Beaver Oaks traffic pattern
Pattern altitude at Beaver Oaks (OR66) is 1,200 ft MSL · 800 AGL as published by the FAA, and 33 is charted right traffic. · Open on the map
All of Beaver Oaks — runways, frequencies, charts and live weatherPattern diagram
Drawn to scale from the FAA NASR runway alignments and the per end right traffic flags — pick a runway to see its pattern. Live wind picks the favored runway when OR66 reports it.
RWY 15LEFT traffic
- Heading
- 150° mag · 169° true
- Dimensions
- 1,700 × 75 ft
- TPA
- 1,200 ft MSL · 800 AGL · charted
- Surface
- Turf
Enter the left downwind (heading 330°) on the 45° at 1,200 ft MSL.
Pattern side: FAA NASR · TPA charted (NASR) · layout: schematic (headings + lengths)
Pattern direction by runway
| Runway | Pattern | Heading | Pattern altitude |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | Left traffic | 150° mag | 1,200 ft MSL · 800 AGL |
| 33 | Right traffic | 330° mag | 1,200 ft MSL · 800 AGL |
Pattern altitude is published for OR66 in the FAA NASR data. Headings are the runway alignment; downwind is the reciprocal.
Flying the pattern at OR66
Beaver Oaks is non towered. AC 90-66B asks for a report on entry and on each leg, and for the standard 45° entry to downwind at pattern altitude.
Watch the right traffic ends here: 33. A right pattern at a field where the other end is left is the single most common place to end up pointing at opposing traffic. The full entry procedure is here →
Frequently asked
What is the traffic pattern altitude at OR66?
The FAA publishes a traffic pattern altitude of 800 ft AGL for Beaver Oaks, which is 1,200 ft MSL on the altimeter with the field at 400 ft.
Does OR66 have right traffic?
Yes, on one runway end: 33. Every other end at Beaver Oaks is standard left traffic.
More about OR66
Pattern direction and alignment are drawn from the FAA NASR (28-day cycle); the diagram is generated, not an FAA chart. Pattern altitude is shown as published where NASR carries one, otherwise as the AC 90-66B 1,000 ft AGL convention. For planning and education only; always verify against the Chart Supplement.
Something here wrong or out of date? Report a data problem.