interesting moment yesterday on final

Matt Whiting wrote:
Margy Natalie wrote:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
An aircraft on final has the right-of-way, big jet or 150.


Not if he is 5 mile out!



Distance doesn't matter. If right-of-way is an issue the aircraft on
final
has the right-of-way.

It appears you interpret "right-of-way" to mean "the next aircraft to
land".
That's not what it means. Right-of-way rules come into play only if the
aircraft concerned would otherwise occupy the same piece of sky, or
nearly
so. If you're on downwind when another similar aircraft announces a
long
straight-in you should be well in front of him and right-of-way
shouldn't be
an issue. If it's a faster aircraft then right-of-way may well be an
issue
so you'll have to extend your downwind to follow him.



I prefer the overhead approach, so I can
determine the least disruptive arrival. You approach at pattern
altitude, down the runway, check for traffic on downwind and break to
the downwind. That way, you are not charging into traffic turning base
to final, while you are watching for the airspeed to diminish to drop
the gear, wait for "gear safe" and set up landing. IMHO, the
straight in
ranks among the "least preferred" of approaches.



There's nothing inherently wrong with a straight in approach, it is
often
the safest. The problem is many pilots that believe a full pattern
should
always be flown don't properly scan for traffic.

I don't have a problem with folks flying a straight in as long as they
do it well. I did have issue with the twin who's first announcement
was XXXX final abeam the Cessna when I was on my 2nd pattern of my
FIRST SOLO. I think he was low and in the ground clutter when I
looked up final. About 30 seconds after he announced I say him shoot
past me and well below. When I was a student the other thing that
bothered me a lot was the instrument guys coming in on straight in and
they were playing strictly by the books, but I had NO idea what Rikki
inbound meant. 5 miles out on a straight in would have made so much
more sense to me!

Margy


I was taught to make calls based on distance rather than approach fix
when practicing approaches in VMC at an uncontrolled airport for just
this reason.

Matt
You had a good instructor!

Margy

wrote in message
roups.com...

I guess that depends on your definition of "properly". (Oh, Mr.
Hotshot wants to come in, and he's too important to join the circle
properly, like the rest of us. Better get out of his way!)

Having seen this discussion numerous other places, I conclude that it
will never be "settled".


I think you're right about that. There will always be those that believe
aircraft flying a full pattern have the right-of-way.

I do not think ANYONE is saying that aircraft flying the proper full
pattern have right of way. Rather, they are saying it is more
appropriate is most circumstances, and in almost all cases, safer for
everyone involved.


Excellent timing from AOPA on this subject...
In my email within the past couple days I received this from AOPA:

"In his May 2003 AOPA Pilot feature, "Pattern Perfection," Thomas A.
Horne reviews preferred entries. "It's best to enter the downwind leg
of a nontowered airport's traffic pattern at midfield, on a 45-degree
interception angle. This gives you a good viewing perspective of all
legs of the pattern. You should be at pattern altitude (anywhere from
600 feet agl to 1,500 feet agl—check your airport reference for the
recommended altitude), and your downwind leg should be flown as close
as is comfortable for the airplane you're flying."

Here is a link to the full article:
http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pi...ttern0305.html


Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com

On May 5, 5:59 pm, Mike 'Flyin'8' wrote:
wrote in message
roups.com...

I guess that depends on your definition of "properly". (Oh, Mr.
Hotshot wants to come in, and he's too important to join the circle
properly, like the rest of us. Better get out of his way!)

Having seen this discussion numerous other places, I conclude that it
will never be "settled".

I think you're right about that. There will always be those that believe
aircraft flying a full pattern have the right-of-way.

I do not think ANYONE is saying that aircraft flying the proper full
pattern have right of way. Rather, they are saying it is more
appropriate is most circumstances, and in almost all cases, safer for
everyone involved.

Thank you. I wasn't saying that. I just figured Steven was baiting
me. ;)

"Margy Natalie" wrote in message
...

I don't have a problem with folks flying a straight in as long as they do
it well. I did have issue with the twin who's first announcement was XXXX
final abeam the Cessna when I was on my 2nd pattern of my FIRST SOLO. I
think he was low and in the ground clutter when I looked up final. About
30 seconds after he announced I say him shoot past me and well below.
When I was a student the other thing that bothered me a lot was the
instrument guys coming in on straight in and they were playing strictly by
the books, but I had NO idea what Rikki inbound meant. 5 miles out on a
straight in would have made so much more sense to me!


Perhaps, but "RIKKI inbound" is far more reliable than "five miles out on a
straight-in".

Perhaps, but "RIKKI inbound" is far more reliable than "five miles out on a
straight-in".

It's not helpful to be reliably ineffective.

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.

"Jose" wrote in message
et...

It's not helpful to be reliably ineffective.


It's helpful to be reliably effective.

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

Perhaps, but "RIKKI inbound" is far more reliable than "five miles out on
a straight-in".

Reliable for whom? I doubt RIKKI is on a VFR sectional.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...

Reliable for whom?

For anyone that knows where RIKKI is. How reliable is "five miles out on a
straight-in"?



I doubt RIKKI is on a VFR sectional.

Perhaps not, but many LOMs are on sectional charts.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Reliable for whom?

For anyone that knows where RIKKI is. How reliable is "five miles out on a
straight-in"?


I'm not sure what you're getting at. "Five miles out on a straight-in"
would seem to be understandable to any VFR or IFR traffic in the pattern.
"RIKKI inbound" is not going to mean anything to the VFR guys.

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

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200705/1

In article 72544a98bca67@uwe, "JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe
wrote:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Reliable for whom?

For anyone that knows where RIKKI is. How reliable is "five miles out on a
straight-in"?


I'm not sure what you're getting at. "Five miles out on a straight-in"
would seem to be understandable to any VFR or IFR traffic in the pattern.
"RIKKI inbound" is not going to mean anything to the VFR guys.

perhaps identification of the runway? I don't know, I haven't been
following the entire exchange, so I'm just guessing here...

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)