"Cleared Straight-In Runway X; Report Y Miles Final"

What would an instructor say when we line up for 'final' at 30 degrees
to the runway? Probably not good job'...

Well, let's see. I got on the ground efficiently and precisely with the
minimum amount of fuel and time required. It was a completely safe
operation, and consistent with my understanding of the FARs and common
sense. Since I do hold a CFI ticket, that's exactly what I would have said
g There's a big difference between teaching a student to fly precise
legs in the pattern, and the real-world of getting from A to B.

What if ATC replies 'make left traffic, report 5 mile left base'?
Would you have driven straight for the numbers?

Nope, I would have driven straight for the normal point in the pattern where
one turns from base to final (approximately 1/2 mile from the numbers at a
45 deg angle to the runway). Actually, your question (although deliberately
smart-alecky and inane), really brings this problem into base relief. Are
you suggesting that I should have picked a point on the EXTENDED BASE 5
miles away and flown to that? If so, I see that as clearly just as wrong as
the "Report Y Miles Final" issue. In my view, a pilot should fly DIRECT to
the turning points in the pattern, NOT artifically extended just because the
controller really wants to know, "When will you be about five miles away?"
Thus, my decision to fly DIRECT to the point in the pattern where one turns
from base to final seems justifiable (while reporting five miles away from
the airport). Thoughts?

Regards, Jim

"HankC" wrote in message
om...
"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...
Hi, all. Ran into this one flying back from KOSH a couple weeks ago:

I check in with the KPRC controller "20 Miles NE" of Love Field in
Prescott,
AZ. She clears me with "Cleared Straight-in Runway 21L, Report 5 miles
final."

I fly directly towards the numbers. My heading was approximately 240
(hence, I'm ~30 deg off of the extended centerline).

At 5 miles from the airport (still offset from the centerline), I report
"5
mile final." She questions my position and gets all snippy (indeed,
darn
right rude) that I am "not on final" since I am not on the extended
centerline. She patronizingly cautions me to be "careful about this."

What would an instructor say when we line up for 'final' at 30 degrees
to the runway? Probably not good job'...

What if ATC replies 'make left traffic, report 5 mile left base'?
Would you have driven straight for the numbers?


HankC



HankC

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news
The purpose of quotation marks is to enclose a direct quotation. There
was
nothing in the message that indicated it was not a direct quotation or
that
the punctuation was improperly used.

So what? In what way does that guarantee an accurate quote?


Quotation marks are used to indicate a direct quote. That is their reason
for existing. Why do you assume he used them improperly? What did you
interpret as an indication of an inaccurate quote? Why do you believe the
controller said something other than what he indicated?



It's funny...given how much time you spend nitpicking what other people
say,
I find it amazing how willing you are to trust someone else implicitly
when
they quote a third party, without any sort of reference to back that quote
up.


Why must there be another reference?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Quotation marks are used to indicate a direct quote. That is their reason
for existing. Why do you assume he used them improperly?

I did not.

Jim Cummiskey wrote:
Why put yourself in a position that A) leaves you hard
to find by other aircraft looking for someone "on final"


John, IMHO, I was "on final." The whole point I'm trying to make is that I
don't believe you have to be precisely on the extended center line to be on
final. Rather, to me "Cleared Straight-In" implies that you should not make
a downwind or base turn, but simply fly direct to the airport, align
yourself with the runway, and land. I also don't agree you are necessarily
any "harder to find" on final if you are offset within 30 deg.

You are correct.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

I did not.


Of course you did. Read your messages.

"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...

commenting on that to Jim, he now has (I hope) learned the proper
procedure (which he obviously did not know prior).


IS this the proper procedure? Pilots tend to resolve things definitively
on this forum by quoting the FAR, AIM, or other appropriate authority.
In the absence of such explicit guidance, we can only offer opinion
backed by informed logic and experience. So, let me restate: Where
does it unequivocally state that being on the extended center line is a
requirement for a "straight-in" VFR approach?


You'll find it in the Pilot/Controller Glossary, which is an addendum to the
Aeronautical Information Manual and FAA Orders 7110.10 Flight Services and
7110.65 Air Traffic Control.

STRAIGHT-IN APPROACH VFR- Entry into the traffic pattern by interception of
the extended runway centerline (final approach course) without executing any
other portion of the traffic pattern.



If so, please define "on the extended center line" for me.


What is there that you feel needs defining?



How close is close enough? 10 ft? 100 ft? 1/4 mile?
30 degrees at 20 miles?


How silly do you want to get?



Perhaps some of the folks on this forum can just fly much more
precisely than I do g.


Perhaps.



Indeed, that is why I believe in the IFR domain, the definition of
"straight-in" includes the 30 degrees. This provides for a
REASONABLE definition of "straight-in" that clearly should
be sufficient for VFR applications.


Different operation, different definition.

STRAIGHT-IN LANDING- A landing made on a runway aligned within 30° of the
final approach course following completion of an instrument approach.

The Pilot/Controller Glossary was created to promote a common understanding
of the terms used in the Air Traffic Control system. You should understand
and be familiar with all terms that may be used in any operation you might
engage in.

"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...

STRAIGHT-IN APPROACH VFR- Entry into the traffic pattern
by interception of the extended runway centerline (final approach
course) without executing any other portion of the traffic pattern.


Thanks, Steven. Just to be clear, what source are you quoting this from?


It's from the Pilot/Controller Glossary, you'll find it in the back of the
AIM.



Also, I must point out that my approach and landing met this criteria. I
"intercepted the extended runway centerline without executing any other
portion of the traffic pattern." In this case, I chose to intercept the
extended runway centerline at approximately 1/4 mile from the numbers,
while reporting a "Five Mile Final" when I was five miles from doing so.
The issue is: Was this correct? Or, must a pilot literally intercept the
extended center line at a specific distance (which some on this forum seem
to assume that the controller implied when she directed me to "Report 5
miles final")?


No, it was not correct. The controller instructed you to "Report 5 miles
final." To comply with that instruction you must report "five mile final"
when you're five miles out AND ALIGNED WITH THE RUNWAY. You didn't do that.
You reported "5 mile final" when you were 5 miles from the airport and
still offset from the centerline by thirty degrees. You did not comply with
the controller's instruction.

"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
...

What would an instructor say when we line up for 'final' at 30 degrees
to the runway? Probably not good job'...


Well, let's see. I got on the ground efficiently and precisely with the
minimum amount of fuel and time required. It was a completely safe
operation, and consistent with my understanding of the FARs and common
sense. Since I do hold a CFI ticket, that's exactly what I would have
said g There's a big difference between teaching a student to fly
precise
legs in the pattern, and the real-world of getting from A to B.


You were instructed to report a five mile final. You did not comply with
that instruction. You violated FAR 91.123(b).

"Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an
ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised."

"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message

John, IMHO, I was "on final."

Jim, you asked the question, and received many answers from people with far
broader experience than your own, the preponderance of which disagreed with
your opinion. These you refuse to accept. So be it.

Try thinking of yourself as one of many many pilots who make up the entire
aviation system, instead of one pilot with an inviolable right to fly
wherever, whenever. You also ought to rethink this idea you seem to have
that you can interpret the regs as you see fit. Things will be smoother.

You strike me as a very smart amateur who just loves to second guess and
think to death little perceived cracks in the regulatory structure -- the
kind of person who gave rise years ago to all the old jokes about Doctors
and Bonanzas.

I wish you luck with your future flying.

Jim Cummiskey wrote:

Actually, no.

Actually, yes.

If you think about it ...

What makes you think I haven't?

... if you approach the numbers at a ~30
deg angle, and a "proper" downwind to base turn is made at a ~45 deg
angle,
there will be no conflict whatsover.

When you reach the point in your training where you start flying at
towered airports, you'll discover that there's no such thing as a
"proper" pattern. Downwind and base legs (as well as upwind and
crosswind legs) are extended and shortened for a wide variety of
reasons, to allow planes in and out of the airport effectively.
Especially when the airport is busy.

You'll also discover that there are larger, faster airplanes - some
even with jet engines - that fly larger patterns, and that can affect
(and can be affected by) traffic farther away from the airport. You
may have already discovered this flying around the pattern at your home
airport. If not, you may want to discuss this with your instructor
before he lets you solo.

Regardless, a plane flying "to the numbers" from 30 degrees off the
downwind side will cross every possible base leg to that runway.

It will also cross every possible downwind leg at some point. For
example, a plane on downwind set up for a 1/2 mile base leg could
collide with the inbound plane 0.866 miles downwind from the numbers.

On the other hand, if that inbound plane were to set up for a 5 mile
final, there would be no possible conflict for any pattern
configuration inside those 5 miles. That's a great reason for a tower
controller to ask for it.