach at 180 knots is just absurd.
>
> If, on the other hand, you didn't know what type of airplane it was
> (and your narrative, above, doesn't specify) I'd have extended my
> downwind. Just in case it was a Gulfstream or some other fast jet.
>
> Either way, the other guy was wrong, and you were right. But there's
> "right", and then there's "dead right"....

Ain't that the truth.

>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[bdl]

On Apr 10, 9:18 pm, "Kyle Boatright" > wrote:

> Yeah, I know... I'm hard headed too, but I don't see where flying a faster
> airplane and calling a long, long, straight in approach means the other
> aircraft in and around the field need to defer to you... Heck, my airplane
> is faster than 90% of the GA fleet, and I'd never do that intentionally.
>

Similar experience at my home field (1H0), im on a left downwind,
there's another guy rolling down 34. I turn base, and just catch a
flicker of something out of my peripheral vision. I look to the right
and there is a small white jet on a long final (probably 5-6 miles).
A half second later comes the call, "Beechjet final straight in 34".
It's obvious from his tone that STL Approach just dropped him off to
the CTAF frequency. I make a call telling him where I am, and that I
would be abort my landing and instead side step to the upwind and go-
around. He landed behind me.

So I went around again, taxied in, put the bird away in the hangar,
and then while driving back, drive over to give the guy a wave. He
thanked me several times over for not making him go around, we
exchanged some discussion about how approach can sometmies do that to
you, etc. All in all a nice experience.

I figured he's probably a transient, and being a jet, its harder for
him to go around than me (especially in the tight class B airspace
confines around 1H0. Plus he's burning more $$$'s per minute than I
am.

So for the $3 it cost me to go around, I hoped I spread some goodwill
and made the pilot feel better about visiting 1H0 (instead of the
pricier SUS).

'Course what I really wanted was a tour of the plane, but he was
loading up the rental car by the time we were talking and the plane
was already buttoned up.

As an aside, anybody ever build 2 push to talk's in their aircraft
yokes (experimental or otherwise) I don't know how many times I'd
love to have a second PTT to talk on COM2 while im monitoring both
frequencies. Without having to turn the "transmit" dial on my
intercom.

On GPS practice appraoches into uncontrolled fields I usually make a
call or two as im navigating the approach (without being with
approach) just to let other airplanes in the area know im out there.
It would be helpful to do this on actual IFR approaches into
uncontrolled fields.

I would think it would be a function of the intercom system more than
anything else. Anybody ever done it? Seems like it would be a neat
thing for the experimental crowd.

Brian

[[email protected]]

On Apr 10, 11:15 pm, "Kyle Boatright" > wrote:
> "Crash Lander" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY is
> >> on a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".
>
> > Just thinking out loud here. Not trying to be a smart arse, and no, I've
> > never had this happen to me - yet!
> > At 180kts and 9 miles out, that means he'd be at the field in 3 minutes.
> > He's not in the pattern as such, so he can't see what's where. You're
> > still on downwind when he calls, so I'd have extended my downwind by a
> > minute to allow him through. Also, if you could see him a couple of miles
> > to the North when you turned base, at 180kts, he's on top of you in under
> > a minute, so it's obvious he's going to need to go around. Having said all
> > that though, you're right. If he pulled the throttle back a bit he could
> > have saved himself the go around.
> > Were any words exchanged once you were both on the ground?
> > Oz Lander
>
> Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
> evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
> like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either. I
> just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic. All
> he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending my
> pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
> maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
> didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield to
> someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
> formal or informal.

Well, its been a few years since I've posted anything here, but I
gotta play devil's advocate here a bit.

You're on downwind, and see traffic on final. You then start your
base turn to cut him off and make him go around, even when you were
planning on doing pattern work? That's a pretty a**hole thing to do.
You could have extended your downwind by 30 seconds and he'd have been
past you, or done a left 270 to base and let him through.

When I was freight doggin' it, we'd often look for ways to save as
much time as we could, and often times it was much easier to land
straight in, than to fly overhead, then circle around, descend and
enter the pattern on the 45, especially when we could keep our speed
up the whole way down and scrub it all off on short final. On the
same note, if there was faster traffic on final it was easier for all
to extend by 30-45 seconds to let the faster guy just land; it's
called common courtesy.

The traffic pattern is no place to by playing chicken, which is
exactly what you did when you turned your base in front of faster
traffic, then continued to turn in front of overtaking traffic on
final, hoping he'd go around or slow down. Sometimes slipperier
airplanes can't just "slow down" as soon as somebody calls that
they're going sequence themselves first. In the Lear, we have to take
1 mile for every 10 knots we want to lose, until we get down to 180
and can start throwing the gear and flaps out. Unless we want to shake
the **** outta the guys in back with spoilers.

Just food for thought; the sky is no place to be playing the same "F-
U, it's MY turn!" games that go on in traffic every day.

Mike

[Jim Stewart]

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:

> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>
>>Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
>>evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
>>like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either. I
>>just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic. All
>>he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending my
>>pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
>>maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
>>didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield to
>>someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
>>formal or informal.
>
>
>
> I don't see how he can claim any pattern rights from 9 miles out. He was taking
> a chance and he knew it. Everybody who flies a long straight in knows he's
> cheating a bit and may well get called on it and have to enter the pattern
> properly after all.

It's a bit unclear whether KB could claim pattern
rights either. From the best I could understand,
he was descending from 3000 either in the 45 or
in the downwind. Call me a student, but what I've
been taught is that you fly the pattern at 1000
or you're not in it.

[Kyle Boatright]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>
>> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>>
>>>Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
>>>evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
>>>like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either.
>>>I
>>>just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic.
>>>All
>>>he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending
>>>my
>>>pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
>>>maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
>>>didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield
>>>to
>>>someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
>>>formal or informal.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't see how he can claim any pattern rights from 9 miles out. He was
>> taking a chance and he knew it. Everybody who flies a long straight in
>> knows he's cheating a bit and may well get called on it and have to enter
>> the pattern properly after all.
>
> It's a bit unclear whether KB could claim pattern
> rights either. From the best I could understand,
> he was descending from 3000 either in the 45 or
> in the downwind. Call me a student, but what I've
> been taught is that you fly the pattern at 1000
> or you're not in it.

Before I made my 135 degree descending turn, I was at 3000' above sea level.
By the time I was inbound on the 2 mile 45 degree pattern entry, I was below
2,500' and descending pretty rapidly towards the pattern altitude of 1,800'.
That was when I made my initial call. By the time the other aircraft
responded, I was either at pattern altitude or very close...

KB

[Kyle Boatright]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 10, 11:15 pm, "Kyle Boatright" > wrote:
>> "Crash Lander" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>> >> "NXXYY 30 miles North, inbound" responds on the radio and says "NXXYY
>> >> is
>> >> on a 9 mile straight in, doing 180 knots".
>>
>> > Just thinking out loud here. Not trying to be a smart arse, and no,
>> > I've
>> > never had this happen to me - yet!
>> > At 180kts and 9 miles out, that means he'd be at the field in 3
>> > minutes.
>> > He's not in the pattern as such, so he can't see what's where. You're
>> > still on downwind when he calls, so I'd have extended my downwind by a
>> > minute to allow him through. Also, if you could see him a couple of
>> > miles
>> > to the North when you turned base, at 180kts, he's on top of you in
>> > under
>> > a minute, so it's obvious he's going to need to go around. Having said
>> > all
>> > that though, you're right. If he pulled the throttle back a bit he
>> > could
>> > have saved himself the go around.
>> > Were any words exchanged once you were both on the ground?
>> > Oz Lander
>>
>> Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
>> evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
>> like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either.
>> I
>> just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic.
>> All
>> he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending
>> my
>> pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
>> maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
>> didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield
>> to
>> someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
>> formal or informal.
>
> Well, its been a few years since I've posted anything here, but I
> gotta play devil's advocate here a bit.
>
> You're on downwind, and see traffic on final. You then start your
> base turn to cut him off and make him go around, even when you were
> planning on doing pattern work?

Mike,

Your feedback is appreciated. Since I share an airfield with Phoenix Air,
I'm pretty familiar with freight operations. One thing I will say is that
the Phoenix guys do a pretty good job of blending with traffic, probably
because several of those guys fly cargo and instruct on the side. They
would probably end up cutting off their own students if they were aggressive
in the pattern.

Anyway, in this particular situation, I had no idea that the Meridian would
need to execute a go around. When he announced he was on "short final" he
was probably 2 miles beyond my base leg and had plenty of room to work with.

KB

>That's a pretty a**hole thing to do.
> You could have extended your downwind by 30 seconds and he'd have been
> past you, or done a left 270 to base and let him through.
>
> When I was freight doggin' it, we'd often look for ways to save as
> much time as we could, and often times it was much easier to land
> straight in, than to fly overhead, then circle around, descend and
> enter the pattern on the 45, especially when we could keep our speed
> up the whole way down and scrub it all off on short final. On the
> same note, if there was faster traffic on final it was easier for all
> to extend by 30-45 seconds to let the faster guy just land; it's
> called common courtesy.
>
> The traffic pattern is no place to by playing chicken, which is
> exactly what you did when you turned your base in front of faster
> traffic, then continued to turn in front of overtaking traffic on
> final, hoping he'd go around or slow down. Sometimes slipperier
> airplanes can't just "slow down" as soon as somebody calls that
> they're going sequence themselves first. In the Lear, we have to take
> 1 mile for every 10 knots we want to lose, until we get down to 180
> and can start throwing the gear and flaps out. Unless we want to shake
> the **** outta the guys in back with spoilers.
>
> Just food for thought; the sky is no place to be playing the same "F-
> U, it's MY turn!" games that go on in traffic every day.
>
> Mike
>

[Jim Stewart]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> "Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
> .. .
>
>>Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Kyle Boatright wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Naah, no words, and I did several stop and go landings to conclude my
>>>>evening. I don't think the traffic conflict was a huge deal. It wasn't
>>>>like I was upset about the situation and he shouldn't have been either.
>>>>I
>>>>just can't figure why he didn't try and blend into the light traffic.
>>>>All
>>>>he had to do was pull the noise lever back a little. As far as extending
>>>>my
>>>>pattern, you're right that it was an option. However, I was on a post
>>>>maintenance flight and wanted to stay close to the field, which meant I
>>>>didn't want to fly a big pattern. Also, I didn't think I needed to yield
>>>>to
>>>>someone who didn't seem to be playing by the "rules of the road", whether
>>>>formal or informal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't see how he can claim any pattern rights from 9 miles out. He was
>>>taking a chance and he knew it. Everybody who flies a long straight in
>>>knows he's cheating a bit and may well get called on it and have to enter
>>>the pattern properly after all.
>>
>>It's a bit unclear whether KB could claim pattern
>>rights either. From the best I could understand,
>>he was descending from 3000 either in the 45 or
>>in the downwind. Call me a student, but what I've
>>been taught is that you fly the pattern at 1000
>>or you're not in it.
>
>
> Before I made my 135 degree descending turn, I was at 3000' above sea level.
> By the time I was inbound on the 2 mile 45 degree pattern entry, I was below
> 2,500' and descending pretty rapidly towards the pattern altitude of 1,800'.
> That was when I made my initial call. By the time the other aircraft
> responded, I was either at pattern altitude or very close...

Fair enough. I read your original post several times
trying to get a picture of how high you were and I
never got the impression that you got down that far.

[Dave[_5_]]

There are those among us who seem to think that they somehow have
priority over other traffic. I have noticed that those who drive
bigger/faster airplanes tend to have such an attitude. However, they
are not the only ones. An incident that I found particularly
irritating was to have a yo yo decide to shoot a practice IFR approach
(downwind) on a busy Saturday morning.
There was an announcement - but it was delivered so fast as to be
unintelligible. Of course it ended in a missed approach - but it sure
messed up the flow of traffic for a few minutes. There is nothing
wrong with straight in approaches - provided that
they do not interfere with the current flow of traffic (if any).
Personally, I only do it when there is no other traffic.

David Johnson