interesting moment yesterday on final

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"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?

While I suppose that's possible, to be VFR, the ceiling at the airport
should be at least a 1,000' (500' above the ground and 500' below the
clouds). All the non-precision approaches I'm familiar with have an MDA
lower than that.


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?

FAR 91.113(g) only says that the aircraft on final has the right of way.
It doesn't say anything about the pattern. It also doesn't say
anything about other aircraft having to wait for a guy on a ten mile
final to land before they can.

Look at it this way. If you are in a car at a stop sign at an
intersection. The crossing street has no stop sign. Cars on the
crossing street have the right of way over cars at the stop sign. If
you see a car coming a half a mile away, you don't have to wait for him.
If he's 100' away, you do.

Right of way only comes into play for conflict resolution. If there is
no conflict, there's no right of way decision to make.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## CP-ASEL, AGI
## insert tail number here
## KHAO, KISZ
"A brute force solution that works is better than an elegant
solution that doesn't work."

Mark T. Dame wrote:
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"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?

While I suppose that's possible, to be VFR, the ceiling at the airport
should be at least a 1,000' (500' above the ground and 500' below the
clouds). All the non-precision approaches I'm familiar with have an MDA
lower than that.

I didn't finish my thought:

If you are on a precision approach in those conditions, you will be at
least 2.5 miles out when you break out (on a steep glideslope).
Normally you will be more than 3 miles out. In either type of approach,
you have plenty of time circle to land if the pattern is full.

So, if there is VFR traffic in the pattern, an arriving IFR plane has
time to transition to VFR and join the pattern without disrupting the
flow. If conditions are so bad that the arriving aircraft can't
transition in time, then it's unlikely that the airport is VFR legal anyway.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## CP-ASEL, AGI
## insert tail number here
## KHAO, KISZ
"For example, no book or "owner's manual" will help you understand
why your 3 year-old daughter rubs toothpaste in your 1 year-old's
hair, or why your children hang their socks in the refrigerator."
-- Advanced C++, James O. Coplien

On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 12:33:49 -0400, "Mark T. Dame"
wrote in :


While I suppose that's possible, to be VFR, the ceiling at the airport
should be at least a 1,000' (500' above the ground and 500' below the
clouds).


Have you overlooked the fact that many, if not most, non-towered
airports lie within Class G airspace (by virtue of the magenta
vignette or not), so according to CFR 14 Part 91 §91.155(a)
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=5edda206c78deab73d9b786f00376b88&rg n=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10&idno=14#14:2.0 .1.3.10.2.5.33
one is required to only remain clear of clouds during daylight hours
(not 500' below)?

Further, CFR 14 Part 91 §91.155(b)(2) Airplane. If the visibility is
less than 3 statute miles but not less than 1 statute mile during
night hours and you are operating in an airport traffic pattern within
1/2 mile of the runway, you may operate an airplane, powered
parachute, or weight-shift-control aircraft clear of clouds.

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

While I suppose that's possible, to be VFR, the ceiling at the airport
should be at least a 1,000' (500' above the ground and 500' below the
clouds). All the non-precision approaches I'm familiar with have an MDA
lower than that.


A ceiling less 1000 feet puts the field below VFR minimums only if it's in a
surface area. Most uncontrolled fields are in Class G airspace where VFR
minimums for airplanes are just one mile visibility and clear of clouds.



FAR 91.113(g) only says that the aircraft on final has the right of way.
It doesn't say anything about the pattern.


Correct, "pattern" does not appear anywhere in the right-of-way rules.



It also doesn't say anything
about other aircraft having to wait for a guy on a ten mile final to land
before they can.


Correct. Right-of-way should not be an issue in that case.



Look at it this way. If you are in a car at a stop sign at an
intersection. The crossing street has no stop sign. Cars on the crossing
street have the right of way over cars at the stop sign. If you see a car
coming a half a mile away, you don't have to wait for him. If he's 100'
away, you do.

Right of way only comes into play for conflict resolution. If there is no
conflict, there's no right of way decision to make.


Correct. I've used similar scenarios myself to explain the right-of-way
rule.

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

I didn't finish my thought:

If you are on a precision approach in those conditions, you will be at
least 2.5 miles out when you break out (on a steep glideslope). Normally
you will be more than 3 miles out. In either type of approach, you have
plenty of time circle to land if the pattern is full.


Nope. Remember, the ceiling is below the circling MDA.



So, if there is VFR traffic in the pattern, an arriving IFR plane has time
to transition to VFR and join the pattern without disrupting the flow. If
conditions are so bad that the arriving aircraft can't transition in time,
then it's unlikely that the airport is VFR legal anyway.


Nope, VFR legal require just one mile visibility.

Further, CFR 14 Part 91 §91.155(b)(2) Airplane. If the visibility is
less than 3 statute miles but not less than 1 statute mile during
night hours and you are operating in an airport traffic pattern within
1/2 mile of the runway, you may operate an airplane, powered
parachute, or weight-shift-control aircraft clear of clouds.

Would this permit departing an airport, remaining clear of clouds within
half a mile of the airport, while climbing or maneuvering to an
otherwise legal VFR position? This could be useful if there are broken
low clouds over an otherwise clearing and VFR area, such as just after a
storm has passed.

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

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

"Maxwell" wrote in message
m...

Why does the aircraft on final have the right-of-way?


Primarily because FAR 91.113(g) says aircraft on final have the
right-of-way.




Agreed. But AC 90-66 describes "final" as the segment between base leg and
the runway. Paragraph 7e clearly states that pilots executing a "straight-in
approach", without mentioning reason for the straight-in approach, will
complete it without disrupting arriving traffic.

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

"Maxwell" wrote in message
m...

I don't know, I'm just posting the info Steven was looking for and how it
reads to me. I actually found this by accident while doing an unrelated
Goggle search.


Steven wasn't looking for the info, Steven has all the info.

Or just thinks he does.




The way I read it you can still do most any kind of approach as long as
you don't disrupt normal traffic in the pattern. But the way I read it,
with
regards to right of way, traffic using the rectangular pattern listed in
the AIM is said to be favored.


Instead of concentrating on material that is not regulatory you might
consider examining some material that is. I suggest FARs 91.113 and
91.126 for starters.


Nothing in either of those FARs indicates you can describe "final" as being
farther away from the airport than the end of "base leg".

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

"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?

Ref AC 90-66a, 7f. Avoid interrupting traffic 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?

Sure it does. Look again.

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

"Maxwell" wrote in message
m...

Aircraft flying a full pattern do have the right of way.


That's not correct.

§ 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing,
have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the
surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force
an
aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting
to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft
are
approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the
lower
altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this
rule
to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to
overtake
that aircraft.



It is correct. AC 90-66 clairifys it very well, and 91.113 is not in
conflict.


Reporting points should be done in miles at uncontrolled airports.


Why?

Per AC 90-66. 7f . Position reports on CTAF should include distance and
direction from the airport.





Everyone should consider aircraft may be correctly operating without
radio
communications.


Yes, or incorrectly operating with radio communications.


http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...h light=90-66


Did you bother to read any of that? Paragraph 8.k states; "Throughout the
traffic pattern, right-of-way rules apply as stated in FAR Part 91.113."

Yep! No conflict.




http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/sa08.pdf


From the Appendix, page 13"

"(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or
while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft
in flight or operating on the surface, except that they
shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft
off the runway surface which has already landed and is
attempting to make way for an aircraft on final
approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching
an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the
lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take
advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is
on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft."


Correct. But an instrument "approach" is an approach, not an instrument
"final".