Bob Turner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2018
- Messages
- 2,826
This might get long - I think I will submit it to my flying club newsletter.
So we train pilots - one cross country dual, and one solo, and they get a license, hopefully. We may get one shot at teaching proper pattern entry, and lately the AIM has become less than helpful, if it is even read after the checkride.
I just did two flight reviews - one for a fairly recent pilot; the other for a Cub pilot with over 20 years experience. Both involved multiple different uncontrolled airports.
Here is my take on uncontrolled airports. It is different from the AIM, but I bet I have more experience at this than all the folks who write the AIM uncontrolled airport guidelines combined! First, always assume there are "no radio" airplanes around, and never assume that anybody will answer your radio calls.
Unless it is your airport, plan on some sort of standard pattern entry. I do not care for the new 1000' patterns, but I think we have to conform, unless we are sure the airport specifies 800'. I always overfly, partly to see the windsock and fuel island, but also to look for other traffic - unless some nice soul has said "Winds 230 at ten; everybody is using runway 24, left traffic" or something similar.
If I overfly, I usually do so maybe 200' above pattern altitude. Then I enter either upwind or crosswind. Any other entry is cutting corners, in my opinion. It only takes two more minutes. Lately, there has been a lot of sentiment for only entering on the outside 45 to downwind. That entry can potentially involve descending aircraft doing interesting teardrop maneuvers, and I only use it when I am coming from an appropriate direction and sure of the runway in use. I am at pattern altitude before three miles, and looking for weird teardrop descents.
Radio calls - here is where I really differ from the AIM. Unless you are in a jet, wait until you are four miles out to call. Then briefly identify yourself and what you are about to do, followed by the airport name. Like this:
"Yellow Piper Cub four miles East landing Deming". Period. If they need to know your N-number instead, tell them you would rather they not come close enough to see if you are really who you say you are. (Just kidding here - if they really need to know your N-number, they can ask, and you can easily tell them. Once.) Then, when you decide what kind of entry you are going to do, let them know. At Hemet, we know they are using 23, and we know where the fuel is, so most of us say " Yellow Cub entering the 45 for runway 23 Hemet.
This particular opinion has generated a lot of discussion. The AIM suggests using only N-number, which is less than informative for other aviators. One might as well say "aircraft". Several commenters have said that the N-number is critical for record keeping and federal funding. I am not sure that even a fraction of uncontrolled airports keep such records. If it becomes clear that this is truly important information on each transmission, then only the full call sign will do. Further research might be necessary.
Noticce how short my calls are. In Southern California we have a lot of folks learning English on the radio, so I try to leave room for them. That is true at towered airports too - I repeat runway assignments with my N-number, and skip the complicated stuff. Most have been instructed to read back every word, so we get "cleared to land behind the King Air on right base, caution wake turbulence, Cessna 123." when a simple "two eight right number 2" would do it. Leaving the runway number out is unforgiveable in my book. It is not yet illegal, but it soon will be. Another idea - when a controller says "standby" he or she means I will get back to you. The proper response is nothing. Be quiet and wait. We often hear as a response, "standby, hold sort of 28 right, number three for departure". Defeats the whole purpose of "standby".
But back to the uncontrolled field: once you scope the situation out, maintain pattern altitude until you are downwind abeam the approach end of your chosen runway. Then - and only then - start your descent to land. You should complete your landing chcklist well before the descent point, and you should be at approach speed for flaps up when you begin the downwind leg.
Remember - you lose 1/3 of your altitude on downwind after the abeam point, one third on base, and the last third on final.
The AIM can be helpful - it suggests being stable on final not less than 1/4 mile from the threshold. A Cub or Champ, at idle from the abeam point, will usually be so established.
In the pattern, or on departure, the AIM recommends being within 300' of pattern altitude and beyond the departure end before turning. That may not work well in a crowded pattern. At our tower controlled airport I ask for early turns in the lower powered airplanes. Picture me and another 190 lb pilot in a 65 hp Chief - we will be a mile and a half west of the airport before we reach the proper altitude for a turn. If you find yourself in that position, remember, you are a sitting duck for a Cirrus or Bonanza smoking out behind you. Have a plan.
So what inspired all this verbosity? My students. One was shooting very short patterns at 500' agl. After 20 years, that was a tough habit to break. It is not clear that I have been successful.
Be precise. Look for "no radio" aircraft. Watch for your fellow pilots doing non-standard stuff (the worst is "straight in"). And discipline yourself to stay at pattern altitude until the abeam point. Find an older document that describes standard arrivals including upwind and crosswind entries, and remember, when these entries were standard, most flying was no radio - at least in light planes.
Of interest: one comment was to the effect that "uncontrolled" is now disfavored by those who sit behind desks and decide this stuff. That is apparently because the word connotes "out of control" rather than not controlled. I, being a really old codger, am not in favor of re-defining stuff in such arbitrary fashion. I note that there can no longer be taxiways "india" and "oscar" because pilots might confuse them with runways one and zero. These same pilots are treated to "line up and wait", which really is ambiguous. I think "line up and wait" is a decade old, and yet every day our tower has to explain it to somebody ("It means 'position and hold' "). So I shall continue to use the older "uncontrolled" term until they threaten me with a violation.
More later. I am just going to add by editing, so if interested, check back here. Last edit Oct 18, 2018.
So we train pilots - one cross country dual, and one solo, and they get a license, hopefully. We may get one shot at teaching proper pattern entry, and lately the AIM has become less than helpful, if it is even read after the checkride.
I just did two flight reviews - one for a fairly recent pilot; the other for a Cub pilot with over 20 years experience. Both involved multiple different uncontrolled airports.
Here is my take on uncontrolled airports. It is different from the AIM, but I bet I have more experience at this than all the folks who write the AIM uncontrolled airport guidelines combined! First, always assume there are "no radio" airplanes around, and never assume that anybody will answer your radio calls.
Unless it is your airport, plan on some sort of standard pattern entry. I do not care for the new 1000' patterns, but I think we have to conform, unless we are sure the airport specifies 800'. I always overfly, partly to see the windsock and fuel island, but also to look for other traffic - unless some nice soul has said "Winds 230 at ten; everybody is using runway 24, left traffic" or something similar.
If I overfly, I usually do so maybe 200' above pattern altitude. Then I enter either upwind or crosswind. Any other entry is cutting corners, in my opinion. It only takes two more minutes. Lately, there has been a lot of sentiment for only entering on the outside 45 to downwind. That entry can potentially involve descending aircraft doing interesting teardrop maneuvers, and I only use it when I am coming from an appropriate direction and sure of the runway in use. I am at pattern altitude before three miles, and looking for weird teardrop descents.
Radio calls - here is where I really differ from the AIM. Unless you are in a jet, wait until you are four miles out to call. Then briefly identify yourself and what you are about to do, followed by the airport name. Like this:
"Yellow Piper Cub four miles East landing Deming". Period. If they need to know your N-number instead, tell them you would rather they not come close enough to see if you are really who you say you are. (Just kidding here - if they really need to know your N-number, they can ask, and you can easily tell them. Once.) Then, when you decide what kind of entry you are going to do, let them know. At Hemet, we know they are using 23, and we know where the fuel is, so most of us say " Yellow Cub entering the 45 for runway 23 Hemet.
This particular opinion has generated a lot of discussion. The AIM suggests using only N-number, which is less than informative for other aviators. One might as well say "aircraft". Several commenters have said that the N-number is critical for record keeping and federal funding. I am not sure that even a fraction of uncontrolled airports keep such records. If it becomes clear that this is truly important information on each transmission, then only the full call sign will do. Further research might be necessary.
Noticce how short my calls are. In Southern California we have a lot of folks learning English on the radio, so I try to leave room for them. That is true at towered airports too - I repeat runway assignments with my N-number, and skip the complicated stuff. Most have been instructed to read back every word, so we get "cleared to land behind the King Air on right base, caution wake turbulence, Cessna 123." when a simple "two eight right number 2" would do it. Leaving the runway number out is unforgiveable in my book. It is not yet illegal, but it soon will be. Another idea - when a controller says "standby" he or she means I will get back to you. The proper response is nothing. Be quiet and wait. We often hear as a response, "standby, hold sort of 28 right, number three for departure". Defeats the whole purpose of "standby".
But back to the uncontrolled field: once you scope the situation out, maintain pattern altitude until you are downwind abeam the approach end of your chosen runway. Then - and only then - start your descent to land. You should complete your landing chcklist well before the descent point, and you should be at approach speed for flaps up when you begin the downwind leg.
Remember - you lose 1/3 of your altitude on downwind after the abeam point, one third on base, and the last third on final.
The AIM can be helpful - it suggests being stable on final not less than 1/4 mile from the threshold. A Cub or Champ, at idle from the abeam point, will usually be so established.
In the pattern, or on departure, the AIM recommends being within 300' of pattern altitude and beyond the departure end before turning. That may not work well in a crowded pattern. At our tower controlled airport I ask for early turns in the lower powered airplanes. Picture me and another 190 lb pilot in a 65 hp Chief - we will be a mile and a half west of the airport before we reach the proper altitude for a turn. If you find yourself in that position, remember, you are a sitting duck for a Cirrus or Bonanza smoking out behind you. Have a plan.
So what inspired all this verbosity? My students. One was shooting very short patterns at 500' agl. After 20 years, that was a tough habit to break. It is not clear that I have been successful.
Be precise. Look for "no radio" aircraft. Watch for your fellow pilots doing non-standard stuff (the worst is "straight in"). And discipline yourself to stay at pattern altitude until the abeam point. Find an older document that describes standard arrivals including upwind and crosswind entries, and remember, when these entries were standard, most flying was no radio - at least in light planes.
Of interest: one comment was to the effect that "uncontrolled" is now disfavored by those who sit behind desks and decide this stuff. That is apparently because the word connotes "out of control" rather than not controlled. I, being a really old codger, am not in favor of re-defining stuff in such arbitrary fashion. I note that there can no longer be taxiways "india" and "oscar" because pilots might confuse them with runways one and zero. These same pilots are treated to "line up and wait", which really is ambiguous. I think "line up and wait" is a decade old, and yet every day our tower has to explain it to somebody ("It means 'position and hold' "). So I shall continue to use the older "uncontrolled" term until they threaten me with a violation.
More later. I am just going to add by editing, so if interested, check back here. Last edit Oct 18, 2018.
Last edited: