Oh, the pattern entry!

[INA201]

Don’t wanna start an aircraft battle here more of a safety of flight discussion. The first pic is my flight into KJWN Sunday. The second is the plane in the third pic.  I call 10 miles out, 5 miles out and my intention for a downwind to “two zero”, I call downwind, then the other aircraft calls 7 miles straight in.  I make the decision to call base and he says “I’ll slow up for you.” I turn base to final as he follows behind. I had him on ADSB but his final was at least 10 miles with no apparent pattern entry and the weather was pretty sketchy but VFR. As a side note I was IFR prior to all the bad weather and cancelled as soon as I reached VFR conditions to manage the pattern entry and landing without all the frequency changed approved stuff going on.

[Andy95W]

Was the other pilot flying the Cirrus in the last picture?  That might be your explanation.

[AaronDC8402]

JWN is a "special" place. A lot of the traffic is jets. Way more jet to piston traffic than I see at any other uncontrolled airport. That combined with proximity to BNA, it seems like almost no one flies pattern there.

[steingar]

I dunno, says me no harm no foul.  I hear guys doing straight in approaches all the time, and I've been known to do them myself from time to time.  If I do them I do my damnedest to make certain there's no-one else in the pattern.  Oh, there can always be NORDO aircraft, I just keep my eyes open.  If the guy doing the straight in gets in someone's way, then it gets bad.  On at least one occasion I radioed that the fellow should consider entering a traffic pattern because of all the aircraft landing.

[Mooneymite]

A straight in approach is completely acceptable as long as the straight in does not interfere with aircraft established on the downwind/base.

While it can be somewhat contentious, anything beyond 4 miles can be considered straight in.

As always...in these discussions, we must remember there is a reason why airports are called "uncontrolled" and most rules quoted by the local pattern police are not rules, but recommendations.

Courtesy and good sense go a long way toward maintaining a safe operation.

[Marauder]

Interesting topic. I was flying safety pilot with another Mooney owner on the ILS at KMQS. The airport is an uncontrolled field served by an ILS and a couple of RNAVs. The airport has a mix of small GA and corporate jets. We were in VMC, not talking with Philly and approaching the FAF.

A Citation comes on the frequency announcing he is 10 miles out on the ILS. We make a call that we are on the ILS, 5 miles ahead of them. The next communication from Citation was “we have been given priority by Philly Approach”. We ask if this is due to an emergency. The response: “No, we have been given priority by Philly”. We told them we would move out of their way but got a snobby “you better have” reply.

That was enough for PIC in our plane. He starts quoting regs about operating IFR in VMC. I felt like I was listening to college lecture on the FARs and AIM. The Citation pilot didn’t say another word.

I would say at most uncontrolled airports there is an assemblance of a reasonable traffic flow. Once in a while you get the cowboy who thinks the airport is their’s to do what they want. Or the inexperienced who don’t know better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[jaylw314]

Hmm.  Flying out of an uncontrolled airport with a busy flight training school, e.g. lots of inexperienced pilots with questionable command of English, I gotta say a little courtesy and understanding go a long way.  It's sometimes too much--it's a little disconcerting when you announce you're 10 miles out straight in on a practice approach in VMC and 6 student pilots quickly announce they're extending downwind or leaving the pattern...

3 hours ago, INA201 said:

I call 10 miles out, 5 miles out and my intention for a downwind to “two zero”, I call downwind, then the other aircraft calls 7 miles straight in.  I make the decision to call base and he says “I’ll slow up for you.”

The fact that he said he'd slow up for you suggests he was in VMC.  Otherwise he wouldn't have changed his approach settings.

On the other hand, with the sketchy weather, I doubt the traffic pattern was busy, so both of you were well within your rights to proceed.

[Mooneymite]

10 minutes ago, Marauder said:

 The next communication from Citation was “we have been given priority by Philly Approach”.

Ha!  That's hilarious.

Either it was that Citation pilot's first day, or he thought it was yours.

I'd love to know how he defined "priority".

I suspect Philly said "Cleared visual, squawk 1200, frequency change approved".

If so, I am a high priority flight virtually everywhere.  

[Deb]

This was recently addressed in the updated AC 90-66B Non-Towered Airport Operations

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-66B.pdf

9.5 Straight-In Landings. The FAA encourages pilots to use the standard traffic pattern when arriving or departing a non-towered airport or a part-time-towered airport when the control tower is not operating, particularly when other traffic is observed or when operating from an unfamiliar airport. However, there are occasions where a pilot can choose to execute a straight-in approach for landing when not intending to enter the traffic pattern, such as a visual approach executed as part of the termination of an instrument approach. Pilots should clearly communicate on the CTAF and coordinate maneuvering for and execution of the landing with other traffic so as not to disrupt the flow of other aircraft. Therefore, pilots operating in the traffic pattern should be alert at all times to aircraft executing straight-in landings, particularly when flying a base leg prior to turning final.

9.6 Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Traffic. Pilots conducting instrument approaches should be particularly alert for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the flow of traffic, and should bear in mind they do not have priority over other VFR traffic. Pilots are reminded that circling approaches require left-hand turns unless the approach procedure explicitly states otherwise. This has been upheld by prior FAA legal interpretations of § 91.126(b).

9.6.1 Non-instrument-rated pilots might not understand radio calls referring to approach waypoints, depicted headings, or missed approach procedures. IFR pilots often indicate that they are on a particular approach, but that may not be enough information for a non-IFR-rated pilot to know your location. It is better to provide specific direction and distance from the airport, as well as the pilot’s intentions upon completion of the approach. For example, instead of saying, “PROCEDURE TURN INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH 36,” it should be “6 MILES SOUTH … INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH RUNWAY 36, LOW APPROACH ONLY” or “6 MILES SOUTH… INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH RUNWAY 36, LANDING FULL STOP.”

9.7 No-Radio Aircraft. Pilots should be aware that procedures at airports without operating control towers generally do not require the use of two-way radios; therefore, pilots should be especially vigilant for other aircraft while operating in the traffic pattern. Pilots of inbound aircraft that are not capable of radio communications should determine the runway in use prior to entering the traffic pattern by observing the landing direction indicator, the wind indicator, landing and departing traffic, previously referring to relevant airport publications, or by other means.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Deb
Formatting

[Marauder]

Ha!  That's hilarious.
Either it was that Citation pilot's first day, or he thought it was yours.
I'd love to know how he defined "priority".
I suspect Philly said "Cleared visual, squawk 1200, frequency change approved".
If so, I am a high priority flight virtually everywhere.  

Yeah, it was an interesting exchange. When he first used the “priority” word, we assumed either a fuel issue or maybe some sort of emergency. It was clear from the follow-up transmissions what his intent was.

When we heard his transmission we had made the decision to fly north of the final approach course to let him squeeze in. The final arrogant response triggered the dissertation on the regs and the AIMs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Marauder]

This was recently addressed in the updated AC 90-66B Non-Towered Airport Operations
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-66B.pdf
9.5 Straight-In Landings. The FAA encourages pilots to use the standard traffic pattern when arriving or departing a non-towered airport or a part-time-towered airport when the control tower is not operating, particularly when other traffic is observed or when operating from an unfamiliar airport. However, there are occasions where a pilot can choose to execute a straight-in approach for landing when not intending to enter the traffic pattern, such as a visual approach executed as part of the termination of an instrument approach. Pilots should clearly communicate on the CTAF and coordinate maneuvering for and execution of the landing with other traffic so as not to disrupt the flow of other aircraft. Therefore, pilots operating in the traffic pattern should be alert at all times to aircraft executing straight-in landings, particularly when flying a base leg prior to turning final.

9.6 Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Traffic. Pilots conducting instrument approaches should be particularly alert for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the flow of traffic, and should bear in mind they do not have priority over other VFR traffic. Pilots are reminded that circling approaches require left-hand turns unless the approach procedure explicitly states otherwise. This has been upheld by prior FAA legal interpretations of § 91.126(.

9.6.1 Non-instrument-rated pilots might not understand radio calls referring to approach waypoints, depicted headings, or missed approach procedures. IFR pilots often indicate that they are on a particular approach, but that may not be enough information for a non-IFR-rated pilot to know your location. It is better to provide specific direction and distance from the airport, as well as the pilot’s intentions upon completion of the approach. For example, instead of saying, “PROCEDURE TURN INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH 36,” it should be “6 MILES SOUTH … INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH RUNWAY 36, LOW APPROACH ONLY” or “6 MILES SOUTH… INBOUND V-O-R APPROACH RUNWAY 36, LANDING FULL STOP.”

9.7 No-Radio Aircraft. Pilots should be aware that procedures at airports without operating control towers generally do not require the use of two-way radios; therefore, pilots should be especially vigilant for other aircraft while operating in the traffic pattern. Pilots of inbound aircraft that are not capable of radio communications should determine the runway in use prior to entering the traffic pattern by observing the landing direction indicator, the wind indicator, landing and departing traffic, previously referring to relevant airport publications, or by other means.

Thanks for sharing. Now I have written text of the lecture I heard. This issue is really a non-issue most of the time. We have gyrocopter and glider activity at my home airport, so we are on constant vigilance on the unexpected.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[thinwing]

Priority given by approach for an ILS 10 miles out....he is not even at the initial approach fix there for he can't be established on the approach .Tell him to shove his priority well the moon don't shine

[kortopates]

38 minutes ago, Marauder said:

 

Yeah, it was an interesting exchange. When he first used the “priority” word, we assumed either a fuel issue or maybe some sort of emergency. It was clear from the follow-up transmissions what his intent was.

When we heard his transmission we had made the decision to fly north of the final approach course to let him squeeze in. The final arrogant response triggered the dissertation on the regs and the AIMs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

The Citation pilot was trying to bully you out of the way - plain in simple. It happens and is very irritating when it does.

At our busiest uncontrolled SOCAL airport in the San Diego area, we have a large sky diving operation. The pilots of which have tried to bully other traffic out of the way as well. I am not referring to entering the airspace after they have jumpers away, but jump pilots asking other pilots to break off their approach so they don't have to wait for you to let loose of their jumpers - while their waiting for the TRACON to give them the all clear because of the other traffic.

At this airport though, doing practice approaches without at least flight following is impossible. As long as your talking to SOCAL, they'll sequence the jump activity between the approaches so that everybody gets their turn; despite occasional calls by the jump pilot on the CTAF asking you to break off. But still the jump planes can be a bit too quick IMO to loose their jumpers - at least I am always a bit nerved when I hear jumpers away and we haven't quite gotten to the MAP yet. Even if they are jumping from over 10'K above us.  

So I suspect that like at my crowded uncontrolled airport, you too wouldn't be seeing such rampant bullying if you were also talking to approach. 

[Marauder]

The Citation pilot was trying to bully you out of the way - plain in simple. It happens and is very irritating when it does.
At our busiest uncontrolled SOCAL airport in the San Diego area, we have a large sky diving operation. The pilots of which have tried to bully other traffic out of the way as well. I am not referring to entering the airspace after they have jumpers away, but jump pilots asking other pilots to break off their approach so they don't have to wait for you to let loose of their jumpers - while their waiting for the TRACON to give them the all clear because of the other traffic.
At this airport though, doing practice approaches without at least flight following is impossible. As long as your talking to SOCAL, they'll sequence the jump activity between the approaches so that everybody gets their turn; despite occasional calls by the jump pilot on the CTAF asking you to break off. But still the jump planes can be a bit too quick IMO to loose their jumpers - at least I am always a bit nerved when I hear jumpers away and we haven't quite gotten to the MAP yet. Even if they are jumping from over 10'K above us.  
So I suspect that like at my crowded uncontrolled airport, you too wouldn't be seeing such rampant bullying if you were also talking to approach. 

Talking with Philly on the north side is a challenge. This is the entry gate for a lot of flights into Philly, so flight following is not always possible due to workload. And when you did get FF, they will drop you as soon as the load picks up. The uncontrolled airport itself has large lulls of no traffic at all and we had not seen any other planes until this guy showed up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

 

Yeah, it was an interesting exchange. When he first used the “priority” word, we assumed either a fuel issue or maybe some sort of emergency. It was clear from the follow-up transmissions what his intent was.

When we heard his transmission we had made the decision to fly north of the final approach course to let him squeeze in. The final arrogant response triggered the dissertation on the regs and the AIMs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

Next time tell the Citation pilot that there are several Nordo Piper Cubs following you in and they won’t be on his TCAS either.

Clarence

[TonyK]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

“No, we have been given priority by Philly”. We told them we would move out of their way but got a snobby “you better have”

I wonder how the people in the back of the Citation would have felt about their pilot catching a beat down on the ramp when they opened the door?

[Hank]

3 hours ago, Marauder said:

Interesting topic. I was flying safety pilot with another Mooney owner on the ILS at KMQS. The airport is an uncontrolled field served by an ILS and a couple of RNAVs. The airport has a mix of small GA and corporate jets. We were in VMC, not talking with Philly and approaching the FAF.

A Citation comes on the frequency announcing he is 10 miles out on the ILS. We make a call that we are on the ILS, 5 miles ahead of them. The next communication from Citation was “we have been given priority by Philly Approach”. We ask if this is due to an emergency. The response: “No, we have been given priority by Philly”. We told them we would move out of their way but got a snobby “you better have” reply.

That was enough for PIC in our plane. He starts quoting regs about operating IFR in VMC. I felt like I was listening to college lecture on the FARs and AIM. The Citation pilot didn’t say another word.

I would say at most uncontrolled airports there is an assemblance of a reasonable traffic flow. Once in a while you get the cowboy who thinks the airport is their’s to do what they want. Or the inexperienced who don’t know better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

You can always turn base, drop full flaps and make a nice slow approach in front of him. While talking to him on the radio. And roll slowly to the far end of fhe runway, after stopping to raise your flaps first . . . But he'd have to really piss me off for this treatment. 

FYI, I have cooperated with jets and fast twins who don't think they own the airport, modifying my approach to land after them or speeding up to get out of their way. I have yet to hog the runway to block an arrogant @ss, but it sure is tempting . . . . . I've only insisted on a straight in landing in front of someone who wanted to take off when pax were throwing up in bumpy air, and I offered that information while still a couple of miles out.

Share and share alike, I always say. But hogging the runway to force the jerk into a go around still sounds better than beating him up on the ramp . . . .

[PTK]

The word “priority” can mean any number of things. Maybe it was a VIP flight and needed to get down without delay. Point being he was not out on a tulip stroll doing practice approaches in VMC. It was a jet that needed to get down without waiting for the little piston. It was his way of saying so nicely. No harm in breaking off the approach to give him the runway. Just get out of the way and hold the drama. He wouldn’t be asking had it been IMC. A jet should have priority over a piston in this scenario where the piston can’t keep speed up sufficiently, imo.

[Bryan]

Or he could have been a jet pilot that doesn't have time for the piston and used the "priority" bully his way in. Sounds like if he had a true priority, he would have announced something more when questioned instead of being snarky.  Being courteous goes a long way on both sides.

My home base is full of corporate fast-movers but they communicate well and give way to whoever is closer (or lower).

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, Bryan said:

 

My home base is full of corporate fast-movers but they communicate well and give way to whoever is closer (or lower).

It's nice of your neighbors to follow the FARs, unlike the clown jet jock under discussion above . . . . If you can't afford to fly it, maybe you shouldn't buy it . . . .

[Marauder]

The word “priority” can mean any number of things. Maybe it was a VIP flight and needed to get down without delay. Point being he was not out on a tulip stroll doing practice approaches in VMC. It was a jet that needed to get down without waiting for the little piston. It was his way of saying so nicely. No harm in breaking off the approach to give him the runway. Just get out of the way and hold the drama. He wouldn’t be asking had it been IMC. A jet should have priority over a piston in this scenario where the piston can’t keep speed up sufficiently, imo.

I will give you one thing, you are consistent. All I do know is the day you and I agree on something, I’m buying a lottery ticket and loading my shotgun.

Why?

Either I’m going to hit the big one or the zombie apocalypse has started.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[N201MKTurbo]

I probably would have just kept making my position reports on the ILS and not acknowledged his calls. If he would have asked nice I would have gladly let him by. 

[Mooneymite]

The trap is that doing something to retaliate for perceived arrogance/misbehavior does nothing to promote safety.

We must strive to fly professionally even when pissed off.  

[gsxrpilot]

So on a related note... I was returning to my home field on Sunday afternoon. It's a very small un-towered field in Smithville, TX 84R.

As I called in range and announce my intention, I get a response from another airplane doing "aerobatics between 1500 and 3500 over the field". Pattern altitude is 1300 ft.

Another pilot approaching the field in a Cherokee 6 was coming right through his "box" at 500 ft above pattern for a teardrop entry to the 45 on left down wind. The aerobatic guy said he shouldn't do that as he was using the airspace. We both just quit responding and flew our normal pattern to our airfield. There was no mid-air but it sure seemed inappropriate for the Extra 300 driver to assume he had the airspace over a little single runway, but well populated country airfield. There was no air show, no NOTAM, etc. Just an ass**** flying an expensive airplane.

[thinwing]

3 hours ago, David Herman said:

Nope. 

Nope nope