On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:31:46 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
::

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:41:39 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
::

As I was taught, the point of flying safely is to always have a
viable option. So, I fly tight patterns and make power-off landings
as a rule. If I make it to the pattern, I can make it to a runway,
engine or no.

Truly? So when you're #5 in the pattern (which necessitates a
looooong, extended downwind leg) you just fly the pattern at 2,000'
then?

Of course not, one has to use common sense, for example, fly the pattern
slower rather than lower

So your aircraft is slow enough to permit you to remain within gliding
distance of the threshold at normal pattern altitude while four other
aircraft head cross country several miles from the runway? Doubtful.

or hold altitude on that "looooong, extended downwind leg" rather than
descend after crossing the usual abeam point and
turn base within gliding range.

See above.

If you don't guarantee that you can make the runway, who will? ;-)

The power developed by your engine.

At John Wayne airport (a Class C facility) it is not unusual to find
yourself on downwind well outside the surface area during "rush hour"
operations. It's not feasible to remain within power off gliding
distance of the runway threshold at these times. An instrument
approach imposes similar difficulty in maintaining power off gliding
distance to the runway. I can understand how it can reduce exposure
to landing short, but I don't find it often possible except at times
of low traffic density.