![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net... | | "Mike O'Malley" wrote in message | ... | | Please explain to me how it is possible to "enter on a 45 to the downwind" | AND "make all turns to the left in the traffic pattern" (that is | paraphrased | from memory). | | | It isn't. The 45 degree entry to the downwind is illegal. No, it is not. The regulation says "unless otherwise authorized," and the 45 degree entry is specifically authorized as a legal maneuver in a document signed by the Administrator (the AIM). The AIM may not be regulatory, but following the procedures in the AIM provides a safe harbor and use of those procedures is to be presumed by the FAA to be in compliance with all federal regulations. May 19, 2000 Pelican's Perch #30: The 45-Degree Zealots http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182100-1.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message ... | | May 19, 2000 | | Pelican's Perch #30: | The 45-Degree Zealots | | http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182100-1.html Good article, but I see nowhere that he says a 45 degree entry is illegal. Contrariwise, he feels that the entry into the pattern is not part of the pattern. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell"
wrote: | Pelican's Perch #30: | The 45-Degree Zealots | http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182100-1.html Good article, but I see nowhere that he says a 45 degree entry is illegal. I quote from that article: "I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..." Todd Pattist (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) ___ Make a commitment to learn something from every flight. Share what you learn. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..." I understand that to mean "ridiculous as it seems, I can ..." We know someone can make a case for it. People do it all the time on this newsgroup. That doesn't make it a good case, especially when the organization that wrote the FARs itself recommends the 45 entry. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote:
"I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..." I understand that to mean "ridiculous as it seems, I can ..." We know someone can make a case for it. People do it all the time on this newsgroup. That doesn't make it a good case, He called it a "very good case." Todd Pattist (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) ___ Make a commitment to learn something from every flight. Share what you learn. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Todd Pattist" wrote in message ... | Cub Driver wrote: | | "I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree | entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..." | | I understand that to mean "ridiculous as it seems, I can ..." | | We know someone can make a case for it. People do it all the time on | this newsgroup. That doesn't make it a good case, | | He called it a "very good case." He can call it a green-eyed lizard if he wishes, but that doesn't make it true. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell"
wrote: "Todd Pattist" wrote in message .. . | Cub Driver wrote: | | "I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree | entry is itself a violation of the FARs,..." | | I understand that to mean "ridiculous as it seems, I can ..." | | We know someone can make a case for it. People do it all the time on | this newsgroup. That doesn't make it a good case, | | He called it a "very good case." He can call it a green-eyed lizard if he wishes, but that doesn't make it true. You understood him to be saying that he thought it was a "ridiculous" case. He didn't use that word, and I don't think he meant that. One doesn't normally call something a "very good case" if one thinks it's a "ridiculous case." My personal opinion is that the FAR clearly states that the 45 left turn is illegal. I also think the FAA finds that to be inconvenient, but too much trouble to change the FAR, so they ignore it. Pilots ignore it too, since we all know the FAA wants us to fly the 45, so it can't be illegal. If push came to shove, the Chief Counsel will probably say that an aircraft making the 45 turn is not yet approaching the airport for a landing. "Interpreting" the language of a law or statute to get the answer you want is a time-honored method. Not enforcing a statute or regulation is also a popular method of ignoring it. Todd Pattist (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) ___ Make a commitment to learn something from every flight. Share what you learn. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:01:58 -0500, Todd Pattist
wrote: He called it a "very good case." Okay. "Ridiculous as it seems, I can make a very good case ..." all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... Good article, but I see nowhere that he says a 45 degree entry is illegal. In about the middle of the article Deakin writes: "In fact, I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree entry is itself a violation of the FARs, since it is ALWAYS in the opposite direction to the established flow of traffic. Since it is the final turn onto the downwind leg, it must certainly be in the "vicinity" of the airport, and therefore covered by the above regs!" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net... | | "C J Campbell" wrote in message | ... | | Good article, but I see nowhere that he says a 45 degree entry is illegal. | | | In about the middle of the article Deakin writes: | | "In fact, I can make a very good case that the classic 45-degree entry is | itself a violation of the FARs, since it is ALWAYS in the opposite direction | to the established flow of traffic. Since it is the final turn onto the | downwind leg, it must certainly be in the "vicinity" of the airport, and | therefore covered by the above regs!" Then in that case I have to disagree with him on that point. It might be interesting to get a couple of FSDO interpretations. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Front louvers for Cherokee/Archer overhead vents? | Bob Chilcoat | Owning | 10 | February 3rd 04 10:19 PM |
Legal question - Pilot liability and possible involvement with a crime | John | Piloting | 5 | November 20th 03 09:40 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |