Flying patterns

Mxsmanic wrote:

This made me think of something else: How many pilots carry
binoculars with them in the cockpit?

I tried as a passenger and it is a *bad* idea for a number
of reasons: very narrow field of vision, it is very
difficult to actually find what you are looking for; shaking,
the aircraft moves and vibrates and shakes; blurs what
you see and can get you hurt as well (binoculars hitting
you hard in the eyes :-) -- and, it is a sure way for
a passenger to get air sick (even someone who is used
to flying);

Can I download the airport directory in PDF?

there are a number of places on the web where you can
download approach plates and airport diagrams; for
instance:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/ and click on the 'free online
product' on the left; AOPA also has something like that
but I don't remember if it is in the public or members
only section of their website;

another source of charts, airport diagrams, etc. for
simmers is your local flying club / airport: these
publication have an expiration date and have to be
renewed often, and are most of the time just thrown
away; if you tell your local pilots that you'd be happy
to recycle these publication to use on a sim I am sure
they'd be happy to oblige.

--Sylvain

to be fair, long straight in approaches in VFR are not uncommon
in controlled airfields, it helps getting people in and out
more effectively -- but then, the controller gets people out
of each others' way. It is in uncontrolled airfields that
things become more interesting :-) especially in the presence
of both VFR and IFR traffic (there are IFR approaches on
non controlled airfields)

--Sylvain

Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
This sounds like you're not quite clear on the distinction between IFR
and VFR. They're essentially like alien planets. Coming straight in and
obeying ATC instructions is the IFR way of doing things. In the VFR
world, pilots decide themselves what they do (as a general rule, there
are exceptions), and they are supposed to fly the traffic pattern when
approaching or departing. I don't know enough about MSFS so I can't
tell how to switch it into VFR mode, but your description sounds like
you're in IFR mode.

Mxsmanic wrote:
T o d d P a t t i s t writes:


It is, but not a lot easier until you get closer.


But getting closer is a Bad Thing, isn't it?

This made me think of something else: How many pilots carry
binoculars with them in the cockpit? Seems like they might be useful
in some circumstances, although obviously flying with one hand on the
yoke and another on the binoculars might not always be practical. It
would ease looking for traffic, and would make it easier to identify
landmarks below from a greater distance for VFR flight.

AGH!!!!! I can't stand this anymore!!! I was not going to feed the
troll, but I can't take it. If I need @#$%& binoculars to see the
frigging traffic I don't have to worry about it. Damn, if a car (10
miles away) is travelling at ... Come on Mxsmanic, buy 1 hour of
flight time (give up eating for a week if you have to) and then come and
ask questions!

Margy

Patterns are defined only loosely. Different speeds are used by
different aircraft or the same aircraft at different times.
Turn locations, turn rate, distance of the legs from the
runway all vary by aircraft and from time to time. The
general idea for non-towered airports is to let the aircraft
space themselves and be able to merge together safely. A
pattern is not even technically required, but most pilots
fly one.


I guess you can space from traffic in front of you or on either side,
but what about traffic behind you? It seems that aircraft have rather
large blind spots as visibility goes.

Also, if you're a big jet and you have a tiny prop aircraft in front
of you, what if you can't slow down enough to avoid overtaking him?


Altitude of the pattern, which may be different for high
speed aircraft or jets.

Direction of turns - left or right.

Sometimes there are published noise abatement procedures,
wind speed/direction or runway slope comments that affect
the direction or positioning of the pattern.


Does noise abatement apply to everyone, or just jets? (I think I
asked this elsewhere, but I don't recall seeing a reply.)


This stuff is in the airport facility directory. Places
like airnav.com and landings.com also have this info.


Can I download the airport directory in PDF?

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 07:06:32 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Sylvain writes:

that's the fun of it :-) it all boils down to see and avoid ...

I don't know that I'd consider avoiding an accident fun; but I suppose

It sure beats not avoiding one!

it prevents one from dozing off.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:13:40 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

T o d d P a t t i s t writes:

It is, but not a lot easier until you get closer.

But getting closer is a Bad Thing, isn't it?

Closer to the airport.


This made me think of something else: How many pilots carry
binoculars with them in the cockpit? Seems like they might be useful

Ahhh...Think I'll pass on that one. Ever use binocs when bounding
around. A friend and I were Salmon fishing on Lake Michigan quite a
few years back This was in a 16' Aluminum boat. It was a pretty
rough day, but he wanted to take a look through the binoculars. He
lasted about 30 seconds, began to perspire and jammed the binocs back
into the case with the comment: "Boy! It wouldn't take much of that to
make a guy sick!"

in some circumstances, although obviously flying with one hand on the
yoke and another on the binoculars might not always be practical. It
would ease looking for traffic, and would make it easier to identify
landmarks below from a greater distance for VFR flight.

Aircraft are relatively easy to see "most of the time" when in the
pattern and particularly if they are all going the same way or
following the same route.

Here, VFR traffic fly's the pattern, but the VOR approach comes in at
half the pattern altitude and on a heading of 137 degrees. which
sometimes surprises the unwary, but most try to make sure every one
knows where they are at all times.



Patterns are defined only loosely. Different speeds are used by
different aircraft or the same aircraft at different times.
Turn locations, turn rate, distance of the legs from the
runway all vary by aircraft and from time to time. The
general idea for non-towered airports is to let the aircraft
space themselves and be able to merge together safely. A
pattern is not even technically required, but most pilots
fly one.

I guess you can space from traffic in front of you or on either side,
but what about traffic behind you? It seems that aircraft have rather
large blind spots as visibility goes.

Most have pretty good visibility straight ahead. For many of us a lot
of pattern flying can lead to a stiff neck from looking for traffic.
Plus we learn to make slight and shallow turns (s-turns) to look for
traffic in all sectors.

Also, if you're a big jet and you have a tiny prop aircraft in front
of you, what if you can't slow down enough to avoid overtaking him?

Another good reason the jets fly a wider pattern and higher pattern.

Altitude of the pattern, which may be different for high
speed aircraft or jets.

Direction of turns - left or right.

Sometimes there are published noise abatement procedures,
wind speed/direction or runway slope comments that affect
the direction or positioning of the pattern.

Does noise abatement apply to everyone, or just jets? (I think I
asked this elsewhere, but I don't recall seeing a reply.)

Normally it applies to every one, but it may apply in a different
manner depending on the size and speed of the aircraft.

This stuff is in the airport facility directory. Places
like airnav.com and landings.com also have this info.

The AFD is a really important source of information. That and now
days it's often a good idea to call the number in the AFD to see in
they have any procedures you need to follow.


Can I download the airport directory in PDF?

I don't know of any, but they are widely available for less than $5.00
USD "I believe". I keep the AFDs, approach charts, low altitude
charts (IFR) and VFR sectionals for all the areas in which I fly.

You can order one along with charts from "Sporty's Pilot Shop" on
line. The online services I use require you be a paying member.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Sylvain writes:

... if you tell your local pilots that you'd be happy
to recycle these publication to use on a sim I am sure
they'd be happy to oblige.

Not if they're from this newsgroup.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Wolfgang Schwanke writes:

The traffic patterns are published nationally, but kinda standardised
in a document called "AIP VFR" which is available on the net in some
countries, but has to be paid for in some others. I doesn't look like
airnav.com has any, but here are some European ones:

France http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv....set_aip_fr.htm
(The form labelled "Accès rapide ...")

Germany http://www.airports.de/index.php?opt...uery&Itemid=67
(not official but almost as good)

Thanks for the pointers, although right now I prefer to avoid anything
European.

This sounds like you're not quite clear on the distinction between IFR
and VFR. They're essentially like alien planets. Coming straight in and
obeying ATC instructions is the IFR way of doing things. In the VFR
world, pilots decide themselves what they do (as a general rule, there
are exceptions), and they are supposed to fly the traffic pattern when
approaching or departing.

Sounds dangerous. Maybe that's why GA has so many more accidents. I
suppose it works if every pilot is very careful and vigilant, but if
one of them isn't ...

I don't know enough about MSFS so I can't
tell how to switch it into VFR mode, but your description sounds like
you're in IFR mode.

It doesn't have modes per se; you just fly the aircraft as you choose.
However, it has a simulated ATC (of very limited scope) for IFR
flights, which I have traditionally used a lot. It lacks most of what
real ATC provides, but it does give instructions that must be
followed, which is a large part of IFR. To fly VFR, you just don't
use the ATC, or you use it only for simple clearances for take-off and
landing or through various classes of airspace (and in simulation the
clearances are pretty much always granted in VMC, so they aren't
hugely challenging).

Still, it's better than earlier versions, where you had no ATC at all.

Chances are you won't see any pattern flying at big airports, because
there IFR dominates. GA (which is mostly VFR) tends to avoid big
airports, and if they do land there anyway they also obey ATC (this is
one of the situations where even VFR does that) who may or may not
instruct the VFR pilot to fly a pattern. If you want to see a typical
VFR traffic pattern, visit a small GA airfield.

I used to live right next to a major airport, so I probably never saw
VFR patterns. I don't live near any airport these days, although I
noticed a lot of GA activity when I go to Versailles; I'm guessing it
comes from Toussus-le-Noble (LFPN), which I think has a lot of
training and GA business, but I'm not sure.

Could be, but why is that a problem?

Thirty seconds doesn't seem like very long to complete a leg,
especially when turns alone make take longer than that.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Sylvain writes:

to be fair, long straight in approaches in VFR are not uncommon
in controlled airfields, it helps getting people in and out
more effectively -- but then, the controller gets people out
of each others' way. It is in uncontrolled airfields that
things become more interesting :-) especially in the presence
of both VFR and IFR traffic (there are IFR approaches on
non controlled airfields)

Does VFR traffic always have the option of a straight-in approach?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

This sounds like you're not quite clear on the distinction between IFR
and VFR. They're essentially like alien planets. Coming straight in and
obeying ATC instructions is the IFR way of doing things. In the VFR
world, pilots decide themselves what they do (as a general rule, there
are exceptions), and they are supposed to fly the traffic pattern when
approaching or departing. I don't know enough about MSFS so I can't
tell how to switch it into VFR mode, but your description sounds like
you're in IFR mode.

Uh, no, that's not it at all.

There are several different distinctions in play here. In short, IFR
(instrument flight rules) is a set of regulations by which ATC keeps you
away from aluminum when you can't do it yourself (such as in a cloud).
Because of this, you can enter cloud when IFR. ATC is generally
required for IFR flight (although there are places you can just take
your chances).

VFR is a set of regulations by which you may not enter cloud or low
visiblity, and in fact have to stay certain distances away from clouds.
You are responsible for separating yourself from aluminum, and you do
it visually. ATC is not =inherenly= required for VFR flight, only
eyeballs are.

Now, more to the point, airports are either "towered" or "non-towered"
(this used to be called "controlled" and "uncontrolled", but somehow the
general public looks askance at "pilots out of control", so they changed
the wording).

At a towered airport, the control tower issues instructions whose
intentions are to keep aircraft separated on the ground, and to sequence
them properly to and from the ground (takeoff and landing).
Instructions must be followed except in emergency, though they may be
questioned and clarified, should that be necessary.

At a non-towered airport, nobody issues instructions. Pilots separate
themselves by looking out the window, and sometimes by reporting their
positions and intentions on the radio for all to hear.

There are traffic patterns at both kinds of airports, and they are
pretty similar.

If weather conditions require flight in the vincinity of a non-towered
airport to be under IFR, then VFR traffic won't (or rather, shouldn't)
exist there at the time, and the IFR flight can arrive or depart even if
there is cloud. Sometimes IFR is required to get near the airport, but
the ceiling is high enough so that VFR flight can still occur down
below. It is up to everyone (including the IFR flight, when it emerges
from cloud) to watch out. Generally, since VFR traffic can't go "near"
the cloud, there is ample time to see and avoid.

The same is true for a towered airport, except that the IFR flight will
be handed off to the tower for sequencing instructions.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Does VFR traffic always have the option of a straight-in approach?


in a controlled airport, you can always ask nicely and
the controller might let you do (straight in, directly
into base, overhead) whatever you fancy (within reason,
traffic allowing, etc.); in an uncontrolled airport,
you join the prescribed traffic pattern (and you keep
your eyes opened)

The key is to avoid surprises and behave in a way which
is as predictable as possible.

--Sylvain