Pattern "A"

Flying_Nun

Flying_Nun

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
537
Location
KLOU
Display Name
Display name:
Flying_Nun
Second session in the sim (Redbird LD). Worked on Pattern "A" which was used train pilots in WWII. Top track is the first attempt. Did some stalls and slow flight between the first and second patterns.

The plan is to do about 10 hours in the sim then transition to the plane. My instructor's other IR student did this with impressive results. Hopefully I'm as good a student as him.

Pattern A 4-16-18.JPG
 
Ok. What is Pattern A? Just a flight pattern to fly?
 
I remember the "patterns". (I can't remember if it was "A".) It inspired me to come up with my own practice pattern that utilized local VORs, a small practice airstrip, 2 - towered fields, and the untowered field I trained out of. Flying this pattern one time pretty much covered everything one could need to practice for instrument flying. I started flying it (in my plane, not in the sim) by myself, VFR, no hood, then added a safety pilot and put on the hood. Flew it religiously during my training, as often as possible. My instructor loved it, and began using it for other students. After I got my flying it twice per month fulfilled my currency requirements.

Hmm. Now that I moved, I need to come up with a new one.
 
There's a number of predefined patterns in the FAA IFR and other books. You can also find them online. A & B are the same, but A is done all at the same altitude, B includes climbs and descents. Many CFIIs love them. As a sporadic instrument student I find them irrelevant. Has anyone here ever had to do a procedure turn, a back course and a pattern for a real approach? I know it's to teach timing and headings, but I still think there are better concepts to teach in better ways.
 
bflynn said:
Ok. What is Pattern A? Just a flight pattern to fly?
Click to expand...

Pattern A:

pattern_a.gif


Great IFR training exercise. It forces you to include a clock or timer into your scan, which VFR pilots generally don't do.

There's also a Pattern B - easy to Google.
 
Last edited:
murphey said:
There's a number of predefined patterns in the FAA IFR and other books. You can also find them online. A & B are the same, but A is done all at the same altitude, B includes climbs and descents. Many CFIIs love them. As a sporadic instrument student I find them irrelevant. Has anyone here ever had to do a procedure turn, a back course and a pattern for a real approach? I know it's to teach timing and headings, but I still think there are better concepts to teach in better ways.
Click to expand...

I've had the pleasure of several "real" procedure turns.

My first IFR flight to see the inlaws, KHTW --> KFAY, Tower nicely vectored me between CUs, then cleared me for the ILS Back Course, which I'd never even flown in training. I accepted it, and asked for the GPS approach to the same runway, and that was granted, making me a happy pilot that evening.

This was maybe 4 months after my Instrument checkride, back in 2010. It's still the only back course I've ever even heard on the radio . . . .
 
murphey said:
There's a number of predefined patterns in the FAA IFR and other books. You can also find them online. A & B are the same, but A is done all at the same altitude, B includes climbs and descents. Many CFIIs love them. As a sporadic instrument student I find them irrelevant. Has anyone here ever had to do a procedure turn, a back course and a pattern for a real approach? I know it's to teach timing and headings, but I still think there are better concepts to teach in better ways.
Click to expand...

You’re missing the point. The idea behind these patterns is to teach and reinforce attitude flying by incorporating turns, climbs, and decents with associated configuration changes. It is not about teaching anyone how to fly an IAP. You need to know how to nail attitude flying and these patterns are simply a means to exercise all the necessary skills in a predictable fashion.
 
tsts4 said:
You’re missing the point. The idea behind these patterns is to teach and reinforce attitude flying by incorporating turns, climbs, and decents with associated configuration changes. It is not about teaching anyone how to fly an IAP. You need to know how to nail attitude flying and these patterns are simply a means to exercise all the necessary skills in a predictable fashion.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I used them for. When I started my IFR training, I was woefully inadequate at precisely holding a heading and altitude, let alone standard-rate turns. The patterns helped a lot.
 
I'd like to try it out and record it on Foreflight to see how I did, however I don't know what low and normal cruise would be in my Cherokee.
 
My CFII made me fly those patterns 30 years ago, and I still use them with my students today. I know many see them as useless, but I disagree. I think they are a good building block between basic attitude flying and flying approaches. It gives the student practice dividing their attention between flying the airplane and reading the pattern and timing legs. Many the tools that you will need to fly an approach with out the added "pressure" of trying to nail the approach. I don't spend hours on this, but I think half a lesson or so helps.
 
Flying_Nun said:
Second session in the sim (Redbird LD). Worked on Pattern "A" which was used train pilots in WWII. Top track is the first attempt. Did some stalls and slow flight between the first and second patterns.

The lower one looks really good, but during my training I found practicing these patterns as not being very helpful but certainly did add time. I got my rating in '04, but when I started giving IFR instruction in '10, I decided to teach flying these patterns in context and integrating them with the procedures flownin the airplane. I believe it makes overall training more efficient, though I don't see either approach to instruction as being superior. It's mainly just CFII preference.
Click to expand...
 
Dave Theisen said:
My CFII made me fly those patterns 30 years ago, and I still use them with my students today. I know many see them as useless, but I disagree. I think they are a good building block between basic attitude flying and flying approaches. It gives the student practice dividing their attention between flying the airplane and reading the pattern and timing legs. Many the tools that you will need to fly an approach with out the added "pressure" of trying to nail the approach. I don't spend hours on this, but I think half a lesson or so helps.
Click to expand...
Likewise.

My observation is that instructors, and therefore their students, consider it a waste of time to build the basic skills before starting to train procedures. It shows up quite clearly later in their flying careers, especially in the area of instrument malfunctions.

I've actually used these patterns with jet pilots because they are so lacking in basic instrument skills.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Likewise.

My observation is that instructors, and therefore their students, consider it a waste of time to build the basic skills before starting to train procedures. It shows up quite clearly later in their flying careers, especially in the area of instrument malfunctions.

I've actually used these patterns with jet pilots because they are so lacking in basic instrument skills.
Click to expand...
This is my instructor's approach. Learn instrument attitude flying while dividing attention between reading the pattern and recognizing abnormal situations. I lost count of the failures he through at me.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
luvflyin said:
That looks just like the time I was trying to hold at an intersection defined by two NDB’s once
Click to expand...
What do you mean with two NDB's? I just thought it was my standard holding pattern.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Simulated 0-0 takeoff. Took a small detour about mid-field.

Screen Shot 2018-04-22 at 7.50.04 PM.png
 
Timbeck2 said:
I'd like to try it out and record it on Foreflight to see how I did, however I don't know what low and normal cruise would be in my Cherokee.
Click to expand...
High cruise is usually your normal xcountry speed. Low cruise is what one CFII said should be for holds. I just checked my notes for A & B, and I have 75 kts for low cruise in the cherokee.
 
Timbeck2 said:
I'd like to try it out and record it on Foreflight to see how I did, however I don't know what low and normal cruise would be in my Cherokee.
Click to expand...

Change the terms high and low to “cruise” and “typical approach speed”. Or whatever suits your fancy. The idea is to make a positive airspeed change and hold it (or do the best the airplane can anyway for most trainers), even in climbs and descents.
 
The continuation of my 0-0 take-off. A 360 per "ATC" then Pattern A followed by Pattern B which includes descents. As others have said, this preps you for flying approaches. The sim is terrific for teaching these kinds of procedures. My biggest complaint about it is it's incredibly sensitive to pitch changes. I'm constantly chasing altitude. Next session I'll get introduced to an ILS and a GPS approach.

Pattern A+B.JPG
 
Timbeck2 said:
I'd like to try it out and record it on Foreflight to see how I did, however I don't know what low and normal cruise would be in my Cherokee.
Click to expand...

murphey said:
High cruise is usually your normal xcountry speed. Low cruise is what one CFII said should be for holds. I just checked my notes for A & B, and I have 75 kts for low cruise in the cherokee.
Click to expand...

One of the first things my CFII had me do was derive the necessary control and power settings for various things like high cruise, low cruise, etc. Filled out a card for each plane so that this information would be available when needed. I have them for all four planes that were in the club at the time (we later sold the Arrow). I've attached the one for our C-172N so you can see that it looks like. Very handy cheat sheet to have available. Sorry this is a PDF, this board won't let me upload the Word file. Also, the blank column would be MP if this were a plane with a constant speed prop.
 

Attachments

  • N75898 Power settings card.pdf
    179.6 KB · Views: 32
tsts4 said:
You’re missing the point. The idea behind these patterns is to teach and reinforce attitude flying by incorporating turns, climbs, and decents with associated configuration changes. It is not about teaching anyone how to fly an IAP. You need to know how to nail attitude flying and these patterns are simply a means to exercise all the necessary skills in a predictable fashion.
Click to expand...
I'm not missing the point. The CFII made no attempt to instruct nor correct what I was doing wrong, just kept me doing the pattern. Over and over. For 14 hours. Needless to say, I'm no longer paying either the CFII or the school. Even after I went to the owner and said I was making no progress. Wasted $$$. Plus the CFII cancelled a lesson one day because his airplane was down and he needed to get it into the shop. Because, after all, leasing that airplane to the school was more important than a lesson that had been scheduled for over a week. When did he tell me about the cancellation? When I showed up for the lesson.

No, I'm not fond of Plan A or B or any of the others (they go thru Plan G). A thoroughly miserable experience.

Perhaps next year I'll start the instrument again, but this time with a CFII that knows how to teach, not merely one that managed to pass the FAA checkride.
 
murphey said:
I'm not missing the point. The CFII made no attempt to instruct nor correct what I was doing wrong, just kept me doing the pattern. Over and over. For 14 hours. Needless to say, I'm no longer paying either the CFII or the school. Even after I went to the owner and said I was making no progress. Wasted $$$. Plus the CFII cancelled a lesson one day because his airplane was down and he needed to get it into the shop. Because, after all, leasing that airplane to the school was more important than a lesson that had been scheduled for over a week. When did he tell me about the cancellation? When I showed up for the lesson.

No, I'm not fond of Plan A or B or any of the others (they go thru Plan G). A thoroughly miserable experience.

Perhaps next year I'll start the instrument again, but this time with a CFII that knows how to teach, not merely one that managed to pass the FAA checkride.
Click to expand...
Sounds like your instructor was missing the point, too.
 
I might be doing more instrument instruction soon so instead of the low-fi Xeroxed-to-death copy I spent a couple hours to draw a new version myself. Print and fold and half and you have a kneeboard-sized version with one pattern on one side and the other on the other side.
 

Attachments

  • patterns a and b.pdf
    19.4 KB · Views: 34
It’s a very good exercise. Approaches and holds all stem from pattern A and B.
 
Flying_Nun said:
Second session in the sim (Redbird LD). Worked on Pattern "A" which was used train pilots in WWII. Top track is the first attempt. Did some stalls and slow flight between the first and second patterns.

The plan is to do about 10 hours in the sim then transition to the plane. My instructor's other IR student did this with impressive results. Hopefully I'm as good a student as him.

View attachment 62010
Click to expand...

Amazing what some people do with a simple “cleared direct” clearance.
 
More sim work. All kind of ugly but got to the runway.

4 ILS approaches
ILS17L.JPG

And an RNAV with vac failure
RNAV24 NoVac.JPG
 
murphey said:
There's a number of predefined patterns in the FAA IFR and other books. You can also find them online. A & B are the same, but A is done all at the same altitude, B includes climbs and descents. Many CFIIs love them. As a sporadic instrument student I find them irrelevant. Has anyone here ever had to do a procedure turn, a back course and a pattern for a real approach? I know it's to teach timing and headings, but I still think there are better concepts to teach in better ways.
Click to expand...

Ever have to recover from a departure power on stall in real life, or do a emergency landing? Many don't, still a good thing to teach.

Despite not doing any of this in the wild, every 6mo for my checkrides, NDB approach circle to land to a missed

Steep turns under the hood or with no horizon

Engine failure at 500' on departure with low visibility

Loc approach using DME, even though there is a LPV, to a missed after a runway incursion.

Etc

I could go on, but just like I wouldn't pick a college for my kid based on which one has the easiest classes, I also don't think we should be teaching aviation for the easiest and lowest common denominator. If you can't time a turn or fly that thing partial panel, you really don't need to be going IMC, some of it is failures that given enough hours you'll have, some is just making sure you can walk and chew gum at the same time.
 
James331 said:
Ever have to recover from a departure power on stall in real life, or do a emergency landing? Many don't, still a good thing to teach.

Despite not doing any of this in the wild, every 6mo for my checkrides, NDB approach circle to land to a missed

Steep turns under the hood or with no horizon

Engine failure at 500' on departure with low visibility

Loc approach using DME, even though there is a LPV, to a missed after a runway incursion.

Etc

I could go on, but just like I wouldn't pick a college for my kid based on which one has the easiest classes, I also don't think we should be teaching aviation for the easiest and lowest common denominator. If you can't time a turn or fly that thing partial panel, you really don't need to be going IMC, some of it is failures that given enough hours you'll have, some is just making sure you can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Click to expand...
Dude, I'm 6 hours into instrument training. What did your first approaches look like?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Flying_Nun said:
Dude, I'm 6 hours into instrument training. What did your first approaches look like?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The above are 6mo recurrent rides for work.

My first approaches and pattern stuff we're all initially in a frasca sim

Frasca_142_simulator.jpg


But I did the pattern A B stuff

Did turns and unusual attitudes and got vectors and decents and stuff from my CFII

The plane I learned in had two NAV heads, DME and no GPS.

First approach was a step down type, a VOR or LOC

Then precision which in my case was a ILS.

As I said my initial training was between a frasca sim with no visuals and the above mentioned basic plane, I logged the bare mins in the actual plane and did a very large amount of my IFR learning in the sim.
What helped was that I did a good amount of my simulated IMC time as hood work trading off safety pilot duties building hours with friends while we were hour building towards our CPLs.

I'd highly recommend spending a good amount of time in the sim, you should be using the plane to demonstrate what you already learned, not to learn new skills for IFR, that's what a sim is for
 
I did pattern B in an SR 20 on a real lumpy day Wednesday, what a work out, I still need some work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top