<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Head-to-head on Base</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?feed=rss2&#038;p=191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191</link>
	<description>A place to discuss safety-of-flight issues, procedures, techniques, and judgment.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:27:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gulf Coast Beaches</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21981</link>
		<dc:creator>Gulf Coast Beaches</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 06:02:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21981</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;strong&gt;Gulf Coast Beaches...&lt;/strong&gt;

“ ......]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Gulf Coast Beaches&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>“ &#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: echo golf</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21929</link>
		<dc:creator>echo golf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:33:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21929</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unfortunatley it&#039;s the wild wild west out there.  Set phasers to stun and blast him this way he won&#039;t be an unsafe burden to others in the future.  To all pilots who wish to avoid being blasted by Cory the armed pattern police, become acquainted with all available information...seems like I&#039;ve seen that before somewhere.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunatley it&#8217;s the wild wild west out there.  Set phasers to stun and blast him this way he won&#8217;t be an unsafe burden to others in the future.  To all pilots who wish to avoid being blasted by Cory the armed pattern police, become acquainted with all available information&#8230;seems like I&#8217;ve seen that before somewhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21897</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 02:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21897</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would think that the no answer you got from the PC-12 was acknowledgement of his mistake.  I would just keep a close eye on him as he is at least reporting his location and should be easy to avoid by extending downwinds.  

I do not think changing the ASOS or AWOS would help.  During a recent trip to Big Bear, I saw a pilot ignore the wind reportings and land the wrong way.  No one said anything until he was on final (the volunteers in the office) and he proceeded to land the wrong way.  He reached the end of the runway to find 3 planes waiting to take off, only then did he acknowledge his mistake and apologize to everyone as he turned around on the runway.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would think that the no answer you got from the PC-12 was acknowledgement of his mistake.  I would just keep a close eye on him as he is at least reporting his location and should be easy to avoid by extending downwinds.  </p>
<p>I do not think changing the ASOS or AWOS would help.  During a recent trip to Big Bear, I saw a pilot ignore the wind reportings and land the wrong way.  No one said anything until he was on final (the volunteers in the office) and he proceeded to land the wrong way.  He reached the end of the runway to find 3 planes waiting to take off, only then did he acknowledge his mistake and apologize to everyone as he turned around on the runway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FlyingRoscoe</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21893</link>
		<dc:creator>FlyingRoscoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21893</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The pilot should have questioned the A.T.C. about the landing Pattern if not familar with the area. The second Pilot should have let him  know he did not follow the published requirements.   If not only for the safety of ohters who might be comeing into the area of the airport to practice touch an go landings.  An as for straight  in aproaches. It is not safe or fair to the pilots that are in the pattern for You to come barreling straight in just because you called in Your position. This is a sure way to get yourself an others hurt. Let alone ruin a $250.00 Hamburger run.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The pilot should have questioned the A.T.C. about the landing Pattern if not familar with the area. The second Pilot should have let him  know he did not follow the published requirements.   If not only for the safety of ohters who might be comeing into the area of the airport to practice touch an go landings.  An as for straight  in aproaches. It is not safe or fair to the pilots that are in the pattern for You to come barreling straight in just because you called in Your position. This is a sure way to get yourself an others hurt. Let alone ruin a $250.00 Hamburger run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh-Daniel S. Davis</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21871</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh-Daniel S. Davis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 05:17:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FAA requires the pilot in command to &quot;become familiar with all available information for the flight&quot;.  There are many free internet terminals where AFD and chart information can be pulled up.

As for the best actions, first, take your exit to a safe place.  Trying to turn about in the pattern is not safe maneuvering.  There might be NORADO planes in the area, etc.

Second, advise the other pilot of published right traffic, and ask if the other pilot is willing to change to right traffic on the next loop.

Then, re-enter the traffic pattern based on his reply.  If he stays left, then you should stay left as a matter of safety.

If you were going to do pattern work, and if he exits the pattern, then you should move back to the published pattern.

If you could spot him, you could extend your downwind so as to ensure you came in behind him on final, but that sort of thing assumes matched speeds, or someone keeping an eye out for you.  Probably best to avoid doing that at a non-towered airport.

Basically, published or not, you as the PIC must do what is required to maintain the safety of the flight.  As PIC, you are specifically authorized to do so.

It&#039;s recommended to send an entry to NASA&#039;s ASRS with details of the encounter.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FAA requires the pilot in command to &#8220;become familiar with all available information for the flight&#8221;.  There are many free internet terminals where AFD and chart information can be pulled up.</p>
<p>As for the best actions, first, take your exit to a safe place.  Trying to turn about in the pattern is not safe maneuvering.  There might be NORADO planes in the area, etc.</p>
<p>Second, advise the other pilot of published right traffic, and ask if the other pilot is willing to change to right traffic on the next loop.</p>
<p>Then, re-enter the traffic pattern based on his reply.  If he stays left, then you should stay left as a matter of safety.</p>
<p>If you were going to do pattern work, and if he exits the pattern, then you should move back to the published pattern.</p>
<p>If you could spot him, you could extend your downwind so as to ensure you came in behind him on final, but that sort of thing assumes matched speeds, or someone keeping an eye out for you.  Probably best to avoid doing that at a non-towered airport.</p>
<p>Basically, published or not, you as the PIC must do what is required to maintain the safety of the flight.  As PIC, you are specifically authorized to do so.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s recommended to send an entry to NASA&#8217;s ASRS with details of the encounter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21870</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:42:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cory,

I figured that I would get blasted for what I said, but I am just trying to help.  This IS a forum to try to help air safety.  I should also say that I am not offended by your comments, I am just going to respond to your argument.

As far as added weight, I was not referring to a problem with the aircraft carrying it... I was referring to me.  Think about how many states a jet can cross in a few hours.  If I have a problem, I want to have charts (approach plates) available for the areas that I am flying over as well as my destination.  I also need to have both high and low enroute charts.  Let&#039;s not forget my ops specs and company manual.  As you can imagine, my chart bag is rapidly outgrowing the area in which I need to place it.  I flew for the airlines for quite a while and I can assure you, I never once saw a little green book in the cockpit.  

For the issue of money, you had better believe that it gets expensive.  If a flight department has 15 pilots, that full set of AFD&#039;s will cost over $3500 for the year.  If it comes down to (another) paycut for me, or getting an AFD, you can imagine what my response will be.  They have us sharing most of the IAP&#039;s from the &quot;library&quot; already.  

I just want to state again that I am not defending cheap operators or careless pilots.  I myself DO try to look up and print off the AFD info for my destination 99% of the time.  (flightplan.com is wonderful!)  There are times where passengers making last-minute changes or availability of internet make that difficult.  I just want to use this safety forum to get an active discussion going on about changes that would make things safer for all of us.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cory,</p>
<p>I figured that I would get blasted for what I said, but I am just trying to help.  This IS a forum to try to help air safety.  I should also say that I am not offended by your comments, I am just going to respond to your argument.</p>
<p>As far as added weight, I was not referring to a problem with the aircraft carrying it&#8230; I was referring to me.  Think about how many states a jet can cross in a few hours.  If I have a problem, I want to have charts (approach plates) available for the areas that I am flying over as well as my destination.  I also need to have both high and low enroute charts.  Let&#8217;s not forget my ops specs and company manual.  As you can imagine, my chart bag is rapidly outgrowing the area in which I need to place it.  I flew for the airlines for quite a while and I can assure you, I never once saw a little green book in the cockpit.  </p>
<p>For the issue of money, you had better believe that it gets expensive.  If a flight department has 15 pilots, that full set of AFD&#8217;s will cost over $3500 for the year.  If it comes down to (another) paycut for me, or getting an AFD, you can imagine what my response will be.  They have us sharing most of the IAP&#8217;s from the &#8220;library&#8221; already.  </p>
<p>I just want to state again that I am not defending cheap operators or careless pilots.  I myself DO try to look up and print off the AFD info for my destination 99% of the time.  (flightplan.com is wonderful!)  There are times where passengers making last-minute changes or availability of internet make that difficult.  I just want to use this safety forum to get an active discussion going on about changes that would make things safer for all of us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charity</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21862</link>
		<dc:creator>Charity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 19:57:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Completely agree with Cory.  Coming off an instrument approach to a field under VFR, you are supposed to observe the flow of traffic and conform to that.  I also don&#039;t have a problem with the an extended left downwind if vectored that way unless circling wasn&#039;t authorized on that side by the IAP, but if staying for closed traffic he should have definitely used the published procedures, especially if there was another airplane in the correct pattern.  I don&#039;t usually have a problem with this at the uncontrolled fields I fly it; the problem I have seen is when a runway is published as a calm wind runway for noise abatement and the other pilots use a straight in on the reciprocal runway.  I&#039;ve landed RWY 15 calm-wind only to have a non-communicating airplane land RWY 33 only a few minutes after me, and despite looking for traffic never seeing the other airplane.  That got my attention for sure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Completely agree with Cory.  Coming off an instrument approach to a field under VFR, you are supposed to observe the flow of traffic and conform to that.  I also don&#8217;t have a problem with the an extended left downwind if vectored that way unless circling wasn&#8217;t authorized on that side by the IAP, but if staying for closed traffic he should have definitely used the published procedures, especially if there was another airplane in the correct pattern.  I don&#8217;t usually have a problem with this at the uncontrolled fields I fly it; the problem I have seen is when a runway is published as a calm wind runway for noise abatement and the other pilots use a straight in on the reciprocal runway.  I&#8217;ve landed RWY 15 calm-wind only to have a non-communicating airplane land RWY 33 only a few minutes after me, and despite looking for traffic never seeing the other airplane.  That got my attention for sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sam ferguson</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21846</link>
		<dc:creator>sam ferguson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 14:11:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21846</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well at least it was a Pilatus and not a Baron! May be the same attitude toward a little Piper though. Myself, I would have reminded the Pilatus of right traffic and got on the ground and out of his way as soon as possible. It would be nice, since ADF or not, we sometimes dont get the information due to diversions or whatever, if the ASOS had the information under remarks.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well at least it was a Pilatus and not a Baron! May be the same attitude toward a little Piper though. Myself, I would have reminded the Pilatus of right traffic and got on the ground and out of his way as soon as possible. It would be nice, since ADF or not, we sometimes dont get the information due to diversions or whatever, if the ASOS had the information under remarks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Burson</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21836</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Burson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 05:40:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21836</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Our AWOS says: &quot;Remarks. Fly right traffic for runway 14. In addition, preferred calm wind runway is runway 14.&quot; This is due to a hospital &amp; school located near the airport. I have noticed that often the same person who forgoes a walk-around, also turns left immediately after takeoff. Recently I observed a pilot in such a hurry he forgot to untie the right wing tie-down. We can almost predict which pilots will do what, can&#039;t we?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Our AWOS says: &#8220;Remarks. Fly right traffic for runway 14. In addition, preferred calm wind runway is runway 14.&#8221; This is due to a hospital &amp; school located near the airport. I have noticed that often the same person who forgoes a walk-around, also turns left immediately after takeoff. Recently I observed a pilot in such a hurry he forgot to untie the right wing tie-down. We can almost predict which pilots will do what, can&#8217;t we?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Heileman</title>
		<link>http://blog.aopa.org/leadingedge/?p=191&#038;cpage=1#comment-21831</link>
		<dc:creator>David Heileman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 19:52:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=191#comment-21831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not sure that any of Bruce&#039;s four options are &quot;right&quot;, although option 1 seems best.  The PC-12 had the right of way until he landed.  After that he was supposed to share the airport with everyone else.  Touch-and-go&#039;s are not an IFR procedure, so the PC-12 pilot should not have done them unless he knew &quot;all available&quot; information for VFR flight in the vicinity of the airport, including traffic patterns.  If I couldn&#039;t engage the PC-12 pilot in enough radio dialog to resolve the conflict, I probably would have tried to time my pattern entry so that I could land just after he took off, thus avoiding conflict.  BTW, it seems to me that the issue of right vs left pattern for the SAME runway (as in this case) is not nearly as dangerous an issue as right pattern for one runway and left pattern for the OPPOSING runway (i.e., left for 09 and right for 27).  In the latter case, you stand a good chance of colliding head-on on the downwind, or on the runway!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure that any of Bruce&#8217;s four options are &#8220;right&#8221;, although option 1 seems best.  The PC-12 had the right of way until he landed.  After that he was supposed to share the airport with everyone else.  Touch-and-go&#8217;s are not an IFR procedure, so the PC-12 pilot should not have done them unless he knew &#8220;all available&#8221; information for VFR flight in the vicinity of the airport, including traffic patterns.  If I couldn&#8217;t engage the PC-12 pilot in enough radio dialog to resolve the conflict, I probably would have tried to time my pattern entry so that I could land just after he took off, thus avoiding conflict.  BTW, it seems to me that the issue of right vs left pattern for the SAME runway (as in this case) is not nearly as dangerous an issue as right pattern for one runway and left pattern for the OPPOSING runway (i.e., left for 09 and right for 27).  In the latter case, you stand a good chance of colliding head-on on the downwind, or on the runway!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
