Tight patterns?

I was wondering the same thing. I own a Citabria and fly a tight
pattern. When I trained in PA28-161's we flew tight patterns. I was
taught to fly a pattern that will allow me to land if I lose the engine
while in the pattern. The students at my home field train in new 172's.
They fly, to my eye, very wide patterns. Maybe it's a newer training
method?
Dave

Anyone else here like to fly a tight (or tighter than normal) pattern?

The field we're based at (Falcon Field, FFC) has a pretty good-sized
training operation, and there are a lot of students out practicing
landings, especially on good days. What annoys me, though, is that
some of these students fly huge patterns--like 2-mile finals,
downwinds 1-2 miles out from the runway, etc. Sometimes, I'll end up
behind somebody in the pattern, only to realize that, by the time he
turns final, I could have done another touch and go and ended up
behind him.

IMHO, there's no reason to go flying a jet/heavy twin pattern in a
Cessna. I've always tried to fly mine 4 white on the PAPI, with
basically a continuous turn from downwind to final (leveling out for a
second just to check traffic).

"dave" wrote in message
...

I was wondering the same thing. I own a Citabria and fly a tight
pattern. When I trained in PA28-161's we flew tight patterns. I was
taught to fly a pattern that will allow me to land if I lose the engine
while in the pattern. The students at my home field train in new 172's.
They fly, to my eye, very wide patterns. Maybe it's a newer training
method?


I took my primary training nearly thirty years ago at GRB in a Cessna 150.
Lambeau Field is about 2 1/2 miles from the runway 24 threshold, I don't
recall ever getting near it while in the pattern unless directed to follow
another aircraft. Today it's common for students in similar aircraft to
make their base to final turn over the stadium even when they're alone in
the pattern.

Dave,
This is an interesting topic. I don't fly out of your home airport
but I have landed there many times. I live close so I spend a lot of
my liesure time watching the traffic there. You are correct that they
typically fly a fairly large pattern but it is not only the students.
I can sit there and predict where the base to final turn will be and
it is very consistent through the entire cross-section of pilots.

I don't know if it's a new method training but I do think it is an
unintended byproduct of the training. Students tend to think of each
leg of the pattern as an event in and of itself. As such, they have
the understandable need to stabilize each leg and go through the
mental work of setting up the next leg. Many pilots retain this
method of landing because it is what they learned and they are
comfortable with it. And there is nothing wrong with that. That
being said, there is a lot to be said for a tighter pattern. It
sounds like something that the CFIs might want to present at their
BFRs. You know, something like "Your landing pattern is fine, but now
that you have xxx hours you may want to consider tightening the
pattern up a little", followed by a demonstration.

By the way, I have observed (strictly anecdotally) that taildraggers
tend to fly a tighter pattern than us trike guys.
Rich Russell

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:26:33 -0500, dave
wrote:

I was wondering the same thing. I own a Citabria and fly a tight
pattern. When I trained in PA28-161's we flew tight patterns. I was
taught to fly a pattern that will allow me to land if I lose the engine
while in the pattern. The students at my home field train in new 172's.
They fly, to my eye, very wide patterns. Maybe it's a newer training
method?
Dave

Anyone else here like to fly a tight (or tighter than normal) pattern?

The field we're based at (Falcon Field, FFC) has a pretty good-sized
training operation, and there are a lot of students out practicing
landings, especially on good days. What annoys me, though, is that
some of these students fly huge patterns--like 2-mile finals,
downwinds 1-2 miles out from the runway, etc. Sometimes, I'll end up
behind somebody in the pattern, only to realize that, by the time he
turns final, I could have done another touch and go and ended up
behind him.

IMHO, there's no reason to go flying a jet/heavy twin pattern in a
Cessna. I've always tried to fly mine 4 white on the PAPI, with
basically a continuous turn from downwind to final (leveling out for a
second just to check traffic).

In article ,
Richard Russell wrote:

Dave,
This is an interesting topic. I don't fly out of your home airport
but I have landed there many times. I live close so I spend a lot of
my liesure time watching the traffic there. You are correct that they
typically fly a fairly large pattern but it is not only the students.
I can sit there and predict where the base to final turn will be and
it is very consistent through the entire cross-section of pilots.

I don't know if it's a new method training but I do think it is an
unintended byproduct of the training. Students tend to think of each
leg of the pattern as an event in and of itself. As such, they have
the understandable need to stabilize each leg and go through the
mental work of setting up the next leg. Many pilots retain this
method of landing because it is what they learned and they are
comfortable with it. And there is nothing wrong with that. That
being said, there is a lot to be said for a tighter pattern. It
sounds like something that the CFIs might want to present at their
BFRs. You know, something like "Your landing pattern is fine, but now
that you have xxx hours you may want to consider tightening the
pattern up a little", followed by a demonstration.

By the way, I have observed (strictly anecdotally) that taildraggers
tend to fly a tighter pattern than us trike guys.
Rich Russell


The instructor who soloed me in the C150 wanted me a mile out on final
at 300 feet agl. Directly over an unlandable area of tall pines. I did
as she asked when she was in the plane. When she got out of the plane to
solo me, I flew the pattern the way I wanted to. I would keep the
runway, or other landable area under my wing, usually pretty close to
the end of the wing strut. Never out of gliding range of a safe landing
site.With the 40 degree flaps and power off, the descent from a high,
short final was pretty much like parachuting. Maybe I was being
paranoid about an engine failure but the C150 I was flying had a very
noticeable repair on the wing where it had once hit a car while landing
on the road following an engine failure. The CFI's I've flown with since
are older tailwheel types who teach high tight patterns.

I had the good fortune to get checked out in a J3 Cub recently. After
flying it for two days, with and without the instructor, I realized that
I could not remember looking at the altimeter once. Everything was about
reference to the ground and horizon and using landmarks on the aircaft,
such as the jury struts, etc. judge correct heights and distances. This
is as it should be for VFR in light (slow) single engine airplanes.

If the engine is not on fire, I'm pretty happy. If it's actually making
power, I count that as a bonus.