Who Has the Right-of-Way?

I am with the majority here. Be nice, communicate. You don't know when you'll be the "other" guy.
When I am in the pattern and someone is coming on a practice approach under the hood and we'd conflict, I'll extend my downwind and get behind him because I know he's going missed anyway (usually).
If I am the one on the practice approach, I talk to the VFR guys in the pattern politely and we never had a conflict so far. Then again, I too try to avoid busy VMC days. I prefer my approaches with a dash of "milk". :D
 
> This may be a dumb question. I think I know the answer, but I want to hear from others.
Not a dumb question this is a very common situation.

>which one do you think should deviate if they are converging?
See and avoid, communicate, as others have said

>For your IFR guys, do you see your practice instrument approach more or less important than the peeps in the pattern?
Equivalent. Safety is most important.

>How important do you feel your instrument approach is in relation to the standard procedures at a non-towered field in VFR conditions?
My approach is subordinate to VFR traffic in the pattern, particularly in VMC. IMO, being able to check a box that I got one more practice approach in, but that I put the lives of several people in jeopardy, just doesn't make sense. I'll break off before entering the pattern and most likely go somewhere else. Moreover, we usually start monitoring CTAF way out in the approach. If the field is a beehive we'll break off and go to a quieter or controlled field.
In the case of a precision approach, still no excuse for creating an urgency situation for pattern traffic, but I can understand a little frustration because there is less time to practice the lateral + vertical guidance skills if you have to break off the approach early (the fun part is when you get down/below pattern altitude). This may be less common, however... would not expect very many ILS's at non-towered fields. Anyway, consider that the frustration may not be aimed towards you - simply frustration at the situation, mixed with a lot of anxiety, mental saturation and fatigue.

> Do you expect pattern flyers to deviate to make your approach work?
No, I expect pattern flyers to communicate clearly and have situational awareness. Please be looking for me. We're looking for you.

>For VFR only guys, do you expect the pattern to take precedence over practice approaches?
When I'm VFR in the pattern, as others have said, I don't expect it takes precedence, but I try to collaborate. Except with fast movers, then I over-communicate and try to stay the heck out of the way because I'm unlikely to see them before they run over me. If I'm on "final" and someone new calls up 3 miles out, I'll reply and state my position, but I'm not going around or breaking off. I might keep my speed up to help out to the extent it doesn't create an unsafe situation.

>Do you expect the plane on IFR approach to break off if he's entering the pattern at a bad time, or do you just try to make room?
I expect us both to defer to what is the safest move. In the case of two similarly capable airplanes, I'm on base, he's on 3-4 mile final, same altitude? Regs say he has ROW. But what's the right action for the AC on base? Curious what others say on this specific situation. Climb to upwind seems most likely. Turn back to a downwind to parallel the landing AC seems dangerous.
 
This was just addressed a month or so ago by the FAA in an AC.

IFR and/or straight in traffic does not have priority over pattern traffic. Now, if I'm in the pattern, I'm fine with extending downwind for someone that asks. I've been IFR and been the person asking and never had anyone refuse either.

But per the original post, in that scenario with VFR traffic on base, he's got priority and I don't think it's reasonable to ask someone on base to break off for a straight in who can simply enter the pattern.
 
Last edited:
Simple fix.
As soon as you hit the pattern declare "Turning final"

I'm kidding.
I think.

The reality is: mass times momentum will always win if there is a physical confrontation in the pattern, no matter what the FAA says.
 
Shepherd said:
Simple fix.



The reality is: mass times momentum will always win if there is a physical confrontation in the pattern, no matter what the FAA says.
Click to expand...

Negative, more mass colliding with less mass is almost always catastrophic for both masses in aviation.
 
Bonchie said:
This was just addressed a month or so ago by the FAA in an AC.

IFR and/or straight in traffic does not have priority over pattern traffic. Now, if I'm in the pattern, I'm fine with extending downwind for someone that asks. I've been IFR and been the person asking and never had anyone refuse either.

But per the original post, in that scenario with VFR traffic on base, he's got priority and I don't think it's reasonable to ask someone on base to break off for a straight in who can simply enter the pattern.
Click to expand...

That's always the question. When is someone flying straight in considered on final vs when must they yield? By the FARs, they have priority when they are on a final approach, regardless of how they got there. How far out can a final start? Legal cases and pilot violations establish it somewhere between 2 and 5 miles. By the time they're within a mile of the threshold, they are definitely on final and if you're on the base leg, you're definitely not. Just be reasonable about it.

Take the AC with a grain of salt.
 
bflynn said:
That's always the question. When is someone flying straight in considered on final vs when must they yield? By the FARs, they have priority when they are on a final approach, regardless of how they got there. How far out can a final start? Legal cases and pilot violations establish it somewhere between 2 and 5 miles. By the time they're within a mile of the threshold, they are definitely on final and if you're on the base leg, you're definitely not. Just be reasonable about it.
Click to expand...

I know what you are saying, but it's not really a question anymore. A 5 mile final simply does not count as "being on final so I've got priority" when traffic is in the pattern according to the new AC.

When you establish final within the normal distances of the pattern, that's fine, but you can't shoehorn your way in by causing conflicts with other traffic already established. That would include someone on base. You can't start a 5 mile final and demand everyone get out of your way and if you are on that 5 mile final and at 1 mile you are going to conflict with pattern traffic, the guy in the pattern has the right of way.

The simplest way I translate it is that the FAA wants you to enter the pattern if VFR traffic is present in it. If you can safely enter the pattern on a 1 mile straight in final, great. If you can't without causing a conflict, you need to enter the pattern another way, namely upwind and make the lap.

I think the FAA got it right here because it's much more natural (and logically safer) for a guy on a straight in to sidestep to upwind at pattern altitude than for someone on base to have to cross face of an incoming aircraft, re-climb to pattern altitude, and then turn back into the pattern.
 
Last edited:
If the FAA wants it that way they need to make it a regulation and not an advisory circular. You can't make a regulation giving one aircraft the right away and an advisory circular saying that same aircraft does not have the right away.

Say there are eight Piper Cubs in the pattern and we have one airplane on Final 7 miles out that has a stall speed of 100 knots. How does that airplane ever enter the pattern if airplanes in the pattern always have the right away? He could never enter the pattern he have to keep leaving it and then every attempt to reenter he has to give way to one of the slow Piper Cubs in the pattern.
 
EdFred said:
If the FAA wants it that way they need to make it a regulation and not an advisory circular. You can't make a regulation giving one aircraft the right away and an advisory circular saying that same aircraft does not have the right away.

Say there are eight Piper Cubs in the pattern and we have one airplane on Final 7 miles out that has a stall speed of 100 knots. How does that airplane ever enter the pattern if airplanes in the pattern always have the right away? He could never enter the pattern he have to keep leaving it and then every attempt to reenter he has to give way to one of the slow Piper Cubs in the pattern.
Click to expand...

A plane with a 100 knot stall speed would almost certainly be turbine powered and would not enter the pattern at the standardized 1000 feet. They'd be at 1500 feet. That's dealt with in the AC (and already fairly standard practice anyway). For them, the pattern is obviously wider, so when they turn final, they are father out but still have the right away just like any other plane on final in the normal sized pattern.

That's how I think they are spelling it out by reading it. If both turn final at the exact same time? Well, you work it out.

None of this is perfect and you can always think of some situation where there'd be issues. 99.9% of the time, this AC's guidance will work fine though.
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
I know what you are saying, but it's not really a question anymore. A 5 mile final simply does not count as "being on final so I've got priority" when traffic is in the pattern according to the new AC.
Click to expand...

A 5 mile final has never counted. However, there are pilots who have been violated for various things on extended finals, including making a right turn onto final 2 miles out when all turns are to the left. If 2 miles was not in the pattern, then the pilot could not have been violated for 91.126. He was; therefore 2 miles is considered "on final".

Question - what is the difference between me extending my downwind by a mile for slow traffic, someone in a fast jet flying a mile wide pattern 1500' up, or someone a mile out on an IFR final? The answer is nothing. However we got there, we are a mile out and on final. The FAR RULE gives that traffic right of way regardless of how the advisory reads.
 
PaulMKE said:
In the case of two similarly capable airplanes, I'm on base, he's on 3-4 mile final, same altitude? Regs say he has ROW. But what's the right action for the AC on base? Curious what others say on this specific situation. Climb to upwind seems most likely. Turn back to a downwind to parallel the landing AC seems dangerous.
Click to expand...

Bingo. That's the main issue right there.

That little piggy had options. This little piggy had none.

So here's my opinion, which ain't worth much. If you are coming straight in and there is someone on base, if there is ANY potential conflict whatsoever, you need to take a hike as soon as practical. We as pilots need to be mindful of what the other guy's "outs" are as well as our own. I'm sure most of us to a good job of that already.

I don't always see conflict in the pattern, but when I do, it's usually because of a jackwagon on a straight in approach. Stay safe my friends.

I think I'm going to start an activist group called PASIAANTF. Pilots Against Straight in Approaches at Non-Towered Fields. I Really think it'll catch on. The acronym is catchy. :D
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that if a plane on a straight-in is close enough for there to be a conflict with a plane in the pattern, then it is close enough to be considered on final approach.

As for that AC, it really bugs me when the FAA publishes guidance that directly contradicts what the regulations say. If they think the regulations shouldn't say what they say, then they should get off their lazy behinds and issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

For myself, when I'm in the pattern, I yield to traffic on a straight-in if they are close enough to be a factor. If I'm making a straight-in, I'm prepared to yield the right-of-way to traffic in the pattern because I know that there are a lot of pilots who are confused about this.
 
Palmpilot said:
It seems to me that if a plane on a straight-in is close enough for there to be a conflict with a plane in the pattern, then it is close enough to be considered on final approach.

As for that AC, it really bugs me when the FAA publishes guidance that directly contradicts what the regulations say. If they think the regulations shouldn't say what they say, then they should get off their lazy behinds and issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

For myself, when I'm in the pattern, I yield to traffic on a straight-in if they are close enough to be a factor. If I'm making a straight-in, I'm prepared to yield the right-of-way to traffic in the pattern because I know that there are a lot of pilots who are confused about this.
Click to expand...


I'd consider that. Still interested to hear peoples' thoughts on how one should yield from the base leg.
 
OkieFlyer said:
I'd consider that. Still interested to hear peoples' thoughts on how one should yield from the base leg.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't have to yield from the base leg because if everybody puts how the pattern is going together in their head you should have never turned base to begin with. However there is the time when that Jackhole pilot blasts in and doesn't make an initial call until a mile and a half out because he was "on frequency" Which is a load of crap because every plane now seems to have at least the ability to listen to two frequencies at once.

if the plane that is on base encounters one of the jackhole pilots then they have to determine to continue base crossinf final to upwind and climb back to pattern altitude in the upwind or to turn right and circle around behind the plane on final. Remember 91.3 gives you the ability to ignore the traffic pattern turns if it's a safety issue.

If I am flying a straight-in I have probably been listening to CTAF 20 to 25 miles out I'll make my initial call at 15 out announcing a straight in but letting them know if I need to enter upwind I will. I will still call ten, seven m five, three mile final and usually by that time they can figure out what the spacing needs to be or I can figure out if I need to enter upwind and I usually ask if they want me to break off my approach or if they can extend. Usually it works out that neither of us have to alter at all.
 
OkieFlyer said:
I'd consider that. Still interested to hear peoples' thoughts on how one should yield from the base leg.
Click to expand...
For me, that would depend on how close the straight-in traffic was when I found out about it, and our locations relative to each other. Basically, it needs to be whatever it takes to avoid a midair collision or near midair collision. Turn left, turn right, climb, descend; whatever it takes to avoid swapping paint.
 
EdFred said:
You shouldn't have to yield from the base leg because if everybody puts how the pattern is going together in their head you should have never turned base to begin with. However there is the time when that Jackhole pilot blasts in and doesn't make an initial call until a mile and a half out because he was "on frequency" Which is a load of crap because every plane now seems to have at least the ability to listen to two frequencies at once.

if the plane that is on base encounters one of the jackhole pilots then they have to determine to continue base crossinf final to upwind and climb back to pattern altitude in the upwind or to turn right and circle around behind the plane on final. Remember 91.3 gives you the ability to ignore the traffic pattern turns if it's a safety issue.

If I am flying a straight-in I have probably been listening to CTAF 20 to 25 miles out I'll make my initial call at 15 out announcing a straight in but letting them know if I need to enter upwind I will. I will still call ten, seven m five, three mile final and usually by that time they can figure out what the spacing needs to be or I can figure out if I need to enter upwind and I usually ask if they want me to break off my approach or if they can extend. Usually it works out that neither of us have to alter at all.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. In this case, I can't know if they were monitoring the CTAF. I can say that the second in line for the ILS was not reporting on CTAF until i think 4 miles, nor did I hear him when I was on Tulsa Departure freq. The first ILS shooter and I were on departure freq together a few minutes prior, so I knew he was coming in and I made plenty of room for him. The room I made for him by extending is ultimately what put me so far out on base and much nearer to the second guy coming in. As mentioned, the second ILS shooter was a surprize and I didn't know he was around until already on base. It was just a odd circumstance.

BTW, I have one comm.

Additionally, as I was gassing up there, there were at least 3-4 more straight in approaches. Next time I go to KOKM, I'll know it's an ILS hot spot and be prepared for that.
 
It seems like there needs to be some way for ATC to get the word when approaches to uncontrolled fields in VFR conditions need to be spaced out enough to accommodate VFR traffic.
 
OkieFlyer said:
Totally agree. In this case, I can't know if they were monitoring the CTAF. I can say that the second in line for the ILS was not reporting on CTAF until i think 4 miles, nor did I hear him when I was on Tulsa Departure freq. The first ILS shooter and I were on departure freq together a few minutes prior, so I knew he was coming in and I made plenty of room for him. The room I made for him by extending is ultimately what put me so far out on base and much nearer to the second guy coming in. As mentioned, the second ILS shooter was a surprize and I didn't know he was around until already on base. It was just a odd circumstance.

BTW, I have one comm.

Additionally, as I was gassing up there, there were at least 3-4 more straight in approaches. Next time I go to KOKM, I'll know it's an ILS hot spot and be prepared for that.
Click to expand...

I would expect the guy flying the straight in to break it off in that case as the base options of breaking off are not as safe in my opinion, fly across the other guy on final? Nope, don't like that, turn back to down wind, not a great option, especially with others in the pattern.

This has happened to me before in the pattern, what I do is call my position in the pattern as soon as they call, even if I had just made a call..... just turned from cross, mid field, abeam numbers, about to turn final. Every time it's happened to me recently, the straight in amends and joins the pattern in a more conventional manner, or if on an approach, tells me they will go missed.

I'll do a straight in VFR if it works out. I'll start listening at least 10 out, then call set up for straight in around maybe 8. If anyone is in the pattern or I have the slightest doubt, I'll maneuver for a more standard entry.

That guy should have offered to get out of your way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top