Absolutely right, BT. At airports that have space for a separate
ultralight pattern and runway (typically grass), I think it is an
ideal solution.

But there are airports that don't have this luxury and all aircraft
have to share the same runway. Putting the ultralights on the "inside
and lower" from the regular (SEL) traffic pattern, which may be
"inside and lower" the MEL puts the burden for see and avoid on the
faster aircraft. As you point out, the MEL pattern is outside and
above the SEL pattern so the MEL guy can see the SEL on downwind and
base. However, the SEL will have a great deal of difficulty seeing the
MEL that is overtaking him. Likewise, the ultralights will have
difficulty seeing any SEL or MEL that are overtaking them. Is this
system really the best way to minimize the risk in the traffic
pattern?

"BTIZ" wrote in message news:cqgUb.7670$IF1.5507@fed1read01...
"BTIZ" wrote in message:
There are aircraft currently flying that qualify as a "light
sport"..that
fit just fine in the standard traffic pattern..

Agreed, but there will also be sport aircraft with approach speeds as
low as 25 knots. At some point, the speed differential between
aircraft in the pattern should become a concern.

Agreed.. isn't that why they created an "Ultra light" pattern.. so if you
are that slow.. fly the ultra light pattern.. if you can keep up with a
J-3.. fly the regular pattern...

and as for the SEL and MEL differences at some patterns.. I agree there can
be problems... and "at most times but not always".. the MEL pattern if
higher is also out farther from the runway so he can see the SEL downwind
and base.

BT