Time to revamp traffic patterns at non-towered airports?

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message ...
"Ace Pilot" wrote in message om...

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.

Back when our airport had a fairly active ultralight activity. They flew the
opposite pattern, obviously lower and tighter than the regular pattern. It
was quite easy as a result for them to adjust on base leg to fit into the
higher performance traffic.

This sounds interesting. If I understand you correctly, everyone used
the same runway, but higher performance aircraft flew a left-hand
pattern while ultralights flew a right-hand pattern (or vice versa).
This is contrary to what AC 90-66A suggests, i.e., different size and
altitude patterns on the same side of the runway. Was there something
that prevented the airport from following the 90-66A recommendation,
or was this procedure deemed safer than what 90-66A recommended?

I can see some of the advantages. While on downwind and base, traffic
with significantly different speeds is more likely forward of you,
enabling everyone to better see and avoid the traffic that is of most
concern.

Having different sized patterns on opposite sides of the runway means
that traffic that overshoots final isn't flying head on into the other
pattern's base leg traffic.

Were there any disadvantages with this procedure? How was knowledge of
this procedure disseminated? Thanks for the input, Ron.

Ace Pilot wrote:

Were there any disadvantages with this procedure? How was knowledge of
this procedure disseminated? Thanks for the input, Ron.

One disadvantage is the fact that aircraft on the base leg of a reverse-direction
pattern can't be seen by high-wing aircraft waiting at the runway. Couple that with
a circling approach from 300' AGL, and you've got real problems. I was almost
nailed on my solo flight by some A**hole doing this in a Breezy. Fortunately, a
CFI flying the usual pattern with a student heard me announce departure and got
on the radio. I was halfway out on the runway before I got stopped, though. His
wheels were below the level of my instrument panel when he went by.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
One disadvantage is the fact that aircraft on the base leg of a
reverse-direction
pattern can't be seen by high-wing aircraft waiting at the runway.

Huh? Left or right patterns are not chosen for the convenience of those
waiting at the runway. At most airports, the pattern is all left turns or
all right turns, and there is only one taxiway to the runway. There is
almost always the potential for a high-wing airplane to not be able to see
traffic on base leg without turning the airplane prior to entering the
runway. This has nothing to do with having a "reverse-direction pattern".

You can NEVER count on there not being an aircraft on base leg behind you as
you enter the runway. That's why I ALWAYS turn the airplane so that I can
see the base leg behind me, whichever base leg that is and whether or not
it's part of the usual pattern, before I enter the runway.

[...] I was halfway out on the runway before I got stopped, though. His
wheels were below the level of my instrument panel when he went by.

Sounds to me like you both screwed up. Before wandering onto the runway,
you should've positioned your airplane so you could see traffic approaching
the runway, and he should have gone around when you violated his
right-of-way as landing traffic.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
Sounds to me like you both screwed up. Before wandering onto the runway,
you should've positioned your airplane so you could see traffic approaching
the runway, and he should have gone around when you violated his
right-of-way as landing traffic.

I'm also not sure why traffic on base is an issue. How long does it take to
depart? Around here there are typically people on final when you pull out.
If you don't you'll never get off the ground on a busy day.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..
I'm also not sure why traffic on base is an issue. How long does it
take to
depart? Around here there are typically people on final when you pull
out.
If you don't you'll never get off the ground on a busy day.

Maybe it's those fast slow ultralights?

Seriously though, I have to assume it's a combination of a significantly
smaller pattern flown (where final is very short) and the base leg
visibility he's complaining about. The complaint still doesn't make sense,
but at least I can hypothesize a pattern flown where traffic on base is
still relatively close to landing.

Who knows? Bottom line though is that one should not taxi onto the runway
until one has made sure one is not pulling out in front of traffic, no
matter where that traffic may be.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
Seriously though, I have to assume it's a combination of a significantly
smaller pattern flown (where final is very short) and the base leg
visibility he's complaining about.

Of course, when they're coming in on the reciprocal runway at our
field, you can't even see the base leg guys until right about when
they turn final.

Peter Duniho wrote:

Sounds to me like you both screwed up. Before wandering onto the runway,
you should've positioned your airplane so you could see traffic approaching
the runway,

I did. The entrance for the end of runway 06 at Kupper is roughly at 45 degrees
to the runway. He was doing a right hand pattern with a downwind at 300' AGL,
using a circling downwind to final (ie. no base leg as such). Kupper uses a left
hand pattern at 1000' AGL. He was still in his turn to final as he came over the
tree tops. He was eventually banned from several local airports for his approaches,
Solberg being one. Finally bought an airport so he could fly any way he wanted.

and he should have gone around when you violated his
right-of-way as landing traffic.

He had no time to go around.

In any case, if I can mix it with King Airs and KC-135s in a Maule, the sport
plane pilots can damn well fly the same patterns as the rest of us. No way is it
safe to have traffic running base legs from both directions.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
Sounds to me like you both screwed up. Before wandering onto the
runway,
you should've positioned your airplane so you could see traffic
approaching
the runway,

I did.

So you saw the guy and still pulled out in front of him? That's pretty sad.
That you did it, and that you're willing to admit it here.

Peter Duniho wrote:

So you saw the guy and still pulled out in front of him? That's pretty sad.
That you did it, and that you're willing to admit it here.

No, I did not see him. I positioned the aircraft so that I could see others
approaching. I put the plane in exactly the position that EVERY PILOT POSITIONS
HIS AIRCRAFT FOR DEPARTURE FROM THAT RUNWAY.

Nobody can see a plane that comes in from behind or is below the tree line.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
No, I did not see him. I positioned the aircraft so that I could see
others
approaching.

First, you claim you were positioned to see aircraft approaching the runway.
The aircraft was approaching the runway. So either you are incorrect about
how you positioned your plane, or you are incorrect about whether you saw
the guy.

Nobody can see a plane that comes in from behind or is below the tree
line.

Second, your story makes no sense. You've got an ultralight too slow to fly
with the other aircraft in the usual pattern, but so fast that it can make
it from the trees to the runway in the few seconds it takes for you to taxi
onto the runway, and so fast that it can't even manuever to go around once
the pilot sees you violating their right-of-way.

That's one fast (but slow) ultralight.

Pete