non-towered airport question

Blanche wrote in message ...
My worst complaint is the pilot (not from the area) who insists on doing
a left pattern when the AF/D and the sectionals all explicitly state
right pattern. Why? Because FTG is cozy in the SE corner of DEN's
class B. A mile west or a mile north, and you're violating the
Class B surfact airspace.

Similar situation at our home airport. Left traffic for two of the
runways snugs you up very close to Class B.

And when the pilot is reminded about the right traffic, he (why is
it *always* a man?) responds "not in my book!"

*hee* *hee*

Is there a directional indicator around the windsock? I'd have
trouble not responding "see those little yellow thingies circling
the windsock down there?"

Yeah, and then there's published TPA of 800 ft but all the planes
who insist on flying at 1000.

Cheers,
Sydney

On 13 Jan 2004 07:09:14 -0800, (Snowbird)
wrote:

My personal nightmare scenario is an airport with left
traffic for one runway, right traffic for another. The
wind is calm or almost directly across, or else one pilot
decides to land or takeoff downwind for personal reasons.

FME has this scenario (L traffic for 28, R traffic for 10). This is
done to keep us out of BWI's class B (and some might say avoid
overflying the NSA as well...)

Luckily(?), we have 123.05 as our CTAF, and people tend to be pretty
good about the radio calls. Notwithstanding you *have* to have a
radio around DC these days... With the 123.05, the only other airport
that interferes is way up in PA somewhere, and you can't hear them
from the ground. You can sometimes hear them in the pattern, but
they're real faint. However, due to some twist of fate, they also
have runways 10/28... So CTAF is usually pretty easy to understand
(unlike 122.8/122.7)...

aw

Whenever I am flying at a non-controlled airport, my primary runway will be
the one appropriate to the direction of the wind. If the wind changes, I
will change. Also if I hear other aircraft still making for the "original"
runway, I will advise them of the wind/preferred runway change.

If I want to do some x-wind landing practice on a different runway from the
preferred, I will clearly announce my intentions and what runway I will be
using. However, I always make sure that I do not interfere with other
pilots. Needless to say my outside scanning becomes much more intense in
this situation; you never know when an airplane will be NORDO.

Also, if the airport is busy on that particular day, I will defer my
practices until another time. I'm not necessarily offering that as a
suggestion, it's just the way I prefer. So far it has worked real well :-).

Harry
PP-ASEL

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
What's the general viewpoint here?

A non-towered airport near us has two runways, shaped
like an "L". Totally flat, no obstructions to vision--
airplane at the departure end for one can see airplanes
at the other. Left traffic both, so the downwind for the
short runway crosses the longer runway at midfield.
The possible conflict points are simultaneous T/O,
or crosswind for the short runway/downwind for the
long.

Today at that airport, one aircraft was in the pattern for
the shorter runway, which the wind favored. I wanted to use
the longer runway for various reasons, so exercising a sharp
look-out and making my radio calls, I proceded to do so.
Later another plane joined him.

There were no conflicts AFAIK. Everyone was doing a good job
making transmissions and keeping track of each other.
It was a good exercise for me since our new home airport has
a similar setup with both runways frequently in use -- and the
added complication of right traffic in one direction, left in
the other. I'm still getting used to it.

When a fourth aircraft called in, I decided the spatial
relationships were getting complicated and taxied over to
the short run way, did one short field landing which my instructor
would have liked and I didn't (power on), and headed for the
horizon.

Question is: how would most pilots here feel about this?
Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway? In terms of my plane's capabilities
and mine, it's plenty of runway, no reason why not. It just
wasn't what I preferred initially.

I used to be based at that airport and it wasn't uncommon, if
I was in the pattern for the short runway, to have other planes
land on the long. It never bothered me except when someone
came straight-in and obviously had no idea where the rest of
the traffic was. But one of the planes in the pattern seemed
to indicate, um, let's say displeasure with me. That doesn't
concern me -- people have to say whatever they feel improves
safety and presents them in a professional light, *hee* *hee*,
and I kept my rule of "don't argue on freq. just don't and
say you didn't"

However I figure I should ask for a sanity-check on whether
what's SOP at home is regarded as inappropriate or rude
elsewhere.

Cheers,
Sydney

"Harry Gordon" wrote in message ...
Whenever I am flying at a non-controlled airport, my primary runway will be
the one appropriate to the direction of the wind. If the wind changes, I
will change.

What if others are still using the "original" runway?

If I want to do some x-wind landing practice on a different runway from the
preferred, I will clearly announce my intentions

Not meaning to pick, just curious: do you really announce
"Pepsi County traffic, Cessna 12345 entering left downwind
for 34 for crosswind landing practice" or some such?

My personal tick on UNICOM is not being able to make necessary
traffic calls in a timely manner because someone is taking up
the frequency with a lengthy announcement full of unnecessary
information. Of course, students gotta learn, but it's often
not students I hear doing it.

Needless to say my outside scanning becomes much more intense in
this situation; you never know when an airplane will be NORDO.

Just to point out that your outside scanning should be IMHO
as intense as you can make it at all times. You never know when
a NORDO aircraft is going to perceive an operational advantage
in using a different runway than you prefer, at any time. You
also never know when someone is going to say one thing and show
up somewhere else. I have to admit I'm usually not directionally
challenged but I've been known to make directionally-challenged
radio calls myself.

Also, if the airport is busy on that particular day, I will defer my
practices until another time.

Well, how do you define busy? One other aircraft? Two? Four?
Seven?

Cheers,
Sydney

Whenever I am flying at a non-controlled airport, my primary runway will
be
the one appropriate to the direction of the wind. If the wind changes, I
will change.

What if others are still using the "original" runway?

One of the "problems" with posting to newsgroups is if you leave something
out, it is automatically assumed the writer doesn't do it :-). Thus far,
when that situation has occurred, and the other aircraft haven't made the
adjustment, I will broadcast a CTAF message about the wind/runway change.
Thus far the other aircraft have all followed suit and adjusted to the new
runway. I haven't had the "opportunity" of someone refusing to change.


If I want to do some x-wind landing practice on a different runway from
the
preferred, I will clearly announce my intentions

Not meaning to pick, just curious: do you really announce
"Pepsi County traffic, Cessna 12345 entering left downwind
for 34 for crosswind landing practice" or some such?

Yes. That is exactly what I do when 34 is NOT the desired runway for the
given wind direction. I would rather use an extra 2 seconds of air time and
avoid a potiential problem.


My personal tick on UNICOM is not being able to make necessary
traffic calls in a timely manner because someone is taking up
the frequency with a lengthy announcement full of unnecessary
information. Of course, students gotta learn, but it's often
not students I hear doing it.

Where I fly, the radio "problems" I have encountered isn't so much a long
winded pilot but having to put up with the radio traffic coming from other
uncontrolled airports :-(.

About the only time I get frustrated with the radio traffic is going into a
Class-C airspace and the controllers are so busy I have to go into a
"holding pattern" while waiting to establish communications with them.


Needless to say my outside scanning becomes much more intense in
this situation; you never know when an airplane will be NORDO.

Just to point out that your outside scanning should be IMHO
as intense as you can make it at all times.

See, there you go trying to read between the lines :-)). One day, I had a
C172 take the runway for departure AFTER I had announced turning final for
that runway. I had to do a go-around. Trust me, I am ALWAYS watching. :-)

You never know when
a NORDO aircraft is going to perceive an operational advantage
in using a different runway than you prefer, at any time. You
also never know when someone is going to say one thing and show
up somewhere else. I have to admit I'm usually not directionally
challenged but I've been known to make directionally-challenged
radio calls myself.

You too??? :-) At least I don't feel like the Lone Ranger now. I still have
a hard time deciding if I am approaching from the S.E., N.W., S.W., etc.


Also, if the airport is busy on that particular day, I will defer my
practices until another time.

Well, how do you define busy? One other aircraft? Two? Four?
Seven?

That is a hard question to answer. I just depends on what the other aircraft
are doing. I have left the area with 2 in the pattern and have stayed with
as many as 5. But, if it is "busy" I will not deviate from the pattern that
the others are using. When I was a student, our practice area wasn't too far
from the uncontrolled airport we would practice our landings/TOs. What I
would do is fly over to the practice area for some other practice and then
return back to the airport when the other aircraft went home.

Sydney, where to you fligh out of primarily?

Happy flying,

Harry

"Harry Gordon" wrote in message ...
Whenever I am flying at a non-controlled airport, my primary runway will
be
the one appropriate to the direction of the wind. If the wind changes, I
will change.

What if others are still using the "original" runway?

One of the "problems" with posting to newsgroups is if you leave something
out, it is automatically assumed the writer doesn't do it :-). Thus far,
when that situation has occurred, and the other aircraft haven't made the
adjustment, I will broadcast a CTAF message about the wind/runway change.

Perhaps I'm not clear enough on the scenario I'm thinking of.
I'm not thinking of you being the guy "established" in the pattern,
but rather of the following scenario:

You are approaching a non-towered airport. There are several
aircraft in the pattern for runway 18, happily making circuits.
You observe that the wind actually favors runway 27.

Are you saying you approach the airport with an announcement
"Podunk traffic, Cessna 1234, the wind appears to favor runway
27, so that should be the active runway now" or something to that
effect (what exactly would you say?) and so far, everyone just
changes to runway 27 and you join them?

Or are you saying you'd broadcast that you're landing on 27 because
that's the runway the wind favors, and everyone else would break off
their pattern and follow you?

Yes. That is exactly what I do when 34 is NOT the desired runway for the
given wind direction. I would rather use an extra 2 seconds of air time and
avoid a potiential problem.

OK, now I'm curious here again. How do you see broadcasting your
reasons for choosing the runway you are using as "avoiding a potential
problem"?

Needless to say my outside scanning becomes much more intense in
this situation; you never know when an airplane will be NORDO.

Just to point out that your outside scanning should be IMHO
as intense as you can make it at all times.

See, there you go trying to read between the lines :-)).

Um, Harry -- no offense intended here, but when you say "my
outside scanning becomes much more intense in this situation",
I don't think there's much reading between the lines going on
on my part. Perhaps you need to adjust what you write, to
better match what you mean?

My point is, I don't think it's a situation calling for a
beyond-normal level of alertness, because it's a situation
which could always be occuring without notice.

You too??? :-) At least I don't feel like the Lone Ranger now. I still have
a hard time deciding if I am approaching from the S.E., N.W., S.W., etc.

Me too. Actually I know what direction I'm approaching
from but my brain has been known to disengage before the words
emerge from my mouth "southeast--um, sorry, no, northwest--"
(and there I go, exhibiting the peeve my fingers warned us against)
It's a consistant trait of mine, I mis-speak in other walks of life.
I would make a horrible ATCS, or any other profession which had to
talk for a living!

Cheers,
Sydney

Perhaps I'm not clear enough on the scenario I'm thinking of.
I'm not thinking of you being the guy "established" in the pattern,
but rather of the following scenario:

You are approaching a non-towered airport. There are several
aircraft in the pattern for runway 18, happily making circuits.
You observe that the wind actually favors runway 27.

Are you saying you approach the airport with an announcement
"Podunk traffic, Cessna 1234, the wind appears to favor runway
27, so that should be the active runway now" or something to that
effect (what exactly would you say?) and so far, everyone just
changes to runway 27 and you join them?

Or are you saying you'd broadcast that you're landing on 27 because
that's the runway the wind favors, and everyone else would break off
their pattern and follow you?


When I or others have announced a wind change, there has never been an issue
about switching to another runway. Communications are brief and contain the
relative information: "Podunk traffic, Cessna 1234, new wind direction 250,
perferred runway now 27, Podunk."

Thus far, no one has refused to adjust their pattern to the new runway. In
fact, I have seen pilots turn their planes around on the ground and taxi to
another runway because of a wind change that was announced by another pilot.


OK, now I'm curious here again. How do you see broadcasting your
reasons for choosing the runway you are using as "avoiding a potential
problem"?


Remember, you broadcast your position, intentions, etc., regardless of
whether or not there are other aircraft in the pattern. The reason I
broadcast my message is to eliminate the possible confusion (maybe I should
have used that word rather than "problem") over an airplane approaching the
field who has listened to AWOS, obtained the wind direction and determined
what runway they will be using. And then when they switch to CTAF have them
hear me using a different runway. It also gives them the ability to contact
me if they so desire. And be assured that I NEVER us a non-preferred runway
for x-wind practice when other aircraft are using the field (of course if
they are NORAD, then I can't respond to their approaching until I see them.)

Perhaps I need to say this since we don't know each other. I consider myself
a very "sky friendly" pilot. When I fly, I fly with other pilots in the sky.
I will not do anything that jeperdizes either their safety nor mine - at
least intentionally :-). I guess I am becoming confused over whether your
challenging what I do or if you're looking for rationale for making your
flying experiences better.


See, there you go trying to read between the lines :-)).

.... Perhaps you need to adjust what you write, to
better match what you mean?


Perhaps your right. Before I retired I spent over 35 years in jobs requiring
intensive writing skills, you would think that I could be a little clearer
wouldn't you? :-). I guess the problem with communicating in these
newsgroups is the fundmental principle of written/verbal communications -
know your audience and then taylor your communications to that audience.

No two people who post to this newsgroup have the same background. Everyone
is different. Some are very young and some are retired; some are fresh
students and others have tens-of-thousands of flying hours and hold every
rating in the book, not to mention those in between; some have great
communication skills, others..., well you get the idea. Added to that is the
frame-of-mind the writer/reader is in at the time the writting/reading takes
place. That frame-of-mind will determine the inflection given to words as
they are written/read (that is referred to as tone-of-font). What the reader
perceives as the "tone" may not in any way reflect that of the writer's.
Unfortunately, the definition of communications is not what is written or
said but what is perceived by the receiver to have been written or said.

I hope we're communicating. :-)

Harry

My pet peeve is the motormouth types who clog the CTAF with
personal chatter that has little or nothing to do with the
safety of flight. Some of these folks aren't even flying -
and seem to think the CTAF is a personal CB channel. The
temptation to become "voluntary NORDO" is quite strong at
the airport I have in mind.

Equally annoying is the Class C scenario in which you can't
get a word in edgewise due to the congestion on frequency.
Sometimes it is simply too many aircraft coming and going at once.
Other times there is the stuck mike or the pilot with a limited
command of English, or somebody who takes 100 words to say what
a the average person could say in ten.

David Johnson

"Snowbird" wrote in message
However I figure I should ask for a sanity-check on whether
what's SOP at home is regarded as inappropriate or rude
elsewhere.

Sanity is hereby checked, Sydney. You went with the flow as soon as a flow
made itself evident. If that wasn't fast enough for the pilot of the plane
that fussed, that aint' your problem.

--
Jim Fisher

(Snowbird) wrote in message . com...
What's the general viewpoint here?

Question is: how would most pilots here feel about this?
Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway? In terms of my plane's capabilities
and mine, it's plenty of runway, no reason why not. It just
wasn't what I preferred initially.

Cheers,
Sydney

i suppose there might be some consideration due to "local
practice", but generally (and legally) speaking, there was
nothing wrong with what you did.

i'm based at an airport with 4 strips of concrete (although
two are currently closed for construction.) it is not unusual
for three of them to be "in use" more or less simulataneously.
everybody has to keep a sharp lookout, and radio communication
definitely helps here (although sometimes there is a nordo in the
mix, too.) i soloed a student last spring during what i thought was
a lull in the traffic -- but the lull didn't last long. on his second
trip around the pattern, he was #4 on downwind, with a warbird
entering the pattern for another runway, and another warbird
overflying the field. (frequently the warbird pilots like to use
what i call "pseudo military" radio calls, like "north american 65c
is on the overhead break for runway one-seven".) i usually just
tell early on students that if they don't understand the radio call,
just treat the plane as nordo and keep their eyes peeled. :-)
anyway, the student did just fine, merged in like a pro and was
on top of the whole situation.

otoh, once when up with a student we were ~8 miles east (there's
another airport ~10 east), and we saw this yahoo take off and
turn west before he got to the end of the runway (couldn't have
been more than 200 agl). we sorta followed him from above, and
about half-way between the airports he called my home a.p. and
announced "2 mile straight in for one-seven". first of all, he was
~5 out, 2nd he was 90 deg from 1-7, and third, there were about
4 or 5 planes in the pattern for 1-7. after several of the planes in
the pattern queried the new arrival and couldn't get satisfactory
information, one pattern plane did a full stop instead of t&g, and
the rest exited the pattern in various directions. i guess the moral
is that one jerk can foul up everybody who is cooperating and
working together.

g_a