Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Change to my Frequency...' started by jd21476, Oct 20, 2019.
Only if you look only in the direction you are travelling, which is a much bigger problem.
I'm not referring to looking ahead, I'm talking about looking for traffic in the most likely location. As aircraft converge on the downwind entry spot, midfield, closed traffic looks right for entering aircraft, midfield bandits look left 'cause they've been taught to look left before turning left (note the PIC in the GIF). Besides, two "bandits" entering for opposite runways are head-on at a high closing rate, low frontal area (hard to see), which should be all the FAA needed to consider before cow-towing to popular demand with this bad idea. You can have the last word.
Ok, I'll take the last word. Just because you don't agree doesn't make them "bandits". Looking for traffic in the "most likely" location is a dangerous concept. Traffic can be anywhere, including closing from a position behind your wings. I was taught to look everywhere in the pattern when entering. Left, right, up, down. Look at the runway too.
Two entering the pattern for opposite runways is just dangerous period. I get outta Dodge when that happens, or more likely the person planning to land against the wind will adjust once they realize there is someone else landing. The NORDO guys, who knows what they are doing or where they are, all the more reason not to have a "most likely position" to be focused on.
I might be a bit fuzzy on things after only 3 flights in 16 years and now a couple months off for the shut-in...but my guess is that the cross midfield above the pattern comes from the idea at an uncontrolled field, cross above the pattern as you were planning to....then turn and decent outside the pattern area for a 45 entry.
so you're never in the pattern. Your situation would have been different, seems to me....
I don't know what the FAA was thinking when they decided to recommend entering midfield crosswind. Aside from other issues mentioned, if the runway is shorter than around 3500' you might not even finish the turn before you're abeam the end of the runway. Not exactly a recipe for a stabilized approach.
That's one way to do it, you can also enter at pattern altitude. There are people who do it on the cross wind. There are probably a few other iterations too. There was a pretty hotly contested thread on this a short while ago and there are a lot different ideas on how to do and what is proper. The bottom line is everyone needs to be vigilant and willing to compromise.
Personally I do cross wind entries (mid field, over the field, pattern altitude), if the conditions warrant it, which for me is not more than one aircraft in the pattern that is in a position where either of us will need to alter course. If I think there may be a conflict, I'll overfly above pattern altitude and make a normal 45 entry. I will also fly the much maligned straight in, again with pretty much the same parameters. And yes, I fly a Cirrus, lol.
Twice this weekend I’ve heard this (might have been the same guy on two different occasions, not sure): “crossing over midfield for a 45 degree entry to the left downwind....”.
Perhaps they recognizesd it was being done and had been SOP in Canada with no problem for a long time.
Funny. I didn't even know the FAA had finally okayed it until I was at a program where the speaker challenged the overhead crosswind to teardrop as incredibly dangerous and recommended the crosswind to downwind. I went up to him after and said, "don't you realize that's the FAA mandated entry?" He told me to catch up on my reading.
BTW, it was SOP where I was a student pilot (3300 foot runaway) due to a voluntary noise abatement and regularly used at the airport where I got my insyrument rating (1800 foot runway). Like LAHSO, if you can't do it, don't.
"No problem" perhaps because Canadians aren't allowed to enter downwind on a 45°like we do unless at an airport requiring mandatory 2-way radio equipment for all aircraft. Perhaps the FAA ought to propose that little detail for airports that want to offer a midfield entry?
If everybody enters midfield for noise abatement, then there's no nearly head-on conflict. Also, an 1800' runway isn't usually very busy with outsiders, not a valid comparison, IMO.