No more "Left Downwind"?

Properly done, redundancy adds to safety.

We're talking about useless information, not redundancy, even though I
suppose that's a form of useless information. Many people feel that
their transmissions are "appropriate length" yet others are
exasperated that the guy is tying up the frequency with irrelevant
details.

Since our goal in communications is usually to provide others with
information they need, they're logically the best ones to determine
whether or not our transmissions are "appropriate length." The AIM is
a good starting point and it emphasizes brevity and I suspect most
pilots value that as well.

Here are the steps I find useful:

1) Think about what you're going to say
2) Remove the noise words
3) Delete details the listener doesn't care about
4) Substitute standard phraseology
5) Press the PTT
6) Say it
7) Release the PTT

Granted, I don't go through all those steps on every transmissions,
but I do this analysis with students to help them communicate more
clearly. Over time, it becomes automatic.

Those pilots who say what needs to be said, no more, no less, are
wonderful to listen to.

Sylvain wrote in
t:

Jay Honeck wrote:

...
In his opinion (and, apparently, the FAA's), saying "left downwind" is
redundant, since everyone should know that the pattern is left (or
right, if appropriate) hand traffic.
...
What do you guys think?

I remember having had a somewhat related discussion with some
CAP folks concerning operations in non-controlled airfields. Now
reading your piece, I went back to the regs just to make sure I
was not imagining things. The one that talks about operating on
or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace, 14 CFR 91.126,
specifies, in its subparagraph (b) the direction of turns. Ok, it
seems clear enough, one should turn left unless indicated otherwise.

However, the subparagraph (a), as a general introduction, has
the following magic words in it: "Unless otherwise authorized
or required..." -- what does it mean exactly? Notice that
unlike other parts of this chapter which use a similar wording,
it does NOT say 'unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC',
i.e., it does not mention ATC until subparagraph (d).

My interpretation -- which might very well be mistaken, please
correct me -- is that if someone has a compelling reason to do
something different, whatever it might be, it is his or her call.
Am I completely off here? seriously?



--Sylvain

I suspect the "unless otherwise authorized or required" refers to
situations where IFR requires one thing while VFR requires the other. Take
a look at Watsonville (WVI). All runways are left hand traffic. If you
are on the VOR/DME GPS A approach, you must circle to land and the approach
chart states "Circling not authorized west of Rwy 2-20." VFR to Rwy 2 is
left hand traffic, while an IFR approach circle-to-land on Rwy 2 will be
right hand traffic.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

kontiki wrote in
:

Jay Honeck wrote:


What do you guys think?

I agree with the FAA. I've never added the "left" or "right" into
my radio calls *unless* I am entering the pattern in a non-standard
way. It really is redundant as according to FARs you are supposed to
be familiar with runway information at the destination airport in
advance of your flight.



Ok. On a MVFR day, someone is practicing pattern work at KWVI. The
wind favors Rwy 2, which is left hand traffic. Meanwhile, someone is
practicing the VOR/DME approach, which is circle-to-land to any runway.
The chart notes that circling is prohibited west of Rwy 2-20. So, you now
have one aircraft on left downwind to 2 and another on right downwind to 2.
Both pilots are familiar with the airport, the runway, the traffic
pattern and are both following the standard required for the approach they
are flying. Both pilots are flying a standard approach. Are you saying
that there is no value in stating "left" or "right" downwind?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Jay Honeck wrote:


What do you guys think?
--

I think you and mary have a healthy attitude toward safety. Dont change.

Dave

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ...
..
:
: When I first read that, I was in agreement, but considering that a
: pilot has the option to enter the pattern at his discretion from any
: point, perhaps omitting the word 'left' might cause others to check
: both downwind legs thus overcoming any ambiguity possibly introduced
: by those pilots who don't know their right from their left.
:

Hmmm, good thought, make us check all the possibilities...

"Emily" wrote in message ...
: Jose wrote:
: (Ok, so I had a startlingly good conversation with our PMI today,
: which slightly rekindled my faith in the FAA....probably not deserved)
:
: Care to share?
:
: Jose
: Oh, nothing piloting related...we had a SUP show up on the doorstep last
: week and he's going to help us do everything we can to figure out where
: it came from and what to do with it. I just wasn't expecting that kind
: of support...I'm used to the FAA either blowing me off and jumping in
: and taking over. I've been fairly impressed by this particular FSDO.

Well, that SUP program is one of their pet projects, so I am sure you will get all kinds of help finding the source -
that helps to justify their existence.

"Wizard of Draws" wrote in message
news:C11E7430.92095%jeffbREMOVETHIS@REMOVEALSOwiza rdofdraws.com...

: Jay asked us what we thought. Reason enough as any to start a debate here,
: as Jay well knows, especially if it's about something trivial. The smaller
: the nit, the longer the thread. Jeff's Law.
:


I like that, I hadn't heard of the law, and it does seem to be true...Jeff's law, eh? Thanks!

Emily schrieb:

Maybe they are doing a last check of the runway alignement?

Or making sure they are on the right runway...

There are those who grasp irony and there are those who don't.

Stefan

Steven P. McNicoll schrieb:

Maybe they are doing a last check of the runway alignement?

That wouldn't require them to stop.

Depends on the length of the runway. And on the student's experience.

Jose schrieb:

When would an operating control tower not induce class D (or better)
airspace? When would a class D airspace not have a control tower?

I can't give you an example in the USA, but where I live, there are
controlled airports without a control zone.

Controlled airfield means the tower controls the runway. Control zone
means the controller controls the traffic around the airfield. These two
are not nessecarily related. (Although they typically come together.)

Stefan