Question from a new flight student (whopping 7 hours!)

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:20:38 GMT, zatatime
wrote:

I've always assumed an 800' pattern
if I didn't see an entry (and have never had a problem), but what you
wrote seems to show a different standard than I was taught.

I took my flight lessons & ground school in 1997. I was told to assume
1,000 feet--even though I fly from an airport with 800 feet TPA!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:33:04 GMT, zatatime
wrote:

Nope. Many airports (and most I fly in and out of) use an 800 foot
TPA, which is the original "standard TPA."

I didn't know that! God, I love newsgroups!

Makes sense. 800 feet is certainly the right TPA for a Cub.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

zatatime wrote in message . ..


(This may be wrong but,)I believe when a TPA is not explicitly stated
in the AF/D the expected TPA is 800' AGL.


That was probably correct 10 or so years ago, but the new standard
TPA is 1000' AGL if not stated in the AFD. The AIM was changed to
reflect this.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

On 18 Oct 2004 10:12:52 -0700, (John Galban)
wrote:

(This may be wrong but,)I believe when a TPA is not explicitly stated
in the AF/D the expected TPA is 800' AGL.


That was probably correct 10 or so years ago, but the new standard
TPA is 1000' AGL if not stated in the AFD. The AIM was changed to
reflect this.


I agree the AIM gives a new standard, but in my experience the AF/D
has not kept up with this change. Most airports I've seen that do not
have a TPA listed have an 800' pattern.

Not trying to be contrary, I don't mind the 1000' standard, just seems
that the FAA needs to be told to change the AF/D for a bunch of
airports.

z

Most airports I've seen that do not
have a TPA listed have an 800' pattern.

Not trying to be contrary, I don't mind the 1000' standard, just seems
that the FAA needs to be told to change the AF/D for a bunch of
airports.


I agree. However I bet the FAA expected the airports to just change their
pattern.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

On 19 Oct 2004 00:35:48 GMT, (Teacherjh)
wrote:

However I bet the FAA expected the airports to just change their
pattern.


Probably, and I'll bet through osmosis as I'm sure they didn't
communicate the change to any operators.

z

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:59:38 -0400, Corky Scott
wrote:

How's that? If you look at the field elevation on the sectional, and
add 1000 feet, that's the pattern altitude isn't it? Are there lots
of airports that specify a non standard pattern altitude?

Many of them, especially small ones. The airport I fly from has a
field altitude of 100 feet and a TPA of 900.

I have the essential information on 10 airports on my knee-board. On
six of them your system would be correct. The others vary from the
thousand-foot rule by anywhere from 65 feet to 200 feet.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

"zatatime" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:38:52 -0600, Newps
wrote:

I'm going to 1000 feet.

This would put you at the wrong altitude at a great deal of airports.
Doesn't causing a safety hazard bother you?

It probably would bother him if it posed a safety hazard.