AVSIG: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern wwswsigarch.jpg (7236 bytes)

✈ . . . . . . ✈ . . . . . ✈ . . . . ✈ . . . ✈ . . ✈ . ✈ . . ✈ . . . ✈ . . . . ✈ . . . . . ✈ . . . . . . Touch-and-Go to our Live Forum (This is a Read-only Archive of the 2004-2017 AVSIG Forum)


AVSIG Discussion Sections >> Training & Proficiency

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)
Ward Miller POU-NY
Top Gun


Reged: 05/05/04
Posts: 10508
Loc: New York
Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Terry Carraway]
      #432998 - 11/24/16 03:52 PM

OK, I'll jump back in the pool.

>> I don't see a big problem. At worst, you roll wings level for a moment to
take a peak.

those of us who have done them, see the benefits. <<

This thread started because UND and AOPA ASF were starting a project to prove
their already arrived at conclusion a circular approach to land was safer
than a traditional rectangular pattern.


Forgetting about the hotdog who can fly the perfect 180-deg turn and line up
perfectly on the centerline on short final verses the klutz doing the
traditional two turns and ends up needing a 110-deg turn to final and crashes
and burns, some of us maintain the AVERAGE GA pilot, considering his skill
set, would find it easier to fly the traditional pattern and would be
approximately as safe, maybe safer.

So far, I have not seen any evidence the circular approach is safer, as the
project has already assumed, and have seen your "take a peak" might even
illustrate it is less safe.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
Top Gun


Reged: 01/11/03
Posts: 20065
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Terry Carraway]
      #433000 - 11/24/16 07:07 PM

Thanks Terry, I have done them.

Just rolling wings level during the turn kind of defeats the purpose of what the proposal claims to be the benefit of the circular approach.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bruce Gorrell [EQY]
Top Gun


Reged: 04/29/04
Posts: 7864
Loc: Charlotte, NC
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Terry Carraway]
      #433002 - 11/24/16 10:08 PM

Concur.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott Perdue (50F)
Top Gun


Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 1126
Loc: Texas
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]]
      #433010 - 11/25/16 07:53 AM

Quote:

Thanks, Gunny. You're not seeing any problems with seeing straight in traffic, or the runway as you are in the turn from a close in downwind? Those were my main concerns (Terry, the discussion was to work out potential safety issues, not to reject the idea because it's not the way patterns have been taught for many decades.)




Scott-

Frankly, I see that concern as a red herring. During a Curved Final Turn you see the final approach until just prior to roll out on final itself, low wing or high wing... just look, it really is simple. Listen to the radio, keep your eyes peeled and fit in with the traffic. It's not all that different from a rectangular pattern... look for the traffic and fit in with it. Who has right of way?

I fly fairly tight patterns and have found I can fall off the perch (remember thats the point you start your final turn from), land and pull off the runway before typical GA straight-in's (both from a true straight in and a rectangular pattern) have even reached short final.

If you remember when we flew the B-25 you did curved final turns. It is FAR easier to judge the geometry of the turn and your descent rate in a constant turn rather than trying to pull two 90 degree turns out of your A.... For all the for-de-rol about folks doing rectangular patterns forever it is still one of the most botched maneuvers out there. Judging two turns that should be descending and combining turn rate and radius with wind is very hard to see. And that leads directly to VERY WIDE/LONG patterns that we see all the time. And in my opinion contributes to the Stall/Turn departures we see every year.

Come back to Texas and I'll make you a believer... even in your 210. You don't have to see the runway ALL the time;) Oh, and this is also a pitch to practice those Private PTS maneuvers like S-turns across a road and turns about a point. Those maneuvers were designed to teach combining turn rate/radius problems with real-world wind situations.

gunny

--------------------
Gunny
www.eagleflyingmuseum.org


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Terry Carraway
Top Gun


Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 7098
Loc: Maryland
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Scott Perdue (50F)]
      #433011 - 11/25/16 09:03 AM

Quote:

If you remember when we flew the B-25 you did curved final turns. It is FAR easier to judge the geometry of the turn and your descent rate in a constant turn rather than trying to pull two 90 degree turns out of your A.... For all the for-de-rol about folks doing rectangular patterns forever it is still one of the most botched maneuvers out there. Judging two turns that should be descending and combining turn rate and radius with wind is very hard to see. And that leads directly to VERY WIDE/LONG patterns that we see all the time. And in my opinion contributes to the Stall/Turn departures we see every year.




This is the point I have been trying to make.

--------------------
Terry
Mostly 0W3


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Randy Sohn
Gradn Exlated Ordre of teh Fyling Fingres


Reged: 08/31/01
Posts: 23187
Loc: Savage, MN - U.S.A.
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Scott Perdue (50F)]
      #433013 - 11/25/16 10:34 AM

Quote:

... just look, it really is simple. Listen to the radio, keep your eyes peeled and fit in with the traffic...... It is FAR easier to judge the geometry of the turn......And that leads directly to VERY WIDE/LONG patterns that we see all the time...... with real-world wind situations




Yup, been reading all the comments and it suddenly made me recall the traffic pattern at REE. Once a month or so, each B-25 IP would get the "mobile control" duty, a 5-6 hour duty of going out to the mobile control unit/tower facility parked next to/along side the active runway and controlling the local traffic by radio. If we saw someone extending the downwind before turning base leg we'd radio him (and we did!) - "aircraft on the extended downwind, go around now AT ALTITUDE, aircraft behind him, turn a normal base".

Lots easier to judge the whole picture from a continuous turn, thus the SFO patterns with their "high key" - "low key" - "runway" sight picture. But they aren't gonna happen given the environment and incompatible aircraft situations.

Thinking back, concur with Dux in that prolly 95% of my air carrier landings were "straight ins". Bob could do a world of good by making sure his students understand that a straight-in is NOT illegal (as I've had many attempt to tell me).

Final thought, "Pay attention Lt., we'll ALL live longer that way!"

best, randy


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tom Charlton
Top Gun


Reged: 04/28/04
Posts: 2221
Loc: The west coast of Florida
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Terry Carraway]
      #433099 - 11/28/16 09:42 AM

Quote:

Jet flame out patterns tend to have higher altitude key points due to the sink rates.


Hi Terry,

Flew out of KBOW for many years and our tower had a letter of agreement with Macdilldo AFB to use our airport for practice SFOs with their single engine F-16s.

So on Return To Base from Avon Park bombing range they’d start a high key overhead at 12,000’. A tight 360 would line them up with the runway. The LOA didn’t permit landings just a missed approach. They’d usually do several before heading home.

Ha, one day an engine came apart on spool-up. Fugly fire’n brimstone with rounds cooking off. Pilot survived with successful plan B.

Regards,
Tom Charlton (was always fun to step out the back door of my office and watch)

--------------------
The airplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, 1939.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Terry Carraway
Top Gun


Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 7098
Loc: Maryland
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Tom Charlton]
      #433114 - 11/29/16 09:17 AM

I have seen the diagrams of Flame Out patterns, but have never actually flown one. All my time was with 2 engines. So we just practiced single engine work.

--------------------
Terry
Mostly 0W3


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Randy Sohn
Gradn Exlated Ordre of teh Fyling Fingres


Reged: 08/31/01
Posts: 23187
Loc: Savage, MN - U.S.A.
Re: Circular Approach v Traditional Pattern [Re: Terry Carraway]
      #433134 - 11/29/16 10:32 PM

Quote:

seen the diagrams of Flame Out patterns




In T-33 flight training, we used 55% with "boards out" (speed brakes) to equal the descent rate of a actual FO. Keeping the RPMs up like that on a SFO enabled "no lag" during the power application on a go-around. The student, of course, had nothing to do with it, it was the IPs's duty to - first cut the throttle while pronouncing a "flameout" (forced landing) and then to advance the throttle to 55% and put the boards out.

best, randy


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 45 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Mike Overly 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 10828

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us AVSIG

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Logout   Main Index    AVSIG Aviation Forum