|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Having solved the impossible turn and other manufactured crises, the aviation training industry (or at least some YouTubers and keyboard warriors) has now turned its attention to the teardrop pattern entry. This “innovation” is alternately described as wildly unsafe or the only legal option for entering the traffic pattern. In reality it’s neither, but the bigger problem is that most pilots don’t even know what it means.
Before you write this off as some academic debate, remember that most mid-air collisions happen during the day, in good weather, in or near the traffic pattern. That means the techniques we use to manage the see-and-avoid process near airports matters. And since 95% of airports in the US are nontowered, most pilots will use some type of pattern entry every time they fly.
What is the teardrop?
Is the boom in teardrop entries all ForeFlight’s fault?
If you’ve arrived at a non-towered airport recently, especially one with a busy flight school, you may have heard another airplane announce something to the effect of “overhead for the teardrop entry.” This is not an instrument procedure, but rather a way to enter the traffic pattern when approaching from the opposite side of the runway. Some people have blamed ForeFlight for the increasing popularity of this maneuver, since the ubiquitous app can draw such a route right on the map. The theory is that today’s “children of the magenta line” are mindlessly following the route on their screen.
In reality, this procedure is in multiple FAA publications. For example, the Airplane Flying Handbook spells it out: “One method of entry from the opposite side of the pattern is to announce intentions and cross over midfield at least 500 feet above pattern altitude (normally 1,500 feet AGL)… When well clear of the pattern—approximately 2 miles—the pilot should scan carefully for traffic, descend to pattern altitude, then turn right to enter at 45° to the downwind leg at midfield.” The FAA doesn’t call it a teardrop, but that word is simpler than “pattern overflight followed by descent and turn to 45-degree leg,” so we’ll use it for now.
What about the old fashioned midfield crosswind, which many of us grew up flying? That is absolutely allowed and referenced in the AFH, but it suggests this depends on traffic conditions: “An alternate method is to enter on a midfield crosswind at pattern altitude, carefully scan for traffic, announce intentions, and then turn downwind. This technique should not be used if the pattern is busy.”
With many flight schools bursting at the seams lately, the part about “if the pattern is busy” is just about guaranteed. That, more than anything, explains the growing popularity of the teardrop: the traditional midfield crosswind is pretty hard to pull off with six airplanes in the pattern.
The AFH is not the final word on traffic patterns. Advisory Circular 90-66C has more details, but this part is critical (and often overlooked): “The FAA does not regulate traffic pattern entry.” In other words, how you get to the runway is mostly a matter of manners, not regulations. In fact, the only thing the FAA is explicit about is the direction of turn: “At an airport without a control tower, the pilot must fly the traffic pattern with left turns, unless otherwise stated.” The word “must” makes it quite clear.
Real world use
To review, the teardrop is one possible option for joining the pattern, but it is not required or even preferred, and FAA regulations do not apply to pattern entries anyway. That leaves pilots with a lot of discretion, which is good for individual pilots but can cause confusion when 10 or 15 of us get together.
Before getting lost in the latest arguments, it’s important to remember the whole point of a traffic pattern: to improve safety and efficiency. Just like slow flight is not an end in itself, merely a way to learn airspeed control, the traffic pattern does not exist as a law of nature—it is simply a way to prevent midair collisions and get airplanes on the ground quickly.
So, what is safe and efficient? A descending 270-degree turn certainly does not meet that definition, especially if you’re in a high wing airplane that will block your view of the traffic on downwind while you’re turning. AC 90-66C alludes to this problem: “Entries into traffic patterns while descending may create collision hazards and should be avoided.” I have seen exactly this scenario play out, with a Cessna 172 in a descending turn right onto downwind while another airplane turns from crosswind to downwind.
The FAA makes clear that the teardrop is not a direct entry into the pattern.
The right answer, both per the FAA and common sense, is to fly the teardrop well outside the traffic pattern. Remember, what the diagram above shows is essentially the standard 45-degree entry into the pattern; the rest of the procedure just gets you over the runway and outside the pattern to make that turn. Here’s one of the key lessons: the teardrop is a way to enter the 45-degree leg, not a direct entry into the pattern. The AFH specifically recommends overflying the pattern by two miles before turning inbound. Also note that it says descend then turn, specifically to avoid that descending turn scenario.
Breaking it down, we have a multi-step procedure and not a single maneuver: fly over the pattern by two miles, then descend, then turn, and then join the 45-degree leg. Following that recommendation alone would eliminate many conflicts.
Still, some more experienced pilots (and I would count myself among them) get frustrated by newer pilots who take a robotic approach to flying, always flying the overhead entry no matter what the traffic conditions. That’s certainly not efficient, and can actually clog up the pattern if downwind is clear but the 45 is filling up.
There’s also the issue of turbine airplanes, which typically fly 500 feet higher in the pattern. That can put a fast-moving Citation at the same altitude as the trainer that’s crossing over midfield to set up for the 45. Again, the AFH has some good advice: “if large or turbine aircraft operate at the airport, it is best to remain 2,000 feet AGL so as not to conflict with their traffic pattern.” Just remember that in this case you will then have 1,000 feet to lose before you enter downwind, so you might need even more space from the pattern.
Don’t be a robot
Two universal skills can solve a lot of problems in the traffic pattern: maintaining situational awareness and staying flexible. Situational awareness means having a mental picture of the other airplanes in the pattern—not just your airplane—as well as where those airplanes are going. ADS-B traffic can help a lot with this, but don’t forget to listen and to look outside.
Flexibility means adapting your procedure to those current conditions, and being willing to change your plan as conditions change. For example, if the pattern is empty, the safest and easiest approach is to enter on the crosswind and turn left, skipping the teardrop and saving time. There are no bonus points for flying a needless leg of the pattern. On the other hand, if the pattern is packed tighter than two football players in a 152, it’s far better to fly at least two miles past the airport and make a turn to enter on the 45-degree leg. Your main priority is to find your place in line.
There’s more than one way to fly crosswind.
It’s the in-between scenarios that can cause trouble, though. What if there is only one airplane in the pattern? Again, flexibility is the name of the game, and there is a lot more on the menu besides simply midfield crosswind and teardrop. For a start, there are multiple crosswind options: if no one is taking off but another airplane is on downwind, you could adjust your crosswind leg to go over the departure end of the runway (instead of midfield), giving that other airplane more space. Just remember, if you’re going to do this the FAA reminds us that, “Aircraft should always enter the pattern at pattern altitude, especially when flying over midfield and entering the downwind directly.”
There’s also the option to fly the upwind leg (not to be confused with the departure leg). While FAA guidance no longer suggests using the upwind leg as a standard pattern entry procedure, nothing prevents you from using this leg to help you properly space your turn to the crosswind leg to accommodate other traffic ahead of you in the pattern. If you’re approaching from the final approach side of the runway and there is only one airplane entering downwind, sidestep to the upwind leg and fly parallel to the runway before turning crosswind. Again, the key is to avoid a collision, not follow some FAA diagram to within an inch.
Let’s make a deal
There is one other sentence in the AFH that pilots should remember, especially if you fly a high performance airplane: “The FAA discourages VFR straight-in approaches to landings.” That seems aimed directly at aviation’s most hated pilots: the ones that blast straight into a traffic pattern at 175 knots, asking the other seven airplanes to get out of the way (you know who you are).
So here’s a possible trade: student pilots should stop robotically flying the teardrop even when the pattern is empty, but only if grumpy old-timers stop flying straight-in approaches when the pattern is busy.
For more details, watch this video tip:
- Weather flying means learning to read clouds - November 11, 2024
- What’s wrong with the teardrop pattern entry - September 25, 2024
- What matters for VFR proficiency: better landings - August 26, 2024
It’s the Wild West out there, and I’m afraid preaching the Gospel of Traffic Pattern Entries according to the AFH and the AC is tantamount to “Old Man Yells at Cloud” (with apologies to Matt Groening). When my part-time Delta goes Golf(ing) at night, we get the mix of entries on the upwind, crosswind, downwind, and base legs, teardrops, straight-ins, and (my all-time favorite): “entering on a modified left-base,” whatever that means. If the first one there–usually an instructor at a local flight school–decides to fly right traffic (as frequently happens), everyone else follows suit despite a distinct lack of “RP” on the chart or “Rgt tfc.” in the Chart Supplement, all while referring to the runway in use as “the active.”
Unfortunately I don’t think there can be messaging, even as articulate and well sourced as this article, powerful enough to break the bad habits of some of our fellow pilots. The ink spilled over safe, efficient, and preferred traffic pattern entries may unfortunately see the same fate as past diatribes over “any other traffic in the pattern….”
Last call,
–JM
I don’t expect military order in the pattern (I’m not that naive), but I do wish pilots would focus on safety instead of rigid procedure. When a procedure leads to an unsafe outcome, it’s time to ditch it and adapt.
Last call… don’t get me started!
Here here John! We should also extend this out to ensuring our “Instructors” are teaching fundamentals early on and not just technology. It’s amazing how many young pilots I talk to that don’t even know what a forward slip is let alone when and how to use it. Too many “puppy mill” schools out there teaching pilots to fly “The magenta line” and do everything “by the book” so they are “ready” for the airline cockpit. Great article to get these kinds of pilots thinking “outside the box”
Always train right hand traffic patterns with students. Obviously traffic permitting, if at a non towered airport. The first time the tower asked them to fly a right hand pattern, you don’t want them soiling themselves.
Agreed. I also think Matt G will appreciate the “shout out”. We don’t want anything “modified” on base turn (or entry) and please no right pattern “RP/Rgt tfc” unless it’s posted in the supplement.
The article did mention “Don’t be a robot”. Often times the book is taken into the air – literally. Students think they MUST fly a certain way or heading/altitude. While we all agree the FAA publishes the rules, there is room for deviation when it comes to PIC options, safety, efficient and emergencies. CFIs should instruct more on real world alternatives while continuing flying etiquette. Let’s talk more about 360 for spacing and plane-to-plane conversations while tight in the pattern (especially at non-towered fields),…such as, “N33333 I have you in sight I’m number 2”, after N33333 has given a 10mi inbound call and I’m doing 180 power-off pattern work. Common sense is encouraged by the FAA.
I’ve watched the videos in question (the original and at least one follow-up interview) and I have to say: That person’s war on the teardrop has got to be mainly for social media hits – my primary CFI always taught me to be at TPA by the time you enter the 45 and NEVER, EVER descend into the downwind.
The whole advantage of flying the teardrop is that when you come around at TPA you can get a full sight picture of the other traffic which can in turn help you see and avoid (vs. say a direct entry). What am I missing?
As an “old timer” who didn’t learn this entry back in the 80’s, while I have no problem with it, it is tough for me when on the 45 entry to know whether I am going to be in front of the plane reporting they will be doing a teardrop entry or behind them. And, when you see that plane turning towards you, it is very uneasy. What would solve the confusion is just more communication. Stating whether they plan to be in front of or behind the aircraft on the 45 entry would have helped during my first experience with someone doing this entry in front of me.
Once us oldtimers all kick off, I suspect it will be much less controversial.
Maybe he’s emotional about it, and you can call it a war, but he’s a CFI/CFII who’s educated us for years and is passionate about it. I don’t think it’s for social media at all, unless Patreon or YouTube is social media.
A lot of excellent points and info, but want to make an additional point. At non-towered airports, pilots may be using either end of the same runway, especially in light wind, and not everyone has a radio, is talking, listening, or there radio could be on the wrong frequency. Point is another plane may be ‘down wind’ on the near side as you start across at pattern altitude to enter what you consider ‘down wind’ on the other side for the opposite runway. Also, if you use the ‘cross over at pattern altitude’, do so at a right angle, not a 45 degree, and remember to scan to the outside when down wind and on base legs.
Until the FAA regulates the traffic pattern procedures and defines what is a final approach problems will continue. Love when a pilot calls NXXX 10 mile final RNAV 9 to trying to avoid entering the pattern and thinking they have the right of way in VFR conditions when they do not. Anyone on a 10 mile final is only on the approach to the runway and not at TPA and not on final.
My personal favorite is a “cross wind” entry at the traffic pattern altitude, which allows an adjustment for another pilot entering from 45° and a longer downwind to complete the landing checklist.
ATP, CFI, A&P.
Wouldn’t a crosswind entry at pattern put you looking down the barrel of a gun if winds are light at a non-towered?
If you are overflying the pattern, use the vantage to of look outside and build your SA on who’s where in the pattern (including those without a radio, not talking, or on wrong freq).
if you can’t make heads or tails of pattern, orbit above until you can, (avoiding turbine or instrument hold altitudes) and then enter (safely as discussed here).
The advice to be flexible and not robotic is great. Flying is a dynamic environment and we (smaller airplane drivers, flying into smaller airports) need to be able to adapt quickly and smartly. Yes, I will fly a straight-in if there is no traffic. However, the time to start making the pattern entry decision is far away from the airport. Make a straight-in, over-the-top or 45 to downwind, whatever makes sense for the situation.
Here are the problems with the so-called “teardrop” pattern entry. 1) The name. The teardrop procedure is an instrument procedure for entering holds and approaches. 2) It doesn’t exist. If you want to enter the pattern using a 45 to downwind entry from the wrong side of the airport, stay well clear of the pattern if it’s busy. Vertical separation is good but it MUST be accompanied by plenty of horizontal separation.
Using the name of an established procedure to come up with a supposedly new pattern entry procedure is confusing and not safe. Encouraging opposite maneuvers in or near the pattern is deadly.
Amen to that, Steven. After 55 years of flying, depending on my mood I’m either amused or annoyed to hear the unnecessary new terminology introduced by the latest crop of 12-year-old flight instructors who, as others have commented, are only focused on accumulating enough time in their logbooks to follow the magenta line to an airline interview.
If you’re approaching from the upwind side of the runway, listen to learn how busy the pattern is. If it’s empty, as Zimmerman says, just fly a midfield crosswind and turn left to the downwind. If it’s busy, plan ahead, stay out of the furball, turn a few degrees to the right while still 10-15 miles away, pass a couple of miles from the airport with the field and all that traffic well to your left, then make an easy 135-degree turn to the 45 entry.
If the airport is really way out in the boonies, and there’s no one around, just enter a right base.
And it bears endlessly repeating, listen and look before you talk. As a wise friend, even older and grumpier than I am says, airplanes fly because of a principle developed by Bernoulli, not Marconi.
Ive been a fan of this “YouTube Celebrity” since he was merely a podcaster.
He was clearly doing this for clicks.
One thing he did mention in his video is that the “500′ above TPA” thing makes no sense as most patterns are 1000′ for light single engines but turbine and heavy are 1500′. So a C172 flying at 1500′ would be in direct conflict with a turbine on downwind.
The Sportys video clearly shows the way I was taught 18 years ago and is still how I do it today.
You don’t “descend into the traffic pattern” you descend and then join the pattern after being established at traffic pattern altitude.
This conversation is long overdue. Yes you can enter the pattern in many different ways, but should you? At my primary airport we have active Skydiving and an Acrobatic Box. Oh, and we have Cubs without radios and turbine aircraft using straight in instrument approaches usually checking in at about 5-7 miles and plan to land straight in regardless of where trafic is in the pattern. And did I mention the increase in practice instrument approaches with no indication of their intentions. “Going Missed? Landing”? Do they have eyes on the traffic and not just ADS/B? Did you communicate your intentions so that a 40 hour pilot knows what you plan to do? Or have you forgotten how bad you were at 40 hours and clueless with all the fancy calls. If I called a 5 mile final for a 200 knot “pop-up break” would you understand what I intended to do and how to stay out of the way? Let’s all work to improve communications and civility. Accidents take all the joy out of flying. And if you can’t navigate from 10 miles out to the 45 without going over the airport, you might want to take some flight lessons.
“have you forgotten how bad you were at 40 hours”
Well said! A little more humility all around would help.
“And if you can’t navigate from 10 miles out to the 45 without going over the airport, you might want to take some flight lessons.”
To learn what, exactly? How to NOT follow the guidance of the AIM?
Not disageeing with anything said here, but would like to hear some discussion of the pluses and minuses of a UK-style overhead recovery versus this American technique.
Not just the UK, but all US military fighter aircraft. And if you’re lucky enough to fly an airplane that can use the Warbird Arrival into Oshkosh, the tower controllers will usually offer you an overhead pattern to 36R, with a right break abeam the tower, because they and the crowd like to see it.
Using the ForeFlight app to plan a teardrop entry is helpful. The descending turn is depicted at and beyond 2 miles from the runway, and it should be easy enough to lose either 500 or 1000 feet in the 225 degree turn to the 45 degree entry path. Using the aerial map view allows you to self-brief the local ground landmarks in advance of the arrival, so the procedure can be flown without staring at the iPad.
I operate a large cabin jet from an uncontrolled airport. Unfortunately, our approach speeds are faster than most single engine trainers. Meshing into a pattern when the speeds are not compatible is difficult, if not impossible. It’s safer for everyone involved for us to fly a longer straight in final(5+ miles) and ask the training aircraft to work around us. We communicate our intentions well outside the airport environment to allow everyone to have plenty of situational awareness.
As pointed out in the article, flying a “teardrop” style pattern entry places an additional aircraft at the jet pattern altitude proceeding in the opposite direction.
Whether an aircraft enters the pattern from the downwind or upwind side, the safest method is to communicate well and keep your head on a swivel. I am also a big believer in ADSB traffic information as an extra source of information as long as it does not distract from visually avoiding other aircraft.
I own a Cessna Skywagon and operate out of the very same uncontrolled airport.
I kinda agree with Brad on this. Even though some pilots may disagree on this, the approach speeds on some jets make it difficult to merge into slower traffic which is why they almost always fly straight in approaches and COMMUNICATE!
Well said. We operate a King Air 350 and always on an IFR clearance. We always put the IFR approach in the FMC and fly it until we have the airport in sight then cancel our IFR flight plan. We announce our intentions starting 15 miles out and continue straight in while coordinating with the local traffic. As was said in one comment at uncontrolled airports with light winds it is possible to have aircraft landing in opposite directions to the same piece of concrete.The key is constant communication, coordination and heads on a swivel. Something interesting is that we routinely fly in to KMDD where the published traffic pattern is Right traffic, yet NO ONE flies anything but a left hand pattern to all the runways. Creates a bit of a challenge.
KMDD is not right traffic for all runways. It it RP for 25 and 34, but LP for 07 and 16.
RE: MDD’s traffic patterns … I’ve been there when there was no wind and everyone was using 16 but along comes a Yellow Cub apparently with no radio who set up on the RIGHT downwind to RWY 34 against all the other traffic on LEFT downwind to RWY 16. That got interesting since everybody was “legal” but head-on to each other..
Excellent points on faster aircraft making a 5 mile straight in approach and communicating very clearly with others in the pattern. There’s no way your much faster aircraft could safely fit into a standard pattern. All pilots should be very clear on the radio about their intentions and get others to acknowledge back to make sure everyone is on the same page. Its pretty tough to do at a non towered airport with lots of training happening though.
Situational awareness is key, whether at cruise or approaching the terminal environment. I fly out of 2A1, a very slow airport, and it’s easy to become complacent about procedures. Clear communication of intentions and visual awareness goes a long way in keeping everyone safe. If there are other aircraft in the pattern and you’re not sure of their intentions, ask them. And like any other procedure, practice different entries.
Since the “teardrop” entry recommends leaving the airport pattern environment for approximately 2 miles before returning to enter the pattern, it makes sense to me (when the A/P is busy) to maneuver the aircraft around the airport from 5 miles out (or so) to ultimately be positioned for a normal 45 degree entry to the downwind at the proper altitude.
The extra time it takes to accomplish a wide circle around the airport environment is the time to scan the neighborhood, monitor the radio and prepare for descent and landing. Eyeballs outside and “head on a swivel” is the answer to the electronic magenta line advocate. Nothing brings you back to earth quicker than a mid-air.
For the last few months I’ve been doing primary flt traing in a Luscombe w com but w/o ADSB at a busy noncontrolled airport. Even though we are religious in makin redundant radio position calls (even more than suggested), we’ve had two near misses. Once on midfield downwind a C172 flew over us at 100′. Another a Cirrus entering pattern from extended base. As has been said, LOOK OUTSIDE THE COCKPIT!!! Please.
Thanks so much! Currently a student pilot and this was tremendously helpful. I had never heard of a teardrop so I guess that’s a good sign? I believe my checkride will consist of a diversion to a non towered airport(Oceanside, CA). So definitely won’t be doing any Teardrops into the pattern!
Follow the rules, fly defensely (think about the defensive driving principals) and most importantly, be courteous and don’t push a situation just because you are “right”
I agree that it’s safer for some large jets to fly straight in and land, while communicating and looking outside. However, two key points:
1. It is possible to fly a Citation, Challenger, or Gulfstream in the pattern. That’s exactly what happens sometimes at towered airports. So let’s not get carried away – it’s not an emergency procedure to fly three legs of the pattern.
2. A Bonanza or Mooney does not qualify as a heavy jet. I sometimes see pilots of moderately high performance pistons claim they can’t possibly fly a full pattern.
I side with Brad S on flying jets straight in. When flying my Arrow, I follow the excellent discussion in this article. However, when flying the Citation for work, I’ve done both: I feel guilty calling for a straight in, but I feel less safe trying to mix into a busy pattern 500 above/60 kts faster and timing the turn to base just right. I’d rather have to fly an engine out approach to mins than mix into an uncontrolled VFR pattern.
I don’t think a Citation in the pattern at a towered field will really correlate to the same level of safety at a non-towered field. The controller will be there to also manage the other aircraft – at the non-towered field, the pilots who will follow the Citation or the pilot following the Citation may be doing that for the first time and may badly misjudge how to maintain safe spacing.
Many airplane pilots aren’t aware of this – Helicopter Pilots are trained to fly the opposite pattern(s) for their approach to landing at non-towered airports. Ie: If a Rwy has Right Traffic, helicopters will be using a Left Pattern to that same Rwy. Communication and head swiveling is key.
Gliders, too, are often directed to fly the opposite pattern from the airplane traffic. We watch for the helicopters.
Additionally, they can fly lower and closer in the pattern….
As an old timer, the teardrop causes one to completely lose sight of the pattern and the airport…not a great solution. As a DPE, every flight school teaches it and the FAA is oddly vague on traffic pattern entry….with the exception of the VFR straight in when aircraft are in the pattern. Unless there’s a Cirrus about, this is usually not a problem. ;)
Excellent summary on a topic almost every pilot I speak to has a strong opinion (almost all are frustrated by these teardrop entries). Turning your back on the runway of an uncontrolled field when coming into land is never a good idea.
All of the above comments have ignored the first time entry to an unfamiliar airport without doing a ‘sock check’ prior to selecting a runway. Therefore a midfield crossing is preferred to check wind and runway conditions. For this reason I prefer the midfield crossing at pattern (circuit in Canada) plus 500’ and the tear drop and if you have selected the wrong runway make adjustments accordingly.
Comments from an ‘Octogenarian Canadian pilot’.
Disagree strongly the teardrop is not safe and efficient. Overcome the high wing block by taking a peak and scanning..turn radius is small and slow, easily done. Efficiency is in the mind of the beholder. It takes time for most people to build SA on busy pattern, teardrop gives them time to do that and places them in a space where they can start putting eyes on the calls they hear. It’s is a “no rush”, efficient-enough method. The teardrop path gives the entering aircraft sufficient space (and time) to re-enter if necessary, and this is occurring on a predictable ground track enabling other traffic to look (IF they care, that is) for the entering aircraft. Teardrop also gives the entering aircraft the opportunity to observe not only other traffic and build an entry, but also the other pertinent pattern conditions. True enough, no entry is mandated or preferred, and that’s too bad. There is nothing “wrong” with the teardrop that a functioning brain can’t overcome, regardless of type aircraft. The advantages far outweigh your personal criticisms. Lots of time here, lots of patterns, lots of students and flight reviews and practical tests.
Guys, come to UK where we’re taught to fly the “overhead join”, an imaginary circle over both ends of the runway at some 1,000 feet above the circuit, descending on the deadside for a downwind join. A bit like flying circuits on QFE, it’s only us mad Brits that do it!
I feel Foreflight has its wires (orientation) crossed . And John as well . I was trained in Canada , if joining a circuit from the upwind side : to cross over head the field at pattern altitude and join downwind at a 90 degree angle left turn .
When joining from the downwind side : cross overhead the field at 500’ above pattern altitude to a safe distance , do the turn around (“teardrop” if you must) descend 500’ to pattern altitude , cross the field , and join the downwind at a 90 degree left turn .
This has everyone joining the pattern from the same one side of the pattern , increasing safety , whether entering from either side of the field , situational awareness is increased all around . From the pattern end , straight in downwind is also a safe entry .
All Straight In Approachs at uncontrolled fields should be totally banned. Unless it’s an emergency call….
If I am approaching from the “wrong side” I like the Upwind entry at TPA. I watch for traffic coming off the runway and turn crosswind while avoiding crosswind traffic by extending upwind if required to sequence behind crosswind traffic.
What’s wrong with using the overhead pattern entry?
I often fly at an airport with a North / South runway where the teardrop entry is recommended by the airport and used by probably 95% of traffic arriving from the east because of airspace and geology issues – it’s in a valley, patterns west of the runway, capped by a Bravo floor, and hard up against Bravo to the surface and has a very prominent reference landmark very close to where the Bravo to the surface comes in and used by both directions. Traffic inbound from the west uses a 45 entry and the teardrop + airspace provides a good method of separation – using north flow as an example the eastbound traffic comes in at pattern altitude aiming for the landmark and turns onto the 45 prior to getting to it, westbound comes in at pattern +500 until over the landmark and starts the 270 degree turn at that point, remains clear of the bravo, and ends up essentially entering the pattern in line with the landmark. It’s 100% the best way for managing that airport’s situation and a good tool to be proficient with and have available elsewhere.
Only a few commentors mentioned upwind entries. This gives you good view of runway and traffic to determine when you enter the parade. We also had a nearby airport with a number of military pilots who liked the 180 degree overhead approach and the upwind entry is a modified 180 that other pilots will understand the calls.
The teardrop option is not used here in Canada. If the pattern is “busy” what’s the different between midfield crosswind entry versus teardrop entry? In both cases you’re still entering a busy pattern with either a left hand turn or a right hand turn to downwind. In Canada we descend to pattern altitude on the upwind side, cross the field at midfield, and enter the downwind leg. Keeping a good mental note of where all the aircraft are in the pattern allows you to make small adjustments so you don’t cut off another aircraft. This has worked for me since 1975 and I fly at a busy non-towered airport.
Wish the “fast mover” crowd would listen to the other traffic and determine if there are other training aircraft. Especially, if there are solo or PPL students are in the vicinity. Yes, eventually they’ll have to be able to operate in a diverse environment, but they are still students. And yes, you “fast movers” may have operational reasons why its easier to fly straight-in, but no need making your problem, the student’s problem.
Additionally, I’ve heard “fast movers” announce “X mile right base” where we have left traffic. So there goes the instrument approach or operational safety rationale.