interesting moment yesterday on final

Cubdriver wrote:
On 29 May 2007 04:52:23 -0700, Denny wrote:

All these maneuvers are legal and appropriate training procedures....

Sure they are. And so is making a right turn after stop at a red light
in most places --- but remember that the other guy has the right of
way!

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.)

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.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## CP-ASEL, AGI
## insert tail number here
## KHAO, KISZ
"Many UNIX utilities have undocumented limitations..."
-- Programming perl, Larry Wall and Randal L. Schwartz

"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?



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?

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

"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.

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

"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.


Again, so what's you point?

"Maxwell" wrote in message
...

Again, so what's you point?


It was stated, "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." The airport can remain legal well after conditions deteriorate to
preclude circling.

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.

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.

"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.