pattern etiquette question

[Vance Harral]

@daver328, I don't recall that particular accident, but I'm aware of others like it.  From balloons to drone operators to scud-runners, a lot of folks simply rely on big sky theory, and don't pay much attention to even simple rules, much less complex ones like right-of-way in the landing pattern.

I respect your experience, and I especially respect your recognition that lots of experience sometimes causes you to be certain about things that aren't actually true, or used to be true and no longer are.  When I asked for an FAR or AIM reference, I really meant it, as it's possible I'm mistaken too.  Perhaps there are specific rules about practice approaches beyond FAR 91.113(g).  But for now, my understanding remains that 91.113(g) is the only real governance, and that interpretation of that rule is nebulous in real life.  After all, if it were crystal clear, there wouldn't be a need for all the industry articles written about this topic, the ACs, the endless forum debates, and so on.

I think everyone here can probably agree on a few basic concepts: do your best to maintain situational awareness; don't be a jerk; and recognize that even good people can interpret rules differently or make honest mistakes.  Negotiating traffic patterns - whether towered or untowered - is probably the most complex task the majority of civilian aviators engage in.  It's a dynamic environment, requiring adaptability and judgment.  I think it's great the OP and others like him post questions like this to stimulate discussion. but I long ago gave up on the idea there is a simple, well-understood answer.

[Mooneymite]

Vance, after being in this game for a few years, I'm convinced that the FAA doesn't want to promulgate any (many?) hard rules that have to be enforced in the uncontrolled airport world.  They cover the subject with recommendations and non-binding publications, but it's very tough to hang your hat on hard and fast rules.

In aviation, courtesy and good sense go a long way toward staying out of trouble....and staying alive.

 

[jaylw314]

36 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

I think that Gus is entirely correct. That having been said, I have a question for the group. If I go flying locally in uncontrolled airspace that I know very well in MVFR, both for the sake of proficiency and in order to protect my cam and lifters, am I a scud runner within the pejorative use of the word?  I am talking about totally legal and in my opinion safe VFR flight in a stable air mass with 10 miles of visability or more. Just under low ceilings. Happens all of the time here in my running grounds in the flat lands of NW Florida,, Lower Alabama, and south Georgia, especially in the winter. 

If so I might be that scud runner you guys need to be on the lookout for. I'd rather do this on blue sky days but that isn't always possible.  Am I an irresponsible ner-do-well or a responsible owner ensuring that both he and his Mooney are flown regularly?

 

If you are in MVFR conditions (ceiling > 1000' AGL, vis > 3 sm) you are both legally (and morally) in your right to fly in class G airspace, and it is the responsibility of anyone to see and avoid you. 

BUT, since we are talking about someone making an instrument approach, you would have to be in class E airspace, which means 500' of cloud clearance.  And since your minimum legal altitude would realistically be 1000' AGL in a congested area (because what area is not congested near an airport?), you would need ceilings > 1500' AGL while you flew 1000' AGL.

With 500' between you and an IFR flight popping out of the clouds, there should be sufficient space and time to avoid any conflict.  And a ceiling of 1500' AGL is not exactly a challenging IFR approach--that's about 4 minutes before landing on an ILS.  The IFR flight should expect to look for traffic once they are out of the clouds, so if you run into each other it is both of your fault.  Either way, you have a right to fly in that airspace under those conditions, although it certainly makes sense to make position calls if you are around an airport with instrument approaches.

Edited October 17, 2017 by jaylw314

[kerry]

7 hours ago, cliffy said:

How many have ever read the, err, Chart Supplement on an airport and paid attention to the "Dedicated Calm Wind Runway"? We have one but no one follows it.

We have over 1,000 jet operations a year here. Up to and including G650s and Globals. We have easily, 10 times that in piston flights.  We can have 100 airport operations in a day here.

ALL at an uncontrolled field and 25% straight-ins and 1 runway.

The jets are straight ins 90% of the time.  One tour operator flies only right base approaches from 7 miles out with 6 to 9 airplanes in that line. Cuts down on flight time by 2 mins per flight! 

We have one main runway and both ends get used at the same time for straight ins. Takeoffs on 33 and landings on 15 happen everyday with in minutes of each other. Then factor in the EMS operator with helicopters and KingAirs on medivac flights that pop in front of everyone else.

This issue will always be a problem and everyone needs to keep their eyes open and be as safe as they can. There is no panacea here. Just pay attention out there. 

Sounds like Page.  This was my destination last Friday and while I'm on my base leg an airliner on a straight in announced that I just cut off an airliner.

[cliffy]

YUP, they think they own the place. Its only a Beech 1900 and both crew members "might " have 2000 hrs between them. They fly Part 135 most of the time as they can't get anyone with experience. Virtually all of the jet traffic uses straight ins also. And we do have an occasional NORDO  

[MyNameIsNobody]

Talk is cheap.  Going to someone's hanger, shutting down and getting real close and personal has an effect...Otherwise save the bravado for the "things I wish/should have done".

I guarantee you that if you land over me we are going to meet and one or both of us are going to the hospital.  Feel me?  That is a friggin' promise...

End of story,

[ShuRugal]

On 10/15/2017 at 4:32 PM, Vance Harral said:

@toto, I get your point.  But the first sentence falls apart in real life too, due to the nebulous understanding of "final approach", which is not formally defined in FAR 1.1.  At what point does a landing aircraft transition from being "in flight" to being "on final approach to land"?  Most VFR-only guys would probably say this happens on the base-to-final turn, but the OP specifically referenced the case of an aircraft on a practice instrument approach.  I don't know the parameters at his airport, but the final approach fix for the GPS approach into my home airport is 6 miles from the threshold.  No reasonable person thinks an aircraft on a practice approach here gets a 4-minute right-of-way (at 90 knots) upon crossing the FAF, vs. a guy who just turned base.

As Daver said, VFR in the pattern has RoW over everyone else at a VFR noncontrolled airport.  However, I would yield to a direct-to-final inbound if, and only if, I had him visual and could see that if I turned final, there would be a conflict.  I'd rather be "wrong" and alive to go around the pattern again than be "right" and dead.

On 10/15/2017 at 6:54 PM, daver328 said:

Turbo props that make no pattern and go straight in (cutting in front of traffic in the pattern. They think they’re more important than everyone else. 

 

saw something similar this past Sunday at OFP.  2-3 aircraft in the pattern, left traffic, and here comes a Citation making an extended right base-to-final.  Someone comes up "hey, the pattern at OFP is LEFT traffic, buddy", citation replies "no shit." and keeps right on coming.  forced everyone else to go around.

[cliffy]

9 minutes ago, ShuRugal said:

saw something similar this past Sunday at OFP.  2-3 aircraft in the pattern, left traffic, and here comes a Citation making an extended right base-to-final.  Someone comes up "hey, the pattern at OFP is LEFT traffic, buddy", citation replies "no shit." and keeps right on coming.  forced everyone else to go around.

Happens every day here Same scenario, same commentary!

[pinerunner]

This can get a little tricky and be a thorny issue. I think the FAR's are written to allow pilots at uncontrolled airports to use their brains and work out the most sensible solutions between each other. I recall being on downwind with our local instructor and hearing a King Air call in that they were on final for an RNAV approach 5 or 10 miles out (I forget which but the idea is I thought they were way out) so I figured I should finish my landing since I had already announced downwind. My instructor, who was very familiar with the various users at 2B7 told me I clearly had no idea how quickly a King Air would eat up 5 miles and had me extend my downwind and all worked out well. 

It's not a one size, one rule, fits all, business. Some  uncontrolled airports have feeder airlines with serious jets coming and going a couple times a day. On the way back with my newly acquired M20E I stopped at Ellis arifield (uncontrolled) near my son's Marine base to lay over with him for a couple days. As I approached I heard a Delta flight call in that they were on final. I didn't want to mess with them and told them I'd just circle around a bit until they were done. They came back and said they were far enough out and I should go for it. So I turned base a little early, adjusted my final and landing so I would end my landing roll right next to a turn off and get out of their way. It all worked out fine. If I had forced them to go around I would have inconvenienced a hundred people and cost Delta a bunch of gas money. An old Piper Cub with no radio would have a perfect right to go into that airport but he would also have the responsibility to do his homework, keep his eyes peeled, and not cut off the other traffic. I think the Delta pilots know this and have their eyes peeled when going into Ellis. I should hope so.

Some of my non-flying friends couldn't believe that an airline would be going into an uncontrolled airport. I think professional levels of behavior at both ends of the spectrum can make it work out fine. The attitude where you figure out when you have the right of way and then insist on it and even fight for it can lead to trouble.   

[N201MKTurbo]

Back in '84 Frontier Airlines flew into Scottsbluff NE an uncontrolled field. I was landing there I made calls on the 45, downwind and base. Then I saw the 737 on final. The very professional pilot made a single radio call: "Get that plane out of the way, I'm landing"

[Mooneymite]

Since I am sometimes "that jet traffic", I'll give you my perspective on the VFR traffic pattern.  About 30% of our destinations are uncontrolled airports.  Of those, we are the only aircraft in the pattern probably half the time....that's good.  However anytime we approach an uncontrolled airport both pilots are on "high alert".

The recommendations for jets is to fly essentially the same pattern but 500' above the slower traffic.  It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out this is setting up for some bad situations with high speed traffic descending through lower speed traffic.  We can't fly a Mooney pattern.  We need more real estate to maintain reasonable bank angles in our turns, so we're way outside of everyone else.  Most jets have pretty poor visibility in some quadrants.  We have our heads on a swivel, but we just can't see through aluminum.

We use our TCAS and our radio, but we are completely aware that a NORDO J-3 flying 60 MPH is always a possiblilty....even at night!

In my opinion, the absolutel safest way to land a jet at an uncontrolled field is from a straight in.  We are in the pattern the least amount of time, we do not descend on base through the 1000' pattern altitude, and we aren't trying to look in all the quadrants we can't see.

The jet pilots may, or may not think they are big-shots, but in most cases they are just being extremely cautious.  Our lives and our livlihoods depend on a 100% safe operation.  Uncontrolled airports are a threat; I have never seen a jet pilot intentionally cut anyone out of the pattern, but have seen it done because the traffic was mis-identified, or unseen.

For those of you who have allowed jets to go ahead out of sequence, my sincere thanks and appreciation.  I'll buy you a cup of coffee at the FBO.  If it's a Signature, I'll add in a cookie.  

[ArtVandelay]

Back in '84 Frontier Airlines flew into Scottsbluff NE an uncontrolled field. I was landing there I made calls on the 45, downwind and base. Then I saw the 737 on final. The very professional pilot made a single radio call: "Get that plane out of the way, I'm landing"

Today almost everyone has a camera and is recording ATC, I would post video, post links on every pilot site I can find, and follow that up with a call to their airline.

[N201MKTurbo]

9 minutes ago, teejayevans said:

Today almost everyone has a camera and is recording ATC, I would post video, post links on every pilot site I can find, and follow that up with a call to their airline.

Not that it is an excuse, but the airline was in bankruptcy at the time and everybody was a little cranky. 

[N201MKTurbo]

OK, sense we are talking about radio calls I got to tell you about an interaction with Tucson approach about a month ago. I had just taken off on 11L and made a downwind turn. Tower handed me off to departure. I checked in with departure and it went like this:

 

Departure: “I’ll tell you what, I have a bunch of arrivals coming in to both airports. (KTUS, KDMA) How about you fly out between the two for a while before you turn on course?”

 

Me:        “Sure I can do that”

 

Departure: “That’d be great!”

 

[PTK]

On 10/19/2017 at 10:36 AM, Mooneymite said:

...For those of you who have allowed jets to go ahead out of sequence, my sincere thanks and appreciation.  I'll buy you a cup of coffee at the FBO.  If it's a Signature, I'll add in a cookie.  

Coffee...and you'll throw in a cookie??!!  Such a sweet gesture!! Not so fast! Coffee just doesn’t cut it I’m afraid! The appropriate and customary beverage for these circumstances is indeed... beer!!!

[peevee]

I DO WHAT I WANT!

[Mooneymite]

8 minutes ago, peevee said:

I DO WHAT I WANT!

Brings to mind a famous Latin phrase:  "Non Serviam!"  

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Mooneymite said:

Brings to mind a famous Latin phrase:  "Non Serviam!"  

You forgot "If elected . . ." on that one!

P.S.--who uses Latin anymore besides lawyers? Even Google didn't detect Latin, it thought Portuguese, and had no translation . . . Obviously, I wasn't taught by ruler-wielding nuns . . . 

[xcrmckenna]

Since I am sometimes "that jet traffic", I'll give you my perspective on the VFR traffic pattern.  About 30% of our destinations are uncontrolled airports.  Of those, we are the only aircraft in the pattern probably half the time....that's good.  However anytime we approach an uncontrolled airport both pilots are on "high alert".
The recommendations for jets is to fly essentially the same pattern but 500' above the slower traffic.  It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out this is setting up for some bad situations with high speed traffic descending through lower speed traffic.  We can't fly a Mooney pattern.  We need more real estate to maintain reasonable bank angles in our turns, so we're way outside of everyone else.  Most jets have pretty poor visibility in some quadrants.  We have our heads on a swivel, but we just can't see through aluminum.
We use our TCAS and our radio, but we are completely aware that a NORDO J-3 flying 60 MPH is always a possiblilty....even at night!
In my opinion, the absolutel safest way to land a jet at an uncontrolled field is from a straight in.  We are in the pattern the least amount of time, we do not descend on base through the 1000' pattern altitude, and we aren't trying to look in all the quadrants we can't see.
The jet pilots may, or may not think they are big-shots, but in most cases they are just being extremely cautious.  Our lives and our livlihoods depend on a 100% safe operation.  Uncontrolled airports are a threat; I have never seen a jet pilot intentionally cut anyone out of the pattern, but have seen it done because the traffic was mis-identified, or unseen.
For those of you who have allowed jets to go ahead out of sequence, my sincere thanks and appreciation.  I'll buy you a cup of coffee at the FBO.  If it's a Signature, I'll add in a cookie.  

I totally agree a straight in approach for you is the best and safest entry for you guys. Jet pilots that do cut off other pilots, would you say just can't be inconvenienced to fit into the traffic pattern while they are flying straight in? Either don't want to speed up a little to keep the other traffic from extending their down wind, or won't throw in a few lazy S turns so the traffic doesn't have to turn sooner from base to final? Are they scarred to do a go around or have an abrupt stop hard on the breaks and the reverse thrusters?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob - S50]

23 minutes ago, xcrmckenna said:

I totally agree a straight in approach for you is the best and safest entry for you guys. Jet pilots that do cut off other pilots, would you say just can't be inconvenienced to fit into the traffic pattern while they are flying straight in? Either don't want to speed up a little to keep the other traffic from extending their down wind, or won't throw in a few lazy S turns so the traffic doesn't have to turn sooner from base to final? Are they scarred to do a go around or have an abrupt stop hard on the breaks and the reverse thrusters?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was once asked to do S turns on final in a DC9 at RST (Rochester, MN) to follow an Aeronca on final.  The Aeronca offered to land on a cross runway.  Problem solved.  Thank you whoever you were.

[xcrmckenna]

I was once asked to do S turns on final in a DC9 at RST (Rochester, MN) to follow an Aeronca on final.  The Aeronca offered to land on a cross runway.  Problem solved.  Thank you whoever you were.

That's cool, and pilots willing to work around others is great. I'm not reading many story's or posts of jet pilots working around other traffic. I was wondering why? Would you of done the S turns if the Aeronca hadn't changed his landing runway? And why would it if been a problem if you did them? I give way to a jet just about every time I fly into Bend Oregon "uncontrolled airport as you know". I don't have a problem with it. And haven't had one cut me off. But don't know how many would if I didn't extend my downwind while they are on a straight in approach. Either we have the FAR's or we have the pecking order. Can't have both to suit the argument or excuses at a particular time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cliffy]

Courtesy goes both ways for it to work (and in a previous life I was a blow torch driver). 

[rbridges]

1 hour ago, xcrmckenna said:

I totally agree a straight in approach for you is the best and safest entry for you guys. Jet pilots that do cut off other pilots, would you say just can't be inconvenienced to fit into the traffic pattern while they are flying straight in? Either don't want to speed up a little to keep the other traffic from extending their down wind, or won't throw in a few lazy S turns so the traffic doesn't have to turn sooner from base to final? Are they scarred to do a go around or have an abrupt stop hard on the breaks and the reverse thrusters?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was flying into PDK in Atlanta.  I was originally #1 for the runway, but then they made me #2 behind a Leer jet.  I let off the throttle so the Leer could pass, but that's another story .  Anyway, that was my first time watching a jet in the pattern.  Crazy fast and much wider than I expected.  I can see how it can be very nerve wracking and frustrating at times for much faster traffic.

[xcrmckenna]

I was flying into PDK in Atlanta.  I was originally #1 for the runway, but then they made me #2 behind a Leer jet.  I let off the throttle so the Leer could pass, but that's another story .  Anyway, that was my first time watching a jet in the pattern.  Crazy fast and much wider than I expected.  I can see how it can be very nerve wracking and frustrating at times for much faster traffic.

And that's why I agree a straight in approach is so much better for them with slower planes in a standard pattern at an uncontrolled airport. But I'm just saying there are probably things they could do while they are flying straight in on a vfr approach to fit into the pattern traffic rather than saying here I come im ten, six, three miles out, short final. Set up around me. Jets have so much more capabilities than my Mooney. Why do they have the right away? Why am I the better man for giving way? I would also agree hands down they will be a better pilot than I am so why can't they set up so they fit into traffic while on a straight in? I would think that is much easier to do than me adjusting for traffic to front of me and behind me and now a jet calling out a six mile final, do I or don't I extend my base, is the guy behind me see I'm slowing down so I don't have to extend my base as much. The reason given for a jet wanting to do a straight in is because of better visibility. And I totally agree. So if they have the better visibility, much more capable aircraft then they should be able to fit into the pattern and still go straight in? If not then that's fine. I was just asking why they can't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hank]

The short answer is because some if them don't want to. "I'm in a ______, move over" doesn't cut it, whether it's a jet blowing the pattern to pieces, or a large truck taking the half of the highway that he wants. Both will get their comeuppance one day.

But so far, my limited jets-in-the-pattern experiences have been good, we've worked things out nicely without having or wanting fisticuffs at the FBO.  

Asshats will be asshats regardless of what they are riding, driving or flying.