I am not critisizing the method, as a matter of fact is the way I fly patte=
rns. Except for the 45 degree dip angle. Did any one try to actually stand=
at a wall, put one foot in front of the other and move away five or six fe=
et (not steps)? Now look at where the wall joins te floor and imagine there=
is a runway there. Did anyone checked google earth?
I think the problem is that pilots see a dip angle of 30 degrees and think =
it looks like 45 degrees. Any skier will tell you stories of skiing down a =
wall when in reality de slope was well below 45 degrees.
So if you are teaching a student and you are at the right distance and angl=
e, it doesn't matter what you call that angle, that is what is retained in =
his or her mind. So it looks about right, whether you call it 25, 30, 45, o=
r 60 degrees. I'm not worried about it. I am worried about someone actua=
lly trying to fly the downwind at 600 feet.
I talked to an instructor today that told me the same, he uses a 45 degree =
dip angle to the runway. Then he flew a couple of patterns at what I estima=
te was 1200 feet from the runway. I know because I measured 600 feet from t=
he runway and nobody was even close to that line.
So the problem may be a matter of perception and calling 45 degrees what in=
reality is 30 degrees.
Tomorrow I will post what it is said on several books about distances and a=
ngles, including one by the author of the article.