Question: "Overhead Entry to Downwind?"

I read an NTSB decision that violated a 135 operator for turning a 5
mile final from a right base. If that is considered "approaching to
land", then surely the 45 entry must be also.


On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:45:34 -0500, Todd Pattist
wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

The regulation does not require turns "in the pattern" to be to the left, it
requires the pilot of an airplane approaching to land at an airport without
an operating control tower to make all turns to the left. The 45 degree
entry to downwind violates the regulation.

While I'm inclined to agree with you that you have the
better interpretation of that regulation, it's also clear
that the FAA recommends a procedure that on its face seems
to be illegal. If the FAA's recommendation is legal, then
the logical reason must be that making the 45 right turn
entry to the pattern occurs before the pilot is "approaching
to land." It seems odd, given that the 45 entry is part of
the defined pattern for the approach to landing, but I've
seen the language in other FAR's strained farther than that.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
Harry:

If that is your attitude, maybe YOU need to adjust YOUR attitude!

snip

BTW, your reference to "spoiling a formation landing" shows you know
nothing about formation flying. They came overhead in the break and, as
such, would have been landing individually, with one rolling out as the
next touched down.

Orval,

Your concern is sincerely appreciated but please don't worry, my attitude is
fine. I followed the recommended pattern entry at a busy uncontrolled
field. I do think, however, your undies may be a little tight.

Regarding my misnomer of "formation landing", you're absolutely correct and
I apologize. Having now had the privilege to fly (unintentionally) with
these fine airmen, slotted in the Number 3 position (original Number 3
became Number 4, or possibly we became Numbers 3a and 3b), we landed in
sequence to the adoration of cheering crowds, or maybe it was only a guy
walking his dog who didn't even notice the little airplanes land...

Regards,
Harry

When I first read 91.126 I thought it was either a poorly-written or
extremely loose reg. But since I'm new to the world of FAR/AIM's I figured
I'd learn about it when I needed to.

But in response to your post I did a little digging, and determined that the
problem is that 91.126 is being misinterpreted!

If you go back and reread 91.126, you will note that all the relevant part
is actually saying is that "left traffic" or a left pattern will be the
default standard. The purpose is to state that unless there are indicators
indicating that "right traffic" should be flown, you should always fly "left
traffic". If you arrive at an airport with no indications of a specified
traffic pattern, you should always fly "left traffic".

My justification for this interpretation comes from AIM 4-24, Chapter 4-Air
Traffic Control, Section 3-Airport Operations.

Figure 4-3-2 Provides an illustration of traffic pattern operations. It
shows a 45 degree pattern entry with a right turn onto downwind, with all
turns inside the pattern being left turns. Obviously all turn directions are
reversed for right traffic.

This agrees with the information I have received from other sources.

If I am somehow incorrect on this please let me know, as I am very much
still in the process of learning!


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...

I'm sitting here looking at my handy-dandy little PDQ pattern
calculator...

For left traffic, it shows a 45 degree entry with a right to downwind, a
left to base, and a left to final. (Obviously, for right traffic,
everything
is reversed).

I'm still a wannabe, but everything I have read indicates this is the
correct method for flying a pattern. Are there any F.A.R.s that indicate
otherwise?


Yes.


§ 91.126 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G
airspace.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each person
operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G
airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.

(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without
an
operating control tower in Class G airspace --

(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to
the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual
markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case
the pilot must make all turns to the right; and

(2) Each pilot of a helicopter must avoid the flow of fixed-wing
aircraft.


§91.127 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class E
airspace.

(a) Unless otherwise required by part 93 of this chapter or unless
otherwise authorized or required by the ATC facility having jurisdiction
over the Class E airspace area, each person operating an aircraft on or in
the vicinity of an airport in a Class E airspace area must comply with the
requirements of §91.126.

Bill Zaleski wrote:

I read an NTSB decision that violated a 135 operator for turning a 5
mile final from a right base. If that is considered "approaching to
land", then surely the 45 entry must be also.

I read it too. It was his base to final turn. We're
talking about a 45 entry turn that is 2 turns before the
base to final turn. You tell me - is distance or number of
turns more important? How about time? There must be some
transition between "not yet approaching to land" and
"approaching to land," but I don't think we can say that
it's always illegal to make right hand turns within 5 miles
of the airport you want to land at.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...
|
| When I first read 91.126 I thought it was either a poorly-written or
| extremely loose reg. But since I'm new to the world of FAR/AIM's I figured
| I'd learn about it when I needed to.
|
| But in response to your post I did a little digging, and determined that
the
| problem is that 91.126 is being misinterpreted!
|

Steve, bless his heart, just likes being a little bit obtuse from time to
time. I love his posts. He is conveniently ignoring the "unless otherwise
authorized" clause in the reg. The 45 degree entry is "otherwise
authorized." The AIM specifically states that pilots following the
recommendations in it provide a safe harbor against violation of the
regulations and that all procedures in it are approved by the Administrator.
The AIM is also signed by the Administrator saying that the procedures in it
are authorized.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
|
| "Mike O'Malley" wrote in message
| ...
|
| Please explain to me how it is possible to "enter on a 45 to the
downwind"
| AND "make all turns to the left in the traffic pattern" (that is
| paraphrased
| from memory).
|
|
| It isn't. The 45 degree entry to the downwind is illegal.

No, it is not. The regulation says "unless otherwise authorized," and the 45
degree entry is specifically authorized as a legal maneuver in a document
signed by the Administrator (the AIM). The AIM may not be regulatory, but
following the procedures in the AIM provides a safe harbor and use of those
procedures is to be presumed by the FAA to be in compliance with all federal
regulations.

In article ,
"Harry Shin" wrote:

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
Harry:

If that is your attitude, maybe YOU need to adjust YOUR attitude!

snip

BTW, your reference to "spoiling a formation landing" shows you know
nothing about formation flying. They came overhead in the break and, as
such, would have been landing individually, with one rolling out as the
next touched down.

Orval,

Your concern is sincerely appreciated but please don't worry, my attitude is
fine. I followed the recommended pattern entry at a busy uncontrolled
field. I do think, however, your undies may be a little tight.

Regarding my misnomer of "formation landing", you're absolutely correct and
I apologize. Having now had the privilege to fly (unintentionally) with
these fine airmen, slotted in the Number 3 position (original Number 3
became Number 4, or possibly we became Numbers 3a and 3b), we landed in
sequence to the adoration of cheering crowds, or maybe it was only a guy
walking his dog who didn't even notice the little airplanes land...

Regards,
Harry



Harry:

It appears that your real complaint is that the three were flying
formation and did an overhead approach -- both of which, if properly
done, are safe, legal and efficient. In my original post, I conceded
that it appears that the flight leader screwed up in breaking ahead of
you. What else do you want?

Are you jealous that others have practiced and enjoy flying formation?
Is it "airplane envy"? Your second paragraph indicates an attitude
problem.

Sounds like the real story here is a guy got cut off in the pattern and was
rightfully ****ed about it, but PO'd another guy by making a blanket
statement about formation flyers.

C'mon guys.. Lighten up. Both of you sound reasonable (but annoyed), just
let it go...

KB

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news

Are you jealous that others have practiced and enjoy flying formation?
Is it "airplane envy"? Your second paragraph indicates an attitude
problem.

Orval,

Hmmm. By your own analysis, these "others have practiced and enjoy flying
formation" did a lousy job, so I'm certainly not jealous of them.

As far as "airplane envy" and my so-called "attitude problem", I guess I
should feel honored that these guys chose to create an un-necessary
situation, with my father and I trying desperately to see where they were
going, and trying to make sure the two in the low wing planes didn't nail
us.

With respect to my "attitude problem", I suppose it's just a case where it
seems some people take themselves Way Too Seriously. "White flight", ten
second landing intervals, "break now!"; you guys should join the Boy Scouts
so you can practice marching in step (turns can be very difficult). I've
also heard it's fun to wear camoflauge to play paintball... (oops, there's
that damn attitude thing again! sorry...)

Roger Out!,
Harry

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

The regulation does not require turns "in the pattern" to be to the left, it
requires the pilot of an airplane approaching to land at an airport without
an operating control tower to make all turns to the left.

The "approach to landing" IS the pattern.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."