texasclouds
En-Route
Where is the clause that exempts Mooneys from this rule?
You misspelled Bonanza!
Where is the clause that exempts Mooneys from this rule?
Actually they can and do run red lights.I am sure that the ambulance is in a hurry too but they still cannot run a red light.
I seriously doubt that Ambulances do not go through red lights in your state. And I seriously hope that is not true, for anyone who needs urgent care sake.In my state ambulances must still obey the traffic laws. Drivers that do not may be liable. Just because someone else runs a light doesn't make it right or smart. If time is important , call a Medivac.
But my point is that whether you are being paid or not is irrelevant to your actions on the road, water or air.
Just finished the class. Our local group feels that if time is that important, call a medivac. Getting into a crash does no one any good. Your place may think differentlyI seriously doubt that Ambulances do not go through red lights in your state. And I seriously hope that is not true, for anyone who needs urgent care sake.
So personally if I'm approaching from the opposite side of the pattern I''d rather fly upwind to get a good look at the pattern (and the windsock) then start the crosswind and downwind as soon as it looks clear. It adds all of about 60 seconds or less and both increases my visibility to other aircraft and my ability to spot other aircraft.
That makes no sense. You’re 3 miles from the hospital and going to wait for medivac rather than go through a light with sirens blaring and lights flashing?Just finished the class. Our local group feels that if time is that important, call a medivac. Getting into a crash does no one any good. Your place may think differently
Need help understanding this. Advise if I’ve over-redacted.
Does it say 10mins before taxi, start making calls?
It’s from 9.5.
View attachment 119003
Your profile says North Carolina...from the NC motor vehicle code:Just finished the class. Our local group feels that if time is that important, call a medivac. Getting into a crash does no one any good. Your place may think differently
The right of way rules were written BEFORE AIRCRAFT RADIOS were common. What you say on the radio has nothing to do with whether you're actually on "final" or not.Isn't there some rule regarding making pattern calls in the 'airport environment'? Like, you need to be in the airport environment before make calls regarding the pattern? This would mean a 10-mile final call is really a position call, and not a pattern call (upwind, crosswind, downwind, base, final). I swear I read it in an accident analysis or a legal analysis from the AOPA.
The right of way rules were written BEFORE AIRCRAFT RADIOS were common. What you say on the radio has nothing to do with whether you're actually on "final" or not.
Then you probably don't want to live in my area. We are semi-rural. I you have a serious chest grabber, you are going to be, at best, warm dead when we show up. We will do compressions and transport but your brain has been oxygen deprived for more than 4 minutes, so...organ donor. My local hospital is 45 minutes from my service area. It is a level 3 trauma center (second lowest) A level 1 trauma center is a 20 minute flight. If we think that it may be bad,(car accident, gunshot) we put the medivac on standby alert. The patient can be at a level 1 trauma center before we can drive to the nearby level 3. If the patient is not that bad off, then there is no need to bust a gut. If it is an ischemic stoke, there is a couple hour window. Again no need to run lights. If it is a hemorrhagic stroke. Unless you are in the hospital when it happens and the neurosurgeon is available, your are an organ donor. So for my area and situation, it does make sense, at least to me.That makes no sense. You’re 3 miles from the hospital and going to wait for medivac rather than go through a light with sirens blaring and lights flashing?
I still doubt that, but I’m glad I don’t live there if it’s true.
according to this, there are half a dozen specific callouts where ambulances are exempted from the rules and a section specifying that local authorities can allow for more exceptions as they see fit. https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/ByChapter/Chapter_20.pdf
that is not what you said previously. I have no argument with that.I agree that the ambulance may do a slow roll through a light if all cars yield.
I've seen similar things mentioned a lot.... and while it's been a long time since I read the regs with great care, I'm not so sure about that. I don't think you're on final at 10 miles out.... even something fast like an F-16. You may be on approach, but not final.... cause I'm sorry....but you aint in the pattern!
and doesn't an IFR approach into a VFR pattern have to fit into that VFR traffic? Seems to me that huge issue centers around this idea of straight in finals. I think Morgan3820 in post#9 is spot on. It aint hard....stop trying to be so selfish.
Straight in works ok....when there's not much traffic in the pattern.....but otherwise not so much.
being on final is irrespective of radio calls. . .. before a plane turns to final - they need to insure they are not affecting a plane already on final. . and again, 10 miles means nothing, it isnt the "distance". Dont be caught up with the distance thing - its "being on final". Because 10 miles, 100 miles, or even 3 miles, if it isnt a factor - then its not a factor. Its only an issue when conflict arises, then the plane on final - has the legal ROW. Perhaps dead, but still has the legal ROW.Isn't there some rule regarding making pattern calls in the 'airport environment'? Like, you need to be in the airport environment before make calls regarding the pattern? This would mean a 10-mile final call is really a position call, and not a pattern call (upwind, crosswind, downwind, base, final). I swear I read it in an accident analysis or a legal analysis from the AOPA.
That’s how we do it here in the north. Unless there’s tower or traffic advisory, no entry by straight in, or by 45 into downwind.Respectfully, why can’t arriving traffic enter The pattern by over flying the field upwind, then crosswind, downwind, base? If an aircraft was arriving from any other direction, they would have to enter the pattern at the appropriate juncture. I don’t know why this is so hard.
What matters, to me, is whether the pilot is close enough to landing where he or she must pay increasing attention to the flight of their own aircraft, and hence cannot be expected to be watching for other traffic with the usual intensity.If you are on final, you are on final. The distance doesnt matter.
I hope they turn off the lights and sirens so everybody else can go.Just finished the class. Our local group feels that if time is that important, call a medivac. Getting into a crash does no one any good. Your place may think differently
So the 10 miles is arbitrary, because they just continue to fly in - and the 10 becomes 5 and becomes 3. They are on "final" - and if you arent on final before them - guess what - you've made an conflict/issue - and you'll not have the ROW. So ignore the 10 miles, or 100 miles. Just realize that the straight in on final has ROW. Its unfortunate, but that is the reality of the regs and several cases have been decided that way. As Dbahn also mentioned - the FAA talks out of the side of their mouth as to what they want you to do - but that isnt the way they have written the legislation. Notice all their circulars are not giving the ROW to the people in the pattern, or on base, or whatever. It is just "advised"
One problem with this method could be limited visibility of traffic flying a missed approach, especially at airports with a high volume of training traffic. A high wing could be making a climbing right turn (opposite side of traffic pattern) on the missed approach while you in a low wing making a right turn to upwind could create a situation where two planes have a blind spot. The approach plate below shows the situation I'm describing where the initial turn to the right starts 400' below pattern altitude. At this airport, all of the approaches for the calm wind runway have similar missed approach procedures with a steady stream all day long. It's surprising how well airplanes can blend into the desert background making them almost invisible."Upwind" is not the same as "departure" so you wouldn't fly the upwind over the runway but rather offset to the side. So personally if I'm approaching from the opposite side of the pattern I''d rather fly upwind to get a good look at the pattern (and the windsock) then start the crosswind and downwind as soon as it looks clear. It adds all of about 60 seconds or less and both increases my visibility to other aircraft and my ability to spot other aircraft.
Also, on the upwind you are flying in the same direction as landing and departing traffic, so the closure rate between two aircraft is much slower. In the NORDO Cub it's not unusual for me to enter the upwind even if I'm in position to land straight it, because I'm more visible to other aircraft for a longer period of time and more turns, and I have more time to study the whole airport environment. At least NORDO aircraft know for sure that no one is listening to them.
Exactly. And what does 91.113(g) state ? That aircraft on final have the right of way. So everything in the above paragraph means nothing in terms of legal right of way.Here's a good example of FAA two sided mouth speaking. They like the use of "however" ...
"9.11.1 Straight-In Landings. The FAA discourages VFR straight-in approaches to landings due to increased risk of a midair collision. However, if a pilot chooses to
execute a straight-in approach for landing without entering the airport traffic pattern, the pilot should self-announce their position on the designated CTAF between 8 and approximately10 miles from the airport, and coordinate their straight-in approach and landing with other airport traffic. Pilots choosing to execute a straight-in approach do not have a particular priority over other aircraft in the traffic pattern and must comply with the provisions of § 91.113(g)."
Exactly. And what does 91.113(g) state ? That aircraft on final have the right of way. So everything in the above paragraph means nothing in terms of legal right of way.
Just to be clear (and not nit-picking for the sake of nit-picking) but it's important to remember that even an aircraft on final has to give way to an aircraft in distress or a glider, etc. , neither of which may be transmitting (for perfectly valid reasons).Then being on final gives you the absolute right of way (published) EXCEPT for one other occurrence - and I think thats the plane on the runway. But thats the only exception.
The approach plate below shows the situation I'm describing where the initial turn to the right starts 400' below pattern altitude.
Yes but it’s a climbing right turn to 5900’, so by the time the plane is even halfway through the turn it should be above pattern altitude. Besides, isn’t ATC providing separation for IFR traffic?
being on final is irrespective of radio calls. . .. before a plane turns to final - they need to insure they are not affecting a plane already on final. . and again, 10 miles means nothing, it isnt the "distance". Dont be caught up with the distance thing - its "being on final". Because 10 miles, 100 miles, or even 3 miles, if it isnt a factor - then its not a factor. Its only an issue when conflict arises, then the plane on final - has the legal ROW. Perhaps dead, but still has the legal ROW.
One time I was forced to abandon the 45-degree entry by someone doing that, except it was in the daytime.Entering the pattern from the inside at pattern altitude is insanity and a potential mid-air waiting to happen.
Some jackwagon did that to me at night and he got reeealy close. Big nope.
I don't believe that's totally true. I think maybe you're missing the part that implies....just because you might be lined up on a runway course....you aint in the pattern yet... and therefore you aint on final.Exactly. And what does 91.113(g) state ? That aircraft on final have the right of way. So everything in the above paragraph means nothing in terms of legal right of way.
I suppose that's where the "coordinate with" thing comes in..... and a little consideration and common courtesy on both ends of the exchange. It aint that hard, right?!?And what about those doing pattern work vs full stop? Doesn’t take too many small planes doing tight pattern work before the pattern is full. I think some deference should be given to planes that actually need to land. This is especially important when landing on runways with no taxiway and full stop landings required a taxi back to exit the runway.
Glad you affirmed my often-stated rebuttal to those who cite Canadian rules as a defense for mid-field cross-over entries directly to downwind. I.e., radio is required up North. YOU are someone who knows what you're talking about! And, of course, all you Canadians have done is relocate the argument about entry technique to the other side of the airport.That’s how we do it here in the north. Unless there’s tower or traffic advisory, no entry by straight in, or by 45 into downwind.
Substitute Traffic Pattern Entry for drugsI see from this thread that all the old arguments on this subject are alive and well. So much for the new AC clarifying anything.
VFR? They should be conforming to VFR pattern rules not doing the missed approach, no? Or did @dbahn say he was scud-running?This is an uncontrolled airport with heavy student training, think slow climbing PA28s and C172s. @dbahn 's suggestion is a recipe for disaster, at least at this airport.
The relative vertical motion is the same as descending into a traffic pattern.
There aren’t a lot places I have seen where you actually have no ground radio advisory or tower, and there is a lot of traffic. Although the practice area near my base has many grass fields dotted all over, and that gets interesting once you switched to the field frequency and a student flies towards or over the area.Glad you affirmed my often-stated rebuttal to those who cite Canadian rules as a defense for mid-field cross-over entries directly to downwind. I.e., radio is required up North. YOU are someone who knows what you're talking about! And, of course, all you Canadians have done is relocate the argument about entry technique to the other side of the airport.
The problem is that the FAA is talking about something difficult to nail down with specificity. The FAR says an aircraft "on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way," subject to the "lower aircraft" rule. At the same time, there is nothing new about the principle that an aircraft approaching an airport, regardless of direction, needs to fir itself in with the traffic already there. That tension between those two principles has been here for decades.I see from this thread that all the old arguments on this subject are alive and well. So much for the new AC clarifying anything.