Very interesting information in your article, too!

But it would seem you are confusing the importance of having a specific
pattern (fairly low) with the importance of having a consistently flown
pattern (very high).

It appears there are many opinions as to which specific pattern is the
safest. And there may well be specific advantages of one over another.

But the most important safety factor is having everyone fly exactly the same
pattern. And before I get flamed on this, let me give an observation: As I
have studied this thing, I have come to perceive the traffic pattern less as
lines, and more as corridors. Some may fly a "tight pattern"; others a
looser one, but everyone is flying some portion of roughly the same
rectangle. I think it should go without saying that "passing" another
aircraft is a big no-no unless everyone in the pattern is made aware of
what's happening via: radio.

Now to entry points...several pilots here have mentioned flying the pattern
with their head on a swivel, making no assumptions, constantly scanning in
all directions. And I'm sure that many achieve that ideal. Keep in mind that
I'm still a wannabe, but from what I have read and studied, pilot workload
can vary widely depending upon where one is in the pattern. And when
workload goes up or other events occur where one is more focused on the
airplane, they will not be scanning as well as they would at other times.
So, one would hope that entry points would be designed in such a way that
aircraft would enter the pattern at a point where the pilot workload of
other planes in the pattern would be low.

So, to wrap it up, it would appear that what Canada was primarily doing was
reducing the number of entry points while getting rid of one type of entry.
And I'm sure they did so based upon there own safety studies and experience.

Once again, the words of a wannabe, and if there's something I need to learn
please let me know...


"Icebound" wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
Bill Denton wrote:
Excellent information! Thank you very much for posting it!

"Jeb" wrote
It is easier to look up this AC



http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/74c9017c9457e4ab862569d800780551/$FILE/AC90-66A.pdf

which says it all.





I still would like to know why Canada seems to have discontinued the 45
deg entry as of October 1996 and recommends against it in:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/an...new197.htm#MF2



--
*** And yet it is from within that most nations fall ***
- Yeesha, PC game character, (c) 2003 Ubisoft, Cyan