Matthew
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well played, sir. Well played, indeed.
Lowflynjack
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 4,065
- Display Name
Display name:
Jack Fleetwood
AOPA put out an article and had diagrams on exactly what you said. They said the FAA says method one, the teardrop entry, is the preferred method. Crossing over mid-field and turning into downwind is the acceptable alternate. I usually cross over mid-field. You do have to yield to any traffic already on downwind, or on a 45 though.
Figure 10 of the ASF brochure describes an alternate way to enter, but ONLY if it's flown at pattern altitude. Note that even if one flies directly across the field at pattern altitude and turns to downwind, it says that this technique should not be used in busy patterns and that aircraft doing this should give way to aircraft that are flying the preferred entry on the 45.
sarangan
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,896
- Display Name
Display name:
Andrew, CFI-I
The teardrop entry is not my favorite - all that maneuvering and descending close to the traffic pattern makes me uncomfortable. I prefer the midfield crosswind entry. There is a new Advisory Circular on this topic (dated March 2018).
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-66B.pdf
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-66B.pdf
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
When I'm coming in from the opposite side of the field I make a direct entry into a crosswind. I personally feel this is far safer than crossing midfield. Entering on the crosswind is basically flying the same circuit that someone does when they stay in the pattern and allows more time to set up and find other traffic than a midfield entrydoes. There's also less of a chance of conflicting with people coming in on a 45 to downwind...especially if they're NORDO.
I basically enter the pattern exactly how Ed's fine piece of artwork depicts entries. Even the cirrus approach, if no one else is in the pattern, if someone is in the pattern I make a direct entry into an upwind and fly a full circuit.
Flying over midfield saves, what?, maybe 15-20 seconds vs. a direct entry into a crosswind? It's just not worth it to me.
I would NEVER do a teardrop. They seem like the least safe option.
I basically enter the pattern exactly how Ed's fine piece of artwork depicts entries. Even the cirrus approach, if no one else is in the pattern, if someone is in the pattern I make a direct entry into an upwind and fly a full circuit.
Flying over midfield saves, what?, maybe 15-20 seconds vs. a direct entry into a crosswind? It's just not worth it to me.
I would NEVER do a teardrop. They seem like the least safe option.
Yup, I do that a lot too.
Lowflynjack
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 4,065
- Display Name
Display name:
Jack Fleetwood
I'm thinking about this and why I choose mid-field. It's not to save a few minutes over crosswind, but it does save time over flying out to the pattern side of the airport and coming back.
I'm thinking a crosswind entry puts you in a place where departing traffic would more likely be at pattern altitude. Mid-field should have landing traffic and departing traffic well below you. It could be a bad place if someone was going around though. A mid-field crossing would leave you looking at 45 degree traffic as well as downwind traffic. Not sure I have an argument against crosswind entries.
However, Sarangan just posted a new advisory circular and it still shows crossing over mid-field into a teardrop as preferred and mid-field into downwind as alternate. I wonder if they considered crosswind?
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
There might be some valid reasoning for low wing pilots to avoid direct crosswind entries for the reason you cite. But, in my case, flying a 182, with no blind spot below me, and keeping an eye on the runway for departing traffic. I don't see any downside.
As an aside: Disregarding blind spots created by wings, I find spotting airplanes below me to be far easier than airplanes above me or at the same altitude, especially if they have a typical white-based paint job. The white stands out against the Midwest green fields far better than it does against either a clear or cloudy sky.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
It also depends on the length of the runway as to whether they will be at pattern altitude when they are at the numbers at the opposite end of the field. On a 7000 foot Runway sure they probably could be. On a 3500 foot runway not so much. Plus if you're coming in from the opposite side and enter on crosswind you have easily been able to watch what's going on to see if a plane has departed or not. There is no reason you should end up having in midair over the numbers on the departure end with the part in traffic because you've been watching this whole time.
It's all about knowing where you are at and the runway length at the field you are going into. Hey isn't there a regulation about knowing that?
It's all about knowing where you are at and the runway length at the field you are going into. Hey isn't there a regulation about knowing that?
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Exactly
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
So, what you're saying is that some people in the pattern use the same communication methodology that you and clip4 use here?
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Or just Have a conversation on what you’re trying to do
Stewartb
Final Approach
I treat uncontrolled strips as if I was the only one with a radio, which is sometimes the case. I announce my intentions but don’t expect anyone to listen or respond. Radios are not required equipment, and in uncontrolled airspace pilots with radios are not required to use them. I look for traffic with that in mind.
O
OPAgain
Guest
OP again.
In this case, there were 2 planes ON the crosswind going against the flow (i.e. right turn out). If I'd attempted an entry directly to the crosswind leg, I'd have been going straight at the outbound traffic. The good news is that I'd have seen them (well, the whites of their eyes)...the bad news is that I'm not big on evasive actions.
My thoughts were as follows:
I could do the FAA recommended (although it seems a lot of folks here disagree) midfield/teardrop to 45 but higher than 500' over pattern to help keep me out of a mess with the outbound right turn traffic.
I could do midfield at pattern direct to downwind. The problem here is that I'm possible going to get into a mess with the outbound traffic.
I could do direct crosswind entry (see above). Side note, there was no other traffic in the pattern so this would have been OK except for dealing with the right turnout traffic.
I could that the long way around and cross the 'final' leg a few miles out, loop around, and do a standard 45 entry. I failed to mention that there was inbound traffic on an ILS path so I'd have had to deconflict with that.
Or I could have gone the other long way around and cross the departure leg and loop into the 45. This route, again, potentially put me in harms way with the outbound right traffic.
Based on everything here, I'm still thinking my mistake was the communication issue rather than the midfield/teardrop thing.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Unfortunately when something like that happens, you just have to do whatever it takes to stay alive. Departing traffic should NOT be making a right turn until they're outside the airport environment, assuming the airport is standard left traffic.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
Too bad there's no regulation to that effect for departures.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
It's ok to turn away for a few minutes and wait for things to clear up too. A few more minutes of flying isn't a bad thing.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
There may not be a regulation (too lazy to look) but there's definitely an AC that states you should fly runway heading to traffic pattern altitude and then depart straight out or with a 45° turn to the left.
Hank S
En-Route
Been there, done that, waiting for meat bombs to land. It's effective, got me out of the way and led to an easy pattern about three minutes later.
Agreed,
Or climb a little higher overfly further out on the other side. Get things calculated and swing back around to to enter the downwind.
Turn away or overfly further out. Adds maybe 2 minutes, but if unsure. That 2 minutes helps a whole lot.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
There is no regulation specifying direction of turns for departures, only for approaches to landing. The discrepancy between the AC, AIM, and regulations means that some people will consider the AC and AIM guidance for departure turns to be mandatory and some will not, thereby creating a potential for conflicts. That's why I wrote, "Too bad there's no regulation to that effect for departures."
91.126(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 or a powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft.
[Emphasis added]
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-i...02633fce&mc=true&node=se14.2.91_1126&rgn=div8
(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 or a powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft.
[Emphasis added]
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-i...02633fce&mc=true&node=se14.2.91_1126&rgn=div8
Last edited:
danhagan
En-Route
If you were "east-ish" enter normal pattern ... about 30 of the responses were for "cross-over" clover leaf pattern which would be "south-ish"
eman1200
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 18,830
- Location
- Oakland, CA
- Display Name
Display name:
Bro do you even lift
I learned on PoA the best way to enter the pattern of a non towered field, especially when it’s super busy is to fly a straight in IFR approach using the opposite runway that everyone else is using and just announce “don’t worry, it’s fine”.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
If you were "east-ish" enter normal pattern ... about 30 of the responses were for "cross-over" clover leaf pattern which would be "south-ish"
Huh? Did you reference your metal landing calculator before making that post?
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2007
- Messages
- 3,183
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Gardner
That still doesn’t change the idea that turning your back on the airport environment isn’t the best idea nor is it necessary at all for a proper entry.
arnoha
Cleared for Takeoff
I'm not sure I'm understanding the advantage of a crosswind entry. Two big issues I see there are that crosswinds are messy and busy. By messy, I mean that varying performance profiles mean that crosswind position and crosswind altitude could be just about anywhere for your traffic. The longer the runway, the messier. By busy I mean that every departure interacts with crosswind. Even a straight out will be traffic for a crosswind entry.
Not true for a midfield. Half your traffic taking off will have disappeared at this point, leaving only downwind departures and pattern fliers. Downwind distance often varies a bit, but downwind altitude is pretty consistent. 45 arrivals are aiming for the same place you are. This would seem like a negative, but it actually makes life easier...conflict resolution is who's gonna get there first. No complicated mental math of figuring out how your arrival point and the 45 interact, just distance and speed. Also, arrivals tend to be the chattiest, making conflict resolution between arrivals more straight-forward compared to arrival/departure resolutions. I find most departures make fewer radio calls and tend to be more distracted by the high-workload of take-off.
All-in-all, I think it's a judgment call and to have all the tools in your belt sharp. Pick the one that makes the most sense for situation you are perceiving. Even the universally-despised teardrop (in this thread, anyway) is useful. I used it a few days ago. Landing 30 (RP) at KEUL from the west, I noted a helicopter in left pattern and landing the parallel. He was doing the pattern at 3000' where standard right pattern at the airport is 3400'. I wasn't interested in being at 3400' and crossing over him. 400' seemed a little tight to me. I stopped my descent at 3900' and did a teardrop entry, which worked out nicely.
Not true for a midfield. Half your traffic taking off will have disappeared at this point, leaving only downwind departures and pattern fliers. Downwind distance often varies a bit, but downwind altitude is pretty consistent. 45 arrivals are aiming for the same place you are. This would seem like a negative, but it actually makes life easier...conflict resolution is who's gonna get there first. No complicated mental math of figuring out how your arrival point and the 45 interact, just distance and speed. Also, arrivals tend to be the chattiest, making conflict resolution between arrivals more straight-forward compared to arrival/departure resolutions. I find most departures make fewer radio calls and tend to be more distracted by the high-workload of take-off.
All-in-all, I think it's a judgment call and to have all the tools in your belt sharp. Pick the one that makes the most sense for situation you are perceiving. Even the universally-despised teardrop (in this thread, anyway) is useful. I used it a few days ago. Landing 30 (RP) at KEUL from the west, I noted a helicopter in left pattern and landing the parallel. He was doing the pattern at 3000' where standard right pattern at the airport is 3400'. I wasn't interested in being at 3400' and crossing over him. 400' seemed a little tight to me. I stopped my descent at 3900' and did a teardrop entry, which worked out nicely.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
The trouble with the midfield crossover at pattern altitude is that the FAA wants you to yield the right of way to 45-degree entries, which they call "preferred," and also to traffic that is already on downwind. So you have potential conflicts from two directions, both of which are more common than people making right-crosswind departures.
If you discover a conflict with a 45-degree entry, what method will you choose in order to yield? If you turn right, that puts you flying head-to-head with anyone who has just made the crosswind-to-downwind turn. Turning left to parallel the downwind might leave you too close to the 45-degree entry after they turn downwind, and could eventually create conflicts with traffic on base, final, or a missed approach. Maybe a 180 or a 360 would be the thing to do, or just climb out of the pattern.
An upwind entry on the opposite side from the downwind, or a crosswind entry past the departure end, seem like they have fewer directions from which a conflict is likely, give plenty of time to spot potentially conflicting departures, and better opportunities to quickly get out of the potentially congested pattern area in the event of a conflict.
I agree that a pilot always has to be ready to adjust the plan depending on the circumstances.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-66B.pdf
steingar
Taxi to Parking
I would never do a teardrop entry. I won't turn my back to an active runway where I intend to land. If it isn't busy I'll happy do a midfield entry. No one should be midfield just above traffic pattern altitude. If it's that busy I'll fly a big circle around and come in for the 45 to the downwind. And if its really that busy I'll go elsewhere.
arnoha
Cleared for Takeoff
I keep hearing this "turn your back" thing, but you don't turn your back at all. You fly past it. You've already seen what you need to see, and if not seeing the pattern during the teardrop is an issue, you're making the teardrop way too close.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
For what purpose? You've overflown the field. Its either permissive for landing or not. If not, what's a big circle (which is really what the teardrop is) going to really do? If you objective is to be on a 45 for the downwind you can do that without overflying the field in the first place.
arnoha
Cleared for Takeoff
How do you enter on an outside 45 from the opposite side of the field without overflying it? I guess you could arrange to cross well outside the pattern space and come from the other side again. (Half Moon Bay...this is an airport that often calls for this.)
The purpose of the big turn is to give you a place away from the pattern to descend, so that you're at pattern altitude when you're on the 45.
I don't have a big issue with a midfield entry when it makes sense. I've certainly used it. It does require that you're in a place where you can be at pattern altitude on the opposite side of the airport safely. Not all airports and not all situations work with that. Not all situations work for a teardrop, either. Just not understanding the hate for the teardrop.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
You fly a circle a couple miles away from the airport, keeping it (and as much traffic as you can see) in sight. You get to be really, really cautious when you pass the departure end of the runway. You then turn inbound on the 45.
Exactly who is at pattern altitude midfield that you have to overfly by 500 feet?
Midfield works so long at there isn't lots of traffic. If there is I go the long way around. The problem I have with the teardrop entry is it takes your eyes off the runway and reduces your situational awareness.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm at pattern altitude midfield when working in the pattern, just about every time, most pilots are. If I hear someone or see someone in the downwind, or turning downwind when doing a Crossfield entry, I will turn out of there unless I know I can safely mix in.
When I was checking out in an SR 20, we were screaming into the pattern (at least from my perspective) at 120 knots on the 45 about a mile out when we heard a timid call of a student in a 172, turning cross to downwind. My instructor immediately jumped on the radio and announced we would turn a right 360 for the downwind traffic and follow her. I started the turn and told my instructor I probably would have continued to the downwind. He told me that was definitely a student, sounded timid and probably was solo, maybe we could have made it, but why risk it and cause an issue for her where she might have to deviate? I thought that was a great lesson for my rusty pilot brain, it's not a race and we need to help each other out when appropriate.
arnoha
Cleared for Takeoff
We both agree that flying around the pattern works. It's a good tool. I have a feeling I wouldn't mind flying with you.
In the last case I mentioned, a helicopter. OK, not quite my pattern altitude, but close enough that I wanted to give him more room. Another one that can happen is a circle-to-land approach where you break out with lots of room and VFR traffic. You are aimed right at the airport, because of the approach, where and how do you cross?
I don't know that we disagree by that much. Go the long way around for lots of traffic? Agree. Midfield for low to no traffic? Agree. Teardrop is a useful entry? OK, maybe we agree to disagree.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
Must be an awfully long runway. I usually take off at about 500 feet/minute and 100-120 miles an hour. If my runway is 5000 ft (roughly a mile, give or take) it should only take me 30 seconds to traverse its length at takeoff speed. At 30 seconds I've climbed 250 feet. Even at double that I've climbed 500 feet. Pattern altitudes were I live are mostly 1000 feet above runway elevation.
Lets say you're in a Skyhawk climbing 500 feet/minute at the same runway. Now you're only doing 80 miles an hour, so its going to take you about a minute to traverse the length of that runway. A minute in which you will have climbed 500 feet.
You need to be climbing around 2000 feet/minute to be at pattern altitude mid-field. Most GA aircraft cannot do that.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
You made me pull out the flying manuals with this post Steingar, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. When I fly a pattern, I climb to at least 500 agl feet before turning, and usually about 800 agl feet. I will turn lower if requested by the tower, but then only shallow turns and when I'm sure I'm clear of obstacles. So generally I only have a few hundred feet to climb when I turn crosswind and for the most part I find myself pulling power just before or during the turn from crosswind to down wind. By midfield, everything is stabilized and steady and I just have to worry about the next landing while looking for traffic.
Now this is the way I have always done it and was taught, occasionally I will turn lower based on a request from a controller or instructor or as necessary for traffic or noise abatement. For my sanity check, I went back to the AFH from the FAA and found this in a paragraph:
"On the departure leg after takeoff, the pilot should continue climbing straight ahead and, if remaining in the traffic pattern, commence a turn to the crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300 feet of the traffic pattern altitude."
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_pol...iation/airplane_handbook/media/09_afh_ch7.pdf
For what it's worth, by midfield I expect and generally find other traffic at pattern altitude.
slacktide
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Messages
- 556
- Display Name
Display name:
Dan
Most any RV can climb at 2000 FPM, and they are an awfully common GA aircraft these days. Even my Grumman will do 1500 FPM when light. I am frequently at pattern altitude shorty after turning downwind, much less mid-field.