Tight patterns?

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).

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
om...

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


I own an Aeronca 7AC and fly a tight pattern, and think I'm quite normal.

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.

Bob,

I can sympathize. I fly (still student) at McCollum (RYY) and do notice the
same thing. My CFI called them "747 patterns". The tower likes to keep
closed traffic between the field and Kennesaw Mountain no matter which
runway is in use so you can't stray too far that way! But yes, I've
wondered "Is he going to Roswell (or Birmingham) before he turns base?"
Then again, they may be a student learning is how I look at it. But, my CFI
used to say things like, "Now would be a good time to turn." But they're
not all students. I've been in the pattern with CAPflight doing touch and
goes and they'll fly those 747 patterns too!

Chris

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
om...
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 ,
(Bob Martin) writes:


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).


Like everything else, this can be taken to dangerous extremes in either
direction.

Too wide a pattern wastes time and puts you out of gliding range from the
runway.

But the only close call I ever had to a collision was the result of a guy in a
NORDO Husky flying too tight, and especially, TOO LOW, a pattern.

At CPK, pattern altitude is 1000 msl. I was practicing crosswind landings in a
Katana ( really like those little airplanes) and staying close in at pattern
altitude. The Husky took off after me and I saw him lifting off about midfield
as I turned from crosswind to downwind, but then lost track of him. On final, I
still couldn't see him and hadn't heard him either, so I got nervous. So I
added power and did some S-turns to move my wing around an look down, and sure
enough, there he was, a hundred feet or so below and slightly ahead of me. I
went around and later had a talk with him at the fuel pumps.

I don't think he ever got to 800 feet, and probably turned crosswing before he
was even to the end of the runway, and flew such a tight pattern that he
overtook and passed me. Add a low wing over a high wing, a NORDO aircraft
flying a non-standard pattern, and you've got a midair waiting to happen.

The point being that we fly a standard pattern for a reason, and that is so
other pilots can anticipate where we're going to be and know where to look to
see and avoid and so that the timing works out right. It would make some sense
for the slower Husky to fly a tighter pattern than a Cessna, and a Bonanza a
wider one, just to accomadate the speed differences in maintaining separation,
but not reaching pattern altitude is asking for disaster.

And, of course, if you're NORDO, it is even more important to fly in a
predictable manner.

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

His not being where you expect him to be... has nothing to do with your
(and his) mutual obligation to see and avoid each other. There is no
requirement to even USE a pattern. You cant depend on other traffic
having a radio at the uncontrolled fields I use.

Dave

Wdtabor wrote:
In article ,
(Bob Martin) writes:


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).



Like everything else, this can be taken to dangerous extremes in either
direction.

Too wide a pattern wastes time and puts you out of gliding range from the
runway.

But the only close call I ever had to a collision was the result of a guy in a
NORDO Husky flying too tight, and especially, TOO LOW, a pattern.

At CPK, pattern altitude is 1000 msl. I was practicing crosswind landings in a
Katana ( really like those little airplanes) and staying close in at pattern
altitude. The Husky took off after me and I saw him lifting off about midfield
as I turned from crosswind to downwind, but then lost track of him. On final, I
still couldn't see him and hadn't heard him either, so I got nervous. So I
added power and did some S-turns to move my wing around an look down, and sure
enough, there he was, a hundred feet or so below and slightly ahead of me. I
went around and later had a talk with him at the fuel pumps.

I don't think he ever got to 800 feet, and probably turned crosswing before he
was even to the end of the runway, and flew such a tight pattern that he
overtook and passed me. Add a low wing over a high wing, a NORDO aircraft
flying a non-standard pattern, and you've got a midair waiting to happen.

The point being that we fly a standard pattern for a reason, and that is so
other pilots can anticipate where we're going to be and know where to look to
see and avoid and so that the timing works out right. It would make some sense
for the slower Husky to fly a tighter pattern than a Cessna, and a Bonanza a
wider one, just to accomadate the speed differences in maintaining separation,
but not reaching pattern altitude is asking for disaster.

And, of course, if you're NORDO, it is even more important to fly in a
predictable manner.

Don

In article et, Dave S
writes:


His not being where you expect him to be... has nothing to do with your
(and his) mutual obligation to see and avoid each other. There is no
requirement to even USE a pattern. You cant depend on other traffic
having a radio at the uncontrolled fields I use.


However is inside pattern and failure to reach the published pattern altitude
created a positioning that made it impossible for either of us to see or avoid
the other.

Had I not been nervous about NOT being able to see him and not knowing, since
he was NORDO, if he had remained in the pattern or flown straight out, he would
have had landing gear poking down through his wings in just a few more seconds.

It may be true that folks aren't required to fly a standard pattern, at the
published altitude, but I am saying it is good practice to do so, and
unnecssarily risky to not.

And that flying predictably when NORDO is even more important.

Not law, just good sense.

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG