Pattern Width on Downwind

Jaybird180 said:
When I was taught landings, my instructor disuaded me from trying to find a reference point on the airplane to judge distance from the runway on downwind. His reasoning was that I would fly different airplanes and that I should learn to judge by sight alone. I think his guidance may have been misguided (or misunderstood by me).

As a result, refusing to commit the 'sin' of 747 size patterns, my pattern is often too close and lately become inconsistent.

I intend to do some pattern work soon, specifically to find a sweet spot and fix the issue. Can anyone make suggestions that I can use as a starting point (ie midway on wing strut, arm width of light beyond wingtip, etc)?
Click to expand...


If you look down around 45* to the runway, you're good.
 
wabower said:
Sounds to me like you have a good handle on the problem and the training deficiency that caused it, and just need a little help in formulating a plan to fix it. I happen to think the fix is dirt-simple and that you'll have it figured out in about 15 minutes, once you determine a method to test the parameters and consciously study the sight picture and visual cues.

Assuming normal wind speed and velocity, in an uncrowded pattern you might take off and climb to a safe maneuvering altitude and then execute a standard rate 180 turn. When the turn is completed, I think the sight picture will leave no question that your downwind leg is too close too the runway. If you then make a 30-40 degree turn away from the runway and fly for 10-15 seconds and then resume the downwind flight path, you will then be able to SWAG the new offset (pattern size) to see if it looks about right or needs more adjustment. The test will be graded when you turn base and see if your guess was within acceptable limits. Once you see the runway from several different offsets and consciously store that sight picture in memory, everything else is simply fine-tuning.

I wish you were here, we would do it tomorrow morning and then eat some great gumbo at T14. Walt is cooking tonight, tomorrow's cajun food will be as good as it gets.
Click to expand...

Remind me of where "here" is.
 
Disregard my last. Figured it out.

It will be awhile before I take 4SP down dere'
 
Jim Logajan said:
My humble suggestion and the one I have been using:

Use the length of the runway as your distance guide or ground ruler. You should know its length since that is required by 91.103(b).

Then try to mentally rotate the runway 90 degrees (trickier than it sounds) and estimate what fraction or number of runway lengths out you need to fly. Coincidently, most of the runways I use are around 3000 ft, or about 1/2 nm - just about the generally recommended distance for small planes.

In fact most runways I use are between 3000 and 6000 feet, so simply flying one runway length away on downwind should generally get you in the 1/2 to 1 mile range I've seen recommended.
Click to expand...

I like and use ALL of the methods mentioned, but this one is slightly more difficult with a 10,000' runway. ;)

It's easier to use a mental "snapshot" of the distance from the threshold to the 1,000' markers on a big runway as a "chunk" you can mentally use as a measuring stick, since most runways that big have precision markings.
 
Went up tonight to get night current. Dragged a CFI along for good measure. He kept his hands to himself (a good thing). He had a few techniques to suggest, but it looks like I have a decent distance now that I focused on it.

Felt like I was dragging it in with power on final although the power changes were minimal. Modified my technique to go flaps 30 on short final instead of the final rollout like I used to. Seems a bit better that way. Next time I think I may get a bit closer and try flaps 10 until final.

All in all, I don't think I can fly the SP the same a the P models I trained on. This airplane needs a little more finesse.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Modified my technique to go flaps 30 on short final instead of the final rollout like I used to. Seems a bit better that way. Next time I think I may get a bit closer and try flaps 10 until final.

All in all, I don't think I can fly the SP the same a the P models I trained on. This airplane needs a little more finesse.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by this....?

Flaps increase drag -- they also increase the camber of the wing and thus provide "more lift" (Shorthand for X lift at Y speed).

You should be able to turn base to final with 0 degrees, 10 degrees, 20 degrees, 30 degrees, and 40/50 degrees (whatever the a/c has) and make it to the runway because you adjusted accordingly.

(Assuming no wind conditions), 40/50 degrees of flaps would require a shorter final than 0 degrees. If I were your CFI I'd suggest we do approaches with all flaps settings until you figured out approach angle relative to flap setting.

Anyway, I'm a proponent of full flaps every time unless there's a compelling reason not to (Full flaps allows the airplane to touch down with the lowest possible energy, which is always a good thing.
 
Jim Logajan said:
My humble suggestion and the one I have been using:

Use the length of the runway as your distance guide or ground ruler. You should know its length since that is required by 91.103(b).

Then try to mentally rotate the runway 90 degrees (trickier than it sounds) and estimate what fraction or number of runway lengths out you need to fly. Coincidently, most of the runways I use are around 3000 ft, or about 1/2 nm - just about the generally recommended distance for small planes.

In fact most runways I use are between 3000 and 6000 feet, so simply flying one runway length away on downwind should generally get you in the 1/2 to 1 mile range I've seen recommended.
Click to expand...

That is 2-4 times as far as you should be on a 1000'AGL downwind IMO. 45* to the runway is a 12/12 pitch or 1000' over for 1000' up. if you have a strong cross wind pushing to at the runway step it out approximately the percentage of 1000' that matches the percentage of the crosswind component of your airspeed. IE 15kt X/W component in a 100kt airplane move out another 150'.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
That is 2-4 times as far as you should be on a 1000'AGL downwind IMO. 45* to the runway is a 12/12 pitch or 1000' over for 1000' up. if you have a strong cross wind pushing to at the runway step it out approximately the percentage of 1000' that matches the percentage of the crosswind component of your airspeed. IE 15kt X/W component in a 100kt airplane move out another 150'.
Click to expand...

The 0.5 to 1 mile suggested distance comes right out of chapter 7 of the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook. But I would agree that anything much beyond 2500 to 3000 ft seems needlessly far for the average small plane.

But when I've flown as close as about 1500 ft, the base leg (for me at least) becomes mostly a half circle. I don't get a good chance to fly the base long enough to take another good look to see anyone doing a straight in approach before I turn final.
 
Ron Levy said:
I agree with you. You should know the right reference point on each plane you fly just as you know the right V-speeds on each plane you fly. Makes it way, way easier.

On your 172, putting the runway halfway up the strut is a good starting point.
Click to expand...

Ya half way up is good, in the Citabria I teach half, to 3/4 up the strut.

I always tell my students that you should never be flying a pattern in which if the engine fails, you can't make the runway. This is of course if you can help it. Sometimes theres nothing you can do. Nothing ****es me off more when I see somebody on a 2 mile wide downwind, or I have to follow somebody who extends downwind like crazy, dumps the flaps in on a 4 mile final and gets low and slow. Makes me want to ring necks.
 
Jim Logajan said:
The 0.5 to 1 mile suggested distance comes right out of chapter 7 of the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook. But I would agree that anything much beyond 2500 to 3000 ft seems needlessly far for the average small plane.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you consider an "average small plane." There are those who think a Bonanza is a big plane, and others who think a 50-seat RJ is a small plane. I'll just say that 1 mile is probably too wide for a J-3 Cub, but 2500 feet would be pretty tight in a Cessna 401. Know your plane, fly your plane, and be courteous in the pattern.
 
I fly as tight a pattern as anyone in the Chief.

But early students fly a bit wider pattern as even at 70 knots they are way behind the airplane for a while.

Be gracious.
 
dmccormack said:
I'm not sure what you mean by this....?

Flaps increase drag -- they also increase the camber of the wing and thus provide "more lift" (Shorthand for X lift at Y speed).

You should be able to turn base to final with 0 degrees, 10 degrees, 20 degrees, 30 degrees, and 40/50 degrees (whatever the a/c has) and make it to the runway because you adjusted accordingly.

(Assuming no wind conditions), 40/50 degrees of flaps would require a shorter final than 0 degrees. If I were your CFI I'd suggest we do approaches with all flaps settings until you figured out approach angle relative to flap setting.

Anyway, I'm a proponent of full flaps every time unless there's a compelling reason not to (Full flaps allows the airplane to touch down with the lowest possible energy, which is always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Not always. Sometimes you get more drag for your lift, IOW less bang for your hang:rofl:
 
Ron Levy said:
Depends on what you consider an "average small plane." There are those who think a Bonanza is a big plane, and others who think a 50-seat RJ is a small plane. I'll just say that 1 mile is probably too wide for a J-3 Cub, but 2500 feet would be pretty tight in a Cessna 401. Know your plane, fly your plane, and be courteous in the pattern.
Click to expand...

Or at least that's the impression they give when they fly the pattern from 10-30 knots too fast.
 
Are any exams or experience requirements necessary to be a a pattern cop, or do you just show up and start telling other people how to fly, when and how they can practice and providing other unsolicited advice?

Inverted said:
Ya half way up is good, in the Citabria I teach half, to 3/4 up the strut.

I always tell my students that you should never be flying a pattern in which if the engine fails, you can't make the runway. This is of course if you can help it. Sometimes theres nothing you can do. Nothing ****es me off more when I see somebody on a 2 mile wide downwind, or I have to follow somebody who extends downwind like crazy, dumps the flaps in on a 4 mile final and gets low and slow. Makes me want to ring necks.
Click to expand...
 
dmccormack said:
There is a curve, and edges to that curve.

For most SEL, 30/40 degrees equals almost all drag with very little increase in lift.
Click to expand...
Don't recall seeing a L/D chart in the POH for various flap settings. Know where I can find such data?

My observations thus far seem to support that 20 deg is preferable on final and 30 over the fence.
 
wabower said:
Are any exams or experience requirements necessary to be a a pattern cop, or do you just show up and start telling other people how to fly, when and how they can practice and providing other unsolicited advice?
Click to expand...

I don't show up and tell anyone how to fly. Its easy to not understand when you sit teaching sims all day. But when somebody else's pattern affects my safety I have a problem with it as anyone should. Or do you not think about that stuff?
 
Someone else's pattern affects your safety how? By dragging you away from glide distance of the runway?
 
Absolutely. Not in all cases, I really only care depending on the plane I am in, and the airport I am at.
 
Inverted said:
Ya half way up is good, in the Citabria I teach half, to 3/4 up the strut.

I always tell my students that you should never be flying a pattern in which if the engine fails, you can't make the runway. This is of course if you can help it. Sometimes theres nothing you can do. Nothing ****es me off more when I see somebody on a 2 mile wide downwind, or I have to follow somebody who extends downwind like crazy, dumps the flaps in on a 4 mile final and gets low and slow. Makes me want to ring necks.
Click to expand...

I practice in the Luscombe at X51, a popular training destination for the dozens of students out of KTMB. So I commonly have to deal with "bomber patterns". If I get behind one, I turn base early and get in front of him. Then I am good for a few circuits before I need to do it again. Provided they do not have to take any avoidance action as a result (go around, S-turn, etc.), it is perfectly acceptable.

edit: of course we are talking a non-towered airport here.
 
Inverted said:
Absolutely. Not in all cases, I really only care depending on the plane I am in, and the airport I am at.
Click to expand...
If you have concerns about the reliability of the airplane you fly you either need to do a gut check or by regulation if the concern is reasonable you may deem that aircraft unairworthy and refuse to fly it.
 
Jaybird180 said:
If you have concerns about the reliability of the airplane you fly you either need to do a gut check or by regulation if the concern is reasonable you may deem that aircraft unairworthy and refuse to fly it.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. Engine failures are statistically more probable in the pattern than in cruise. It's about minimizing your exposure, not that there's something wrong with the airplane. Why NOT fly within gliding distance? What does it cost you? Nothing.
 
Last edited:
...and you have statistical records to back this up?
 
alfadog said:
I practice in the Luscombe at X51, a popular training destination for the dozens of students out of KTMB. So I commonly have to deal with "bomber patterns". If I get behind one, I turn base early and get in front of him. Then I am good for a few circuits before I need to do it again. Provided they do not have to take any avoidance action as a result (go around, S-turn, etc.), it is perfectly acceptable.
Click to expand...
alfadog's point is well taken -- just be sure you're right about the other plane not being forced to alter its pattern. It would also, if possible, be prudent and courteous to discuss this on the radio with that other pilot so there's no panic in the other cockpit.

edit: of course we are talking a non-towered airport here.
Click to expand...
You bet. At a tower controlled airport, you do what tower says or face the consequences unless you really will have an emergency if you do what they say (and that's where the E-word comes in handy).
 
RoscoeT said:
You're missing the point. Engine failures are statistically more probable in the pattern than in cruise.
Click to expand...
There are no data to support that OWT. None.
RoscoeT said:
Why NOT fly within gliding distance? What does it cost you? Nothing.
Click to expand...
Because there are many aircraft in which that is impossible within a normal pattern, and many others where it would result in a very steep and highly banked approach. In addition, it will force an unstabilized power-off final, since if you were close enough to be able to glide if power is lost, you will be too close to carry any power down final without going high/long short of unstable maneuvering.
 
Last edited:
Jaybird180 said:
Don't recall seeing a L/D chart in the POH for various flap settings. Know where I can find such data?
Click to expand...

Look at the flap setting/ stall speed chart and extrapolate.

Jaybird180 said:
My observations thus far seem to support that 20 deg is preferable on final and 30 over the fence.
Click to expand...

Only because that's what you're accustomed to.
 
Ron Levy said:
There are no data to support that OWT. None.
Click to expand...

The airplanes I learned in with small-block Continentals were very prone to carb icing, and the carb heat system was pretty ineffective. Also prone to loading up the plugs on power off final approaches. So staying within gliding distance is how I have done it from the start. It has served me well. Again, no cost for me. Why NOT do it?

Ron Levy said:
Because there are many aircraft in which that is impossible within a normal pattern, and many others where it would result in a very steep and highly banked approach. In addition, it will force an unstabilized power-off final, since if you were close enough to be able to glide if power is lost, you will be too close to carry any power down final without going high/long short of unstable maneuvering.
Click to expand...

Pure BS. I am not talking about Lear Jets and King Airs. I am talking about the airplanes that make up 95% of the traffic at GA airports - spam trainer types, etc. - Cessnas, Cherokee types, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc. They can all do it. Not talking about the first few hours of student training, but if a licensed PPL cannot safely fly a pattern this close in these types, they could use some re-training. I know you think it's impossible for lots of single-engine airplanes to safely fly patterns in the manner we are describing. I just think that's BS and we will have to agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Jim Logajan said:
The 0.5 to 1 mile suggested distance comes right out of chapter 7 of the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook. But I would agree that anything much beyond 2500 to 3000 ft seems needlessly far for the average small plane.

But when I've flown as close as about 1500 ft, the base leg (for me at least) becomes mostly a half circle. I don't get a good chance to fly the base long enough to take another good look to see anyone doing a straight in approach before I turn final.
Click to expand...

How about this? Learn both and decide for yourself what's best.
 
dmccormack said:
Did I say that? No -- please review.
Click to expand...
Yes, you did:
Originally Posted by Jaybird180
Don't recall seeing a L/D chart in the POH for various flap settings. Know where I can find such data?
Click to expand...
Look at the flap setting/ stall speed chart and extrapolate.
Click to expand...
There aren't sufficient data in the flap setting/ stall speed chart to extrapolate L/D at varying flap settings.
 
RoscoeT said:
The airplanes I learned in with small-block Continentals were very prone to carb icing, and the carb heat system was pretty ineffective. Also prone to loading up the plugs on power off final approaches. So staying within gliding distance is how I have done it from the start. It has served me well. Again, no cost for me. Why NOT do it?
Click to expand...
For the reasons I stated. In any event, your underlying premise (greater likelihood of engine failure in the pattern versus en route) is flatly unsupported by any data.



Pure BS. I am not talking about Lear Jets and King Airs. I am talking about the airplanes that make up 95% of the traffic at GA airports - spam trainer types, etc. - Cessnas, Cherokee types, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc. They can all do it. Not talking about the first few hours of student training, but if a licensed PPL cannot safely fly a pattern this close in these types, they could use some re-training. I know you think it's impossible for lots of single-engine airplanes to safely fly patterns in the manner we are describing. I just think that's BS and we will have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion, but the fact is that a 180 power-off approach requires, in most light planes including those "spam trainers" an exceptionally tight pattern the FAA deems less safe than a partial-power stabilized approach, and they have the accident data to back their position. And if you aren't flying a 180 power-off approach from that point, you'll go high or long if you stay that close. And those are facts, not opinions.

So, if you like doing 180 power-off approaches, you keep doing that. But please -- don't teach that to your primary students as the "normal" way of doing things or they will have problems on their practical test when the examiner wants to see a partial-power stabilized approach from an AIM-recommended pattern as "normal."
 
Last edited:
Jaybird180 said:
If you have concerns about the reliability of the airplane you fly you either need to do a gut check or by regulation if the concern is reasonable you may deem that aircraft unairworthy and refuse to fly it.
Click to expand...

So the 2008 Pitts S2C I fly is not airworthy because it glides like a rock tied to another rock when the engine takes a dump?
 
Inverted said:
So the 2008 Pitts S2C I fly is not airworthy because it glides like a rock tied to another rock when the engine takes a dump?
Click to expand...

Remember for many folks, the world outside Cessna and Cherokee flying is completely alien. But I know exactly what you mean.
 
RoscoeT said:
Remember for many folks, the world outside Cessna and Cherokee flying is completely alien. But I know exactly what you mean.
Click to expand...

This exactly is the problem, lack of understanding and open-mindedness. The world doesn't stop with Cessna just as it doesn't stop with the Pitts I fly. I understand aircraft are operated differently and I am understanding of that fact. But there is understanding, then there is excessive. IMO its bad piloting if its unnecessary and it increases risk.

The fact that people are caught in their own little bubble with regard to the plane they fly is the reason why this thread exists.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Don't recall seeing a L/D chart in the POH for various flap settings. Know where I can find such data?

My observations thus far seem to support that 20 deg is preferable on final and 30 over the fence.
Click to expand...

As long as full flaps and stall horn both hit before the gear tags it's just fine. Adjust to to full flaps as late as you feel comfortable.
 
Inverted said:
This exactly is the problem, lack of understanding and open-mindedness. The world doesn't stop with Cessna just as it doesn't stop with the Pitts I fly. I understand aircraft are operated differently and I am understanding of that fact. But there is understanding, then there is excessive. IMO its bad piloting if its unnecessary and it increases risk.

The fact that people are caught in their own little bubble with regard to the plane they fly is the reason why this thread exists.
Click to expand...

+1. Most people watching you bring that Pitts in would seriously think you are batsh!t crazy. :sigh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top