Why do some people fly 747 patterns

[SkyBoy1981]

http://img474.imageshack.us/img474/7733/mx1w2912aw.gif

 

[CalifDan]

My (strong) opinion on pattern work (in spam cans & rag wings): Crosswind leg should be just long enough to roll wings level and check for traffic. Pull power to idle abeam midfield glide it all the way to landing, and keep all turns 30 degrees bank.... no less!

These threads are always interesting in that many of the responses completely fail to take into account that airport conditions, traffic in the pattern and type of aircraft will and does affect how you may fly the pattern.

Unlike the poster quoted above, I don't have opinions so strong that I'm not willing to adjust based on conditions, aircraft, etc. He might find it interesting to arrest the descent rate in my Duchess if he pulled it to idle at midfield. If he did, I'd suggest a very quick turn towards the runway and carry some extra knots all the way into the flair, because you will need it to arrest the descent rate. I usually carry a little power until into the flair.

Also, I try to stay under 30 degress bank in the pattern. If you need more, you didn't plan something right.

Back to the original post. It's not just the large patterns, its the pilots who were taught to slow to something close to approach speed downwind and maintain that "stabilized" approach all the way to the flair. And then they touch down on the numbers and slow taxi to the first exit 2500 feet down the runway, I'm sure thinking what great pilots they are while the Citation (cleared for a straight-in) that reported 12 miles out when they entered downwind is wondering if he will need to go around.

And before this causes the typical responses on here, I understand two things....the aircraft cleared to land owns the runway and the value of teaching the stabilized approach in light aircraft. However, ownership of the runway does not require poor thinking and a stabilized approach is more critical to a safe landing in a Citation than in a Cessna 150. Teach a stabilzed approach and then when they have it down, teach them how to fly patterns in varying conditions (I don't mean wind, I mean with different traffic loads and aircraft types) and at varying speeds.

Many years ago, even before TCA's, I use to fly my Mooney into SFO. Call them a bit over 5 miles out and sound like you knew how to use a radio, blend in with traffic and they were fine. I usually came down final a few knots below gear speed aiming somewhere near the numbers....at 100 feet or so, pull the power and start triming up, add flaps as necessary, touch down in the last 5000 feet and turn off with a short taxi to Butler. It's about conditions.

I fly out of an airport where a major foreign carrier does their intial flight training. They teach them to fly very large patterns. I'm sure it suits their ultimate goal, but it's too bad they aren't teaching them more about flying the immediate environment. There will come a day when they will be on final in a 747 and cursing the slow GA aircraft ahead, and in my opinion, should have little to complain about given the delays they caused others during training. It's even worse now because of the "position and hold" changes.

Aircraft can't fly in a vacumn but it's surprising how many pilots do.

 

[PositionandHold]

A lot of students do that. One way to stop it is to pull their engine whenever they consistently fly wide patterns whenever you're up. That usually solves it real fast (assuming these are students).

 

[sleddriver71]

quote by CalifDan
"....at 100 feet or so, pull the power and start triming up, add flaps as necessary, touch down in the last 5000 feet and turn off with a short taxi to Butler. It's about conditions."

Flying the high speed approach is often a good idea when in a small plane going into big and busy airports like SFO, but a couple of things I wonder why you do the way you do. Do you really add any or all flaps at 100'? Why do you land on the last 5,000'? You can do the same high speed approach but slow down just a little sooner and get off the runway as soon as possible instead of flying down half of it and wasting time. It may be more convenient for you to not have to taxi as far and if there is no one behind you on final it's certainly an option but remember, you are expected to touch down in the touchdown zone so request a long landing if you are planning to touch down beyond that zone.

 

[acaTerry]

That's what happens when you put a pilots uniform and epaulettes on these 10 hour wonder pilots.

YES!!

 

[WGP guy]

I would prefer a small plane flying a big pattern than a big plane flying a small pattern as I saw today. I was driving on the interstate, and saw signs for an airport (I had no idea which one at the time), and decided to go check it out. Well I turn off towards the airport and see a C-130 (Air Force) fly right overhead. Well I get to the airport and watch this guy, he is flying an amazingly tight pattern. He was flying downwind about 1/4 mile from the airport, and was litterally banking about 40 degrees to do a 180 (no base) onto final, starting when he was abeam the start of the threshold, he would roll out about 150 feet above the runway and land. Don't ask me who it was, where he was from or where I was :erm:. Also this was a towered airport.

 

[CalifDan]

Flying the high speed approach is often a good idea when in a small plane going into big and busy airports like SFO, but a couple of things I wonder why you do the way you do. Do you really add any or all flaps at 100'? Why do you land on the last 5,000'? You can do the same high speed approach but slow down just a little sooner and get off the runway as soon as possible instead of flying down half of it and wasting time. It may be more convenient for you to not have to taxi as far and if there is no one behind you on final it's certainly an option but remember, you are expected to touch down in the touchdown zone so request a long landing if you are planning to touch down beyond that zone.

The Mooney had hydraulic flaps that you pumped down. Gear speed was higher than the flap speed as I recall (it has been over 20 years). Holding the flaps allowed me a higher approach speed until nearer the runway. The Mooney also had a better attitude at touch down with some or all flaps out.

Because of potential wake turbulence, you are going to land a few thousand feet down the runway anyway. Add another few thousand and you can hit the high speed and get off the runway really fast.

Any long landings were always with tower concurrence. I think they appreciated that I was doing what I could to mix well, communicate clearly and stay out of the way. And yes, it was a shorter taxi. I don't think I ever took off from SFO in those days using the entire runway either. It was a different time...before oxygen rules, when you could still fly down the Grand Canyon, no Class B, Class C, etc., but on the other hand, I didn't have a color moving map to tell me where I was at a glance either.

 

[A Squared]

I would prefer a small plane flying a big pattern than a big plane flying a small pattern as I saw today. I was driving on the interstate, and saw signs for an airport (I had no idea which one at the time), and decided to go check it out. Well I turn off towards the airport and see a C-130 (Air Force) fly right overhead. Well I get to the airport and watch this guy, he is flying an amazingly tight pattern. He was flying downwind about 1/4 mile from the airport, and was litterally banking about 40 degrees to do a 180 (no base) onto final, starting when he was abeam the start of the threshold, he would roll out about 150 feet above the runway and land. Don't ask me who it was, where he was from or where I was :erm:. Also this was a towered airport.

Why would you care if a large airplane flew a tight pattern?

 

[FN FAL]

I would prefer a small plane flying a big pattern than a big plane flying a small pattern as I saw today. I was driving on the interstate, and saw signs for an airport (I had no idea which one at the time), and decided to go check it out. Well I turn off towards the airport and see a C-130 (Air Force) fly right overhead. Well I get to the airport and watch this guy, he is flying an amazingly tight pattern. He was flying downwind about 1/4 mile from the airport, and was litterally banking about 40 degrees to do a 180 (no base) onto final, starting when he was abeam the start of the threshold, he would roll out about 150 feet above the runway and land. Don't ask me who it was, where he was from or where I was :erm:. Also this was a towered airport.

"Literally" and "amazingly", I would think it is a good thing that target prone military aircraft with multiple crew members who can insure collision avoidance, practice a 40 degree turn once in while.

 

[wmuflyguy]

I would prefer a small plane flying a big pattern than a big plane flying a small pattern as I saw today. I was driving on the interstate, and saw signs for an airport (I had no idea which one at the time), and decided to go check it out. Well I turn off towards the airport and see a C-130 (Air Force) fly right overhead. Well I get to the airport and watch this guy, he is flying an amazingly tight pattern. He was flying downwind about 1/4 mile from the airport, and was litterally banking about 40 degrees to do a 180 (no base) onto final, starting when he was abeam the start of the threshold, he would roll out about 150 feet above the runway and land. Don't ask me who it was, where he was from or where I was :erm:. Also this was a towered airport.

The Air force dos a few more aggresive things than you would do in a 172. That approach to the runway was probably planned that way and done so for a reason. If I had the chance of being shot at, I wouldn't want to fly a slow and straight 3 mile final.