"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message
...

That's the key, the way I read it. Traffic flying the full recommended
pattern has the right of way of traffic not flying the full pattern. That
includes those making base leg entries, straight into downwind entries,
and straight in approaches (both visual and instrument, be it practice or
actual). (All of that assumes the airport is above the VFR minimums. If
it isn't, then IFR rules apply and "right of way" is theoretically a
non-issue because ATC handle sequencing the departures and arrivals.)


The airport can be above VFR minimums but still require an instrument
approach, imagine good visibility under a low overcast. What's an arriving
IFR aircraft supposed to do if he's still in cloud at the circling MDA and
there are VFR aircraft in the pattern?



Basically, you can fly whatever you want, but only if it doesn't conflict
with traffic established in the recommended pattern. That holds true any
time you enter the pattern. Even when using the recommended 45 degree
mid-field downwind entry, traffic already on the downwind (presumably from
a take off staying in the pattern) has the right of way and it's your
responsibility to time your entry so as not to interfere with existing
traffic. So for a straight in approach, if there's no one in the pattern
or you can make the approach without interfering with those who are, then
go for it. If not, it's your responsibility to figure out how to sequence
yourself into the traffic flow without causing a conflict.

All of that said, flying a proper pattern doesn't give you the right to
cut off someone flying a straight in approach. That's the gist of the FAA
ruling someone posted elsewhe the guy was violated for intentionally
cutting off aircraft making straight in approaches or really long
downwinds. That's a no-no.

Finally, there is no FAR one way or the other. Just the AC and the ASF
publication. Bottom line: the traffic pattern is no place for a ****ing
contest. Just be courteous to those around you and pay attention for
those who aren't.


FAR 91.113(g) does not exist? Where the hell do you get your information?