RussR
En-Route
Reading 91.126, which discusses pattern directions:
I find the bolded wording interesting. One of the airports I fly at has right traffic published on the sectional and the A/FD, but no ground markings. Apparently it used to (using Google Earth historical images), but it doesn't now. Likely just an airport maintenance oversight, I'd bet. The exact situation at this airport isn't the question, though.
A student of mine caught this interesting wording. Basically, 91.126 says you turn left unless there are ground markings. There are no ground markings. The sectional and A/FD say turn right.
I suppose what we are wondering is why the specific mention of "ground markings" when of course this information is properly published in the A/FD and sectional chart. Merely a historical anomaly since before published charts and books? It's almost as if a non-standard pattern direction doesn't really apply if there are no ground markings, though that seems silly.
(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;
I find the bolded wording interesting. One of the airports I fly at has right traffic published on the sectional and the A/FD, but no ground markings. Apparently it used to (using Google Earth historical images), but it doesn't now. Likely just an airport maintenance oversight, I'd bet. The exact situation at this airport isn't the question, though.
A student of mine caught this interesting wording. Basically, 91.126 says you turn left unless there are ground markings. There are no ground markings. The sectional and A/FD say turn right.
I suppose what we are wondering is why the specific mention of "ground markings" when of course this information is properly published in the A/FD and sectional chart. Merely a historical anomaly since before published charts and books? It's almost as if a non-standard pattern direction doesn't really apply if there are no ground markings, though that seems silly.
Last edited: