Stop flying 2 Mile Patterns
Posted by DRMWhibang@reddit | flying | View on Reddit | 213 comments
Is it just me or has anyone noticed people flying HUGE patterns, even when no one is in front of them. I was always taught to be close enough that I’d be able to make it back in case of engine roughness or failure. But it feels like no one else got the memo. I may be stupid and missing something but is there any reason to be flying a pattern and bigger than like 1.2mi?
EM22_@reddit
Long downwind? I can get over it.
But WHY THE FUCK are we taking the upwind out there 1 to 2 miles????
I see it every god damn day.
Kein-Deutsc@reddit
Some people actually climb the upwind to pattern altitude. Really strange. Can cause spacing issues too for those of us who turn crosswind a a reasonable time
RebelAviatior45@reddit
“On the departure leg after takeoff, the pilot should continue climbing straight ahead and, if remaining in the traffic pattern, commence a turn to the crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300 feet of the traffic pattern altitude.”
FAA Airplane Flying Handbook - Chapter 8, Airport Traffic Patterns
run264fun@reddit
I was following a twin Comanche once and I swear they were level at TPA for 1nm before turning X-wind. Lucky for them, I was flying with a student that really needed me to be patient.
RelevantAnus@reddit
Also possible that they were practicing OEI, I teach my students not to turn crosswind until they finish their engine failure drill.
run264fun@reddit
Good point. To be fair, we were the only ones in the pattern and normally I’d turn early to cut in front, but that day I wasn’t bothered
bluebird_14@reddit
On rare occasion I've delayed crosswind if guys are already extended downwind 3-4miles. It starts getting silly when there's lot of planes in the pattern and guys are extending downwind to let others take off and then everyone else does the same an extra 1 mile upwind is better than an extra 4miles downwind IMO if no one else is in the pattern though you should be turning xwind as soon as youve reached safe altitude.aybes these guys aren't climbing Vy?
I think the real issue OP is referring to is the 2mile wide patterns.
indecision_killingme@reddit
Well, if certain ppl would extend upwind maybe down wind wouldn’t be so long.
7-8 ppl i. The pattern after tower is closed, frustrating.
Flyingredditburner44@reddit
Yep. All the way into the ocean.
Minute-Telephone7125@reddit
Tell me you’re actually complaining about Cirrus pilots without telling me you’re actually complaining about Cirrus pilots… 😏😏😉😉
endurance86@reddit
My CFI used to call it “bomber pattern” he also noted that there are no official regulations on pattern size.
Whisky-354@reddit
People have been complaining about this since Pontius was a pilot.
goatfuckersupreme@reddit
i'll bite, i dont get it
spearmint_flyer@reddit
The very same!
TxAggieMike@reddit
I’m going to wash my hands on this pun
dodexahedron@reddit
Let's not crucify the poor guy.
JSTootell@reddit
WWBD?
TxAggieMike@reddit
Maybe like Eric Idle, we can always look on the bright side of life.
aftcg@reddit
lyfe's a piece of shet, wen ewe lookit et
dodexahedron@reddit
You're. Deep. In trouble friend. Someone pylote, king of the skies.
randombrain@reddit
And making videos about it for at least sixteen years.
IGoUnseen@reddit
I miss Paul's videos
unbelver@reddit
Rumor has it his entire shirt and even his trousers are now epaulet. Hundreds of bars!
nellonthemellon@reddit
Reference of biblical proportions
dinkleberrysurprise@reddit
Since Moses wore short pants
AlexJamesFitz@reddit
The guy who invented the Pilatus?
odinsen251a@reddit
Pontious Pilatus? Is that an amphibious variant?
U-977@reddit
Chris Pontius Pilatus?
G91G28X0Y0Z0@reddit
Nominated 3rd party candidate running for POTUS
JumboTrijet@reddit
😂
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
No they haven’t. Pilots aren’t taught to be pilots anymore
dfelton912@reddit
Look at all the downvotes, you're getting crucified!
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
It Reddit, go figure. And it doesn’t matter. Meow
dfelton912@reddit
Joke still went over your head
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
Hammered right thru my wrist,eh?
dfelton912@reddit
Haha, you get it :)
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
Meow
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
Ok, you’re right.
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
Wasn’t commenting about popes. Was responding to OP
Pilot-Imperialis@reddit
Your instrument rating is for flying through the clouds, not shouting at them.
EliteEthos@reddit
That joke went RIGHT over your head
dodexahedron@reddit
*makes airplane noises* ✈️
PiperCherokee383@reddit
Thank you for the new turn of phrase that will forever be used.
quillseek@reddit
How have I never heard this before lmao
Additional_Name_867@reddit
Bravo sir.
Pilot-Imperialis@reddit
Yup, stealing this phrase lmao.
hartzonfire@reddit
Pocketing this for later thank you.
Apptubrutae@reddit
lol, never seen that line before. Solid gold
Amf2446@reddit
Fuck that’s funny
Tight_Ear888@reddit
HA THIS IS GOLD
moxiedoggie@reddit
I’m fucking cracking up at “since Pontius was a pilot” that’s gold
SATSewerTube@reddit
Rgr. Asking ORD for a power-off 180 abeam the numbers tomorrow in the 777
andrewrbat@reddit
One clear day at gso in a 145 we checked in with approach and they immediately cleared us for an untestricted visual and straight to tower... we were at 10,000’.
Gear down flaps 9 power idle autopilot off. Basically flew an upside down chandelle to the numbers while still meeting stable approach criteria.
Still probably flew a tighter pattern than the 172s in Florida that beat up the pattern at every delta.
theyoyomaster@reddit
[Laughs in C-17]
andrewrbat@reddit
Yeah well my reversers are locked out in flight…
theyoyomaster@reddit
We can get down plenty fast without them.
AutomagicJackelope@reddit
I've seen the C-17 do some freakishly amazing things at KMRB. That airplane is SNEAKY capable.
theyoyomaster@reddit
Oh yeah, tac arrivals are a blast.
Necessary_Topic_1656@reddit
STL would do this abeam the numbers on at 11,000. hey you guys got the runway in sight?
yeah runway in sight.
theres a mad dog on a 8 mile final keep the base turn tight cleared for the visual approach rwy 30R. contact tower…
push and hold the gear horn override with the index finger while using the rest of your forearm to chop the power levers to idle. props full forward pitch down to imitate a rock turn base drop the gear flaps 17 turn final flaps 35 before landing checklist power back up by 500ft for the stabilized approach gate.
Hey can you guys sidestep to 30L?
sure
sidestep to 30L cleared to land 30L
touchdown with 5 miles to spare ahead of the Maddog
n30409@reddit
Was this in a 1900?
Necessary_Topic_1656@reddit
So you’re saying you also did the idle with your forearm maneuver too to be able to recognize the airplane? lol
n30409@reddit
No it was the flaps 17 and 35.
linuxid10t@reddit
I used to fly out of there with the ERJ. That thing will drop out of the 11,000 ft pattern with the gear down and boards out real well.
Ok-Selection4206@reddit
10 miles 10k ft in the dc9, drop like a bag of hammers.
Ok-Selection4206@reddit
That is basically the exact way the controllers set you up in Cologne Germany. 10k feet midfield and continuous descending180° turn to intercept final with altitude and speed restrictions with power off at the end of an 8 hr oceanic crossing. Balls fun in the 767.
74_Jeep_Cherokee@reddit
Got someone similar in CLT one day - idle, gear, spoilers, etc roll out of the 180 configured, checklist "1000 stable" then I remembered we had a UPS jump seater... I'm thinking, this guy just think I'm a real asswipe for doing that... Land, roll out and of on the taxi he says "that was awesome we never get to do stuff like that at Brown"
PhotoBeginning@reddit
Anyone here ever try this in the sim? I’m curious how you’d do. Haha
redacted_post@reddit
10k, 10 miles out and cut all the engines. Landed fine. Braking was dependent on the APU starting - ours doesn't start in the air. Stopped. ✅️
ljthefa@reddit
Did it in the CRJ9 sim, went well, the thing glides much better than expected
swakid8@reddit
Yes, I’ve practiced it in the sim a few times when I have extra time….
CRJ and 737, Speed 210 with flaps up a beam the numbers. Wait on drag at the last minute.
soulscratch@reddit
Did it in the dash 8 sim and it was ok, I got it on the runway in the TDZ just hauling ass with no flaps and only the parking brake. Ended up off end of the runway. Straight wing helped a bit, the hard part in the sim is that the visuals don't go far back enough to keep the field in sight for the base turn.
I'm sure it'd be much worse in a jet.
scottyh214@reddit
I actually did a PO180 in the Citation X sim. It was a rather shite landing but the screen didn’t turn red so I guess we survived.
Flavor_Nukes@reddit
Does not go well
CalliopesMask@reddit
Please post the gopro video
DRMWhibang@reddit (OP)
Why else would the PO180 be on Comm ACS
andrewrbat@reddit
Its in the go-home-day section of the acs
Oregon-Pilot@reddit
oof too real
imblegen@reddit
Only for CSEL though. So make sure you shut down one of them and idle the other.
Ramrod489@reddit
I got “expedited vectors” at IAD once in a 73 that damn sure felt like a power off 180.
FlyByPC@reddit
DCA's supposed to be the local challenging one...?
awkwarddachshund@reddit
The hero that we all needed but didn't deserve
MrFrequentFlyer@reddit
Absolutely!
Aviator8989@reddit
……you won’t
poser765@reddit
Pretty similar to my thoughts, just DFW flavored.
Like stop putting me on downwind at 12k then having me turn base over Denton.
imblegen@reddit
Make sure you get a recording of the response. I’d pay good money to hear it
SATSewerTube@reddit
Hell it’d probably be uploaded to a bunch of platforms with thousands of hits before we even get to the gate
China_bot42069@reddit
That’s why I always fly a 20 mile final
FreezeDriedPineapple@reddit
I have a bunch of really slow 172s in the pattern. So I’ll take a wide pattern sometimes because they’re so slow…
CavalierRigg@reddit
“N123XX, extend downwind until I can’t see you any more on radar”
CamoJG@reddit
The Busy Delta Experience ™ presented by Lycoming
Mehere_64@reddit
This has been discussed many of times here. Just saying.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
Big pattern means more time to think and manage energy. When you fly really tight patterns you end up cramped and its tricky for students to manage their energy when they are first starting out.
If I have an engine failure, I am happy with being able to make the airport environment, even if that means the grass next to or short of the runway.
Do you fly every instrument approach fully deflected above the GS so that you can glide to land if you lose your engine?
EM22_@reddit
Teach your students to do it correctly from the start. It’s tough? Good. Practice it. A wider pattern to “slow things down so they can think” is coddling them.
No reason to fly the bomber pattern in a 172.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
Its not coddling if it helps them understand energy management more than just chopping the throttle and swinging it around.
x4457@reddit
That is in fact the opposite of what you’re teaching them. You’re teaching them less about energy management if you give them more time to manage the energy and more opportunities to increase the total energy state with the throttle.
You got it backwards.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
Energy manaangement isn't only about bleeding off energy, its about knowing when to add or reduce power to keep the correct speed and decent angle. Set the correct speed, trim the airplane out, then use power to control your decent angle.
That process is easier if you have more time to manage your decent. If you stay too tight then it becomes a lot trickier, especially for new students. Its not hard once you have 100 hours under your belt, but it is difficult to make it click for newer students if you don't give them time to figure it out.
x4457@reddit
That’s on you as the instructor to teach.
My students learned then, and learn now, tight patterns. 1/2 mile downwind length, close and high base turns.
Why? Cause there’s a great video of a Cherokee rolling through a busy street intersection less than 1/4nm from the airport after they flew a mile wide and long downwind…
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
There are many more pilots who died trying to force a bad approach than who dies because their engine failed in the pattern. If they get into the habit of thinking "I can make it" when they're 300 feet high because they're used to keeping it real tight, its going to bite them one day.
If you're stabilized on final and your engine dies, you're probably not going to make the runway. Unless you're teaching every approach as a PO180, which I don't. I'm more worried about what is going to happen in those first 100 hours after they pass their checkride and I'm not there to help them out. Engine failure? Possible but unlikely. Stall/spin because they were trying to force an approach that was never going to work? Far more likely.
x4457@reddit
Firm, firm disagree.
You are the problem and the reason for this post. You’re not teaching your students basic airmanship. Flying a half mile pattern normally does not ever involve winding up “300 feet high,” it involves a steeper initial descent and larger power reduction. It also doesn’t involve steep turns or slower speeds. You’re making exactly the same turns at exactly the same speeds as your B-52 pattern.
I wish someone would show you what it looks like because you clearly have no idea, and that’s genuinely not your fault - the instructors who trained you failed you, and you’re in turn unknowingly failing your students.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
You're making a lot of assumptions about me and my training. Lets just call it a difference of opinion and leave it at that.
x4457@reddit
Because you’re painting a very clear picture of what you’re teaching. I’m not making assumptions, I’m acting on what you’re telling me.
Damn right it’s a difference of opinion. Be better. Your students deserve it.
atthemattin@reddit
I teach this. In fact at our school we teach our students power off 180s before they solo. Not to the commercial levels, but students never get to learn where they will land if their engine cuts out. Giant patterns just ensure you don’t make it back to an area where you can land safely
jonny-five@reddit
Man I feel this comment. I did my first touch and gos morning and it was so damn stressful. Felt like I had zero time to think about anything before doing my next task while there was so much to think about.
DRMWhibang@reddit (OP)
I totally understand it in more flat areas and for student pilots. But I see a ton of non students doing it. The worst part is most of these airports you would not be so lucky landing short.
dynamic_fluid@reddit
You got your priorities wrong dude; bigger risk from an unstable approach than from an engine fail in the pattern.
Now you can keep a stable approach in reasonably tight, but the steep, power-off approach that keeps you within glide distance is more likely to kill you.
There’s a reason you see more experienced pilots flying a safe, stable approach as opposed to bombing it in wicked aggressively.
mirassou3416@reddit
TR182 here--I'll always vote for a stable approach than being too tight and overshooting final
nineyourefine@reddit
I've had this convo with students when I was a CFI. At SOME point you need to just trust your engine. You can't always think "This thing is going to fail RIGHT now". If that was the case I'd never have flown IFR in a single.
Heck, if you're flying at towered airports sometimes they'll call your downwind and you end up miles away at pattern altitude. What then? Going to say no?
Substantial-End-7698@reddit
Even at airlines with two or more jet engines you don’t “just trust your engine”. That’s why net flight path is calculated for every takeoff, climb, cruise and landing without exception.
Unfortunately when single engine, situations that leave you outside gliding range of a safe spot are unavoidable, but the goal is to minimize the amount of time that you are vulnerable. That’s the most important part of single engine flying. If you consistently fly wide circuits just trusting your engine, you’re not doing a good job of flying a single engined aircraft.
Same goes for single engine IFR. Just because you can legally go flying with 200’ ceilings doesn’t mean you should. It is wise to minimize time spent overflying areas with <1000’ ceilings. That way if you do lose an engine and can’t make an airport, at least you have a minute or two to find a place to land after you break out.
Figit090@reddit
My checkride had me miles out. DPE said just keep it going until we can get behind the robinson that ended up leisurely approaching on a million-mile final. Gotta adapt. 🫣
Figit090@reddit
There's a slough short of my prevailing runway, and a bay, highway, and slough on the opposite approach.
If we need a too-short landing you have to jog it last minute into a damp field next to the runway or slam into one thing or another.
Nine-TailedFox4@reddit
Fly it wide enough so the turn to final is nice and shallow. Hate it when final turns are super sharp.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
Agreed. I'm tired of students trying to kill me with the classic base to final stall spin.
Turbo_Normalized@reddit
There's nothing wrong with bank if you have the airspeed.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
Do you typically carry a lot of extra airspeed on the turn to final? I generally don't.
Turbo_Normalized@reddit
Depends on my bank, of course.
TheVillianOfValley@reddit
Keep the nose down then. I’m tired of students being afraid to go past ten degrees of bank in the pattern because their CFI had more fear than stick skill or instructional capability.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
You obviously haven't flown with my students trying to rip it around with 50 degrees of bank and full left rudder because a crosswind pushed them closer to final than they expected.
Just like everything else, its a matter of personal preference and there is no one true answer. I like to have my students fly slightly wider patterns because it slows things down for them and allows them to be nice and stable for the whole pattern. To each their own.
N546RV@reddit
PREACH
TheVillianOfValley@reddit
How shallow?
sr15enjoyer@reddit
No one flys instrument approaches in single engine airplanes! It’s unsafe! /s
soittfire88@reddit
Unironically what so many reddit comments basically say lol
Icecreamforge@reddit
A big pattern flown in a 172 for example gives you less energy than a tight pattern at pattern altitude and speed so I’m not sure how that’s safer for most pilots.
Mountain-Captain-396@reddit
If you're at the same altitude and airspeed you have the same amount of energy. The goal is to go from pattern altitude and speed to touching down with minimal energy. If you fly a big pattern that gives you more time to bleed off the same amount of energy, which makes it easier for new pilots.
ywgflyer@reddit
I see you too have flown with some of the turkeys I flew with at the start of my career.
NeutralArt12@reddit
I never leave the airport environment ever so I’m always within glide distance to an airport
JasonThree@reddit
People saying you should fly a pattern within glide distance are not thinking in the real world. Flying like that leads to unstable approaches, which are FAR more common than an engine failure. Loss of control on landing is always on the top of the list of reasons for aircraft accidents. At some point you have to trust your engine. Ever fly IFR? Notice how there is no discussion of engine failure procedures for IFR? Because it's an assumed risk. You can't plan for an engine failure in all scenarios. If you won't fly a wider pattern due to being outside glide distance, better never leave the pattern because you would be outside glide distance there too. Risk management is important here. The risk of an unstable approach is much higher than an engine failure.
SSMDive@reddit
‘Unstable’ means different things depending on the plane and the pilot.
On a 208 I fly (TPE engine) I can be at 6k feet 1.5 miles from the runway and make the first turn off without any heroics. My old Pitts dragging it in from 2 miles out at 80 is harder than a tight pattern because I can’t see the runway at that speed/attitude - need about 120 to see the runway, but then I need to kill off all that speed for the flare.
Not everyone is flying transport category aircraft. So they should not be trying to act like they are.
SSMDive@reddit
The trick is to just the fly the pattern you need for the plane you are in and the traffic.
If you are in a 172, you don’t need a 2 mile turn to base. If you are in a Falcon 900 you might need 4-5 miles.
When there are people in the pattern, you need to try and play nice with each other. That means letting someone land before you if your down wind could be logged as a XC or extending a bit past where you want to turn because someone is on final.
It’s not that hard. But ignoring everything and being ridged in what you expect from others is just never gonna work out in your favor.
sp3ng@reddit
I fly a Pitts... please don't make me extend my downwind and set up for a 2 mile final 😂
SSMDive@reddit
I knew the CFi’s at my field. I would often do 2:1 landings with them when we were both in the pattern if they were OK with it - most were.
Preventerwind51@reddit
Not surprising. The funny part is with Riddle Diddles (Embry Riddle Instructors) doing it and gears gnashing in their brains. Ironically, this one was a friend of mine and a Pitts Instructor (The Pitts LITERALLY has a 1:1 glide ratio, so we keep it tight! That is not a plane you want to land off field! Granted, those Pitts Instructors even called themselves the "Elite Assholes", so take it for what you will. When I was a young pilot I was told to look up to these individuals as examples), and was flying a 2 mile downwind. ATC finally put me on right traffic and I was doing 2 patterns to their one. This is how the convo after went:
Me: "What were you doing on that pattern?"
ER: "I was doing touch and go's with my student"
Me: "What were you going to do if you lost an engine?"
ER: "We'd glide back to the airport"
Me: "Whats the glide ratio of a 172?"
ER: "Seven to one"
Me: "How high were you?"
ER: "1,000 ft AGL"
Me: "How far away were you?"
ER: "Two mile downwind. That's Embry Riddle Procedure"
Me: "So if you are at a 1,000 feet in a plane with a seven to one glide ratio, how far will you glide?"
ER: "7,000 feet"
Me: "How far is two miles?"
You could literally see the gears gnashing in his head. If I can go 7,000 feet and I'm 10,560 feet away....how do you make it to the airport (I'm a glider CFI, and we do glide rings with 1/2 the glide ratio to be conservative for cross country planning and to account for wind....and our glide ratios are WAY better)
ER: "THAT'S EMBRY RIDDLE PROCEDURE!"
Me: "Your procedures are going to get you and your student killed"
Even when spitting the numbers out from their own data, its like they just....couldn't accept it. I sincerely hope it wasn't ER procedure and this was a one off CFI....regardless, it doesn't reflect well.
Personally, mixing my glider and aerobatic experience, I tailor the pattern to the aircraft's performance and airfield such that given the conditions I can make a 180 if I lose an engine. Given the totality of the situation, you don't fly a 172 like a 747, nor a 747 like a 172....or in my case a Pitts Special like a single seat high performance glider.
SSMDive@reddit
The Pitts LITERALLY does not have a 1:1 glide ratio. It is a rock with an engine but engine out it is more like 5:1.
AutomagicJackelope@reddit
I used to think I flew nice, tight patterns until I bought an RV-6. I was quickly disabused of this notion and learned to fly much nicer, tighter patterns with a 25' wingspan.
Preventerwind51@reddit
I've heard with the S1's when they had the issue with the props departing the aircraft that it glides much better without it windmilling! I've got an S-2B with an MT prop, never tried it without the engine....yet :D
Buddy did acro out over the ocean in his S1, lost the prop, and was worried about not being able to make it back. He said he was shocked he made it back, and apparently it glided much better without the prop!
Hokie_Pilot@reddit
Brother, I fly a Cirrus. You will see me fly a straight in 10 mile final and will like it
AutomagicJackelope@reddit
I laughed and I still wanted to punch something.
Baystate411@reddit
Sorry I'll take the ol 737 on the half miler for ya
Drunkenaviator@reddit
There's no reason you can't turn final at half a mile in a 737 on a visual. Done it plenty of times.
dynamic_fluid@reddit
Most companies frown on turning final at 150’ AGL in a transport category jet.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
Most, but not all! We didn't even have foqa yet.
4Sammich@reddit
FOQUA the tool everyone who does sketchy shit hates.
ThinkDeepSpeakSoft@reddit
A mile or so is about right unless it’s super windy/gusty. I fly a sr22 and most fatal accidents are in the base/final turn - faster speeds and higher wing loading make them easy to stall. So, I’m usually a bit wider in the pattern than say a 172.
Appropriate-Oil555@reddit
I also fly a 22. I wanted to see how flying in hot and high altitudes affected it. Instead of doing it for real I loaded up Gunnison Regional on a 90 degree day in MSFS and tried to fly a tight pattern. The plane/game gave me one audible “Stall!” before it was inverted and slammed into the ground. It was sobering.
experimental1212@reddit
The overwhelmingly largest factor on stall speed is bank angle. The altitude will not become an issue until a great deal higher than any airport altitude compared to the effect bank angle has.
Stay above 1.4x clean config stall speed, keep the turn near standard rate, stay coordinated. The pattern still won't need to exceed circling minima.
Al-tahoe@reddit
Coffin corner?
ghjm@reddit
Coffin corner is the altitude at which the stall speed and Mach limit converge. In this flight regime there is only a very small range of airspeeds at which controlled flight is possible, and any deviation will result in a loss of control. Before this was well understood it was a mysterious phenomenon that killed airplanes when they flew too high. It's way up in the flight levels and has nothing to do with the base-to-final turn in a Cirrus.
Al-tahoe@reddit
Thank you, doctor
nascent_aviator@reddit
Apparently this cirrus was getting close to the sound barrier? Lmao.
vector4nudes@reddit
A cirrus is more understandable cause at pattern altitude you still have the chute.
Murky-Resident-3082@reddit
Problem solved I fly 3 mile patterns
Nasreth7@reddit
my favorite was once seeing an embry riddle student ask for a short approach and proceed to fly nearly a mile past the threshold before turning base. needless to say I saw them add power on final lol
DisregardLogan@reddit
It’s ERAU, they don’t know energy management exists
GlassPension2372@reddit
Flying 3 mile patterns now
randombrain@reddit
How is this post almost an hour old and nobody has posted the Paul Bertorelli video yet?
helno@reddit
This should be the top reply in this thread.
He probably needs more epaulets now.
th0ma5w@reddit
Classic, wonderful, thank you
CharAznableLoNZ@reddit
If no one is in the pattern I fly pretty tight. However if there are people in with me I will adjust to be closer to their pattern for safety. It is annoying when they fly a a couple miles past where they should have turned base though.
flyingron@reddit
You're flying too tight as well if you are in the pattern with other people. Despite you what you are "taught", that isn't always practical nor what the FAA espouses. Most planes can't make a 3 degree glideslope engine out.
I've never understood why people get their panties in a bunch about the engine failing on base leg after they've flown for two hours previously outside of gliding distance.
L_Cranston_Shadow@reddit
It's been almost a decade now, but you just gave me flashbacks to extended down winds at KPAO when we would get cleared all the down to Moffett before turning around and coming back in.
Bubbly_Upstairs6160@reddit
Stop flying draggy Cessnas and pipers that go down final at 55kts. Different airplanes different patterns to some extent.
extraeme@reddit
Yeah stop it, CAE
Sunsplitcloud@reddit
If there's no one infront of you and you're extending 1-2 miles downwind, you should expect a person behind you to turn base before you do. How would they know you're not departing the area?
Comfortable_Client80@reddit
Because you stated your intention on the radio when passing middle of downwind?
Bucketnate@reddit
IM SORRY
GoldenKoala100@reddit
If your lucky enough to fly at an airport with riddle kids you’d be lucky to only go 2 miles out 😂
Being_a_Mitch@reddit
"making it back in the event of an engine failure" at any time during the pattern means you're going to be high and fast every single time. Most airplanes can't hold a configured 3 degree approach with no engine. This means you're essentially doing engine-out practice every pattern and significantly increasing your risk of an accident due to an unstable approach...all to cover yourself in the very very unlikely event of an engine failure without warning. Something that, by the way, is a risk you're already willing to take if you ever leave the pattern.
The alternative is that you're telling yourself that you could make it to a runway if the engine quit, but actually you're misjudging your energy and you couldn't make it no matter what.
Now, that said, I'm not saying people don't fly too wide of patterns sometimes. Especially upwind, I see people way extending for absolutely no reason, and it can royally fuck the flow of the pattern up. But if 50 hr Cessna pilot wants to take a 1.5-2 mile final to stabilize his approach instead of doing power-off 180s every pattern, I think that's a fair trade for safety.
megaduce104@reddit
so your small 172 pattern should apply to everyone, cool
InsGuy2023@reddit
Unless the pattern is really full, half mile off the runway. Focus.
FeatherMeLightly@reddit
Fly a faster plane. Youll get some perspective.
charlieray@reddit
I dont do a lot of flying but when I fly with this one friend, his patterns are both too close and too far at the same time, as well as too high and too low at the same time. Ending in unstabilized approaches, unwillingness to trim the aircraft into one, and a varying array of types of "arrivals" that one can perform.
Double-Switch6089@reddit
I transitioned to a PA-44 from a 172 for multiengine and flew 1.2-1.5 mile traffic patterns. I had my first CFI flight today in a 172 after not flying one for 45 days and my instructor asked me why tf i was flying bomber patterns lol. Fixed that real quick to a 1 mile pattern and everything went so much smoother
rdrcrmatt@reddit
When I had a Citabria, I barely left the airfield property!
ckb1988@reddit
Are you talking about”pattern work” or just coming into land and entering the pattern and then making a long downwind and rest of pattern? In terms of the latter I could give two shits about losing my engine in the pattern and would be more worried about having an unstable approach because I rushed it. Seems like most people in my experience are always taught to have contingencies planned for an engine failure, most critical time and likely place for it to happen is on takeoff. I have also witnessed a lot of tight patterns that are just downright unsafe. Like making your base turn over a set of hangars and being so tight that you’re continuing the turn into your flare and then touching down halfway or more down the runway all to save maybe 1 or 2 minutes. If there is a legitimate reason and thought process on why you’re doing a particular maneuver then I’m all for it. To each their own I guess (if it’s safe and thought out).
dynamic_fluid@reddit
Agreed, especially in a turbine, but even in a piston single I’d bet there are more crashes due to unstable approaches than an engine fail in the pattern.
My company’s stabilized approach criteria require us to be stabilized by 500’ in VMC, that’s just inside a 2-mile final.
When I fly a piston single in my off time I’ll shorten it to one mile, but that’s only 300’. Unless there’s a good reason to, I don’t see why you would want to fly a closer pattern.
IMO people just feel cool ripping it in steep and tight and want an excuse to do so (consciously or subconsciously). The whole “remain within glide distance” is just an excuse to justify that behavior.
RecentAmbition3081@reddit
Or calling in on a 5 mile straight in!
Ok-Technician-2905@reddit
I have no idea why this is considered bad form if the pattern is sparsely populated. It’s no different than someone coming in on an instrument approach.
Oregon-Pilot@reddit
I think both VFR and IFR/practice IFR straight ins irritate some pilots equally because it then they have to accommodate others. Pilots are whiney bunch sometimes.
didsomebodysaywander@reddit
Got yelled at on CTAF recently for doing this from the FAF, which forced me to make another call clarifying practice approach.
humpmeimapilot@reddit
Because these pilot factories aren’t training the meat sacks to fly the aircraft they are currently in. They train them like they are flying a 747.
jjrkegler@reddit
Our airport has noise abatement procedures, if you take off on 28 you fly 30 until pattern altitude, then turn crosswind.
humpmeimapilot@reddit
Noise abatement is dumb. Don’t buy next to an airport. I’m gonna fly what I need to fly
Philly514@reddit
Some people are low hour/student pilots, I prefer they go wide and land safely than to cut corners and run into the ground
T-1A_pilot@reddit
As we say in tankers - go wide with pride!!
Beautiful-Low9454@reddit
I ain’t gonna lie I fly a huge pattern in barons and citations and in the Lear I used to fly. Gives me time and space to make gentle turns and long finals for smoothness
JJohnston015@reddit
It's been an issue.
lnxguy@reddit
I alternate my flight reviews between airplane and helicopter. The first time I flew an airplane after many years of helicopter only, I made a super tight, high as hell pattern and still landed on the numbers. They guy checking me was stunned, but he was enjoying it because he too, was a helicopter pilot. We had fun, despite having to fit in with all the "B-52 patterns "
14Three8@reddit
sigh get the Paul Bertorelli video going…
R5Jockey@reddit
I love that video.
Additional_Name_867@reddit
My CFI is the same way. He wants me to keep it tight and finals short, always assuming that my engine is going to crap out in the middle of pattern work and was talking shit about the big flight school's student that was flying HUGE patterns ahead of us the other day.
R5Jockey@reddit
Sounds exactly like my CFI from 20 years ago. 🤣
LockPickingPilot@reddit
That’s the recommendation from the Boeing manual
-Aces_High-@reddit
Cirrus 1234B, left downwind 27.
Me: "Ok cool I have about 3 business days to do a few laps before he turns base I'm good"
ConnectionMother9782@reddit
I don’t see why this is a problem. Let people do as they want. Seen cirus pilots do 20mins straight in calls. Doesn’t matter to me. If no one’s there why would it bother you? You do what you want and let them do what they want as long it’s not a hazard to you
Fun_Supermarket1235@reddit
Just for perspective, in my last job I routinely joined the pattern at 1.5nm - 2nm downwind. This was in a jet weighing ~70,000lbs with approach speed about 135kt.
If you are doing 2nm in a Cessna your doing it wrong
Rush_1_1@reddit
Is it part of the airport procs?
williamrbt@reddit
This guy flies in Phoenix, we’ve all shared the pattern with Oxford….
Fluffy_Battle_2677@reddit
Oxford who?!?
AK_born00@reddit
The ATP way™️
Russian_Bass@reddit
At my airport it's the 61 school that does 2nm pattern and the 141 doing 1nm patterns
dumptruckulent@reddit
That’s why I love helos, man. If you clear me for the short approach, I’ll cut off my downwind at midfield and head straight for parking.
tempskawt@reddit
Practice vs preach. I think any CFI you ask about pattern width, barring the big box flight schools, would say to always be within glide distance. But complacency sets in, and that base leg can be like 5 seconds long if you’re close to the runway… if you’re trying to teach base legs and you’re only in them momentarily, you’ll start to widen out inadvertently.
Icecreamforge@reddit
I’m a simmer and I fly a tight pattern but my question is how tight is too tight?
EliteEthos@reddit
Don’t matter. It’s a computer game.
Icecreamforge@reddit
Say it wasn’t though
Needs2GetLaid@reddit
I often keep my patterns within the runway length, omitting the crosswind/base legs for a nice tight paperclip.
EliteEthos@reddit
Wishing runway length? So, you offset 3 miles for a 15000ft runway?
EliteEthos@reddit
I have a weird desire to fly a 3 mile pattern now…
Fast-Government-4366@reddit
I was flying today and I wish the other dude in the pattern was flying only a 2 mile pattern lmao
RyzOnReddit@reddit
Depends what I’m flying: - Twin I want some space to do all the things and think, and I’m not as worried about losing an engine. - Mooney/172 make a 180 and fly downwind probably half a mile from the runway. - Citabria inside the fence, especially if it puts me close enough to the plane in front to make the controller nervous after a few laps 😎
lazymiddleclass@reddit
They do this at Montgomery in San Diego. I even asked the controller once about it and they had no idea why.. if you lose your engine it's the difference between just calming landing on the runway or ending up in someone's backyard.
Small_Chicken1085@reddit
Discomfort. Just ask if you can get in front of them? It’s like golf. Just ask. I have no problems doing a 360 to get behind someone faster in the pattern. Or land and get in front of them. Some people need more time.
Fly3rBoi@reddit
I was trained to fly a pattern that if the engine died I could get down with no issues. Staying tight really makes that possible,
I do this every time I can, I adjust when people do it differently.
rFlyingTower@reddit
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
Is it just me or has anyone noticed people flying HUGE patterns, even when no one is in front of them. I was always taught to be close enough that I’d be able to make it back in case of engine roughness or failure. But it feels like no one else got the memo. I may be stupid and missing something but is there any reason to be flying a pattern and bigger than like 1.2mi?
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.