Personally I have a lot more issues with the guys without radios than I do with the definition of what a "standard" pattern is. If the people coming/going to/from the airport do a decent job of position reporting I'll get in line behind them even if they are flying a big pattern. Virtually everybody is faster than me so I yield to their standard. (I'd like to see everybody who won't cough up a couple of hundred bucks for a hand-held radio relegated to private fields. It's these same people who also can't seem to see a plane on final when they want the runway.)
----- Original Message -----From: Edward BensonSent: Friday, October 08, 2010 1:05 PMSubject: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: THE SAFER LANDING PATTERN METHODFrom James Meade:
"Circling, square, straight in, whatever. I use what fits the situationand can do so with safety and consideration for others in each."Maybe its just me, but "consideration for others" is not what comes to mind when I think of another pilot flying "Circling, square, straight in, whatever".Are the other planes in the pattern just supposed to guess what you'll do next time around? Remember, some may not have radios.There's a reason traffic patterns have been standardized over the years - it lets other pilots plan around expected maneuvers by the other planes in the pattern.At non-towered fields, my students are trained to always:1) overfly the field about 500' above pattern altitude (to check wind sock, runway for obstructions/condition/wildlife)2) fly clear of the pattern and then descend to a 45ยบ entry to downwind, and then,3) fly the FAA-defined standard pattern for that fieldAnd that's not just for my students - its the way I fly as well.Fast Eddie B. (Ed Benson - Mineral Bluff, GA)Sky Arrow 600 E-LSA • N467SA
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment