Playing By The Rules

[Nearly Retired]

I was in a business jet once, one of those single-pilot Beechcraft Premier jets, flying with a friend. We had his boss in the back and were headed to his private hunting ranch (I won't say where). Up ahead, a military operating area had just gone active. It wasn't a Restricted Area, so we could legally be in it, but ATC wouldn't take us through IFR.

 

The controller wanted to vector us waaaaay out of the way around it. “No dice,” said my friend, who promptly cancelled IFR and started a descent to below 18,000 feet.

 

Trouble was, the clouds were solid underneath us and we were very quickly in IMC. We stayed that way until it became time to descend for the ranch. We broke out around 1,500 feet, having spent perhaps twenty minutes VFR-in-solid-IFR. I was scared to death. My friend wasn’t. He was relying on his TCAS to keep an eye on the military traffic. I haven’t flown with him since.

 

Recently there is a guy who’s YouTube videos I watch. He apparently owns and flies his own business jet, coincidentally another Beechcraft Premier. He often records and posts his flights, using multiple cameras with pretty good editing and interesting narration. His videos are always fascinating to watch.

 

One of his videos caused a problem for me though. He was coming back to his home base airport, which is uncontrolled. Because of the way he was approaching, he elected to make a right-base pattern entry. In the narration, he says that he *could* just go overhead a midfield and enter a left downwind, but because nobody else was in the pattern he’d just enter the right base-to-final.

 

Well, you know me. I couldn’t let that slide.

 

In the first place, FAR 91 dictates that, for airplanes, all turns in the traffic pattern will be made to the left (unless the airport has published procedures to the contrary). Why they made this regulatory, I do not know. But you can read it for yourself in 91.126 (a reg we’re all familiar with).

 

Secondly, I know many fixed-wing pilots who, when approaching an airport from the side opposite the traffic pattern, will come directly overhead the airport at midfield and make a left turn to enter the downwind. This is incorrect. For a while I used to be guilty of this myself until I got my ass chewed by a CFI in an airplane departing the runway I was flying over.

 

The FAR’s don’t specify this, but if you look in Section 4-3-1 of the AIM you’ll find a depiction of the traffic pattern at uncontrolled (i.e. Class G) airports. Nowhere on that diagram do you see an entry to the downwind that takes an airplane directly over the field.

 

Okay, okay, I hear you screeching, “The AIM is not regulatory!” Yes, I know that. But it sets forth the standards and practices that the FAA consider safe and prudent. If something were to bring you to the attention of the FAA (a near-miss involving an aircraft without a radio at a Class G airport, say), the FAA would look to see if *you* were following the procedures outlined in the FAR’s and AIM. If *you* are not, then as Ricky Ricardo would say, you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do!

 

I commented on the Premier pilot’s video, suggesting that his technique might need a review. He replied that yeah, he knew what I was saying, but…I think his words were, “If a tree falls in the forest, does anybody really care?” Or something nonsensical like that. Total cavalier attitude.

 

Which is a shame. I mean, we all make mistakes…we all violate rules to a certain degree. But if you’re going to do that, at least have the decency to not put it up on YouTube for all the world to see, where smartass helicopter pilots can come on and sharpshoot you.

 

Why bring this up on a helicopter pilot forum? Because aviation safety depends on everyone doing the right thing. If I’m approaching an airport from the non-traffic pattern side, avoiding the normal flow of traffic as prescribed in the FAR’s, then I’d like to be sure that some bonehead in a business jet isn’t bearing down on me because he’s too lazy or dumb to enter the pattern properly.

 

We like to think that pilots of big, sophisticated airplanes know and play by the rules all the time, but it’s not true.

[WolftalonID]

Well you should read the FAA publication FAA - H - 8083 - 25B.

Pages 14-2 and 14-3.

Non towered airport operations. ( I have copied and pasted the excerpt for your convenience)

 

"Nontowered Airport

A nontowered airport does not have an operating control

tower. Two­way radio communications are not required,

although it is a good operating practice for pilots to transmit

their intentions on the specified frequency for the benefit

of other traffic in the area. The key to communicating at an

airport without an operating control tower is selection of the

correct common frequency. The acronym CTAF, which stands

for Common Traffic Advisory Frequency, is synonymous

with this program. A CTAF is a frequency designated for

the purpose of carrying out airport advisory practices while

operating to or from an airport without an operating control

tower. The CTAF may be a Universal Integrated Community

(UNICOM), MULTICOM, Flight Service Station (FSS), or

tower frequency and is identified in appropriate aeronautical

publications. UNICOM is a nongovernment air/ground radio

communication station that may provide airport information

at public use airports where there is no tower or FSS. On pilot

request, UNICOM stations may provide pilots with weather

information, wind direction, the recommended runway, or

other necessary information. If the UNICOM frequency

is designated as the CTAF, it is identified in appropriate

aeronautical publications. Figure 14­1 lists recommended

communication procedures. More information regarding

radio communications is provided later in this chapter.

Nontowered airport traffic patterns are always entered at

pattern altitude. How you enter the pattern depends upon the

direction of arrival. The preferred method for entering from

the downwind side of the pattern is to approach the pattern

on a course 45 degrees to the downwind leg and join the

pattern at midfield.

There are several ways to enter the pattern if you’re coming

from the upwind leg side of the airport. One method of entry

from the opposite side of the pattern is to announce your

intentions and cross over midfield at least 500 feet above

pattern altitude (normally 1,500 feet AGL.) However, if large or

turbine aircraft operate at your airport, it is best to remain 2,000

feet AGL so you are not in conflict with their traffic pattern.

When well clear of the pattern—approximately 2 miles–scan

carefully for traffic, descend to pattern altitude, then turn right

to enter at 45° to the downwind leg at midfield. [Figure 14­2]

 

An alternate method is to enter on a midfield crosswind at

pattern altitude, carefully scan for traffic, announce your

intentions, and then turn downwind. [Figure 14­3] This

technique should not be used if the pattern is busy. Always

remember to give way to aircraft on the preferred 45° entry

and to aircraft already established on downwind.

In either case, it is vital to announce your intentions, and

remember to scan outside. Before joining the downwind

leg, adjust your course or speed to blend into the traffic.

Adjust power on the downwind leg, or sooner, to fit into

the flow of traffic. Avoid flying too fast or too slow. Speeds

recommended by the airplane manufacturer should be used.

They will generally fall between 70 to 80 knots for fixed­gear

singles and 80 to 90 knots for high­performance retractable. "

 

This publication used by most flight schools specifically lays out how to enter a traffic pattern by crossing midfield and enterig the downwind. Your old go to way to enter is an FAA prefered method and that CFI was wrong to jump your case and use the AIM as justification. The AIM is just one of several FAA publications to gather information from. Thought you might want to know from another CFI.

[SBuzzkill]

WolftalonID - Thanks I knew I had read that somewhere in there but couldn't remember which paragraph it was in. Interesting that they would not mention that again in the traffic pattern section, instead they chose to simply quote the AIM.

[iChris]

Well, you know me. I couldn’t let that slide.

 

In the first place, FAR 91 dictates that, for airplanes, all turns in the traffic pattern will be made to the left (unless the airport has published procedures to the contrary). Why they made this regulatory, I do not know. But you can read it for yourself in 91.126 (a reg we’re all familiar with).

 

Secondly, I know many fixed-wing pilots who, when approaching an airport from the side opposite the traffic pattern, will come directly overhead the airport at midfield and make a left turn to enter the downwind. This is incorrect. For a while I used to be guilty of this myself until I got my ass chewed by a CFI in an airplane departing the runway I was flying over.

 

The FAR’s don’t specify this, but if you look in Section 4-3-1 of the AIM you’ll find a depiction of the traffic pattern at uncontrolled (i.e. Class G) airports. Nowhere on that diagram do you see an entry to the downwind that takes an airplane directly over the field.

 

Okay, okay, I hear you screeching, “The AIM is not regulatory!” Yes, I know that. But it sets forth the standards and practices that the FAA consider safe and prudent. If something were to bring you to the attention of the FAA (a near-miss involving an aircraft without a radio at a Class G airport, say), the FAA would look to see if *you* were following the procedures outlined in the FAR’s and AIM.

 

The rule would not preclude crossing midfield and then maneuvering back to enter left traffic, if in fact that was the required flow of traffic at the airport.

 

Section 91.126( b )( 1 ) applies to pilots approaching to land at an airport without a control tower and is designed to promote predictable aircraft maneuvers, traffic flows and patterns in Class G uncontrolled airspace. The AIM, while not regulatory, consists of recommended procedures to assist pilots in executing their responsibilities as required by the regulations. Section 91.126( b )( 1 ) does not prohibit a 45-degree right turn from the entry leg onto the downwind leg because we have long considered that this rule does not prohibit maneuvers necessary to safely enter the flow of traffic at the airport. The regulation itself contemplates that right turns may be necessary or required: "... in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right .... " 14 CFR 91.126( b )( 1 ). Chief Counsel to Grossman

 

The FAA emphasizes, however, that the circumstances in which this deviation from §91.126( b )( l ) is "authorized or required" are very limited. The phrase "authorized or required" itself does not give pilots the discretion to deviate from§ 91.126. Such deviation must be "authorized or required" by the approach guidelines of a specific airport or by another FAA regulation.

 

For example, § 91.3( b ) authorizes the pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft to deviate from any rule of part 91 to the extent necessary to resolve "an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action." Although the decision to deviate under these circumstances is within the PIC's judgment, this determination must be made in good faith based on safety concerns and not convenience; failure to do so may result in the suspension of the PIC's certificate. Chief Counsel to John Collins

 

In Administrator vs. Van Dyke; The FAA found a violation of §91.126 by a skydive plane pilot making improper turns on approach in part because it was "quite obvious that Respondent Van Dyke was in a hurry" to land and did not have any safety reason which would require him to deviate from §91.126. This decision resulted in a 45-day suspension of the pilot's commercial certificate.). NTSB ORDER NO. EA-4883

Edited January 18, 2017 by iChris

[Azhigher]

I mean, we all make mistakes […] At least have the decency to not put it up on Vertical for all the world to see, where smartass helicopter pilots can come on and sharpshoot you.

 

Fixed that for you. Good advice. =)

[iChris]

Okay, okay, I hear you screeching, “The AIM is not regulatory!” Yes, I know that. But it sets forth the standards and practices that the FAA consider safe and prudent.

 

This publication used by most flight schools specifically lays out how to enter a traffic pattern by crossing midfield and enterig the downwind.

 

Your old go to way to enter is an FAA prefered method and that CFI was wrong to jump your case and use the AIM as justification. The AIM is just one of several FAA publications to gather information from.

 

That's correct....

 

The word on advisory circular and the AIM…..

 

An advisory circular is a document created by the FAA that is intended to provide guidance to the aviation community about how to comply with the FAA's regulations. As the name implies, an advisory circular is "advisory", and because it is neither a regulation nor an official interpretation of a regulation, an advisory circular has no regulatory effect. Chief Counsel to George Braly

 

The AIM states in its preface, the AIM is not regulatory. It does, however, provide information to assist in compliance with title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, and includes examples of operating techniques and procedures that other federal publications, such as regulations, may require. Chief Counsel to Paul Lockard

Edited January 18, 2017 by iChris

[avbug]

Midfield crosswind entry is perfectly legitimate.

[Nearly Retired]

It appeared to me that the Premier pilot in the video would have gone overhead the field at pattern altitude and turned left to enter the downwind. (You can search it out and watch it yourself if you're interested.) OF COURSE you always have the option of going overhead *above* pattern altitude and then coming back in for a "standard" 45 degree entry. Which seems dumb. Why not just enter an upwind or enter on the crosswind? Simple as cake. And you'll be where people expect to see you.

 

The FAA's other document, the 8083 25B that WolftalonID quoted does mention the technique, but cautions that your speed should be in the neighborhood of 70 to 90 knots. A Beechcraft Premier enters the traffic pattern at a much higher speed than that. So in my mind, the overhead to the left downwind entry would not apply to the Beech jet *and* would be a fairly unsafe procedure in such an aircraft. If CFI's and/or flight schools are teaching this as a primary way of entering the pattern from the non-pattern side, then I think they're making a mistake.

 

But even if there was no speed recommendation, if there was a conflict with a slower airplane, or perhaps one that did not have a radio, then guess who would be the target of the FAA's very pointed questions? Which is all I was saying. Personally, I wouldn't espouse the overhead downwind entry, as it is the last option the FAA talks about.

 

Actually, as long as you make all your turns to the left, you can do anything you want as long as there are no other aircraft in the pattern. But...since aircraft at Class G airports are not required to have radios, how do you *know* if the pattern has traffic or not? Obvious answer: You don't. As iChris points out, the overhead to the downwind entry is not considered one of the FAA's best practices since it's not listed in the AIM.

 

But there's the other issue - the more important one. The right-base entry to final actually is, however, directly contrary to the FAR's. And that is the maneuver the Premier pilot did perform. *That* was the dirty laundry I suggest people shouldn't air on YouTube. Apparently some of you are too dense to get that. So Azhigher, you can go screw yourself, babe.

 

And then ol' reliable Avbug chimes in, as usual, with his little one-liner about how the overhead downwind entry is perfectly okiedokie. Jesus H. Christ. Apparently he didn't even fully read this thread. (How did he even see this post? I thought he blocked me! I was kind of hoping he'd keep his big, intrusive nose out of it. But no...)

 

Like I said, you can do anything you want until there's a problem. Whichever way a fixed-wing pilot enters the traffic pattern is of little importance to us helicopter pilots. Unless they have a midair right over our heads and the wreckage comes raining down on our helicopter.

 

All this is probably quite boring to helicopter pilots. But again I reiterate: Don't expect fixed-wing pilots to know the rules or follow them. When they're in a hurry they do whatever they want.

 

P.S. The reason I got chewed out so many, many, many years ago was this: There was a flight school on the field and the pattern was busy. And the field had a really long runway. And here comes ol' Bob, crossing at midfield in my Cessna. Where I was, departing aircraft were already airborne and climbing out. My stupidity put my airplane closer to departing traffic (and traffic already in the pattern) than the CFI on the ground thought was prudent. And I agree...well, now I do but at the time I did not. Here I thought I was being perfectly legit (as Avbug might say) but I wasn't. It was dumb and indefensible.

[avbug]

From the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, previously cited by WolftalonID:

 

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/media/16_phak_ch14.pdf

 

An alternate method is to enter on a midfield crosswind at pattern altitude, carefully scan for traffic, announce your intentions, and then turn downwind. [Figure 14-3] This technique should not be used if the pattern is busy. Always remember to give way to aircraft on the preferred 45° entry and to aircraft already established on downwind.

 

 

Entry on the midfield crosswind with a direct turn to the downwind is an acceptable method of pattern entry.

 

This has always been the case, and has not changed.

Edited January 18, 2017 by avbug

[iChris]

[Eric Hunt]

Advisory publications are truly just for advice.

 

But when you go to court, and the judge asks why you did not follow this advice, you better have all your ducks lined up and of the right colour.

[SBuzzkill]

Was this one of Premier 1 Driver's videos?

[helonorth]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. The reason I got chewed out so many, many, many years ago was this: There was a flight school on the field and the pattern was busy. And the field had a really long runway. And here comes ol' Bob, crossing at midfield in my Cessna. Where I was, departing aircraft were already airborne and climbing out. My stupidity put my airplane closer to departing traffic (and traffic already in the pattern) than the CFI on the ground thought was prudent. And I agree...well, now I do but at the time I did not. Here I thought I was being perfectly legit (as Avbug might say) but I wasn't. It was dumb and indefensible.

 

Okay, so you told us what not to do. So how, exactly, are you supposed to join the pattern in an airplane? Since this is/was a helicopter forum, here is my answer.

 

91.126((2) - "Each pilot of a helicopter or powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft."

[SBuzzkill]

Well, if you don't know how airplanes are entering the pattern how are you going to avoid their flow?

[helonorth]

Well, if you don't know how airplanes are entering the pattern how are you going to avoid their flow?

 

Good point!

 

I guess if they are landing south and you are coming from the west, you have to go find another airport!

[Azhigher]

So Azhigher, you can go screw yourself, babe.

 

Aw shucks. Wasn't trying to get your goat, just pointing out that if you go on the internet to nitpick lord knows the internet will nitpick you right back.

[Jaybee]

Meh, alter course vector 3 degrees and call 5 mile final for the straight in

[WolftalonID]

Advisory publications are truly just for advice.

 

But when you go to court, and the judge asks why you did not follow this advice, you better have all your ducks lined up and of the right colour.

Problem I have is I dont have rows, or ducks, just squirrels and their drunk.

[iChris]

1. The controller wanted to vector us waaaaay out of the way around it. “No dice,” said my friend, who promptly cancelled IFR and started a descent to below 18,000 feet.

 

Trouble was, the clouds were solid underneath us and we were very quickly in IMC. We stayed that way until it became time to descend for the ranch. We broke out around 1,500 feet, having spent perhaps twenty minutes VFR-in-solid-IFR. I was scared to death. My friend wasn’t. He was relying on his TCAS to keep an eye on the military traffic. I haven’t flown with him since.

 

2. One of his videos caused a problem for me though. He was coming back to his home base airport, which is uncontrolled. Because of the way he was approaching, he elected to make a right-base pattern entry. In the narration, he says that he *could* just go overhead a midfield and enter a left downwind, but because nobody else was in the pattern he’d just enter the right base-to-final.

 

These two fix-wingers did not play by the rules, in both cases, violations were committed. In the first §91.173 & §91.13, in the second, §91.126 & §91.13.

 

Rationalization - is a subconscious technique for justifying actions that otherwise would be unacceptable. When true rationalization takes place, individuals sincerely believe in the plausible and acceptable excuses which seem real and justifiable.

 

FAA documents 5 common unsafe attitudes pilots undertake during the "Rationalization Mode" to help justify the need for committing an intentional violation. Anti-Authority attitude, macho attitude, impulsivity attitude, invulnerability attitude, and Resignation attitude.

 

It's fairly easy to commit a violation of §91.13...

 

With respect to your first two questions, 14 CFR § 91.173 requires an IFR flight plan and ATC clearance in controlled airspace but is silent with respect to uncontrolled airspace. Per this regulation and assuming an IFR capable aircraft and pilot, it would also be permissible to fly in IMC without a clearance. However, § 91.13 prohibits operating an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner, and the NTSB has previously ruled that under certain conditions, "takeoff into clouds without an ATC clearance or release was 'extremely dangerous' and in violation of section 91.13( a ). Chief Counsel to Daniel Lamb (APR 19, 2016)

 

Potential endangerment is sufficient to find a violation of section 91.13. See, e.g., Haines v. DOT, 449 F.2d 1073, 1076 (D.C. Cir. 1971). The fact that respondent flew a right-handed traffic pattern when he knew that the runway called for left traffic clearly created the potential for a mishap. See Administrator v. PABLO SPERONI; Docket SE-15018 (October 1998)

Edited January 20, 2017 by iChris

[Spike]

All this is probably quite boring to helicopter pilots. But again I reiterate: Don't expect fixed-wing pilots to know the rules or follow them. When they're in a hurry they do whatever they want.

 

 

Not only do I expect them to do the incorrect thing, I also expect them to make a plausible attempt to kill me….. Fixed wing, helicopters, UAV’s and ATC alike…… No matter the reason i.e. conscious decision, hazardous attitude or a flat out mistake, I trust no one simply because they are human and human’s will error…..

Edited January 19, 2017 by Spike

[helonorth]

You best not go flying then as you are probably human...

[helonorth]

Only one problem with the whole scenario...MOA's only go to 18,000'. I guess I don't understand the situation as it seems like insanity to do what they did.

Edited January 19, 2017 by helonorth

[brian74]

 

Not only do I expect them to do the incorrect thing, I also expect them to make a plausible attempt to kill me.. Fixed wing, helicopters, UAVs and ATC alike No matter the reason i.e. conscious decision, hazardous attitude or a flat out mistake, I trust no one simply because they are human and humans will error..

This is what should be written in the AIM. Common sense always prevails. I have seen some incredibly stupid sh*t. Most of the fixed wing students out here cannot even speak understandable English over the radio when they do actually decide to key their mikes.

[Nearly Retired]

Only one problem with the whole scenario...MOA's only go to 18,000'. I guess I don't understand the situation as it seems like insanity to do what they did.​

 

 

It's not a problem. The ranch/runway we were headed to was within the overlay of the SUA. We were going to have to descend through it, and the controller wasn't having it. He wanted to vector us around so that we'd stay clear of it during our descent. I don't know exactly what would have happened because the pilot cancelled IFR and we went on our own.

 

Thank you for your concern.