Actually when you put it in terms of 150m being 0.1 nm, I take back what I said about being able to fairly easily keep to a 150m corridor. You cant (notwithstanding a GPS/AP combination).
0.1 sm is 160m approx
0.1 nm is 185m approx
Very tight to navigate this by hand, even following a GPS track. The potential wind correction will throw you way off.
Speaking of hysterical noise complaints, are permissible noise levels in Germany regulated in terms of decibels or in terms of purely subjective disturbance? If maximum noise levels are officially specified, I’m sure sending a person with a noise meter to complainants’ homes would prove the vast majority of such complaints to be frivolous. In many cases, the aircraft noise may not even exceed the average daytime background noise from other sources.
If maximum noise levels are officially specified, I’m sure sending a person with a noise meter to complainants’ homes would prove the vast majority of such complaints to be frivolous
When applying for planning permission for his already-in-use airstrip, a local farmer had an appointment with planning officials, with noise meters. He flew circuits, while they measured the noise at neighbouring houses. It was a disaster. They could not record the aircraft due to the barking of the collie dogs in the houses, in response to detecting the strangers. He got permission. (The neighbours hadn’t objected) 
[quote cleaned up]
The traffic patern is based upon a number of factors from the aircraft speed to its gliding distance. A 747 will have a different traffic patern to a C152. When training pilots to fly, the traffic patern has a number of purposes; to practice landings and take offs in an efficient manner and to have single engine aircraft where they can safely reach the field in the event of an engine failure, once a very important consideration. In the main the primary reason for flying a circuit is teach a pilot safe procedures and techniques. Because of other traffic LOOKOUT is of primary importance to prevent collisions and to position the aircrat where it can acheive all of the required safety functions. In the main an aircraft downwind should be a wingspan out from the runway therefore, its ground position will depend upon the circuit height and the wingspan. To set a tolerance around a ground track is both meaningless and potentially dangerous; the aircraft is no longer in a position to optimise its performance, something essential in teaching safe operration; the pilot is distracted from essential LOOKOUT by concentrating on totally irrelevant parameters making the likelyhodd of a collision more likely and an unsafe landing quite probable. All these ridiculous requirements should be attacked by using a logical risk assessment which highlights the inherrent dangers of following such illconceived ideas. If it is more dangerous for the pilot and the aircraft, it must be more dangerous for those below.
