Question: "Overhead Entry to Downwind?"

"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...

As you have more than adequately informed all of us that the 45 degree
pattern entry is incorrect, would you please advise all of us as to what
you
believe the correct pattern entry procedure to be?


To be precise, I have not stated that the 45 degree entry is correct or
incorrect, just that it runs afoul of FAR 91.126. You'll discover that the
more FAA documents you examine the more inconsistencies you will find.

"Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

The regulation says when approaching to land at an airport without an
operating control tower each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of
that airplane to the left.

Agreed. I submit, that it is legal to make right hand turns
in airplanes at some point during flight after departure and
prior to landing. I also submit that during that period of
time when it is legal to make such right turns that one is
*not* "approaching to land." Consequently, I submit that
there is a dividing line between the "not approaching to
land" when it is legal to turn right and "approaching to
land" when the FAR's prohibit it. That dividing line will
come into play if any of us are ever accused of violating
91.126.

Logically, any turn made for the purpose of
aligning the airplane with the landing runway is such a turn and must be
made to the left. That would include all turns in the pattern and the
pattern entry.

If you are right, then the 45 entry is in violation of
91.126. However, I have my doubts that the application of
"logic" is particularly useful in interpreting the FAR's.:-)
It's probably better to look at the Chief Counsel's
interpretations and the NTSB hearing records

To my knowledge, no pilot has ever been violated for a 45
entry, and many cases have upheld the AIM's recommendations
as good operating practices, so 45 entries are pretty safe
to use, and the disparity between the AIM and 91.126 is
little more than a curiosity that the FAA likes to ignore.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...

If you are right, then the 45 entry is in violation of
91.126. However, I have my doubts that the application of
"logic" is particularly useful in interpreting the FAR's.:-)
It's probably better to look at the Chief Counsel's
interpretations and the NTSB hearing records

To my knowledge, no pilot has ever been violated for a 45
entry, and many cases have upheld the AIM's recommendations
as good operating practices, so 45 entries are pretty safe
to use, and the disparity between the AIM and 91.126 is
little more than a curiosity that the FAA likes to ignore.


Agreed.

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

Just a question - what is this 45 degree entry to downwind we keep
hearing about? I'm from the other side of the world and that's not
something I was taught - instead, like the guys from the UK, I do an
overhead join at an uncontrolled field,

It is part of the recommended approach in the U.S., and is so commonly
used that alternative entries are upsetting to many pilots.

It really doesn't matter how you approach an airport, but it sure
helps if everyone does it the same way.

Since I fly a high-wing airplane, however, I would prefer that people
not descend upon me while I'm in the pattern. As an alternative to the
45, I would choose a mid-field crossover to the downwind, but not if
there's a NORDO aircraft in the pattern. He's expecting traffic to
enter from his right, not his left.

Doesn't matter if you fly with or without a radio you should expect traffic
to enter the pattern anywhere and everywhere. Why do you think NORDO
traffic would only expect traffic to enter from "his right, not his left?"



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..

Since I fly a high-wing airplane, however, I would prefer that people
not descend upon me while I'm in the pattern. As an alternative to the
45, I would choose a mid-field crossover to the downwind, but not if
there's a NORDO aircraft in the pattern. He's expecting traffic to
enter from his right, not his left.

He should be expecting traffic to enter any time from anywhere, just
as you, and every competent pilot, are.

it's also clear
that the FAA recommends a procedure that on its face seems
to be illegal.

What makes it illegal? The requirement to make left turns (except when
making right turns!) is an FAA requirement. No legislature passed this
law.

What the FAA requires, the FAA can amend.

You know that it is not a law. Think: if you bust the requirement,
will the local sheriff come out and arrest you? No. The FAA will lift
your certificate at worst. There is merely an institutional
requirement, and to enforce it there is an institutional remedy. There
is nothing "illegal" about it.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"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

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

What makes it illegal?


FAR 91.126



The requirement to make left turns (except when
making right turns!) is an FAA requirement. No legislature passed this
law.


The US Congress passed the Federal Aviation Act which authorizes and directs
the FAA to develop plans for and formulate policy with respect to the use of
the navigable airspace and assign by rule, regulation, or order the use of
the navigable airspace as necessary in order to insure the safety of
aircraft and the efficient utilization of such airspace.



What the FAA requires, the FAA can amend.


Yes, but they haven't amended the regulation.



You know that it is not a law.


It is law.



Think: if you bust the requirement,
will the local sheriff come out and arrest you?


So only that which the local sheriff might arrest me for is law?



No. The FAA will lift
your certificate at worst. There is merely an institutional
requirement, and to enforce it there is an institutional remedy. There
is nothing "illegal" about it.


Nonsense.

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 14:48:06 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:

snip

Since I fly a high-wing airplane, however, I would prefer that people
not descend upon me while I'm in the pattern. As an alternative to the
45, I would choose a mid-field crossover to the downwind, but not if
there's a NORDO aircraft in the pattern. He's expecting traffic to
enter from his right, not his left.

Doesn't matter if you fly with or without a radio you should expect traffic
to enter the pattern anywhere and everywhere. Why do you think NORDO
traffic would only expect traffic to enter from "his right, not his left?"

Finally, someone who thinks like I do!

If you only expect (and look for) the expected, the unexpected will
get you sooner or later.

There can be an aircraft in distress (emergency) that comes into
the pattern from virtually anywhere.

There can be a pilot who's lost who blunders into a traffic
pattern / area.

An analogy might be trusting other drivers in their cars when they use
signals, merge onto freeways, etc. If you only expect them to do what
they're supposed to do (or what would be deemed logical to do), you're
asking for trouble....

Like defensive driving, defensive flying is the way to go.

Bela P. Havasreti

"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.