Teardrop Pattern Entry

[Half Fast]

The upwind entry risks you getting center-punched by departing traffic - some planes climb better than others!

This would be a concern if you flew the upwind leg directly over the runway.

Flying it about 1/4 mile offset let’s you see the runway and any departing traffic, and if there’s a departure that’s a concern you can do a 360 away from the runway to establish spacing.

 

[aftCG]

Jesus. Teardrop is not new, nor is the term. Many decades old. Having witnessed Internet cry sessions about it's use I no longer use the term on the radio.

In a busy pattern (say 5-8 planes) you would have to be insane to cross mid field and turn downwind in front of 2-3 planes also on down wind or a legit 45 entry. This new and dangerous maneuver that makes others cry allows you to fly far enough over that traffic and turn once you are past all of them, turning back when the only targets you need to coordinate with are planes entering the 45.

Lastly, it's in the FAA publications as the preferred method of pattern entryv from the wrong side so it doesn't matter if you don't like it. If you're not comfortable with them or haven't heard of them that's your instructor's fault.

Still not convinced? Find me just one example of a midair blamed (by accident investigators) on this decades old published procedure

 

[Papa Pilot]

I've done every pattern entry maneuver in the book. They all have their pros and cons. You choose the best option for the given situation. I don't lock myself into "I always do xxxxxxxx." I want options.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

Where did the term come from? I know what it means as an instrument maneuver.....but not for a pattern entry. Like others, I'd rather enter from the up wind-cross wind direction. Everyone knows that....geez.

 

[Maxnr]

It’s the way we were taught last century, before AWOS was invented, and the procedure was to overfly the field 500’ above pattern altitude to check the wind sock so you knew which way to land. If you ended up on the wrong side of the field, then yes, you did a 180 to go to the other side and then did your teardrop entry.

This procedure is at least 60 years old. It was taught by CFI's that in turn date back to WW2.

 

[Sierra_Hotel]

Midfield cross at pattern altitude just seems like really poor form to me unless you're positive there's no one else in the pattern.

 

[bbchien]

It is. If you do that, cross >500 above the highest TPA, descend >3 miles in the teardrop, and enter on the downwind 45….

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

I prefer to fly 500 feet below pattern and climb up to pattern altitude on the crosswind leg.

 

[luvflyin]

I prefer to fly 500 feet below pattern and climb up to pattern altitude on the crosswind leg.

You can be expecting a call from FSDO soon

 

[AlphaMike]

In a busy pattern (say 5-8 planes) you would have to be insane to cross mid field and turn downwind in front of 2-3 planes also on down wind or a legit 45 entry. This new and dangerous maneuver that makes others cry allows you to fly far enough over that traffic and turn once you are past all of them, turning back when the only targets you need to coordinate with are planes entering the 45.

.

what if one of the 2-3 planes on downwind is a King Air? That’s the part I don’t like. 500’ above puts you right in his face.

 

[luvflyin]

It’s the way we were taught last century, before AWOS was invented, and the procedure was to overfly the field 500’ above pattern altitude to check the wind sock so you knew which way to land. If you ended up on the wrong side of the field, then yes, you did a 180 to go to the other side and then did your teardrop entry.

I'm having trouble picturing this. Lets say it's a runway 18/36. No Right Traffic indicators. Give a turn by turn description of arriving from the West with winds dictating 36 and then 18. And then arriving from the East.

 

[PaulS]

And I think the second choice was a ten-mile straight in.

I call a ten mile final, I figure at 180 mph I'm about 2 and half minutes from a 2 mile final. Gives people time to get out of my way.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Yeah. AC 90-66B describes it with a picture that tells you go a couple miles beyond the downwind, then start the turn that puts you on the 45. Has kinda a nice teardroppy shape to it. Foreflight and I suppose other Apps give it a Name. Foreflight depicts it going 1.4 miles to the other side, then starting the turn.

Exactly the problem.

I remember when I first found out the FAA accepted the cross2downwind (my term) at pattern altitude entry. It was one of those WINGS days with multiple seminars. One of the speakers did an excellent scenario-based presentation on how the course reversal to 45 is the most dangerous pattern entry. I thought to myself, "I know he's right but it's the only one the FAA approves of!" Found out a few minutes later the cross2downwind entry (used in many other countries and actually the one I learned at my base when I was a student) was finally FAA-sanctioned.

The presentation used a very common scenario with three airplanes. #1 was doing pattern work and on crosswind. #2 was approaching the pattern from the upwind side. #1 continued on an unnecessarily wide downwind (that never happens ) and #2 did that FF steeple descending teardrop. (#3 was not really a factor)

 

[PaulS]

.

what if one of the 2-3 planes on downwind is a King Air? That’s the part I don’t like. 500’ above puts you right in his face.

Or a citation.

 

[RyanB]

I prefer to fly 500 feet below pattern and climb up to pattern altitude on the crosswind leg.

I mean, it’s easier to spot traffic if you’re about to hit it .

 

[midlifeflyer]

Jesus. Teardrop is not new, nor is the term. Many decades old. Having witnessed Internet cry sessions about it's use I no longer use the term on the radio.

Well, let's put it this way. I still subscribe to the Summit CD which contains which contains almost everything published by the FAA. All the regs, the AIM, the Orders, the handbooks, etc, etc, etc. (including the documents and handbook which describe the cross above leave the pattern and turn to a 45 maneuver. In the In the entire collection there are 50 uses of the word teardrop, all of which refer to instrument procedures.

I'm not really bothered by people calling it a teardrop but I don't like the term because I think it makes it sound like a "maneuver" and normalizes the too close to the pattern way we see many do it. .

 

[Van Johnston]

arriving from the West with winds dictating 36.

Overfly on heading 090. Note winds indicate using 36. Do a 180 to heading 270. Overfly again to west of field and pattern. Do a right 225 to heading 135 to set up for 45 degree entry to left down wind for 36.

arriving from the West with winds dictating 18.

Overfly on heading 090. Note winds indicate using 18.Continue east (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 315 to set up for 45 degree entry to left downwind for 18.

winds dictating 36. And then arriving from the East.

Overfly on heading 270. Note winds indicate using 36. Continue west (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 135 to set up for 45 degree entry to left downwind for 36.

winds 18. And then arriving from the East.

Overfly on heading 270.Note winds indicate using 18. Do a 180 to heading 090.Continue east (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 315 to set up for 45 degree entry to left down wind for 18.

I am not saying it is pretty, or efficient. Just the way I was taught. I don’t think people appreciate what a game changer AWOS was.

 

[luvflyin]

Exactly the problem.

I remember when I first found out the FAA accepted the cross2downwind (my term) at pattern altitude entry. It was one of those WINGS days with multiple seminars. One of the speakers did an excellent scenario-based presentation on how the course reversal to 45 is the most dangerous pattern entry. I thought to myself, "I know he's right but it's the only one the FAA approves of!" Found out a few minutes later the cross2downwind entry (used in many other countries and actually the one I learned at my base when I was a student) was finally FAA-sanctioned.

The presentation used a very common scenario with three airplanes. #1 was doing pattern work and on crosswind. #2 was approaching the pattern from the upwind side. #1 continued on an unnecessarily wide downwind (that never happens ) and #2 did that FF steeple descending teardrop. (#3 was not really a factor)

Sometimes I think the use of the term 'Pattern Entry' maybe should not be used when discussing this thing called the Teardrop. The Traffic Pattern has five legs. Upwind, Crosswind, Downwind, Base and Final. If you do this Teardrop thing as described, you are entering the pattern via the 45. You will seldom enter the pattern via the 45 without having done some maneuvering(let the record show I resisted the urge to call it manuring and play the typo card) to get on the 45.

 

[Salty]

This morning, after the 5th time in 1/2 hour or so, the same guy asked for "a traffic advisory" at some airport I wasn't at, someone answered back "I advise you don't hit any traffic".

 

[eman1200]

.

what if one of the 2-3 planes on downwind is a King Air? That’s the part I don’t like. 500’ above puts you right in his face.

"One method of entry from the opposite side of the pattern is to announce your intentions and cross over midfield at least 500 feet above pattern altitude (normally 1,500 feet AGL.) However, if large or turbine aircraft operate at your airport, it is best to remain 2,000 feet AGL so you’re not in conflict with their traffic pattern."

 

[bflynn]

I remember when I first found out the FAA accepted the cross2downwind (my term) at pattern altitude entry.

Seems a good point to inject that the FAA does not regulate pattern entry. There is no “acceptable” classification.

 

[eman1200]

Sometimes I think the use of the term 'Pattern Entry' maybe should not be used when discussing this thing called the Teardrop The Traffic Pattern has five legs. Upwind, Crosswind, Downwind, Base and Final. If you do this Teardrop thing as described, you are entering the pattern via the 45. You will seldom enter the pattern via the 45 without having done some maneuvering(let the record show I resisted the urge to call it manuring and play the typo card) to get on the 45.

I was actually gonna say something just like this. at what altitude does "the pattern" end (for pistons, let's assume no turbines)? if you consider TPA to be "the pattern", then overflying the field at anything above that isn't flying in the pattern. so you're just flying around until you join the 45, and someone named that 'teardrop'. but, I don't do teardrops so whatevs. someone doing this silly maneuver just gives me more time to enter the pattern before them. outta my way, suckah!

 

[luvflyin]

Overfly on heading 090. Note winds indicate using 36. Do a 180 to heading 270. Overfly again to west of field and pattern. Do a right 225 to heading 135 to set up for 45 degree entry to left down wind for 36.



Overfly on heading 090. Note winds indicate using 18.Continue east (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 315 to set up for 45 degree entry to left downwind for 18.



Overfly on heading 270. Note winds indicate using 36. Continue west (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 135 to set up for 45 degree entry to left downwind for 36.



Overfly on heading 270.Note winds indicate using 18. Do a 180 to heading 090.Continue east (a subjective distance safely away from the pattern). Do a right 225 to heading 315 to set up for 45 degree entry to left down wind for 18.

I am not saying it is pretty, or efficient. Just the way I was taught. I don’t think people appreciate what a game changer AWOS was.

Gotcha. Somehow I had read your post to say you always start out with a 180 regardless, then do the other stuff. I gots the picture now.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Sometimes I think the use of the term 'Pattern Entry' maybe should not be used when discussing this thing called the Teardrop. The Traffic Pattern has five legs. Upwind, Crosswind, Downwind, Base and Final. If you do this Teardrop thing as described, you are entering the pattern via the 45. You will seldom enter the pattern via the 45 without having done some maneuvering(let the record show I resisted the urge to call it manuring and play the typo card) to get on the 45.

Exactly.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

We just call it .....entering downwind on a 45.

 

[dtuuri]

We've been hearing a couple pilots using that language to describe what they're doing in the pattern. I'm curious as to how widespread it's use is in the rest of the flying community.

I use "ampersand entry". It looks just like the symbol on the #7 key on my keyboard. The one where they cross into the downwind leg at pattern altitude is the "T-bone entry" in my vernacular. Not good behavior at roller rinks either:

 

[midlifeflyer]

Seems a good point to inject that the FAA does not regulate pattern entry. There is no “acceptable” classification.

You are correct. From a purely regulatory standpoint there are no nontowered traffic pattern rules other than the one requiring a certain direction of turn once in it. As AC 90-66B says, "The FAA does not regulate traffic pattern entry, only traffic pattern flow" (the rules about direction of turns within the pattern). OTOH, the AC warns against instrument pilots thinking they have priority on a straight in approach, and pilots have been called on the carpet for for interfering with flow of the "normal" pattern

 

[Van Johnston]

Another old school reason to overfly the field is that right patterns weren’t noted on the sectional. You were supposed to check the segmented circle as you overflew the field to determine the pattern direction.

 

[mondtster]

We get ALOT of pilot mill traffic at my airport from ERAU and ATP. The tear drop is definitely being used by these large organizations.

It seems to be pretty universal that university taught pilots will use this method of pattern entry exclusively, and teach their students to do the same if they’re an instructor. I’ve never understood why they seem so rigid on this.

 

[AlphaMike]

I prefer to fly 500 feet below pattern and climb up to pattern altitude on the crosswind leg.

That only works for you low wing guys.

 

[donjohnston]

The OH break just killed a lady at Patty Wagstaffs airport in an Extra 300 this week. Speculation is she G-locked and augered in while in the pattern.

I must have missed that. Do you have a link for that?

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I must have missed that. Do you have a link for that?

I posted about an accident at St. Augustine, that could be what he's talking about. If so, not at all matching the description; smoke in the cockpit, runway overrun.

 

[luvflyin]

Another old school reason to overfly the field is that right patterns weren’t noted on the sectional. You were supposed to check the segmented circle as you overflew the field to determine the pattern direction.

Yeah. RP where applicable was a nice addition to Sectionals.

 

[OneCharlieTango]

If you use the Runway Advisor in Foreflight, one of the options is “teardrop.” I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s where the term originated in this context. If so, they should be punished.

Next thing you know, they’ll have a banner pop up when you’re three miles after departure, saying “Last Call.”

 

[MauleSkinner]

It is. If you do that, cross >500 above the highest TPA, descend >3 miles in the teardrop, and enter on the downwind 45….

Yeah, but most people prefer crossing AT the highest TPA, so they can be the target of turbine airplanes instead of piston airplanes.

 

[OneCharlieTango]

A little digging unearths AC 90-66B, which refers to the “preferred” teardrop entry. It also says that IFR circle-to-land must be made with left turns unless right traffic is specified somewhere.

Isn’t that brilliant? Imagine you’re on an ILS 27, intending to circle to land on 36. Combining the instructions from this AC, you’d fly down to circling mins, overfly 36, and make a right 270 to join the left downwind for 36. No one in his right mind would do such a thing, but that’s how the AC reads.

 

[Salty]

If you use the Runway Advisor in Foreflight, one of the options is “teardrop.” I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s where the term originated in this context. If so, they should be punished.

Next thing you know, they’ll have a banner pop up when you’re three miles after departure, saying “Last Call.”

For crying out loud, it was put into the AIM years ago. But Boeing is the root of all evil argle gargle.

 

[bflynn]

Next thing you know, they’ll have a banner pop up when you’re three miles after departure, saying “Last Call.”

bets on whether this comes before, after or with “any traffic in the pattern” call alert?

 

[OneCharlieTango]

For crying out loud, it was put into the AIM years ago. But Boeing is the root of all evil argle gargle.

You misjudge me. I’m a FF fan. Also, see my subsequent post regarding the AC.

Where is it in the AIM? Searching “teardrop” in an AIM pdf yields 8 matches, all referring to hold entries.

 

[donjohnston]

I posted about an accident at St. Augustine, that could be what he's talking about. If so, not at all matching the description; smoke in the cockpit, runway overrun.

What I meant was that the overhead break caused the pilot to G-loc and then crash.

I thought the aircraft ran off the end of the runway while landing after an engine problem.