Talk:Airfield traffic pattern

message: *Moved 45-degree midfield join to first in sentence, since common in US.
*Added 90-degree midfield join, used in some European countries.
*Added run-and-break.
*Removed parenthesised bits regarding who does what kind of join where, since otherwise the sentence would get too complex.
BaseTurnComplete 13:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joins 

message: It is defined in the article "The area of the airfield adjacent to the runway but opposite the pattern is known as the "upwind leg", while it doesn't completely comply with the presentation in the figure. According to FAA's "Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge", "The 'upwind leg' is a course flown parallel to the landing runway, but in the same direction to the intended landing direction. The upwind leg continues past a point abeam of the departure end of the runway to where a medium bank 90 degrees turn is made onto the crosswind leg." --Natasha2006 15:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Tunahawk is correct.  In the US, "upwind leg" properly is *not* an alternative term for departure or climb out because it is in-line with the runway and below TPA.  Strictly speaking, Departure is no more upwind than is final.  Upwind is the opposite of downwind, both of which are at or near TPA and parallel to but offset from the runway. 75.208.220.22 (talk) 05:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  About "upwind leg" 

message: As noted in the section above the section above this one, the definition of the upwind leg on the article was incorrect (the description seemed to be that of a /downwind/ leg, so I removed it and updated the "departure leg" (a term I myself am not familiar with but it seems reasonable so I will leave it alone) to include "upwind leg" as an alternative term. Lumbergh 18:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upwind leg revisited 

message: Per the Pattern Diagram in the FAA's Aeronautical Information Manual the upwind leg is separate and distinct from the departure leg, so the two should not be confused.
Reference http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0403.html Figure 4-3-1 Tunahawk (talk) 01:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: * Tunahawk is correct.  In the US, "upwind leg" properly is *not* an alternative term for departure or climb out because it is in-line with the runway and below TPA.  Strictly speaking, Departure is no more upwind than is final.  Upwind is the opposite of downwind, both of which are at or near TPA and parallel to but offset from the runway. 75.208.220.22 (talk) 05:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: More on Upwind leg

message: What does the term "abeam midfield" mean? 86.138.123.91 20:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Abeam midfield" means just that -- abeam the middle of the field.  I have removed the  tags around the places that phrase appears as they are unnecessary. See: Abeam @ wiktionary, definition 2. Lumbergh 18:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No offense, but could you explain a bit clearer please. Abeam seems to essentially mean "to the side" -- is "abeam midfield" talking about the plane's position, or its orientation? 86.134.165.228 23:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Abeam midfield refers to the plane's position.  Orientation refers to the line of the downwind leg (which is parallel to the runway). 75.208.220.22 (talk) 05:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: I feel the paragraph on touch and go is a bit out of place in the "benefits" section. Also, the procedures expected from the pilot are not sourced nor placed into specific regulation context. 
Note that in the U.S., there's also a possibility to get "cleared for the option", i.e., the pilot can then, at his own discretion, do a full stop landing, stop-and-go (land, stop, and takeoff again), or a touch-and-go (land, stabilize, re-configure for take-off while still rolling, and take-off again). — Preceding unsigned comment added by BACbKA (talk • contribs) 
:Quite right, that doesn't belong under "benefits" - feel free to move it. You add "the option" if you have a ref (AIM might be a good place to look!) - Ahunt (talk) 22:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for finding that. I formatted the ref and moved the remainder of the "benefits" text up to the lead. I am not sure if it should stay there or whether it is redundant enough that it can just be removed entirely. - Ahunt (talk) 13:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

text: The whole article really needs an overhaul and properly referencing. It can probably all be sourced from the FAA and Transport Canada AIMs - Ahunt (talk) 18:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: * There are more differences internationally, e.g., Australia. 75.208.220.22 (talk) 05:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Benefits 

message: The wording makes it sound like following standard procedure might contribute to mid-air collisions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.208.220.22 (talk) 04:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Altitudes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Airfield traffic pattern. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090712031134/http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/ to http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified