Training and Safety

Pattern Procedures

A lot of the procedures involved in flying an airplane are pretty cut and dried. We pilots like it that way. Ambiguity is not a useful condition in aviation; certainty is. Things work best and safest when there are specific ways to do them.

This is especially true for basic aircraft control. To change course to the left, turn the yoke counterclockwise (or shove the stick to the left) to bank the wings, mash the left rudder pedal to keep the ball centered, and adjust pitch as necessary to maintain altitude. Sure, the airplane eventually will turn to the desired heading if you use only the ailerons or the rudder, but that's sloppy exploitation of a loophole in the laws of aerodynamics. There is only one way to do it correctly.

The "only one way to do it" rule also applies to IFR flying. To fly an instrument approach, follow the procedures printed on the approach plate. Period. No shortcuts, no home-brewed procedures allowed. It has to be that way to avoid encounters with the earth or another airplane.

The unquestioning certainty that surrounds aerodynamics and IFR flying begins to soften when we go VFR. Instead of obediently following natural or FAA law, we encounter a lot of "recommended" procedures. And we are confused. What does recommended mean, anyhow? Is it just another name for a required procedure, or does it really mean that we can do what we please? It means neither. A recommendation is something to follow unless conditions call for a more appropriate tactic. Some of us lose sight of the discretionary aspect of the word recommendation.

One recommended procedure that causes confusion is that for entering the traffic pattern at an uncontrolled airport. I recently wrote about flying to a small airport from the north and entering the west-to-east pattern by flying a crosswind to a left downwind (see "Pilotage: Listen Up!," December 1995 Pilot). I was taken to task by many readers who accused me of thumbing my nose at the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), because it recommends flying a 45-degree leg to enter the downwind. The AIM says nothing, however, about how I was supposed to get from the north side of the airport to the south in order to execute that 45-degree entry.

My correspondents had that covered, too: Their instructors taught them to overfly the field 500 to 1,000 feet above pattern altitude, fly beyond the terminal area, descend to pattern altitude, and make a 180-degree turn to get into position for the 45-degree leg. That procedure works fine in many situations, but I've learned there are circumstances in which a different approach--literally--is more than justified.

For 11 years my home airport was Frederick (Maryland) Municipal Airport (FDK), where AOPA is located. Frederick is a busy melting-pot airport. Several corporate jets and turboprops are based there, and it is not unusual to see a visiting Gulfstream or Canadair Challenger on the ramp.

Several hundred piston singles and twins call FDK home. It is one of the few general aviation fields in the Washington, D.C.-Baltimore area with an ILS approach, and the approach path is usually occupied with airplanes flown by pilots learning or polishing their precision approach skills. A soaring club is based on the airport, one of the fixed-base operators rents no-radio taildraggers, a former Army Cobra helicopter gunship pilot gets his adrenaline pumped back up to its Vietnam-days level by flying a gyrocopter at Frederick, and--until a few years ago--ultralights would buzz around, using a tiny patch of grass and a miniature pattern inside the normal pattern.

I loved the airport for its convenience, diversity, and activity, but entering the pattern on a nice flying day was a task to be handled with great care. The primary runway at Frederick is 23, which has a left-hand pattern. Much of the traffic comes from the south side of the runway and flies a 45-degree entry to the downwind. Often I came in from the north. At first I overflew the airport high, descended, and turned to a 45-degree entry; but I soon began to question that tactic. I felt uncomfortable descending into traffic inbound to Frederick from the south. I was also uncomfortable making a 180-degree turn to get back to the airport. It didn't seem very smart to be descending and making steep turns in the vicinity of a busy uncontrolled field, especially since I had to do it in the face of opposing traffic.

Then I flew with someone who was more of a veteran at negotiating Frederick traffic. We came in from the north, and he neatly inserted us into the busy circuit by flying a crosswind to the downwind. It was a revelation, and I immediately adopted the technique as my own. Time and again at Frederick the wisdom of the crosswind entry was brought home to me. As I motored in from the north I would listen to the steady, staccato beat of the swarm of pilots making arrival position reports. I joined in, announcing my presence at five miles out and again just before starting the crosswind. It was easy to spot airplanes entering or already established on the downwind, and I could quickly judge where and how to blend in with the flow to avoid disruption. No one ever complained, and no one ever accused me of cutting him off. It worked, and I became convinced that it was the safest way to enter a pattern at an uncontrolled field when arriving from the opposite side.

Some take strong exception to this procedure, but the fact is that the FAA wisely left it up to us to decide the best way to proceed. We've been given some guidance, but even that is difficult to follow to the letter. The recommendation in the AIM to fly a 45-degree pattern-entry leg may mean making a right turn onto the downwind, but the good book also says that all turns in a pattern should be made to the left. There are so many different and unique situations at the thousands of uncontrolled airports in the country, and therefore so many variables to consider, that it would be unworkable to impose a single inviolate pattern-entry procedure.

The pattern-entry issue has the attention of Bruce Landsberg, executive director of the AOPA Air Safety Foundation, has asked his folks to take a look at it. The conclusion may be that the only certainty about pattern-entry procedures is that there is widespread uncertainty. There is opportunity to provide guidance to all. When settling the pattern-entry question and others like it, we should not look to rigid regulation. The beauty of an uncontrolled airport is that almost every type of aircraft and flying can exist in relative harmony. Regulation tends to diminish this capacity. Following agreed-upon procedures is an important ingredient in peaceful and safe coexistence, but more important is the one unimpeachable rule of VFR flying: Look for other aircraft--and avoid them.