Jump to content

Near miss in traffic pattern


jcovington

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, carusoam said:

What are you guys using for judging distance around the pattern on the down wind..?

  • wing tip on the runway
  • runway halfway out on the wing
  • Fuel cap on the runway, extra close
  • wing tip + four fingers, extra far
  • GPS
  • visual cues... roads, steeples, etc..

Just seeing how you measure this.

Best regards,

-a-

A traffic pattern should be judged by angle and not by distance. A higher pattern AGL should take you out further like a faster one. Slower flown patterns and lower patterns bring you in closer. Turning radius at lower speed is tighter anyway.

Since the glide ratio of most airplanes is not too different, the angle is pretty similar. Since most traffic pattern altitudes are predetermined, that makes speed determine the distance to maintain the right angle.

Simply put, a traffic pattern is an angle relative to amount of energy.

Edited by 201er
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, steingar said:

One of the reasons is sometimes one needs larger bank angles than is prudent, and stall speeds rise accordingly.  The tighter the pattern the larger the bank angle, the higher the stall speed.

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight. 

Edited by PTK
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 201er said:

Speed shouldn’t matter. If everyone would fly a traffic pattern proportionate to their airspeed, everyone could be on the same page. The problem is when someone in a Skyhawk flies a jet pattern, then the whole sequence is shot.

I usually fly wide patterns too, although it's mainly because I don't trust other pilots.  At one of our local airports, it seems like the majority of planes landing at any given time fly something that only be called a "pattern" with heaps of generosity.  Entering and flying a wider pattern gives me a better chance of bugging out if somebody does something stupid.  It also keeps most of the traffic to the inside where it is easier to see them all at the same time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, PTK said:

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight. 

It is painful, like getting dental work, but for once I agree with this guy. :wacko:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 6
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:


It is because pattern can only safely handle so many aircraft.
By clogging up the arriving and departing traffic effectively adding more aircraft to the airspace, making it more dangerous for everyone.
At every towered airport I have been to, pattern traffic gives way to cross country traffic.


Tom

Several of us here fly out of Deer Valley, KDVT, the busiest GA airport in the country.   It is not unusual when it gets busy that when somebody wants to enter the pattern for whatever reason, arrival to land, enter the pattern for the dreaded touch-n-go, whatever, that the tower just tells them to remain outside the airspace.   I've often heard them give a time estimate, e.g., "I'll get back to you in ten minutes."   So people arriving at KDVT from wherever may, on occasion, show up and have to wait a while, essentially, "Negative, Ghost Rider, the pattern is full."    I've not observed them ever boot anybody out of the pattern on behalf of arriving traffic.   It's not unusual for people to be asked to extend downwind or upwind or do a 360 or whatever to provide spacing, but I've not observed anybody already in the pattern get significantly moved on behalf of arriving traffic.   I have heard arriving traffic get told to stay away for a while, though.

Our local pilot association sponsors pancake breakfasts at the washrack once in a while and some of the controllers show up just to chew the fat and put faces to names (or tail numbers).   I've yet to catch up with one of them, but if/when I do I got a ton of questions on stuff like this.  ;)

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TCC said:


One way to ensure separation is instrument arrival and departure.
 

 

Instrument arrival does zip-po for separation when you arrive at an untowered field. I'm busy moving to my 5th base, all untowered, and did my Instrument training at one that didn't even have an approach. On VFR days, even on an Instrument Approach, the PIC is responsible for separation, and for making position calls on CTAF that even student pilots can understand. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PTK said:

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight. 

Many bank angles are not prudent in the pattern, especially on base-to-final. Say, any bank angle > 30°. That was pounded into my heqd by my primary CFI in a mighty Skyhawk, and by my regional airline CFII in my Mooney. I generally aim for less angle. If I'm wide turning final, I hold the bank and fly back to the right  course; if I can't get there, I go around and try again. I rarely miss twice.

For pattern width, downwind for 26 used to be over downtown (still is, I'm just not based there anymore), and I noticed that I flew the Mooney 3-4 small city blocks wider than the Skyhawk. Lately, though, I've slipped into a longer final leg--googlemaps shows me at about a mile-long final, but closer in on downwind. It's easy at your home field, set it for Satellite view, find a landmark you're used to seeing and measure distance to the runway. I use a church that's often under me as I turn base . . . . . Lots of them here in Alabama, the Buckle of the Bible Belt.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, steingar said:

I do not in any way wish to criticize your piloting, I only wish to state my thoughts on this.  I tend to do wide patterns.  This bothers CFI's to no end, but my reasoning is as follows:

The idea behind tight patterns is so you can make the runway if the mill quits while you're in the landing pattern.  But how often does that actually happen?  I would suggest such a thing is rare indeed.  What kills pilots in the landing pattern is the stall/spin from base to final, and it's killed lots and will continue to do so.  One of the reasons is sometimes one needs larger bank angles than is prudent, and stall speeds rise accordingly.  The tighter the pattern the larger the bank angle, the higher the stall speed.  I myself am profoundly uncomfortable yanking and banking at low altitude and low energy.  Perhaps I am just not that good a pilot, and that a better pilot can accomplish such things with ease.  I will only say that after any of these stall/spin accidents, which as often as not involve high the commercial pilots, no one ever says "that guy was a lousy pilot and I'm unsurprised".  Usually I read about the surprise and shock, with testimonials as to the skill of the accident pilot.

My thoughts for what little they're worth.

I don't take at as criticism.  We all make decisions about risk and return. I respect the line of thinking that says the ragged edge is over there and I am staying as far away as possible.  Being close to the airport in the unlikely event of a power failure is a small comfort.  The reason I that I fly the patterns I do (big or small is subjective when it comes to patterns) has to do with the same risks that drive you towards larger patterns with gentle bank angles.  Low energy, low level maneuvers can be dangerous. I hope that I never have to execute maximum performance maneuvers at low altitude in an emergency but I want to be familiar, practiced and as comfortable as possible in the unlikely event that it is needed. That doesn't mean that I am going for max performance descending turns in the pattern, it means that I try to use the remaining energy as efficiently as possible. If I don't have pax on board, I try to be power off from abeam the numbers until adding power to taxi. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, jcovington said:

I though by keeping my speed up I was avoiding a conflict. I was wrong. However, in 20 years of flying I haven't encountered a plane turning crosswind to downwind at midfield. Now I have. I won't make that mistake again.

Jim,

Thank you for starting this thread.   As with all contentious threads, I learned quite a bit about the nuanced details of flying my Mooney and what other pilots are thinking while flying, but my biggest takeaway was "expect the unexpected" while continuing to 'see and avoid'.    Now @gsxrpilot, about that beer.....

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 201er said:

Speed shouldn’t matter. If everyone would fly a traffic pattern proportionate to their airspeed, everyone could be on the same page. The problem is when someone in a Skyhawk flies a jet pattern, then the whole sequence is shot.

NOPE.   If you are entering the pattern and there are planes in the pattern and you are not a jet, then you blend into the pattern.   So if the Cessna is way out there you just follow them , doing what ever they do.  It's about having better airmanship and watching out for the other guy and not bending metal.   If no planes do whatever bank angle you want.

See that little dandy of a circle.  Well the tail dragger 140 I thought was going to make the first turn off.  Nope.  He did not.  So now what do I do to kill some time to let him keep rolling.    There was a tincy bit of pride when I made the first turn off in the "hard to slow down" "float all the way down the runway" Mooney.   The first turn off landing 34 at brenham is much shorter than landing 16.  You kind of have to be on your game.

I believe for me on downwind the runway is 2/3 out the wing.

 

Screenshot_20190615-094611.png

Edited by Yetti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, PTK said:

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight. 

Bank angles that meet the requirement for a parachute are not prudent in the pattern IMO (which is 60 degrees-that’s from FAR 91.307 (c)). 

My personal max is 45 degrees- if I can’t get it done with 45 degrees, then I’m going around... but I’ve also had extensive aerobatic training, and have flown fighter jets for 18 years... I recommend 30 degrees max for basic VFR pilots until they fully understand what they are doing to their aircraft.

It is not necessarily true that pilots trying to maintain just level flight get themselves in trouble when they bank up the plane.  Otherwise, why would we see so many issues with pilots wrapped up in final auger it in?

the key whenever one is thinking about a stall is to remember that the stall is exclusively all about angle of attack on the airfoil.  That is 100% determined by how much backstick is being commanded for a steady state power setting (thrust=drag, lift=G+Weight, level turn or not).  The problem with adding a bunch of bank, then pulling for all you’re worth to decrease turn radius and increase turn rate isn’t the stall necessarily... it’s an uncoordinated stall into the turn (a skid)... which leads to a departure, and probably a spin.

when descending, your stall speed does change, too, based on angle of bank.  Just as it does when you’re climbing based on angle of bank.  That’s a function of gods G.  Don’t believe me?  Try it out.  Be careful though- the risks of a wrapped up turning descent aren’t just a spin... but also an over stress of the airframe and possible material failure.

Edited by M016576
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Seymour said:

Jim,

Thank you for starting this thread.   As with all contentious threads, I learned quite a bit about the nuanced details of flying my Mooney and what other pilots are thinking while flying, but my biggest takeaway was "expect the unexpected" while continuing to 'see and avoid'.    Now @gsxrpilot, about that beer.....

^This.

I've always assumed that the other pilots that are flying around me have absolutely no situational awareness.  That keeps me vigilant.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this as a failure to employ and respect Murphy’s law. Some student pilot in a pattern - a guy on the radio who sounds like the should have hung up the spurs 29.5 years ago - someone in a non-standard aircraft like a gyrocopter -  all these and many more are red flags for something that may increase my risk exposure.  Remember anything that can be screwed up will be.  Assume the other guy will f up, have your contingency plan ready to execute, and that will keep you safer.  

The other thing I see as a learning opportunity is to use the radio to not just announce position, but deconflict or raise awareness. It’s right there  and if both aircraft have them they should use them to coordinate.

“Mooney is 45 entry to right downwind 36 at KXYZ, I heard a warrior but negative visual contact”

”warrior 1FU turning downwind 36”

”Warrior negative contact..where are you? ”

”midfield downwind”

”OK making a left 360 to rejoin the pattern on a 45, will sequence behind”. 

That takes 5 seconds or radio time and can avoid a lot of grief   

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, PTK said:

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight. 

I don't think Mr. G is implying aerobic wing overs in the pattern but that pilots need to understand how to fly their airplanes and that making a descending thirty to say 45 degree bank with the wing unloaded should not be foreign territory when flying the pattern. Personally I find power off base and final turns with a 30 bank to give very consistent results with a rate of descent between 300 and 400fpm. And if you don't get the result you expect then for shits sake go around.  But it's all about planning knowing where you are relative to the runway and what the winds are doing. As for entering while others are in or approaching the pattern I always make sure I know what and where everyone is and if I'm not certain then I will stay clear until I am. Communication between pilots and making sure position reports make sense you have to assume folks might not know your local ground reference at your home field. 

Just my 1 cents worth.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, bonal said:

I don't think Mr. G is implying aerobic wing overs in the pattern but that pilots need to understand how to fly their airplanes and that making a descending thirty to say 45 degree bank with the wing unloaded should not be foreign territory when flying the pattern.

One of the reasons is sometimes one needs larger bank angles than is prudent, and stall speeds rise accordingly.  The tighter the pattern the larger the bank angle, the higher the stall speed.”

This statement indicates a gross lack of understanding of the concepts. It is statements like these that are at the root of spins from cross control stalls. As in the infamous base to final turn for example. Pilots reading such statements are afraid to bank and set themselves up for a cross control situation of the bad kind, i.e. a skid. Banking is not the problem and it doesn’t increase stall speeds. Stall speeds only increase when g load increases when pilot tries to hold level flight. This is very important and needs to be understood.

Edited by PTK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure but I think you really misunderstood my point in agreement with what you were saying about basic airmanship 

or perhaps I was mistaken as to which statement you were referring to 

Edited by bonal
Misunderstanding
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, PTK said:

Stall speeds only increase when g load increases when pilot tries to hold level flight.

This is not accurate. 

Stall speeds increase when bank angle increases at a higher rate than normal backstick pressure alone (all lift vector against weight+G).  A pilot attempting to increase their turn rate by using elevator thus is increasing angle of attack quicker to a stalling AoA, hence “higher speed.”  This effect doesn’t require level flight, just an angle of bank and an attempt to increase turn rate using elevator. Climbing, or descending... your stall “speed” increases with angle of bank (your wings stalling AoA, however, remains constant.

”holding level flight” is not a prerequisite for this condition.

Edited by M016576
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like that is describing load factor and it’s relationship to stall speed (everyone remembers that graph right?).  PTK is maybe not communicating that in a bank the elevator acting to produce both horizontal and vertical lift components of the wing when banked. That horizontal part of is also loading the wings opposite the lift vector.  Put load factor on the wings and you can stall whether climbing, descending, or level flight in an accelerated stall.  Pulling a turn right with elevator will increase load factor as will trying to hold level altitude.  

I can stall my plane in an accelerated stall when coordinated.  I could also stall it uncoordinated (but I don’t really practice that) with and without acceleration. 

Also I'm betting that the vast majority of those base to final turns were in a constant rate of descent.  But the critical AoA (and stall speed) was still exceeded for the load factor at that descending base to final turn.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, for example  can an airplane be banked at 30 degrees to establish a turn with an understanding you will lose altitude without increasing wing loading or AOA. If I'm at 30 degrees and am pushing the nose down in full coordination with the rudder am I or am I not increasing angle of attack. And if not as long as I know how much radius is needed and how much altitude must be lost and I begin my base to final which for me is usually a single 180 turn at the correct distance and altitude I should be able to safely line up with the runway at my desired GS when I've completed my turn. If not I'm not sure I will ever be able to land again. And for the record my bank angles may vary depending on conditions. I totally understand how wing loading and stall speed is effected when you try to increase  your turn rate by adding up elevator 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bradp said:

Seems like that is describing load factor and it’s relationship to stall speed (everyone remembers that graph right?).  PTK is maybe not communicating that in a bank the elevator acting to produce both horizontal and vertical lift components of the wing when banked. That horizontal part of is also loading the wings opposite the lift vector.  Put load factor on the wings and you can stall whether climbing, descending, or level flight in an accelerated stall.  Pulling a turn right with elevator will increase load factor as will trying to hold level altitude.  

I can stall my plane in an accelerated stall when coordinated.  I could also stall it uncoordinated (but I don’t really practice that) with and without acceleration. 

Also I'm betting that the vast majority of those base to final turns were in a constant rate of descent.  But the critical AoA (and stall speed) was still exceeded for the load factor at that descending base to final turn.  

^yes, this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bonal said:

I'm not sure but I think you really misunderstood my point in agreement with what you were saying about basic airmanship 

or perhaps I was mistaken as to which statement you were referring to 

I'm pretty Peter was referring to one of Steingar's statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, M016576 said:

This is not accurate. 

Stall speeds increase when bank angle increases at a higher rate than normal backstick pressure alone (all lift vector against weight+G).  A pilot attempting to increase their turn rate by using elevator thus is increasing angle of attack quicker to a stalling AoA, hence “higher speed.”  This effect doesn’t require level flight, just an angle of bank and an attempt to increase turn rate using elevator. Climbing, or descending... your stall “speed” increases with angle of bank (your wings stalling AoA, however, remains constant.

”holding level flight” is not a prerequisite for this condition.

I think Peter’s point is that while bank angle can affect AOA, they are independent of one another. Given enough altitude one could theoretically do a slow 8 point roll and attain the same AOA at every point. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Andy95W said:

I'm pretty Peter was referring to one of Steingar's statements.

I’m pretty Peter...

:lol::lol::lol: You leaving just one word out made this sentence was hilarious to me for some reason.

Edited by Shadrach
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2019 at 7:48 AM, Yetti said:

NOPE.   If you are entering the pattern and there are planes in the pattern and you are not a jet, then you blend into the pattern.   So if the Cessna is way out there you just follow them , doing what ever they do.  It's about having better airmanship and watching out for the other guy and not bending metal.   If no planes do whatever bank angle you want.

See that little dandy of a circle.  Well the tail dragger 140 I thought was going to make the first turn off.  Nope.  He did not.  So now what do I do to kill some time to let him keep rolling.    There was a tincy bit of pride when I made the first turn off in the "hard to slow down" "float all the way down the runway" Mooney.   The first turn off landing 34 at brenham is much shorter than landing 16.  You kind of have to be on your game.

I believe for me on downwind the runway is 2/3 out the wing.

Not sure if I'm seeing this right, but did you make your 360 to the inside of the pattern from the base leg?  I would have thought making a 360 to the outside of the pattern would be safer?  You've presumably just cleared your right side looking for traffic on extended final, whereas you've not had a reason to scan the downwind leg behind you?

Also, just to contribute to the apparent thread migration further, I should point out that load factor in a constant rate climb or descent is still 1 G.  It's an accelerated climb or descent that produces a change in load.  If you're descending and your VSI is steady at -500 fpm, you're still at 1 G.  If you're descending and your VSI is decreasing through -500 fpm, you're at less than 1 G.

Simply descending while turning does not protect you against an accelerated stall.  You only have the extra margin created by decreasing your wing loading while your nose is continuing to drop.

Edited by jaylw314
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.