What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Near Miss. Why we fly a standard pattern, or maybe should.

Status
Not open for further replies.

JonJay

Well Known Member
I thought I would share an experience I had with a Near Miss a couple of weeks ago. I normally don't start many threads, but was encouraged to do so in this case.
I fly out of Tillamook Oregon, a WWII Naval Air Station and Blimp Base. It is very typical of the WWII airports that where built after Pearl Harbor up and down the West Coast. Large fields with very good runways oriented for our coastal conditions. One Blimp Hangar is still there, largest free span structure in the world, and a couple of the round launch pads. It is a great place for people to train, and only a 20 minute or so flight for a 150 to get from our busiest training airport in Hillsboro Or.
The airport has been getting busier over the past few years as folks have discovered the relatively un-congested airspace, cheap fuel. Just yesterday I flew with my wife and upon our return, there where five aircraft working the area. I would still say this is unusual, but becoming more frequent.
My story:

I was returning from a local flight. I heard three aircraft announcing positions and doing pattern work. I oriented myself for a 45 entry for 31, the runway being used. I announced 5 miles west of the field with my intent. Immediately following my call, a Bonanza called 7 miles west and that he would be looking for the RV. All good.

I entered the 45 soon after and announced my position. I entered downwind ahead of a 172 doing pattern work. He had just turned cross wind. I noticed a Citation holding for clearance, a call made earlier, on 31 hold short line.
All good,

As I approach my base turn, the Citation calls the runway and rolls to position. Ok, a few more seconds and I would have landed and been clear, but, hey, he's been waiting. Now the decision tree......

I could easily land before the take off point of the Citation, but I am in no hurry and out of an abundance of caution, decided I would not continue to land for wake turbulence avoidance. I decided not to land.

I could extend my downwind, but I have a 172 behind me, and a Bonanza somewhere behind us both? No sense in stretching this thing out for two minutes.

I could do a 360 and re-enter the pattern behind the 172, but there is a Bonanza out there somewhere, and he hasn't called in his 45 entry. He hasn't called in at all.

So, I called out my intentions. RV turning base will maintain 1000' (pattern altitude), fly the runway center line and re-enter downwind. My intentions where turn cross wind and re-enter, just as if I had a go around, or was doing pattern work.
All good.

Shortly before I was going to announce my turn to cross wind, a had a windscreen full of Bonanza belly. What the He.....xxx! The Bonanza announced that he saw me and he must have been stepped on. Huh? He continued his odd modified cross wind, 45 degrees to the centerline, pitched up aggressively, and dropped his gear in the middle of his turn to downwind. All done at pattern altitude

I follow around, land behind him, and he taxis to fuel. I land short and back taxi on the cross runway 19 to my hangar. I call for the Bonanza. No answer. I ask the 172 still working the pattern if he heard the Bonanza make any calls after he called 7 miles west? No. Did he hear my calls? Yes. click click

At my hangar, one of my hangar neighbors is waiting for me. He was walking his dog and saw the whole thing. He is angry as ****.
That Bonanza comes in here for fuel often. Did you go talk to him, did you get his N number? He comes in from the east and does this hopped up weird turn, drops his gear and enters the downwind. He's going to hurt somebody! I said I didn't talk to him and honestly don't do that anymore as past experience tells me idiots like that don't care or listen. My bad.

The next day, another neighbor comes over and says he heard I had a scare. He's a CFI and does training locally. I walked him through the scenario and my decisions. He felt I did what he would have done and didn't offer an alternative. Directly over the runway is supposed to be the safest place in the pattern right?

So, what happened?
The Bonanza mis-announced his direction. He was east, not west. It happens.
I couldn't see the Bonanza as he was coming in right and behind me at that weird cross wind angle.

The Bonanza came in and made his moves at pattern altitude.

The entire point of this post is a reminder. Standard pattern entries exist for a reason. This is a prime example of a close call that should have never happened.
Did I make all of the right decisions? Perhaps, perhaps not, doesn't matter. If the Bonanza came in with a standard entry, or even did his modified cross wind above pattern altitude, it isn't great, but it probably doesn't end up in a close call.

Most of us do non-standard pattern entries from time to time. I do. I will practice an initial and break. I will fly a cross wind and enter downwind if the pattern doesn't have other aircraft, or isn't very busy and spacing looks good. I will occasionally go straight in, traffic permitting.

Also, remember, there may be folks not talking or without radios?

A standard pattern entry is the safest way to enter a pattern. We all know that, but a reminder doesn't hurt.

Be Safe out there!
 
I had that happen the other day at our uncontrolled airport. Two other planes in the pattern, all diligently announcing... I was just going to turn base when a guy in a Cub made his initial announcement that he was on a straight-in final and 3 miles out. I couldn't see him so extended my downwind until I did. Screwed up all three of us in the pattern. Irritating. I know the guy...nice new Carbon Cub. I ran into him yesterday and commented on the busy pattern that day. He knew what he did and apologized.
 
Jon

I agree with you on this. Entering into the traffic pattern at an uncontrolled airport requires good communication between existing traffic and new arrivals. Non-standard entry is okay but requires even better communication. Too many times I’ve heard people call out incorrect cardinal entry positions and even wrong runways (35 vs 17). I’ve been guilty of this a few times myself - it happens!

But when someone is a repeat offender, or create a safety of flight situation they need to be called to task - for everyone’s sake. They may need to be reported to the local FSDO if they continue their unsafe behavior.
 
and I suppose the Bonanza isn't running ADSB, so no option to get a traffic alert...

My adsb saved me from a close one the other day. Got a traffic alert and so leveled off my departure climb. Finally spotted him at my 8.
 
Stupid people in the pattern......

and I suppose the Bonanza isn't running ADSB, so no option to get a traffic alert...
My adsb saved me from a close one the other day. Got a traffic alert and so leveled off my departure climb. Finally spotted him at my 8.

Makes me crazy when my ADS-B says there is someone out there and I can't find them....:eek::eek::eek:

The pattern at my home field is always interesting. There is a flight school here and one at a near-by airport (KBJC) that has both fixed-wing and rotor-wing. The helicopters can be ANYwhere both in the pattern and on the ground. There are some pilots that think NORDO is just perfectly OK at a busy airport. Legal? Yes. Good idea? Let me think.....

I start listening to the airport frequency 20 miles out in SuzieQ and 10 miles out in the Cub. I call 10 miles out in SuzieQ and 5 miles out in the Cub with where I am, altitude, where I'm going (airport) and what runway I am expecting to use, and when they can expect to see me arrive. Then multiple position reports after that initial call. I do standard patterns unless there is NO one in the pattern or have called in. I think it's idiotic that Cirrus (usually) or other fast airplanes call 3-5 miles out on the initial call and sometimes think a straight in from wherever they are is a good idea. The typical Cirrus pattern seems to be 1-2 miles from the airport on downwind at cruise speed, apparently that far out so they can slow down. I am always looking way further out than normal pattern distance. The Class D airspace is 1.5 miles from the airport and there are multiple incursions into that airspace, to the point they were putting a warning at the end of the ADIS not to blow the airspace. :rolleyes: There are many arrivals that it is apparent they have NOT been listening to the frequency. "Blowby 542 at the blue water tower (2.5 miles out). Anyone else in the pattern?" Makes one appreciate the visibility we have in our airplanes!
 
Last edited:
Good time to review recommended operations at non-towered airports.


Excellent resource. I read both through and it was a good refresher. I even made some assumptions that could be corrected in my original write up.
Is there a definition for “congested pattern”? Seems pretty open to interpretation. I think the pattern is congested when theres even one other airplane! Ha!
 
Glad to see someone post the AC on this. It's one of the better ones.

I'm surprised by the number of pilots who refuse to fly an upwind leg (like you did) although I would recommend side-stepping a bit to the right (with left traffic) so you can see the runway below you before you turn crosswind.

I think you absolutely did the right thing, and you ABSOLUTELY kept your head on a swivel. If everyone does everything the "right" way, it's a non-event. It takes one knucklehead + complacency in others to = a midair.

Pattern altitude at the approach end is, indeed, the safest place in the pattern.

Usually.

EDIT - it's congested when I don't get a happy funtime feeling that everyone is where I think they are.
 
Thanks Bill. Noted.

I will correct one error. The Tillamook Blimp Hangar is the largest “wood” free span structure in the world and shares that with the other few remaining. There are certainly larger free span structures, just not made of wood.
 
Instead of position reports establish two-way communication with other aircraft in the pattern and work something out. I start listening and talking 20 miles out, then 10, and 5. My patterns are tight by modern standards, within gliding distance at all times so I always run the risk of cutting someone off flying a five mile final in a Cessna 150 or a Citation on a 10 mile R Nav approach.
 
Instead of position reports establish two-way communication with other aircraft in the pattern and work something out. I start listening and talking 20 miles out, then 10, and 5. My patterns are tight by modern standards, within gliding distance at all times so I always run the risk of cutting someone off flying a five mile final in a Cessna 150 or a Citation on a 10 mile R Nav approach.

Kinda tough to do, when you're flying IFR and approach doesn't hand you over to advisory frequency until 7 miles out - sometimes closer.

"Appears to be multiple targets in the pattern..."
 
I don’t want to hear from anybody 20 out. You would do well to read the AC on communications in uncontrolled airports.

Almost all mid airs and near misses occur very near the airport. Clogging the frequency or accidentally stepping on someone at a critical time could lead to a bad result.
 
I would have reported him to the FSDO. He may have a great reason for being stupid, but it's the FSDO's job to find out.

Let's strive to become aviators and not just pilots...Consequently, there are safe reasons to fly non-standard. I had someone question why I was flying a right pattern when it was left traffic. Simple...there's several aircraft over a NHRA race on that side that I don't care to hit.
 
Also, remember, there may be folks not talking or without radios?

Maybe I'm a bit of a complainer but in the modern world of electronics where a handheld radio can be had for less than $200, I don't know why it's still allowed that planes can fly without a radio. Seems like a basic piece of safety equipment. I mean an ELT is required hardware and its usefulness is debatable, but a radio is optional and is a practical safety component on virtually EVERY flight? I don't mean the panel of a vintage cub needs to get spoiled with a panel mounted radio, but NORDO needs to be reserved for emergencies, not for pilot discretion.

Just my opinion.
 
I have had several experiences like that and it is scary and frustrating that folks do non standard stuff without telling anyone about it. I had a scare that keeps me from putting too much stock in position reports. I come to an airport and enter the downwind via a 45. After I announce, som guy says he is on a 7 mile downwind. He keeps updating his downwind position. never says that he sees me or works with me to coordinate (apparently in his mind he just reports so others can get out of his way), just keeps giving downwind positions and he is getting close. Just about strain my neck trying to see behind me and make the turn to base and there he is in my windshield and he then gets on the radio and screams (I had been spending too much time looking behind me to find this guy as he never stated visual contact and feared he would over run me) Apparently this pilot calls a straight in final a "downwind." The proximity was not close enough to be a serious scare, but really makes me question the skill and intelligence level of some of my peers sharing the sky. I am a big proponent of following standards and announcing intentions and positions as I think it enhances safety. However some just don't care and others just don't seem to possess the mental capacity to be able to do it correctly, so I no longer accept those reports as factual. I always assume they are wrong and have my head on a swivel.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm a bit of a complainer but in the modern world of electronics where a handheld radio can be had for less than $200, I don't know why it's still allowed that planes can fly without a radio. Seems like a basic piece of safety equipment. I mean an ELT is required hardware and its usefulness is debatable, but a radio is optional and is a practical safety component on virtually EVERY flight? I don't mean the panel of a vintage cub needs to get spoiled with a panel mounted radio, but NORDO needs to be reserved for emergencies, not for pilot discretion.

Just my opinion.

Agreed. In my book flying without a radio is about as smart as riding a motorcycle on the interstate without a helmet - but it's still legal (in some states).

Don't remember who said it but - "Stupid kills, but not nearly often enough to really help."
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm a bit of a complainer but in the modern world of electronics where a handheld radio can be had for less than $200, I don't know why it's still allowed that planes can fly without a radio. Seems like a basic piece of safety equipment. I mean an ELT is required hardware and its usefulness is debatable, but a radio is optional and is a practical safety component on virtually EVERY flight? I don't mean the panel of a vintage cub needs to get spoiled with a panel mounted radio, but NORDO needs to be reserved for emergencies, not for pilot discretion.

Just my opinion.

The radio is not really the issue. The FAA still DOES NOT require pilots to communicate at a non towered airport, even if you have a radio. According the to the FARs, it is purely optional. Plenty of stubborn folks that refuse to speak on either of the two radios they have turned on. Plenty of FARs that require you to use a piece of equipment if you have it, but the FAA refuses to address this issue. I have never really understood why, given their seeming commitment to safety issues and just don't see how requiring communication would not improve safety.
 
Last edited:
I don’t want to hear from anybody 20 out. You would do well to read the AC on communications in uncontrolled airports.

Almost all mid airs and near misses occur very near the airport. Clogging the frequency or accidentally stepping on someone at a critical time could lead to a bad result.

When I'm 20 miles out I will probably be on the ground in 6 minutes.
 
I fly out of an uncontrolled field that is between two controlled airspaces so most aircraft entering have unconventional pattern entries since it is difficult to enter normally. We are under a 1700 ft (1500 agl) umbrella of a class B that drops to the surface just 2 miles to the east and have a class d airport whose ring gets within about 3 miles to the west. All approaching and departing paths go to north and south for a north/south runway. You can squeeze in a downwind 45 entry but requires pattern aircraft to be flying tight patterns. Most have ADSB due to class b umbrella but we have plenty of antiques on the field that are no electrical system so don’t have ADSB.
I just have learn to listen and watch everything when entering pattern and not trusting anything. Stay alert and sometimes even ask for a position report for someone if you have not heard from them in a while and don’t see them. Probably not acceptable practice but By asking I hope I am teaching others to use their radio and better safe than sorry.
 
Last edited:
I've had enough experiences at uncontrolled fields that lead me to believe that an overshoot at pattern altitude down the active runway is a Bad Idea(tm). Aircraft flying a midfield entry cross over without expecting traffic to be there, because mid-field 99.999% of the time any other aircraft in the circuit will be on the runway, either rolling out on landing or rolling on takeoff.

If I overshoot at an uncontrolled field, I do it "half-way", splitting the difference between pattern altitude and the runway elevation. Descend, fly the runway sidestepped so I can keep an eye on the reason i'm overshooting, then climb back to pattern and continue the circuit for another go.
 
We've all made mistakes and we've all seen some bizarre stuff at our local (busy) non-towered airports. The minute 1 aircraft - the Bonanza in this case - had developed a local reputation for being a problem, then I think its time for somebody to grab his N-number and report this funky maneuver to the FSDO. Not a popular choice, but as already mentioned, it is only a matter of time before he kills himself and/or somebody else. Perhaps he's not busting any FARs, but the dangers associated with what he's doing may at least garner a chat from an ASI.
 
I've had enough experiences at uncontrolled fields that lead me to believe that an overshoot at pattern altitude down the active runway is a Bad Idea(tm). Aircraft flying a midfield entry cross over without expecting traffic to be there, because mid-field 99.999% of the time any other aircraft in the circuit will be on the runway, either rolling out on landing or rolling on takeoff.

If I overshoot at an uncontrolled field, I do it "half-way", splitting the difference between pattern altitude and the runway elevation. Descend, fly the runway sidestepped so I can keep an eye on the reason i'm overshooting, then climb back to pattern and continue the circuit for another go.

That certainly was my experience, however, that would have put me at 500’ off the ground and directly exposed to the Citations wake turbulence, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid. Side stepping would have exposed me even more.
I respect what you’re saying Rob, but not sure I would have done anything different. Thank you though. You’re the first person to offer another option that I didn’t consider. When I “go around”, I do exactly what you do, but I am usually much lower than pattern altitude already.
If this ever happens again, I might just depart the area for a bit and come back! Still, this would have been a non-event if the Bonanza did a proper pattern entry, which is the main point of these discussions.
 
Maybe I'm a bit of a complainer but in the modern world of electronics where a handheld radio can be had for less than $200, I don't know why it's still allowed that planes can fly without a radio. Seems like a basic piece of safety equipment. I mean an ELT is required hardware and its usefulness is debatable, but a radio is optional and is a practical safety component on virtually EVERY flight? I don't mean the panel of a vintage cub needs to get spoiled with a panel mounted radio, but NORDO needs to be reserved for emergencies, not for pilot discretion.

Just my opinion.

And maybe I think that there is no good reason for you not to have anti-lock brakes on your RV - the technology is well understood, and we’ve had them on cars (and big airplanes) forever, so I think YOU need to spend the money to have them….want to go down that rabbit hole? Next, we’ll require you to have a BRS….

But seriously - the radio issue isn’t actually about having or not having a handheld. If I asked for a show of hands of experienced pilots who have never found their radio tuned to the wrong CTAF frequency after landing, I bet no hands go up. Everyone will make that mistake at some time (and probably several times). So if you are depending on everyone in the vicinity of the airport to be on the radio all the time, you are making a big mistake. Assume that there are always NORDO airplanes in your vicinity - even innocent, well-equipped ones - if you want to have a long life flying airplanes….

Paul
 
We've all made mistakes and we've all seen some bizarre stuff at our local (busy) non-towered airports. The minute 1 aircraft - the Bonanza in this case - had developed a local reputation for being a problem, then I think its time for somebody to grab his N-number and report this funky maneuver to the FSDO. Not a popular choice, but as already mentioned, it is only a matter of time before he kills himself and/or somebody else. Perhaps he's not busting any FARs, but the dangers associated with what he's doing may at least garner a chat from an ASI.

Our local airport community is keeping an eye out for this guy. In hind sight, I shouldn’t have been selfish. Regardless of my bad experiences in the past, I should have followed this guy to the fuel and had a “chat” or at least got his N-number.
 
Not talking...........

Maybe I'm a bit of a complainer but in the modern world of electronics where a handheld radio can be had for less than $200, I don't know why it's still allowed that planes can fly without a radio. Seems like a basic piece of safety equipment. I mean an ELT is required hardware and its usefulness is debatable, but a radio is optional and is a practical safety component on virtually EVERY flight? I don't mean the panel of a vintage cub needs to get spoiled with a panel mounted radio, but NORDO needs to be reserved for emergencies, not for pilot discretion. Just my opinion.

I was in the pattern recently and one of the flight school 172s was "at the blue water tower, inbound" (to the West of the field) as I was approaching from the East. I saw him enter the pattern on a 45 degree; no radio communication; turned base: nothing; turned final: nothing. I was now on base behind him (instructor with a student!!) as he departed again back into the pattern without a word said. "Xray Bravo. You on the radio?" "Yes." "You are not reporting your positions in the pattern." "I don't have to report." "No, legally you don't but it is a common courtesy not to mention a lot safer for those of us who are in the pattern if you do." Suddenly his radio communication came alive. And he was with a student!:mad::mad::mad: Living at an airport can be very interesting at times.... And that is one of MANY stories..... Radio etiquette is apparently a back burner issue these days....
 
While I absolutely agree radio communications plays a big role in safety, I started this discussion about standard pattern entry. Assuming nobody is talking at all, if everyone is doing a standard 45 entry, and keeping eyes outside, we’re all safer.
Let’s not drift too far as radio communications opens up an entire new topic.
 
I've had a few occurrences of unplanned close proximity flying, all were near the airport and don't recall any involving proper or improper traffic pattern. All of the actual events could have or should have been resolved with eyeballs looking in the right directions at the right time.

Radios aren't a perfect tool and arguably contribute a false sense of security or even added risk in some cases. In my area, there's this #### trend of announcing taxiing progress on the radio at every intersection. Then there's the unnecessarily long call signs or long exchanges on busy days. And my favorite - incorrect radio calls. Someone turning on crosswind and accidentally announcing they're turning base - when I'm turning on base. That's fun! But all you can do is roll the plane wildly left and right looking for the plane because the frequency is locked up with, "Cessna Skyhawk November one-seven-niner-Charlie-Delta, uhh, taxiing across runway , uhh one-two at Lima for the south tee hangars." SMH :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
In Driver's Ed many years ago, the teacher explained defensive driving as assuming that everyone else on the road was an idiot and trying not to be one yourself. I've carried that over into my flying, rightly or wrongly, but I've seen enough idiots at the controls of other planes to be convinced that I'm on the right track.

As to NORDO, out here in the boonies there are many, many stick-and-fabric airplanes without radios bopping around in our vast uncontrolled airspace. This is never more evident than during pancake breakfast season. Over the years, I've learned that there are just some such fly-ins that are unsafe (IMHO) to fly into.
 
Seriously......?

I agree with the AIM that using the standard pattern entries, exits, etc are what should be done especially at busy not-towered airports (seldom have I had any type of standard pattern at a controlled field as it behooves the traffic flow to NOT use standard patterns). But using other entries may also be the better choice based on the pilot-in-command and the current traffic or conditions at the airfield.

Please lets not go down the "make more regulation path" which makes for more burdensome regulations....but not necessarily safer conditions (no more than thinking having a legal speed limit means nobody speeds). What we have is sufficient and whether you are flying around in the middle of nowhere or the pattern it's about vigilance.

I agree with JonJay that to speak to the offender(I didn't say attack them) may have brought to light that he and his passengers almost got a clearance via Direct to eternity....it may or may not work but it is worth a try before trying to get the FAA involved. Heck I have spoken to flight schools about the B747 patterns they teach there C172 students and how that messes up the pattern....if my student ever did that they would suddenly "lose their engine" and perform an emergency landing in the plain sight of what was a perfectly good runway!!!:eek:

And rest assured to say 91:13 "Careless and Reckless" is not as easy an regulation to get to stick as you may think....especially when there are no regulations that have been violated. Which in my opinion is a good thing lest any infraction (and we have all done them....knowingly or unwittingly) could be cause for suspension, revocation and legal enforcement. Like Paul said "Do you want to go down that rabbit hole?....you may find it to be a badgers den in the end! :eek: IMHO
 
There's no free lunch

Even if everybody flew a 45 entry to the standard pattern, there will still be conflicts. There are pilot-induced variations to the 45, that is, different people fly the 45 differently sometimes, and there are variations in the size of the traffic pattern. And, even if ALL pattern entries began with a 45 flown exactly the same, there would be potential conflicts at the same point in space, as aircraft converge on the 45 entry point from various directions.

A conversation with Bonanza pilot seems appropriate. Not to inform him/ her of what they're doing wrong, but to share a point of view. Who knows, maybe this pilot might see a way to modify his/ her methods to be more compatible with others in the operating environment. Such as better CTAF communications, describing the intent to cross over the airport to a direct downwind entry, and maybe squaring-up the crossover path to better enable see-and-avoid.
 
Last edited:
I agree with the AIM that using the standard pattern entries, exits, etc are what should be done especially at busy not-towered airports (seldom have I had any type of standard pattern at a controlled field as it behooves the traffic flow to NOT use standard patterns). But using other entries may also be the better choice based on the pilot-in-command and the current traffic or conditions at the airfield.

Please lets not go down the "make more regulation path" which makes for more burdensome regulations....but not necessarily safer conditions (no more than thinking having a legal speed limit means nobody speeds). What we have is sufficient and whether you are flying around in the middle of nowhere or the pattern it's about vigilance.

I agree with JonJay that to speak to the offender(I didn't say attack them) may have brought to light that he and his passengers almost got a clearance via Direct to eternity....it may or may not work but it is worth a try before trying to get the FAA involved. Heck I have spoken to flight schools about the B747 patterns they teach there C172 students and how that messes up the pattern....if my student ever did that they would suddenly "lose their engine" and perform an emergency landing in the plain sight of what was a perfectly good runway!!!:eek:

And rest assured to say 91:13 "Careless and Reckless" is not as easy an regulation to get to stick as you may think....especially when there are no regulations that have been violated. Which in my opinion is a good thing lest any infraction (and we have all done them....knowingly or unwittingly) could be cause for suspension, revocation and legal enforcement. Like Paul said "Do you want to go down that rabbit hole?....you may find it to be a badgers den in the end! :eek: IMHO

Nicely said.

The other thing I have a problem with is the “I’m going to report him to the FAA” mentality. Yes, there may be a time for that but talking to the other pilot first may be a better plan.
 
The radio is not really the issue. The FAA still DOES NOT require pilots to communicate at a non towered airport, even if you have a radio. According the to the FARs, it is purely optional. Plenty of stubborn folks that refuse to speak on either of the two radios they have turned on.

About 15 years ago, an active CFI with two functioning com radios approached my home airport without using the radio. He entered it on a very low altitude 45 to final. He was based at the airport. It was a very busy Saturday afternoon after a long period of bad weather at what was probably the busiest non-towered airport in the Los Angeles basin. There were maybe 5 in the pattern, and that was about as quiet as it got.

Anyway, I was in a big open cockpit biplane. The final result was a lot like the OP's near miss.

Well, without the "miss" part. It was an actual midair collision. Contrary to popular belief, people do sometimes survive them. I did. Richard Collins did. Alan Klapmeier did.

There weren't even any injuries to anyone on either aircraft. But I thought about it every single day for many years. I spent a lot of time researching the concept of see-and-avoid. I wrote articles about it (here's one from 2013). I gave seminars about it. I taught students about it.

Even today, it amazes me how often the TCAS in my G650 will tell me there's traffic at 12 o'clock, same altitude, and ATC will call it out, and even with two pilots sporting 20/20 vision looking and KNOWING exactly where it is, we still never visually acquire it.

Maybe seven years later I was flying a Pitts S-2B in the aerobatic box at Borrego Springs during an competition when a V-35 flew through the middle of the box while I was flying an upline with vertical roll prior to a hammerhead. Someone on the box freq said "Traffic aler...." and I saw the plane go right by underneath me.

As much as I dislike FAA equipment mandates -- because I know they make flying more expensive and therefore price even more aviators out of the avocation -- I'm pretty happy with ADS-B.

The craziest part about the midair is that I later from one of his students that the CFI flying the other aircraft teaches all his students NOT to use the radio. Every now and then I'll still see him flying non-standard patterns without the use of his functional radios at Socal airports. Some people truly never learn.

--Ron
 
Heck I have spoken to flight schools about the B747 patterns they teach there C172 students and how that messes up the pattern....if my student ever did that they would suddenly "lose their engine" and perform an emergency landing in the plain sight of what was a perfectly good runway!!!:eek:

I SOOOO wish you were responsible for setting standards for flight instructors. ;) While I am sensitive to students and try to accommodate them, I so hate having to go 2 miles out on final when stuck behind them. WHile it may be good training for flying big iron, I just don't see why that needs to be addressed so early in one's training. I get the desire for a stabilized approach for students, but it shouldn't require 2 miles to achieve that.
 
Last edited:
Nicely said.

The other thing I have a problem with is the “I’m going to report him to the FAA” mentality. Yes, there may be a time for that but talking to the other pilot first may be a better plan.

Bob, I agree as a knee jerk reaction - a short discussion about ones perspective and ask to share theirs would be in order. But emotions could be high at landing. Mine would.

<snip>
Even today, it amazes me how often the TCAS in my G650 will tell me there's traffic at 12 o'clock, same altitude, and ATC will call it out, and even with two pilots sporting 20/20 vision looking and KNOWING exactly where it is, we still never visually acquire it.

Ron, I have had this happen and once turned on my wig wag where the opposing aircraft said - "have traffic"

I was looking straight (4 miles) at a DC9 one day and did not see it until he rolled/turned. He was on TO I was doing a crosswind - all as directed by tower. I remain amazed that I could not see it. 35 yrs ago and recall the view like it was yesterday.
 
Bob, I agree as a knee jerk reaction - a short discussion about ones perspective and ask to share theirs would be in order. But emotions could be high at landing. Mine would.

Also Agee.

I have had a few near misses, a couple mechanicals, an off field, ….. I don’t think you fly for 25 + years and not have some stories.
The odd thing, and I have many, is my emotions don’t change. My heart rate doesn’t go up, I don’t get angry or excited, it’s weird…. I should, but I don’t.

Maybe I’m missing the self preservation gene that a normal human should have!
 
The odd thing, and I have many, is my emotions don’t change. My heart rate doesn’t go up, I don’t get angry or excited, it’s weird…. I should, but I don’t.

Maybe I’m missing the self preservation gene that a normal human should have!

I completely understand that. I was cruising at 15,000 one day and my engine quit dead - and my reaction was "Huh? Wonder why it did that?"... and yes I was on plenty oxygen at the time.
 
That certainly was my experience, however, that would have put me at 500’ off the ground and directly exposed to the Citations wake turbulence, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid. Side stepping would have exposed me even more.
I'm not so sure you'd be any better off than on a normal approach, though. Jets always seem to come in on a shallower approach than I do in my RV, so my standard approach always places my flight path above theirs right up until the numbers where they converge. If I see a jet ahead, I tend to shift my touchdown point further along the runway (7000'+ here at home) and land long to be *really* sure i'm clear.

Anywhere on my final descent, normal or shifted, if I stop the descent at 500' i'm doing so from a position that's already above their path, and immediately rapidly diverging from their flight path as long as I stay horizontal and they continued to land. Add the propensity for wakes to descend from a flight path and not rise above it, and I would expect to be golden.

If there's something i've missed though, i'm happy to have it pointed out... Does anyone see anything wrong with this logic?

I respect what you’re saying Rob, but not sure I would have done anything different. Thank you though. You’re the first person to offer another option that I didn’t consider. When I “go around”, I do exactly what you do, but I am usually much lower than pattern altitude already.
Absolutely. Certainly not suggesting you did anything "wrong" in this situation, it worked out in the end, and anything you can walk away from is a good thing, right? :)
 
Good time to review recommended operations at non-towered airports.


I think this thread has ran out of life. The above from Carl is probably the most important thing to take away. Most of us, after flying for a few decades, think we know what we know, then something happens to wake us up…. This was a good review for me and I appreciate it and all of the constructive discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top