What Is The Non-Towered Traffic Pattern "Size"?

[KennyFlys]

I'm being told the downwind side extends out "Three Nautical Miles" from the center line. I'm not finding that in AIM 4-3. Is it written anywhere?

Thanks for the help in advance!

 

[TMetzinger]

Hmm - never heard that.

 

[ScottM]

News to me. We have ultralights within 1nm while bigger bug smashers are farther out.

 

[mantakos]

The Airplane Flying Handbook says:

The downwind leg is a course flown parallel to the landing runway, but in a direction opposite to the intended landing direction. This leg should be approximately 1/2 to 1 mile out from the landing runway, and at the specified traffic pattern altitude.

It also points out, in an earlier section, that faster aircraft might be flying higher or wider patterns.
-harry

 

[gprellwitz]

I'm not sure where to find the canonical answer, though harry's cite looks like it's got it. OTOH, it depends on whether you're asking what you should teach students to fly (harry's answer), or how far out they should be before considering themselves clear of where others may be flying the pattern (and 3NM seems reasonable to me).

 

[dmccormack]

Another limitation may be the "protected area" for Circling Approaches -- 4.5 miles for Cat E a/c.

 

[Pi1otguy]

If you're asking a student/CFII for purposes of orals or other PPL training I can't help.
But practically speaking the pattern is as big as it needs to be. By that I mean flying far enough to have a usable base leg instead of a 180* turn, but close enough to make it the runway from downwind. Obviously, traffic may alter this by extending downwinds to fit more guys in the pattern or let people off the ground.

Could this be some VFR "protected area" thing similar to TERPS?

 

[SkyHog]

According to some pilots I've seen, downwind happens about 5 miles away from the runway.

For me: 1/2 mile tops.

 

[dmccormack]

According to some pilots I've seen, downwind happens about 5 miles away from the runway.

For me: 1/2 mile tops.

Entering the pattern behind a Cessna on downwind at a "intensive flight training airport" my student said, "I think he's leaving"

I said, "Let's follow him for a bit" (Radio transmissions were non-existent/ unintelligible).

We were below and behind, and watched as the turn to base happened 6 miles from the runway -- I kid you not.

Then I said, "Let's watch the Space Shuttle land..."

Cracked my student up...

 

[Skyhawk4754]

Entering the pattern behind a Cessna on downwind at a "intensive flight training airport" my student said, "I think he's leaving"

I said, "Let's follow him for a bit" (Radio transmissions were non-existent/ unintelligible).

We were below and behind, and watched as the turn to base happened 6 miles from the runway -- I kid you not.

Then I said, "Let's watch the Space Shuttle land..."

Cracked my student up...

Didn't know you were right behind me.............. I'm not that far out but I do get a little more than 1/2 mile. I like a little more time on my x wind before final and I have been teased some about it. I just feel a little jammed if I get closer. A bit more like John Glenn on his second trip back from outer space.

 

[SkyHog]

Didn't know you were right behind me.............. I'm not that far out but I do get a little more than 1/2 mile. I like a little more time on my x wind before final and I have been teased some about it. I just feel a little jammed if I get closer. A bit more like John Glenn on his second trip back from outer space.

Must be an awfully wide pattern to go direct from x-wind to final

 

[Skyhawk4754]

Must be an awfully wide pattern to go direct from x-wind to final

I was still laughing so hard on the space ship thing I mis spoke. If you happen to notice my seeing eye dog gots glasses so we do get a bit wider than the fighter pilots, i use to be faster but age is getting to me,forgetting stuff ya know

 

[Skyhawk4754]

All seriousness I would like to know the correct answere. I do have a high wing and like to take a second look both ways before final. Around my neck of the woods most airports are non tower, spray planes in and out, and not everyone likes to talk on the radio. I do worry if I get out to far that some spray jocky will cut in short.....then I'd have to change my undershorts when I get down.

 

[kkoran]

Three miles! I can only assume the people telling you this are B-52 pilots.

 

[citationxjl]

I agree with the 1/2 to one mile.

While I was learning to fly, my instructor asked me on the downwind what type of plane I was flying. I said a Piper warrior. He responed with "why are we flying a 747 traffic pattern?"

I have also been at towered airports with many aircraft in the pattern and was following one on the downwind. He went so far out before turning base that tower jumped in and cleared me #1 for landing and asked if I could make a shorter than normal approach to land. I landed, turned off the runway, and half way to my tie down before he touched down.

Definitely make the pattern large enough to become established on base to check for straight or extra wide pattern traffic that may or may not be making radio calls. Also might want to think a little about if you lose an engine can you get back to the runway.

 

[KennyFlys]

As some of you may have read, I'm on a non-towered field sharing the pattern with a school teaching Indians. It is far too common they fly a pattern more than a mile out. I teach my students to fly down from our practice area up north back down well east of the field, at least two miles east of the airport and usually at angles that put us more than three miles out. The reference I point out to them is a water tower. The water tower is exactly 1.2 miles east of the centerline and 1.2 miles north of the threshold of RWY 19.


Yesterday morning, my student and I are returning from the lesson and as usual, I have them go considerably south to enter on a 45 so they are turning downwind abeam mid-field. Coming south, we are a good half-mile or more east of the tower. To our right is an Indian plane right over the water tower. That also puts him on a 1.2 mile base and subsequently on a 1.2 mile final.

My boss happens to be up with a buddy doing some insurance time for his 310. He has to swing wide to stay away from the Indian student which puts him over me, nearly two miles out from the center-line. The Indians have no consistency. They either scream on downwind or they are at final approach speed throughout the pattern. This one was dragging along so the boss ends up on a three-mile final.

I have my student continue south where we turn on a 45 toward the pattern about 1.8-2.0 miles from the center-line. There were no calls until I announce being on the 45 turning downwind. My call was maybe ten seconds advance of the actual turn. Then, I hear an Indian announce turning downwind. They did not call crosswind.

I take the plane and do a right 360 to give spacing for that plane. We then come back around and enter downwind while also announcing so. Immediately after, I hear a plane turning crosswind. They'll have to do some spacing behind me. The plane I circled for was well ahead and landed on what appeared a fairly normal distance for base and final.

I have them establish downwind where it puts us right over the approach end of RWY 32, about a half-mile from the center-line of 19. If there were a step on the strut of our Skyhawk (a traditional reference), it would be perfect.

We continue downwind and just before reaching abeam the numbers, I see a plane off to the right and ahead by at least a mile. I call abeam the numbers on downwind. Then, the other plane calls turning base.

We continued and turned base with the threshold behind us on the left at a 45 and shortly after turned base, calling both times. The other guy (Indian) accused us of cutting him off. The poor thing had to go around.

When I brought it up with another person, the claim was the pattern went out three miles. The same person said there was no specification for pattern altitude. I easily proved that wrong.

I'm in the process of trying to obtain a standard that should have been written in accordance with AC 90-66A. So far, I'm having difficulty finding anyone at this airport management who has a clue what I'm talking about. The guy running unicom was supposedly a controller at one time.

Bottom line, I'm more than anxious to see the tower in operation. With several schools operating at PDK, two of them large, I didn't see near the issues there that I have here. The unicom guy thinks the tower will bring havoc. I disagree. Order shall be established and flight instructors will be called on the carpet with the tower chief for allowing students to operate with such poor habits.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The halfway-up-the-strut reference doesn't always work. I'm tall, and my downwind always seems to be too close to the runway. Downwind to base to final ends up being a U-turn.

 

[KennyFlys]

The halfway-up-the-strut reference doesn't always work. I'm tall, and my downwind always seems to be too close to the runway. Downwind to base to final ends up being a U-turn.

Well, I'm referring to us "normal sized" folks.

One student who is 5-2 may have a bit of a different refernce as well. But, she flies a good pattern so no worries there.

 

[poadeleted20]

There is no regulatory definition. AFAIK, the closest you'll find is the discussion in an NTSB case:

Under the established interpretation noted in Administrator v. Dibble, 5 NTSB 352 (1985), any turn into a straight-in approach must be made sufficiently far from the runway that it does not interfere with the normal traffic pattern. This naturally requires consideration of the aircraft using that airport. Respondent complains that the approach distances required by the Board are too great,yet he fails to prove the critical point he identifies -- that righthand turns into final at the 1-2 miles found here would not interfere with the normal traffic pattern. In fact, in Administrator v. Davis, supra, at 222, the law judge found that 1½ miles was within the normal traffic pattern at Kotzebue.

Given that 1½ miles was judged within the pattern in Boardman, I can see 3 miles being judged within the pattern under the right circumstances, but not at most nontowered airports handling only light traffic. Personally, I usually give it at least 3 miles depending on the size of the aircraft involved.

 

[gismo]

All seriousness I would like to know the correct answere. I do have a high wing and like to take a second look both ways before final. Around my neck of the woods most airports are non tower, spray planes in and out, and not everyone likes to talk on the radio. I do worry if I get out to far that some spray jocky will cut in short.....then I'd have to change my undershorts when I get down.

If the question is about the "proper" separation between the runway and the downwind leg, the answer depends on the speed of the aircraft and to a lesser extent the wind and altitude. The best answer I can give is that you should spend around 20 seconds in straight flight on the base leg. That's plenty of time to check the approach area and runway for conflicts yet not so long that you'll be accused of going on a cross country. If you're flying a trainer at 60 kts that will put the downwind about 1/2 mile from the runway with 30 degree banked turns at sea level with no crosswind (don't forget your TAS increases with DA). In my airplane I generally fly 120-140 KIAS on downwind and decelerate to 100 by the time I turn final. For the same 20 second base in no wind conditions my downwind will a bit more than one nm from the runway. Add some crosswind pushing the airplane on base and you need to add a little more room to avoid rushing the turns.

 

[Teller1900]

Like Lance said, it's a lot to do with the speed of the a/c and the speed/direction of the wind. "Normally" we fly downwind right about 1-1.5 miles from the runway. More if the wind is pushing us in, but very rarely less...at 140kts on base, we don't spend a lot of time level. Usually we shoot for the base turn to set us up for a 1.5-2mile final - just enough time to get the sink rate stabilized and reduce from Vapp to Vref. Some CAs make shorter final than that, but I'm not comfortable at much less than 1.5 mile final on the roll out. We try to avoid the 747 patter, but if there's a honkin' wind blowing toward the runway, it's hard not to if you want to use only 30 degrees at 140 kts. Of course this is all done at 1500ft AGL, too.

As far as what Ron said about the straight-ins...our company profile says we have to be established on a straight-in (within 20 degrees of the runway heading) by 5nm, or else it doesn't count as a straight in and we have to join the patter (especially if we're going to be coming from the opposite side of the pattern).

 

[Skyhawk4754]

The halfway-up-the-strut reference doesn't always work. I'm tall, and my downwind always seems to be too close to the runway. Downwind to base to final ends up being a U-turn.

You know every once in a while I gotta hit myself in the forehead and say Da!!! why didn't I think of that. I have spent most of my time in a low wing until I ran accross this nice 1957 c-172 and I bought it. I have been having a difficult time getting in the sink ofgetting setup on my down wind base final turns . Things just seem to be jammed up for time and I end up doing the U turn thing. Manual flaps and all. I had this freind tell me to do the half way up the strut thing too. I am 6-3 and I think now that you mention it, it has just put me too close in. I'll change that and give it a try, thanks.

Around here 8-10kt wind is a calm day. It's fun when it's coming right down the chute but that doesn't happen all the time. The other day it was a good x wind and a guy on the ground in a RV-6 radio'd me after a go around and asked if I was going to land the thing or was just up enjoying the wind. We both had a chuckle when I got down. thanks for the help.

 

[EdFred]

Whatever distance puts me at a power off 180° landing. My base leg is about 3-1/2 feet long.

 

[KennyFlys]

Whatever distance puts me at a power off 180° landing. My base leg is about 3-1/2 feet long.

Feet? Stretching it on that glide, aren't ya?

 

[EdFred]

Feet? Stretching it on that glide, aren't ya?

Just long enough to dip my wing and see if anyone is on final.

 

[flyersfan31]

The pattern is as big as the pilot in front of you makes it.

I've seen some crazy stuff, between the in-a-hurry Tiger driver who decided to lap inside of me about 2" laterally from the runway on downwind and base, to the students who think about 5miles lateral makes sense.

Be prepared.

 

[KennyFlys]

The pattern is as big as the pilot in front of you makes it.

I've seen some crazy stuff, between the in-a-hurry Tiger driver who decided to lap inside of me about 2" laterally from the runway on downwind and base, to the students who think about 5miles lateral makes sense.

Be prepared.

It just keeps getting worse and worse.

This morning, I had just entered the pattern and since the Indians tie up the radio with ten thousand calls between radio checks, asking for traffic advisories, asking for anyone in the pattern to call, asking for this and that...

Well, I digress. I keep calls to a minimum. But, there's one on final, another is on base turning final so we call abeam the numbers because there's another again entering from across the field right behind us. Not less than ten seconds later, some moron in a Duchess calls "simulated emergency landing" for the same runway where I'm number three and should already be descending but I can't because we're going to have to end up on over a two-mile final.

I told the guy, "This is NOT the time for simulated emergencies. It's TOO busy!" He announces it again. I tell him again, "It's TOO BUSY. This is NOT the time or place to be doing simulated emergencies." He finally says he'll cancel and fly a "normal pattern," whatever the hell that meant for him.

My student and I end up on base for a two-mile final with the other two in front of us. I called "Number three for the circus." got us down and away from the nut cases.

Had he continued with this "simulated emergency" I would have definitely made a visit on that school. The student I had at the time keeps her plane in a hangar just a few hundred feet from that school's office. His attempt to do such a stupid move could have potentially created a real emergency with cutting off someone else on short final.

There are three other small airports available for such practice. All rarely used and all within 25 miles. It's only a matter of time. Someone else is going to get hurt with the stupidity continued.

 

[gismo]

It just keeps getting worse and worse.

This morning, I had just entered the pattern and since the Indians tie up the radio with ten thousand calls between radio checks, asking for traffic advisories, asking for anyone in the pattern to call, asking for this and that...

I'm thinking that you ought to post a few signs in Sindhi that say the airport will be closed to student traffic every day during the hours you normally fly.

 

[Teller1900]

I found out last Friday the true answer. Midfield abeam should be at 5,000 feet AGL, 6.1 DME from the airport, and final should be no more than 2 miles long. Oh ya, and you're supposed to fly it at 220kts or better. Then again, I re-read the post title and realized it was BOS tower, so it doesn't count. Never mind.

 

[KennyFlys]

If I didn't know better, I'd think some of these people were reading a DME of two miles or greater.

 

[ATCT_]

Hey Ya'll,
I fly a J-3 Cub (mine) and I fly a pattern pretty close in. I personally say no farther than 1/2 a mile in anything other than something large (King Air's, Lear's etc.). I personally think anyone that teaches 1+ mile away downwinds to students is commiting involuntary manslaughter when their student loses their engine and is killed when they smack into the trees trying to get to field. I fly at a pretty busy non-towered G/A airport and I have no qualms about cutting off students and pilots who are flying B-52 patterns in Cessna 152's. Its not safe flying that far out and maybe the go around im causing will give them more time to think (before they go back to their country not learning how to speak intelligible english on the frequency with 350 hours TT and fly Airbusses...which is another rant altogether).

Keep the blue side up and for the safety of those of us involved, keep your patterns in close...let the Lear's and KingAirs (and B-52's) fly far patterns. It might save your life someday.

ATCT
(One who HAS put a Cessna into trees at night and lived...though not on downwind mind ya )

 

[jesse]

Hey Ya'll,
I fly a J-3 Cub (mine) and I fly a pattern pretty close in. I personally say no farther than 1/2 a mile in anything other than something large (King Air's, Lear's etc.). I personally think anyone that teaches 1+ mile away downwinds to students is commiting involuntary manslaughter when their student loses their engine and is killed when they smack into the trees trying to get to field.

I'm not a huge fan of airline sized patterns in light airplanes. That said--I think involuntary manslaughter is a bit much. Most of our flying is done over areas where we're unlikely to make a runway. Moving your downwind closer isn't going to make any statistical difference when it comes to making the airport during an engine failure. They just don't fail that often on downwind.

I fly at a pretty busy non-towered G/A airport and I have no qualms about cutting off students and pilots who are flying B-52 patterns in Cessna 152's. Its not safe flying that far out and maybe the go around im causing will give them more time to think (before they go back to their country not learning how to speak intelligible english on the frequency with 350 hours TT and fly Airbusses...which is another rant altogether).

I would argue that it is much less safe to intentionally cut off students in the pattern forcing go-arounds (versus the actual risk of an engine failure on a distant downwind). I would also go as far as to say knowingly cutting off airplanes because you don't like their pattern is probably not the most responsible thing to be doing. In my view, doing so is by far worse than an instructor teaching a pattern a little bit big.

 

[poadeleted20]

I would argue that it is much less safe to intentionally cut off students in the pattern forcing go-arounds (versus the actual risk of an engine failure on a distant downwind). I would also go as far as to say knowingly cutting off airplanes because you don't like their pattern is probably not the most responsible thing to be doing. In my view, doing so is by far worse than an instructor teaching a pattern a little bit big.

I agree with Jesse, and would also point out that it's illegal as well as unsafe. If you are reported for (or seen by an FAA Inspector) doing that, you will be subject to an enforcement action for violating 14 CFR 91.113(g), and I know of at least one case where the pilot's certificate was revoked (not just suspended) for intentionally cutting off another plane in the pattern.

 

[KennyFlys]

No one should be cut off in the pattern. But, this should include the same model aircraft that never slows on downwind and passes other traffic to the outside who previously departed ahead of them. I've seen that happen several times. An aircraft does not have to be inside the other to cut off them off.

I don't teach tight patterns but rather a cross between an economical pattern with regard to time and safe approach. Don't make it so tight you don't have the space and time to set up properly but there's no need to make downwind and finals over a mile out for a Skyhawk unless someone has already done so ahead of you. Preferably, it was a larger aircraft.

 

[jmaynard]

I just figured out how wide a pattern I fly. N55ZC is a low wing plane. I figure my head is about 2 feet above the wingtip, and I fly far enough out that the centerline appears to be about a foot in from the tip. The Zodiac's wings are 11 feet 8 inches long. That makes my downwind leg right at a mile out at a TPA of 1000 AGL.

I'm still playing with it, but it seems to work out that I fly straight and level at 80 knots at 2000 RPM. I try to slow to this speed before entering the pattern; there's no need to blast around the pattern at cruise speed. It also gives me a chance to trim for the initial approach speed, and that makes managing the aircraft in the pattern easier.

I'm pretty comfortable by now flying a 1- to 2-mile final, but that doesn't mean I can't extend downwind if needed: it just means I carry more power until short final.

I guess it's a good thing I haven't had to deal with a really busy pattern yet. I'm sure I could, but throw folks doing all sorts of stuff like wide patterns into the mix and it might get interesting.

 

[silver-eagle]

I was taught, and I practice, not more than a mile on downwind, base, and final unless there are other aircraft in the pattern. Then it may be to extend the downwind as much as needed to compensate. The mile distance provides adequate engine out (for me) on field landing. I would certainly compensate for someone flying a downwind ahead of me who's outside of that. Anything else would be foolish.
In a busy environment, you sort of have to go with the flow. Still, too far out is too far out. It doesn't seem you can properly set up a landing from 3 miles out no more than less than a half mile.

 

[EdFred]

I agree with Jesse, and would also point out that it's illegal as well as unsafe. If you are reported for (or seen by an FAA Inspector) doing that, you will be subject to an enforcement action for violating 14 CFR 91.113(g), and I know of at least one case where the pilot's certificate was revoked (not just suspended) for intentionally cutting off another plane in the pattern.

Just for argument's sake, how would turning inside them be "cutting them off" when your wheels are kissing the pavement about the time they are making the turn to base, and you are off the runway before they even make their turn to final?

 

[jesse]

Just for argument's sake, how would turning inside them be "cutting them off" when your wheels are kissing the pavement about the time they are making the turn to base, and you are off the runway before they even make their turn to final?

Ed. This is why:

and maybe the go around im causing will give them more time to think

I think if you cause them to go around and do it knowingly that qualifies as cutting them off.

 

[EdFred]

Ed. This is why:

I think if you cause them to go around and do it knowingly that qualifies as cutting them off.

Like I said, you are not even on the runway when they make their turn to final. If I overfly the field to look at the windsock 500' above the highest TPA and it freaks someone out, and causes them yo go around, am I "cutting them off" ?

I'm not talking about sliding in front of someone already on final. I'm talking about my 1 minute from abeam to touchdown. If they are in a 150 and flying their 60kt pattern to 2 miles out on downwind with a 1 mile offest from the runway, I am on the ground at least 3 minutes before them, and off the runway since they are flying 5 miles of pattern starting from the abeam point.

 

[rottydaddy]

FWIW, I'm one of those "1/2 mile laterally, base and crosswind 1 mile from the ends of the runway" guys, and it's always worked fine for me (in light singles).

But it is not carved in stone, usually due to other traffic, or lack thereof. I've flown some crosswind entries at more like 1/2 mile from the threshold when there's nobody around, or maybe if there's departing traffic (far safer to be well above their climbout flight path). A closer base, or even a 180 from downwind to final, makes sense for a simulated engine-out, or occasionally just for the hell of it.
And I sure have had to extend some downwinds for traffic... ugh.

Towers help to some extent (I suppose once a certain volume of traffic is reached, they are a must), but only if they and the pilots are on the ball. The closest shave I ever had in the pattern was at a towered airport...actually, make that a shave and a haircut, now that I think about it...

Potentially, the cab crew is just another person or persons who can screw up, adding to the annoyance and danger. And unless the pilots are the kind who would also do well at an uncontrolled field, there's not much that even the best controllers can do with them.