Proper pattern etiquette question?

[cnoe]

I'm just looking for a few opinions on what is proper etiquette when flying practice IFR approaches at an uncontrolled airport. Here's the situation:

 

While prepping for an upcoming Instrument Checkride three weeks away I was practicing a procedure turn and ILS approach at a local airport. My safety pilot and I both had full ADS-B Traffic displayed and the safety pilot was obviously keeping a keen watch out the windows. I made frequent position reports over the radio starting about 10 miles out starting the procedure turn inbound. Calls were also made approaching the FAF and twice when on final. We were flying with the flow of traffic along with one departing aircraft and two in the pattern practicing VFR touch-and-goes.

 

Shortly after calling our 2 1/2 mile final @ 90 kts (low approach) one of the planes (C172) on downwind made a right turn to base (and called it out on the radio). I asked my safety pilot if he "had the airplane in sight" to  which he replied that he did and it appeared to be a conflict. At about the same time the other pattern traffic called out on the radio "does aircraft on final see that a plane has turned base in front of you?" (nice of him to make that call I believe).

 

I asked my safety to clear me for a left turn and then aborted the approach with a left turn out (right-had traffic on this runway). No big deal; no real danger, but...

 

... Am I unreasonable in thinking that the guy cutting in front of my approach was rude? Or was "I" being rude by practicing an approach where a couple of planes were already in the pattern?

 

I felt like the guy could have easily extended his downwind for another 1/2 mile and followed me in #2. I don't like getting in the way of others and had gladly aborted a previous approach to yield way for faster jet traffic coming up behind me on the same approach.

 

Thanks for any input.

 

Cnoe

[Joe Zuffoletto]

Was the guy who cut you off on frequency? If so, he should have been aware of your position and he was indeed rude to cut you off. If not, then you needed to be prepared for anything, which you were. I don't think you did anything wrong, and I certainly don't think you were being rude for practicing approaches when there was other traffic in the pattern.

[M20S Driver]

I'm just looking for a few opinions on what is proper etiquette when flying practice IFR approaches at an uncontrolled airport. Here's the situation:

 

While prepping for an upcoming Instrument Checkride three weeks away I was practicing a procedure turn and ILS approach at a local airport. My safety pilot and I both had full ADS-B Traffic displayed and the safety pilot was obviously keeping a keen watch out the windows. I made frequent position reports over the radio starting about 10 miles out starting the procedure turn inbound. Calls were also made approaching the FAF and twice when on final. We were flying with the flow of traffic along with one departing aircraft and two in the pattern practicing VFR touch-and-goes.

 

Shortly after calling our 2 1/2 mile final @ 90 kts (low approach) one of the planes (C172) on downwind made a right turn to base (and called it out on the radio). I asked my safety pilot if he "had the airplane in sight" to  which he replied that he did and it appeared to be a conflict. At about the same time the other pattern traffic called out on the radio "does aircraft on final see that a plane has turned base in front of you?" (nice of him to make that call I believe).

 

I asked my safety to clear me for a left turn and then aborted the approach with a left turn out (right-had traffic on this runway). No big deal; no real danger, but...

 

... Am I unreasonable in thinking that the guy cutting in front of my approach was rude? Or was "I" being rude by practicing an approach where a couple of planes were already in the pattern?

 

I felt like the guy could have easily extended his downwind for another 1/2 mile and followed me in #2. I don't like getting in the way of others and had gladly aborted a previous approach to yield way for faster jet traffic coming up behind me on the same approach.

 

Thanks for any input.

 

Cnoe

 

The Cessna pilot was either in-experienced or clueless.  

I have been on both sides of this situation multiple times and the IFR plane is always given priority.

[Mooneymite]

Aircraft in the VFR traffic pattern generally have priority over aircraft on a straight in.

 

There have been many airline pilots violated arriving straight in on an instrument procedure and falsely believing they had priority over aircraft on the downwind.

 

However the FAR's are written, courtesy and headwork should prevail.  Most of what is in the AIM is "recommended", not regulation.  The FAR's really aren't too specific:

 

FAR 91.113:  (g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake

that aircraft.

 

AOPA opinion piece:  Straight-in approaches are always a topic for discussion. Under VFR conditions they are acceptable only if there is no conflict with other traffic. Local VFR traffic should work with transient IFR and IFR practice traffic to allow a reasonable flow. An IFR inbound aircraft, real or practice, executing a straight-in into a jammed-up VFR pattern is not the most courteous approach. A retired airline captain allowed that he never made straight-ins at nontowered airports if the weather was decent. It gave him a chance to fly the aircraft and get a good look at the traffic.

[ArtVandelay]

Slight thread shift...what is the etiquette for small airports with no parallel taxiway, where you have to back taxi and there are turn around at the ends, I assume even in a turn around you are considered on the runway, I also assume runups at this time would be in bad form, judging how much time it takes vs where incoming traffic might not be easy

[Hank]

One thing that may help in the future is to give your position reports in a way that VFR pilots can understand, as well as Instrument pilots without the plate open in front of them. As a student pilot, I once sat at the hold short while someone was on a practice approach, then they called the miss, and I had no idea what it meant. Never saw them go by; a couple minutes later, still waiting, they didn't answer my call about where they were . . .

It's easy to get caught up in procedures and reports when practicing, but if the people in the pattern don't speak the language, and don't know where the FAF is, you're speaking but not communicating.

[Hank]

Slight thread shift...what is the etiquette for small airports with no parallel taxiway, where you have to back taxi and there are turn around at the ends, I assume even in a turn around you are considered on the runway, I also assume runups at this time would be in bad form, judging how much time it takes vs where incoming traffic might not be easy

I was based at this airport for eight years. We did our run ups at the hold short line (single runway entrance, 1000' from the approach end of the most-used direction, 2000' from the other end). Runup at the line, call back taxi, get to the end, turn around and go.

Sometimes I visit other fields done similarly. I always runup BEFORE back taxiing, to minimize time on the runway, minimize interference with other pilots, and reduce my own time if there's a problem and I need to check something out.

[N601RX]

On the rare ocasion that we have 2 planes wanting to depart or having a group fly out for breakfast we will usually back taxi in groups of 3 and then depart. I've also saw planes doing a run-up in the turnaround area while another plane lands.

[47U]

The airplane on final has right of way. The Cessna should not have turned base creating a potential conflict. Make sure when you call your position that you say "X-mile final RW XX ILS approach." Or VOR or RNAV, whatever, but don't use the FAF or other intersection as your position report because it's likely none of the VFR guys will recognize where those intersections are. Make sure your landing light and strobes are on to be as visible as possible.

If you're getting close to the checkride you probably want to get as much work in as possible for the time you have available, but please recognize the impact that shooting approaches has on other traffic when the airport is busy. Perhaps your schedule (and safety pilot's schedule) will support flying during off-peak hours. I had a safety pilot who would go out at 0300... and flying in the dark helped with simulating instrument conditions, but please be kind to airport neighbors, too.

A couple years ago I'm on the 16 ILS to the former McClellan AFB. NORCAL reported an air tanker also headed to MCC then switched me to the CTAF. I reported a seven mile final and the DC-10 air tanker replies with a nine mile final and reports me in sight. I offer to break off my approach so he can get topped off and go fight fires, but he was done for the day and flew a 360 for spacing instead. I thought that was quite accommodating, but I don't want to be the guy that sends heavies around in terminal airspace. Traffic spacing at uncontrolled fields is give and take. Everyone needs to work together. If a DC-10 can fly a 360 for spacing, certainly a -172 can extend the downwind. Communication is key.

[Mooneymite]

The airplane on final has right of way. 

 

 

At an airport with no tower, this is not necessarily correct and has bitten many an instrument pilot.

[midlifeflyer]

.  

I have been on both sides of this situation multiple times and the IFR plane is always given priority.

 

Can you point us to the FAA rule or policy guidance that says this? I've been on both sides of the situation as well and I'm not aware of any that gives an airplane flying an instrument approach in VFR conditions any priority whatsoever. Nor have I ever seen it referred to in any sport or private pilot syllabus.

 

The only rule of IFR priority I know of is over SVFR aircraft. Other than that, the only FAA guidance I know of is the one that says:

==============================

It is solely the pilot's prerogative to cancel an IFR flight plan. However, a pilot's retention of an IFR flight plan does not afford priority over VFR aircraft. For example, this does not preclude the requirement for the pilot of an arriving IFR aircraft to adjust his/her flight path, as necessary, to enter a traffic pattern in sequence with arriving VFR aircraft.

FAA Order 7110.65V - Air Traffic Control

==============================

[Guest]

I would have thought that in VFR conditions it would come down to acceptable/ legal places to enter the traffic pattern, and who is in the pattern first.

Having said that, one may have the right of way but still end up dead.

Clarence

[midlifeflyer]

I would have thought that in VFR conditions it would come down to acceptable/ legal places to enter the traffic pattern, and who is in the pattern first.

Having said that, one may have the right of way but still end up dead.

Clarence

I does come down to acceptable pattern entries and right of way rules — but those rules don't simply involve who is first. I know that about the US rules but I doubt the rules of any other ICAO country are substantially different.

 

Your other statement definitely reflects reality

[Andy95W]

Aircraft in the VFR traffic pattern generally have priority over aircraft on a straight in.

 

There have been many airline pilots violated arriving straight in on an instrument procedure and falsely believing they had priority over aircraft on the downwind.

 

+1

That doesn't mean the guy in the pattern wasn't a jerk, though.

[Robert C.]

I've been using the rule drilled into me while doing my PPL at an untowered airport, the guiding philosophy was to be courteous and safe:

 

The aircraft that called "final" has priority; if someone called final I was expected to find him and extend downwind and watch him/her go by on final before starting my base turn.

Don't call final until on 2-3 mile final (again a courtesy item, so you don't create unnecessary delays)

 

It felt like common sense then and does so now so I use it under the hood as well.

[DonMuncy]

Although it does create problems when practicing instrument approaches, I try to cut the guys in the pattern a lot of slack. Until you get into instrument flying you have no idea what an instrument approach is. I believe the non-instrument guys think that everyone "in the pattern" are intruded upon by anyone doing a straight in.

[M016576]

Not that it matters much, but were you on an instrument flight plan, or just shooting approaches VFR? Remember, just because you're following an instrument procedure, does NOT make you automatically under IFR or give any sort of special precedence or right of way. You're still VFR... Much like a pilot operating IFR in VMC is still required to clear their flight path visually (see and avoid doesn't go away ever!

As has been mentioned above- traffic in a VFR pattern have priority over aircraft VFR on a straight in.

Also mentioned above, though, if that cessna had SA on your position, it was a jerk move. But I'm willing to bet he didn't know you were there... Which is proof of why we fly with a safety observer in these situations.

[47U]

If there's other traffic in the pattern or approaching the airport a straight in landing to the preferred runway just for convenience is not appropriate. This isn't an issue of IFR vs VFR. Certainly an IFR pilot on a flight plan to an uncontrolled airport in VFR conditions needs to fly a pattern that fits in with the traffic flow at the time when ATC turns them loose to CTAF. Having said that, FAR 91.113 says in part:

(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach.

My personal rule is that if the pattern is so busy that a practice IFR approach is going to disrupt the flow, I'll go somewhere else. There are times when a straight in approach is appropriate, and sometimes when it's not. Communicate, and don't be a jerk.

[bonal]

On one of my more repeated flights my homeward heading is the same as our preferred runway 28 as I hit 10 miles I begin making position calls and also request for traffic advisory from other aircraft. I also begin to monitor local CTAF as soon as is practical for my surrounding airspace. As long as there is no traffic in the area and more importantly in the pattern I will do a straight in. If there is any pattern traffic I will swing right to set up a 45 entry for the down wind which is what I was taught the correct procedure. if I had been the pic in the 172 I would have extended for number 2 number one rule of thumb at uncontrolled fields is courtesy and communication. As a non IFR pilot I don't know but if you are doing a simulation and not in IMC I don't think that puts you in a right of way condition. Technically you have not entered the pattern for the field and need to abort your simulation and fly the traffic for the VFR approach.

There have been a couple of times when others have made that clear to me as I have been coming into the area (one CFI in particular)

[Mooneymite]

When flying jets into VFR airports, generally the prop guys are super courteous and allow us to land straight-in even if they have to extend.  We really appreciate it.  What a lot of prop guys don't realize is how poor the visibility can be out of some jets once they are in the pattern making turns.  We really have to depend on our TCAS a lot and hope that everyone has a transponder and radio.

 

Every once in awhile, some prop guy seems to take pleasure in making us go around.  It is lawful to use one's legal right, but in the big picture, is safety served?

 

Our worst "night" mare is flying into a VFR airport at night and being unaware of a nordo/no transponder aircraft on final with only a single white light on the tail visible to the faster moving jet behind it.  There, but for the grace of God.....

[pinerunner]

What I like about all these responses is the degree to which they seem to disagree, which I think reflects the real world situation. I'm working on my instrument rating and wonder about this stuff. It seems pretty clear to me that ATC is responsible for providing you with clearance from other instrument traffic but if you're in VFR conditions there can easily be other aircraft around that are uncontrolled and you have to see and avoid. I haven't seen anything in the FAR's that gave a plane with an IFR approach clearance the "right-of-way" over existing VFR traffic at a small, uncontrolled airport (at a controlled airport of course the tower sorts this stuff out for you).

 

Would calling a straight-in approach from 10 miles out entitle you to shut down traffic while there might have been time for a couple of landings or take-offs by others? I don't think so.

 

Etiquette is the right word I think. I've understood for a long time that a piper cub (or even a Mooney) shouldn't cut off a Lear jet or small airliner at an uncontrolled airport even if they technically have the right of way. The expense of making big iron circle around makes it sensible in my mind to try help them and not hinder them with my behavior. Flying a much more complex airplane on an IFR clearance they might not be watching as close as they should in VFR conditions and so turning in front of them could be setting yourself up.

 

My rule of thumb is "try not to surprise the other pilots"

[Mooneymite]

What I like about all these responses is the degree to which they seem to disagree......

 

Ha!

 

Ain't that the truth.

 

Ask 10 pilots how to enter the VFR pattern and you'll get at least 15 answers....all backed up by.....nothing.

 

The AIM is advisory, the FAR's are not specific.

 

Y'all be careful out there.   

[ArtVandelay]

I think those doing a full stop should have the right away over T&Gs if for no other reason that having less planes in the air should be safer.

[PTK]

In VFR conditions the proper entry to an uncontrolled field tp is on downwind at a 45. Straight in entries are not recommended and practice approaches do not have the right of way.

Having said that, you did announce position reports. Should the other aircraft have followed you in? Perhaps. Was he technically wrong not doing so? No. Common sense prevailed and in the interest of safety you aborted.

It all worked out well.

[AndyFromCB]

How about inverted overhead approach starting at redline with a half snap roll at the end to arrive over the numbers at precise 70knots while NORDO. I've seen Kirby Chambliss do it once.