Pattern Madness

neither of those regs require you to make a turn..

You're right.

Given the tone of this whole thread, I feel the need to preface the next statement. I am in no way arguing with you. I am just adding content. :)

However, it does state that when turns are made, they should be to the left and it only stipulates during approach to landing. A right, left or straight out departure appears to be fine.

Pilots have been violated for flying right hand patterns at non-right hand airports. I've got a very good friend who works out of the DEN FSDO and this came up.

With that said, the FAA can and will violate for whatever they want. He was telling me a story related to a case that came across his desk. A pilot was preparing to land at an airport where the runway was iced over. There were two snowmobiles running up and down the runway on the ice. The pilot buzzed them to let them know he intended to land. He was violated for flying too low over a congested area.
 
You're right.

Given the tone of this whole thread, I feel the need to preface the next statement. I am in no way arguing with you. I am just adding content. :)

Great, we are up to 23 pages and no one has told me what rule was broken.

However, it does state that when turns are made, they should be to the left and it only stipulates during approach to landing. A right, left or straight out departure appears to be fine.

True,,,,,,, noise abatement is one really big thing dictating the requirement.


Pilots have been violated for flying right hand patterns at non-right hand airports. I've got a very good friend who works out of the DEN FSDO and this came up.

It's called careless and reckless 91.13,

With that said, the FAA can and will violate for whatever they want. He was telling me a story related to a case that came across his desk. A pilot was preparing to land at an airport where the runway was iced over. There were two snowmobiles running up and down the runway on the ice. The pilot buzzed them to let them know he intended to land. He was violated for flying too low over a congested area.

Again 91.13 the violation of ATC requirements is a whole different thing, but a pilot may do as the please in the event of safety. 91.3 but they best have a good story as to why.
 
Originally Posted by RV Guy
PS, I consider one form of "pattern Madness" to be flying a downwind 1.5 miles from the runway.
Sorry, but a student flying his first pattern (with assistance) might not fly as tight as you, but a mile and a half is still well within a reasonable distance.
Seems like an appropriate time to recycle a photo.

I doubt very many here would consider 1.5 miles to be well within a reasonable distance for a C-150.
 
neither of those regs require you to make a turn..

Which way would you like to turn here
Tom,

I didn't say turns were required. I just pointed out that the regs say that if you do make a turn, it has to be in the appropriate direction. Pilots can't just decide to fly the opposite pattern.
 
Again 91.13 the violation of ATC requirements is a whole different thing, but a pilot may do as the please in the event of safety. 91.3 but they best have a good story as to why.

Yeh, you declare the emergency and you can fly inverted to the numbers at 500kts if you need to. ;)

I'm not sure what rule has been broken either. (aside from the fact that the OP violated §91.126 by making a right turn in the pattern, but perhaps he was in an emergency situation and it warranted it) From the sound of it, an RV pilot was hot rodding and almost killed someone.

I'm trying to play the scene out in my head.

So, they enter the downwind and are almost abeam the numbers. An RV calls 3 miles out that he is on the downwind to 28 yet, somewhere in here he goes head to head with the C150. This is where it is fuzzy for me. To go head to head the RV had to be on final for 28, not downwind. So in the head to head action, the OP executes a right and turn, while the RV does a 360* turn to where? Final?

I've also expressed a curiosity about what else was in the pattern. OP claims "busy GA field." 1 C150 doing bounces does not constitute a "busy GA field" but I digress.

I dunno, either way, I guess RV pilots are, as Iceman would say "Dangerous!"
 
Yeh, you declare the emergency and you can fly inverted to the numbers at 500kts if you need to. ;)

I'm not sure what rule has been broken either. (aside from the fact that the OP violated §91.126 by making a right turn in the pattern, but perhaps he was in an emergency situation and it warranted it) From the sound of it, an RV pilot was hot rodding and almost killed someone.

I'm trying to play the scene out in my head.

So, they enter the downwind and are almost abeam the numbers. An RV calls 3 miles out that he is on the downwind to 28 yet, somewhere in here he goes head to head with the C150. This is where it is fuzzy for me. To go head to head the RV had to be on final for 28, not downwind. So in the head to head action, the OP executes a right and turn, while the RV does a 360* turn to where? Final?

I've also expressed a curiosity about what else was in the pattern. OP claims "busy GA field." 1 C150 doing bounces does not constitute a "busy GA field" but I digress.

I dunno, either way, I guess RV pilots are, as Iceman would say "Dangerous!"

What ever,,,,,,,, it's just 2% of the pilot base making all the news again.

I was abreast the numbers (34 @ AWO) set up with 10 degrees flap and had the mighty 150 ready for the base turn, when the AWO RV squadron (5 AC) broke over head and spiraled down into the base leg in front of me. I simply extended down wind and allowed the ego driven dudes go to their hangar, kinda made me sour on the whole bunch.
 
What ever,,,,,,,, it's just 2% of the pilot base making all the news again.

I was abreast the numbers (34 @ AWO) set up with 10 degrees flap and had the mighty 150 ready for the base turn, when the AWO RV squadron (5 AC) broke over head and spiraled down into the base leg in front of me. I simply extended down wind and allowed the ego driven dudes go to their hangar, kinda made me sour on the whole bunch.

I'm confused. Are you Dan's student?

You need to understand that the overhead break has less to do with ego and more to do with enjoying piloting a fun aircraft.
 
Last edited:
There's plenty of fun aircraft that don't make it a habit to do overhead breaks into occupied traffic patterns.

It's a habit. An unnecessary one.

Plenty of Pitts, Yak, and Citabria/Decathlon drivers who fly normal patterns, for example.
 
did you get his tail?
Yeah, "tail". Pretty hard to get his "tail" when they are 4" numbers.

I saw over on the Van page someone had their checkride "scrubbed". That plus invasion stripes, mil insignia, and checkered tails just sends me. I will never be so cool.

Count me as one who has had way too many run-ins with the RV fleet. But I guess the boys over on the Ford Pinto Owners Group have to defend themselves too. Just like any owners group I suppose.

Just don't use a desire to be way cool as reason to dive and drive into the pattern.
 
That is true, but there is even less of a practical purpose in using a carrier break in the general aviation world.
I had heard several times the overhead break was the most efficient method to get the entire formation on the deck in the shortest amount of time.

For civilian use, the break looks cool as long as discipline is maintained and that only comes through thorough briefing involving all users, ie, not just the formation elements.

EDIT: For a couple years I was active in a local group flying "more affordable" warbirds in formations. Mostly we flew specific ceremonies like final salutes and federal holidays. I got out when some of the pilots repeatedly demonstrated a lack of skill even though we flew the same routine over and over and again. It sure was fun while it lasted but I cannot overemphasize the importance of a solid briefing.
 
Last edited:
Yeh, you declare the emergency and you can fly inverted to the numbers at 500kts if you need to. ;)

I'm not sure what rule has been broken either. (aside from the fact that the OP violated §91.126 by making a right turn in the pattern, but perhaps he was in an emergency situation and it warranted it) From the sound of it, an RV pilot was hot rodding and almost killed someone.

I'm trying to play the scene out in my head.

So, they enter the downwind and are almost abeam the numbers. An RV calls 3 miles out that he is on the downwind to 28 yet, somewhere in here he goes head to head with the C150. This is where it is fuzzy for me. To go head to head the RV had to be on final for 28, not downwind. So in the head to head action, the OP executes a right and turn, while the RV does a 360* turn to where? Final?

I've also expressed a curiosity about what else was in the pattern. OP claims "busy GA field." 1 C150 doing bounces does not constitute a "busy GA field" but I digress.

I dunno, either way, I guess RV pilots are, as Iceman would say "Dangerous!"

Ok, you officially are one of the idiots, then, if you can't see the danger posed by flying at pattern altitude, directly opposite left hand traffic (the published pattern for this airport and very much preferred due to local concerns).

I give up.
 
Dan, I guess I can accept the apology, as difficult as that is after 8 pages and 32 posts of being called "dissembling", an "apologist", a "wannabe" "pretending to still be in" etc etc etc. I accept only because of my expansive "view of the range of human interchange".

There are lots of bad pilots out there. Consider yourself lucky that your closest encounter was one stupid RV guy (I've been shot at and missed by many, several much dumber, faster and bigger than that - and incidently, none yet in an RV).

We are all working hard to get better. We don't consider derisive dialogue (including pictures of winged rec vehicles coming from fellow pilots) to be particularly helpful in our efforts, Thank you.

Keep your headup and please work your students in a bit closer as soon as possible. We don't want to re-enforce any bad habits. Thanks again

Hang on -- my apology was for painting all RV pilots as wannabes that do overhead breaks at busy airports.

The rest of my comments apply -- the idiot that almost collided with me was flying an RV, I've had an inordinate share of in-the-pattern, near-the-airport sightings of RVs being flown stupidly and unsafely.

Therefore not ALL are guilty of this.

But there's enough to spot a trend -- Draw your own conclusions.
 
AS I read the savy aviator http://www.swaviator.com/html/issueam01/basicsam01.html I see no requirement to do any turns in the pattern.
How can you fly the pattern without doing any turns in it?

You are pretty much free to do any thing that is safe.
Not exactly. By regulation, any turns you make in the pattern be to the left, unless the pattern is designated right.

Do what fits the area best.. It's all legal.
Almost. The FAA is rather insistent about the direction-of-turn rule if you make a turn in the traffic pattern.
 
Again 91.13 the violation of ATC requirements is a whole different thing, but a pilot may do as the please in the event of safety. 91.3 but they best have a good story as to why.
The rule on direction of turns in the pattern is 91.126(b), and it applies without exception at nontowered airports.
 
Hang on -- my apology was for painting all RV pilots as wannabes that do overhead breaks at busy airports.

The rest of my comments apply -- the idiot that almost collided with me was flying an RV, I've had an inordinate share of in-the-pattern, near-the-airport sightings of RVs being flown stupidly and unsafely.

But there's enough to spot a trend -- Draw your own conclusions.


> Hang on -- my apology was for painting all RV pilots as wannabes that do overhead breaks at busy airports.

Thank you :)

> I've had an inordinate share of in-the-pattern, near-the-airport sightings of RVs being flown stupidly and unsafely.

Dan, I am beginning to wonder if the problem isn't a little more specific to the airport(s) that you frequent and the people based there that happen to own RVs? As I have mentioned to you privately, I have NEVER seen an RV execute a midfield break. I have only once had an RV fly into my pattern and land ahead of me (while I still owned the Cherokee, before I got my RV4) and he politely asked me if it would be OK before doing so.

> But there's enough to spot a trend -- Draw your own conclusions.

Again, maybe a trend in the areas you frequent but not where I do. The nice thing about the Internet is that you can reach a wide audience. The bad thing about the Internet is you can reach a wide audience.

There is NO question that the experimental community is adding significantly and possibly disproportionately to the accident numbers. There is also no question about the fact that many within that community are working hard to fix that. Some will dig in their heels and say they are within their rights and others just need to mind their own business - hopefully they don't take any innocent lives along with them while they are exercising those rights.

While not all posts in this thread have been constructive there is no doubt that you have done the aviation community as a whole a service by bringing up this topic. I'm not pleased about the scarlet letters with which I have been branded because of my choice in aircraft, but I do see some benefit to using controversy to move the needle to advancing the cause of safety. I guess I'm just going to have to frequent your airport and raise the percentage of RV sightings that are more congenial than you are used to!
 
Last edited:
How can you fly the pattern without doing any turns in it?
The point I was making is " you don't have to fly the pattern."

Not exactly. By regulation, any turns you make in the pattern be to the left, unless the pattern is designated right.

When you make turns is says use the indicator on the ground.


Almost. The FAA is rather insistent about the direction-of-turn rule if you make a turn in the traffic pattern.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each person operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.

(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

Neither rule .126 or .127 require you to make any turns, plus it doesn't set a requirement for you to follow the visual indicators if they have any. but doing it any other way is cause for a 91.13 violation
 
Last edited:
The rule on direction of turns in the pattern is 91.126(b), and it applies without exception at nontowered airports.

Are you suggesting that any pattern entry except what the FAA recommends is Illegal?
 
Ha, yeah I know. :) Too funny. That's why I used 18V for fuel instead, but the restaurant at GXY used to be pretty good.

We had a lot of RV's at Front Range, but I never saw them abusing their aerobatic nature in the pattern. One did bust the Denver Class B when it the tower went in, and they modified the airspace.

I really, really like the RV's and want to get one someday, just don't want to build it!

We still have a lot of RVs at FTG. And the 3 flying into GXY on Sat were probably from FTG. Sat morning breakfast at GXY is pretty much scheduled every Saturday.
 
I think there is more an element of jealousy for RV than hate around here.
 
Well, I've read every post so far and what I can see is that it's more a concern / disdain for pilots who are perceived as being not sufficiently safety conscious - And, that some RV pilots have been observed as making poor judgments regarding those kinds of safety concerns.
I really don't think it's hate or jealousy; but certainly an element of taking things personally throughout this thread skews it to seem that way.

Surely, everyone agrees that flying an aircraft within regs and what would be a safe manner is paramount for all pilots regardless of the platform.
 
I think there is more an element of jealousy for RV than hate around here.
That is a pretty wide brush to paint with and rather ironic considering that the original complaint was that RV drivers were being painted with a wide brush by a poster on this board.
 
Last edited:
We had a lot of RV's at Front Range, but I never saw them abusing their aerobatic nature in the pattern. One did bust the Denver Class B when it the tower went in, and they modified the airspace.
What was the mod? The current cutout still seems extremely claustrophobic to me even now.
 
I'm sure there's a boiling cauldron of seething at some type-specific board out there with links sending their emissaries out. This would explain how the fish guy thinks that flying head-on at pattern is acceptable.
 
Neither rule .126 or .127 require you to make any turns, plus it doesn't set a requirement for you to follow the visual indicators if they have any. but doing it any other way is cause for a 91.13 violation
I'm still not seeing how you can fly the pattern without making turns, but 91.126 does indeed make it mandatory to follow the visual indicators.
(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;
 
What was the mod? The current cutout still seems extremely claustrophobic to me even now.


Front Range (KFTG) was a non-towered field when I first got there. After about a year or so of being based there, a private tower was constructed and the airspace changed to Class D with a cut-out in KDEN's Class B. It was a "learrning experience", for many of the pilots there, so to speak.

There are several RV's based at KFTG, and I never had a bad experience with any of them.

I also don't think that just becuase an airplane is painted like a warbird or with military colors means the pilots are wannabees and/or reckless.
 
Are you suggesting that any pattern entry except what the FAA recommends is Illegal?
No, and I believe I've repeatedly said otherwise in this thread and others. The only issue I've addressed with reference to 91.126(b) is direction of turns once in the pattern. The FAA is well aware that the recommended 45-downwind entry requires a turn in the opposite direction from the 45 to join the downwind, and seems perfectly happy with that turn -- just no flying the pattern backwards or on the opposite side.
 
I see very little benefit to OP's intent, tenor and broad brush accusations. I find it interesting he claims to have an inordinate number of in-the-pattern encounters with RVs - Hmmm.. at some point maybe he needs to be a little more introspective and ask "maybe I'm part of the problem". I fly to RV fly-ins several times each month - many have 20-30 RVs flying in from all over the country. I'm a CFI as well and fly C-152's at towered and non-towered airports, I'm an active duty Navy pilot and fly all over the world and I don't have an inordinate number of bad encounters with any specific group of aviator. How is it our zealous CFI OP ends up being the bad RV magnet?

Maybe the RV who went head-to-head wasn't an idiot but was confused, made a mistake, or having a bad day. Ever happen to you Mr. CFI RV basher? I can count on one hand in 27 years of military flying the number flights in which I didn't make a mistake - some of them bad. Dan doesn't mention getting on the radio and asking the RV pilot to clarify his intentions despite acknowledging non-standard radio comms. What example did you set for you new 6 hour student? You showed him it was ok to be COMPLACENT and RESIGNED by other peoples mistakes or perceived lack of professionalism in light of a possible safety concern. NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE TO SET! Then the ridiculous OP makes me wonder what kind of new pilots he is turning out - how is their attitude and behavior affected by his? He could have gotten on the radio and said, "silver RV, C152 on DW 28 @ KXXX, You are flying upwind on the downwind side Sir requiring me to maneuver to avoid you - please state your intentions?" or better yet when the first radio call came in, "aircraft calling for 28 at KXXX, I'm a C152 on left DW for 28 at 1000ft, please state your location and intentions? Thank you" You'd be amazed at the willingness for people to work things out when you approach it like that... please teach your students to be proactive and not complacent. COMPLACENCY kills!

BTW - The OH Break entry has nothing to do with EGO - it is fun though. I land at a private grass strip where nobody is watching and still do the OH break. It takes more skill, requires more precision, and helps build mastery of the aircraft. Just yesterday I flew into West Palm Beach International and asked for the OH. They said, "RV - report 3 mile initial and expect left break at the numbers" No hesitation, no consternation.
 
I think there is more an element of jealousy for RV than hate around here.

More like an element of RV owners thinks their **** doesn't stink. ;)

Look, here's the deal, and I think it's a perfect analogy:

We (as pilots) are all motorcycle riders and the rest of the world cagers. And it doesn't matter if we are riding a

GS500 (152)
DR350 (170/180/185/205)
Harley/Victory/Indian (SE/FG/FP Cessna, Piper, Beech)
Goldwing (Seneca/Baron)
VMax (Comanche, Mooney, Bonanza)
Canam (Rutan design), or a
GSXR/CBR/ZX/YZF (RV-n)

Some of the cagers look at us and think, that freedom would be nice. Some cagers will look at us no matter what we are riding and want us off the roads, or want them outlawed. And some cagers want us to crash so we never ride again. Now most of the bike riders from each group are going to be pretty good about all the rules of the road and blending in with other bikes and traffic, and never cause any problems.

Now every once in a while you're going to see someone on that beginner bike (the 152) do something stupid, because they are just learning, and mistakes happen, and the rest of us bikers go what an idiot, good thing he's on a 500, he would have been in trouble with anything bigger or faster. But you aren't going to see vast numbers of GS500s weaving in and out of traffic, riding wheelies on the interstate or other shenanigans that make all of us bikers look like morons.

Then you've got the times where all us bikers are stuck in traffic with no where to go, and the DR rider just pulls off the highway, runs through the grass for a while, and avoids the whole mess. The cagers look at them, and think "you lucky bastard" as do the rest of us, and for a bit we think, "man, would be nice to have one of those and avoid all this pavement." And sure once in a while when they can't get off road, they might snake their way through a traffic jam, but they still aren't white-lining at 125mph.

And we've also got the Harley riders. This is what most cagers associate with motorcycles. You tell someone, I've got a bike, and they ask "Is it a Harley?" These are common, and they are seen everywhere. Sometimes you see them in large groups, and sometimes you see them out on the road all by themselves, and yes, they probably account for a good number of accidents because there are so many of them out there. You're not usually going to see them white-lining, cutting in and out of traffic, and if they try the wheelies, they usually end up paying for it with a crash.

Then we got the travelers. The Goldwings. You rarely, if ever, see them in town. They are always out on the road, by themselves, loaded up for a weekend trip, or taking a big trip in comfort and style. You'll never see them weaving in and out of traffic, never white-lining, and never ever trying to lift the front wheel off the ground, or doing a wheel stand. But yep, sometimes you get that guy that has too much money, not enough brains or experience, gets in way over his head, and ends up with 1000lbs of metal on top of him. You'll see that with all the bikes, but usually problem with this group, is too much money, not enough discipline, not because they were showing off.

Then we've got the straight line screamer. The VMax. Oh, it goes fast, and once in a while you will see one haulin' ass on the highway. But they aren't made to weave, and dart, are a bit too big to squeeze between the two semi trucks, and a bit too heavy to really get into close quarters with the rest of the cagers. They can go fast, well, and most riders know that's the limits. They go fast in straight lines, and if you want them to turn or slow down, they're gonna need some room to do it. So for the most part, they stick to themselves, and get out of the way, but yeah, once in a while, some dumbass tries doing something the bike shouldn't do on purpose, and wrecks it.

And we see the Canams around and think, "WTF is that weird looking thing?" That might be fun to ride once, but that's not a real bike, everything is just pure backwards about it. You never see them do anything crazy, because they are already afraid the thing is going to just do it's own thing anyway.

Then of course we have the crotch rockets. And yes, I own one. Most people that ride them take off fast from lights to get out of the way of the cagers. They accelerate quick, they stop quick, they turn on a dime. They are light, they are nimble, they are capable of just about anything, and in the wrong hands they are a lot of trouble. You can race them on the track with some modifications, and they are a blast to ride. You will see about an equal number of them solo as you will in groups of five or six. Most of the crotch-rocketeers are just trying to stay out of the way of the cars and trucks, and yeah, it might look unsafe to someone that doesn't ride one, but it's generall operated within the envelope of the bike, and the rider. But this group of bikes has a higher percentage of riders performing stupid bike tricks than any other group. They do wheel stands, they white-line at 100+ mph, they ride on one wheel on the interstate, they race each other on the highway, in neighborhoods, and on busy city streets. And the idiots that are riding this way see absolutely nothing wrong with what they are doing. Even though quite a few know for a fact what they do ****es off the drivers and the other riders because it gives not only the crotch-rocketeers a bad name, it gives ALL the bikers a bad name. They can be ridden in a completely normal manner, but they aren't by this subset. Quite a few of the rocketeers, ever if they don't perform the tricks themselves will say, "well that's what the bike is made to do, if you don't like it and you see one, stay out of the way." Most of us in this group shake our heads, and say, "there isn't a lot we can do, they aren't going to listen anyway, we can just hope they only kill themselves and no one else when they do it." A few of us try to change them, but it's a lost cause.

But the biggest problem with the rocketeers, is not that the majority of them are bad riders, or discourteous riders, but they have a disproportionate amount of wannabes in their group. They treat the public roads like a race track, and to hell with the consequences, or if they cause problems for anyone else.
 
Last edited:
OH break is a good practice for engine out.
Everybody should be proficient in doing it.
 
OH break is a good practice for engine out.
Everybody should be proficient in doing it.

Or lose 750' of that 1500' before you get to the airport and fly a straight in. Being below pattern altitude a couple miles out allows you a better view of what's going on in the pattern as it's easier to see planes against the sky than it is against ground clutter.
 
If you can't land a C150 engine out 1000' AGL from 1.5 miles away you're a pi$$ poor pilot, hero.
Depends which way you're pointed and where you are in relation to the runway when it happens and how fast you're going. 1.5 miles aligned straight in with no flaps extended and above best glide speed, probably no sweat. 1.5 abeam midfield pointed away (say, coming off a midfield crossover entry)... :yikes: In between...:dunno:
 
Last edited:
Depends which way you're pointed and where you are in relation to the runway when it happens and how fast you're going. 1.5 miles aligned straight in with no flaps extended and above best glide speed, probably no sweat. 1.5 abeam midfield pointed away (say, coming off a midfield crossover entry)... :yikes: In between...:dunno:

You can't put a 150 on the runway from 1.5 miles out in anywhere on downwind?

(Ignoring unusually strong winds)

Keep in mind -- I'm a very tight pattern flier (especially the first flight after the Chief sits for a awhile). Look at KWAY -- I'm on left downwind north of Route 21.

But with a new student, even a 150 is "fast." There's slop when entering and flying the pattern. It happens. We want perfection, we let them learn.

Sorry, but the focus by hour 6 (5th with me) is not a tight pattern.

Early forays in the pattern are about traffic avoidance and flow, attitude and airspeed control, configuration changes, communications, and the sense of the airplane and height above the ground... plenty to keep a student busy.

Tightening up the pattern will come.


::cue clan of Superior AviatorsTM to tell me how wrong I am::

:rolleyes2:
 
...

But there's enough to spot a trend -- Draw your own conclusions.

I have heard people call an Aeronca slow, but that's no way to draw a conclusion on the owner's mental aptitude.
 
First of all -

The Overhead break entry wasn't created to "look cool" it is in fact the most efficient and orderly way to sequence a formation flight into the pattern.

I'm asking out of my own ignorance here, because I really don't know. For GA formation flights why not break formation somewhere outside of the pattern?
 
You can't put a 150 on the runway from 1.5 miles out in anywhere on downwind?
A C150 has a 9:1 glide ratio. That gives you 9000 ft of glide, assuming no winds. 1.5 miles is 7,920 feet. You don't have much margin left with only 9000 ft of glide to maneuver in a way that can get you into a position to land, but it can be done.

A crosswind you had to turn into would absolutely destroy your ability to get back.
 
Not for my part -- I want a Barron, but a fairly low time A36 will do... :D

a friend just spent $7,000 to annual his SR22.

you could save a bundle with experimentals.




ps. Actually the label "experimental" is a misnomer. With today's design and kit completeness, there is nothing experimental about experimentals. You use the same engine, same (or better) avionics, same sheet metal... the only difference is the weight of your wallet.
 
a friend just spent $7,000 to annual his SR22.

you could save a bundle with experimentals.




ps. Actually the label "experimental" is a misnomer. With today's design and kit completeness, there is nothing experimental about experimentals. You use the same engine, same (or better) avionics, same sheet metal... the only difference is the weight of your wallet.

So which "experimental" can I buy that has 4 seats 1000nm range, IFR certified GPS, 1250lbs useful load, and I can get used for $53,000?
 
Back
Top