joining the traffic pattern quandary

Bob Gardner wrote:

I'm sure that there are "joining the pattern" incidents somewhere in the US
every day, but for most of us it is not a quandary.

Oddly enough, joining on downwind, by whatever method rarely leads to accidents.
Most midairs in the patter occur on final.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

The question, which you snipped: "The 45 degree turn to downwind
violates
the letter of the law regardless
what the FAA sayeth." violates which law?



Actually, the question was "Which letter of which law?" I did not snip
it.
And the statement was: "The 45 degree turn to downwind violates the letter
of the law regardless what the FAA sayeth"

Do you have such a hard time with reading comprehension, are do you just
enjoying being an asshole? You seem to play the role of parrot; I suppose
being a bureaucrat of sort is an approprate career for you.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Rob Montgomery" wrote in message
...

So, how far out are you when you start "approaching the airport to
land"?

I don't know, but if you're at a point in flight where you are maneuvering
for the purpose of putting the airplane on the ground, then you are
"approaching the airport to land".

Start a slow descent 200 miles out and your are, technically, "approaching
the airport to land".

I'm sure my communications skills are a bit ragged, but man-oh-man,
McNicoll, you really need to get your ego out of your anus.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Y'All,
Gene is right about the possibility of the FAA types being hiding in the
weeds at your local airport.

I landed at Albany, OR about 20 years ago becasue of weather.
Fellow pilot gave me a ride into town and told me his story.

Seem he owned an American Yankee Trainer. He took a lady friend for a ride
and decided to give her a thrill. Thrill consisted of making a low pass
down the runway prior to landing. And he did it and the FAA was watching
and listening.

The FAA approach to improving his flying was to ground him for
90-days. The charge was flying within 500' of another aircraft.
This aircraft happened to be taxiing on a parallel taxiway to the
runway being buzzed.

Pilot compounded his problem by announcing on the CTAF that
he was going to make a low pass down the runway.

My opinion that the situation could've and should've been handled
differently.

Gene Whitt

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

And the statement was: "The 45 degree turn to downwind violates the letter
of the law regardless what the FAA sayeth"


Good. You've learned the diffeence between a question and a statement. I'm
glad to see we're making progress.



Do you have such a hard time with reading comprehension, are do you just
enjoying being an asshole?


Funny, I was questioning your reading ability. What do you believe I did
not comprehend?



You seem to play the role of parrot; I suppose
being a bureaucrat of sort is an approprate career for you.


You are a remarkably poor judge of character.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

Start a slow descent 200 miles out and your are, technically, "approaching
the airport to land".


Absurd. Start a slow descent 200 miles out and you only dempnstrate poor
technique.



I'm sure my communications skills are a bit ragged, but man-oh-man,
McNicoll, you really need to get your ego out of your anus.


So an ignorant jerk thinks I have my head up my ass. I'm okay with that.

"Gene Whitt" wrote in message
nk.net...

Pilot compounded his problem by announcing on the CTAF that
he was going to make a low pass down the runway.

My opinion that the situation could've and should've been handled
differently.


The pilot probably compounded his problem by not "exhibiting a sufficiently
compliant attitude", in the words of an FAA inspector to me.

"Gene Whitt" wrote in message
nk.net...

Y'All,
Gene is right about the possibility of the FAA types being hiding in the
weeds at your local airport.

I landed at Albany, OR about 20 years ago becasue of weather.
Fellow pilot gave me a ride into town and told me his story.

Seem he owned an American Yankee Trainer. He took a lady friend for a
ride and decided to give her a thrill. Thrill consisted of making a low
pass down the runway prior to landing. And he did it and the FAA was
watching and listening.

The FAA approach to improving his flying was to ground him for
90-days. The charge was flying within 500' of another aircraft.
This aircraft happened to be taxiing on a parallel taxiway to the
runway being buzzed.


So he wasn't charged with violating any FAR?



Pilot compounded his problem by announcing on the CTAF that
he was going to make a low pass down the runway.


How could announcing one's intentions compound the problem? Is that not the
purpose of the CTAF?



My opinion that the situation could've and should've been handled
differently.


Only by the FAA, the pilot handled it perfectly.

Gene Whitt wrote:


The FAA approach to improving his flying was to ground him for
90-days. The charge was flying within 500' of another aircraft.
This aircraft happened to be taxiing on a parallel taxiway to the
runway being buzzed.

There's no rule that you can't get within 500' of another aircraft.
However, you can't get within 500' of a person on the ground unless
you're landing.

This isn't an isolated bust. They got a lear pilot making a low pass
on the same charge. Low passes aren't "a lower altitude necessary for
landing" so you better make sure you maintain the minimum altitudes.

500' is plenty low for a low pass.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

Start a slow descent 200 miles out and your are, technically,
"approaching
the airport to land".


Absurd. Start a slow descent 200 miles out and you only dempnstrate poor
technique.

When at FL290 and descending to 2,000 it's like coasting a long way
downhill.

So an ignorant jerk thinks I have my head up my ass. I'm okay with that.

And what is my "ignorance"? I'll bet your are oaky with that. Few people
here make as much apparent effort to be a prick as you seemingly do.

Look in the mirror! Numerous people ask you civil question and you spout
like a pompous windbag. The question becomes whether your comprehension
skills are lacking or your delicate ego is so over-inflated. My guess is the
latter.

Grow up, junior. And shove that ego up your backside.

BTW, large transports, airliners and high flying turbine equipment
frequently begin their descents 200 miles out when having a tailwind. So
who's ignorant and a jerk, huh Sparky?

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO