CAAP 166-1(2) joining circuit upwind

[Substandard]

In the interpretation of CAAP 166-1(2) there seems to be general confusion as to how to join circuit on upwind at for example YTOC or TBLA.

When I pose the question for a 100kt aircraft, the most usual response from both private pilots and instructors is to "overfly upwind at 1500ft AGL then descend to 1000ft circuit height while still on upwind".

While this is what I was trained to do at YTDN back in 2004, it is NOT how I interpret the CAAP where all circuit joins are at circuit height and to never descend onto the active circuit.

Unfortunately, the CAAP does not specifically detail upwind joins, so most "seasoned" pilots/instructors either cite joining upwind at 1500ft as is done at YMMB, or, how they were originally trained pre NAS.

Your thoughts?

[Blueskymine]

Descend on the dead side or join at circuit height OCTA.

Can't be any simpler than that, hang on :ugh:

[Substandard]

Some ADs have no dead side due glider or skydiving ops.
Read ERSA for YTDN where for added excitement, the one sided circuit is over water

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Anyone want to take bets on how many pages this thread will run to arguing about how to join the circuit?

Seems that this is what aviation in Oz has become - nobody is sure about the latest "rules" for doing anything anymore!

So the old blokes like me default to doing what we have always done - and eventually the rule changes get back around to what we were taught 20 or 30 years ago.

Does that mean we were doing it right all along? :E

Dr :8

[ravan]

What the Doctor said....if we wait long enough then everything old will be new again:)

[Creampuff]

Crazy idea: Find out what the rules say.

I only read CAAPs for comic relief.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

One rule that has worked well for me for 40 years - "Don't hit anything"! :E

Dr :8

[Creampuff]

Funny thing is, that’s essentially what the actual rule actually says.

The actual rule is fewer words than the CAAP.

Go figure.

[Squawk7700]

This is why I always do a straight in or join on base (Thanks Dick), avoids any confusion about whether I'm doing the right or wrong thing.

[Capn Bloggs]

it is NOT how I interpret the CAAP where all circuit joins are at circuit height and to never descend onto the active circuit.
The CAAP shows (figure 3) and states (6.6.5) that you descend to circuit height on the deadside/upwind (or when flying "along the bitumen" at TOC). You "enter the circuit" ie cross the runway AT the circuit height.

The CAAP even show a couple of aeroplanes arriving at "greater than circuit+500".

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

This is why I always do a straight in or join on base (Thanks Dick), avoids any confusion about whether I'm doing the right or wrong thing.

:ok:

(Plus enough other words to make it work!)

[Substandard]

The issue with descending on upwind is that there are potentially three circuit heights (500, 1000 and 1500) so a low performance aircraft would need to be at 2000agl then descend to 500 agl through two circuits levels on upwind

[Wally Mk2]

I always find it interesting the way pilots interpret rules, Regs & advisories (CAAPS). It shows one thing that like a lot of rules & regs in any industry there is always a level of confusion or doubt.

Personally although I haven't joined a circuit as being described here for sometime but upwind is part of a std circuit anyway. You have crosswind, downwind base & final, final also being upwind as you may have gone around for various reasons so flying upwind say for another circuit is considered still being in the circuit for landing & you would not climb to above normal circuit height anyway (unless departing) so upwind is actually in the circuit.
To sum all that up you need to be at circuit height BEFORE joining upwind as you would for say joining downwind, how you do that is variable due some of the reasons already mentioned here.
Common sense is yr best defense:-)


Wmk2

[Capn Bloggs]

would need to be at 2000agl then descend to 500 agl through two circuits levels on upwind
That's why you do descend on upwind; you're not yet in the circuit.

Would you get Hi-Perf aircraft at YTOC? If not, that's one layer removed. Now it's only a descent from 1500ft.

6.6.4 of the CAAP does suggest joining at 500ft crossing the runway at midfield. At YTOC, whether that implies you could join on upwind ie along the runway at 500ft is another thing. Lots of potential conflicts: aircraft/gliders turning final belly-up to you (from both directions) and taking off and doing go-arounds (oh and those jokers doing Straight-ins, too)! :ok: :eek:

May be better to position well outside of the circuit and then just join on downwind at 500ft (as suggested in ERSA). For at least 180° of inbound tracks, that would work OK.

And of course, Talk... A quick call will direct your eyes and you can then keep clear of others.

[Substandard]

Capn B

The caution box on page 16 of the CAAP advises not to descend onto the active circuit.

Your post seems to suggests that the upwind leg is not part of the 'active circuit'. Am I understanding you correctly?

[Jabawocky]

The caution box on page 16 of the CAAP

WHAT THE???

A CAAP that is 16 or maybe more pages on how to join a circuit. :ugh:

I am with Creamie and Forkie.

[Substandard]

Agreed Jaba, but I get pinged every time I do an AFR. Different procedure every time!
Another instructor advises to be established at circuit height three miles before joining upwind.

[ACMS]

Don't do it if it's too hard......

There, fixed. :ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

Your post seems to suggests that the upwind leg is not part of the 'active circuit'. Am I understanding you correctly?
You are. :ok: We're probably arguing semantics, but I take Upwind to be the leg, on the deadside (or along the centreline at YTOC), on runway track.

Hey Jabba, perhaps the CAAP is in response to the lowering of standards of pilots/instruction in this area... I don't have a problem with the CAAP; if you know it, then you know all you need to know about how to fly a circuit and interact sensibly with others, CASA-Approved. You won't get that from AIP or the CAR.

[Squawk7700]

Another instructor advises to be established at circuit height three miles before joining upwind.

That sounds like a 1,000 ft 3 mile final where you don't descend.

I don't like it. Someone in front of you could go a go-around and come up from underneath you. No dramas you say, just go slightly to the right of centre-line, however at places like YTDN you can't, because that could very well be the PJE side where you aren't meant to be :\

[Substandard]

Also, nothing to say you cannot depart circuit on base causing collision risk

[ACMS]

At YTDN when I fly there I will always try and join downwind, if that means diverting around a bit down south outside the circuit to do it then so be it.

After all I'm only zipping around for fun and a few minutes extra doesn't matter to me.

Just don't fly over the field in YTDN especially on weekends. :ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

After all I'm only zipping around for fun and a few minutes extra doesn't matter to me.

I wish!!!! :{

[ACMS]

True.......I can't justify with the wife any more than 1 hour or so every couple of months private flying these days, but when I do venture out an extra few minutes diverting a bit doesn't matter much to keep away from the meat bombers...:cool:

[Wally Mk2]

Gee it's difficult to believe that some don't consider upwind as part of a circuit for the purposes of flying at the same level as x-wind & downwind.
EG. MB Twr says join upwind Rwy 17R. Are you going to join 500ft higher whilst along the upwind position (as in over the Rwy) then let down? The Twr guys would open their Twr window & shoot you down!:-)

If yr 500ft above circuit height & joining parallel to upwind on the dead side of the circuit then that's a diff story but it's not called joining upwind unless you are already at circuit height.
Saw some pretty dumb things over the years at CTAF's in the old Beech, had to have several sets of eyes peeled for the 'Farmer Browns' out there who had no idea!:-)


Wmk2

[Jack Ranga]

Get another wife :cool:

[Jack Ranga]

Not another additional one (like in Utah), that'd be stupid. Just a different one.

[Wally Mk2]

Do what smart men/pilots do, get rid of them all ! Planes & females don't mix remember! I mean we have an industry full of divorced pilots, what does that tell ya?:E

Wmk2

[Jack Ranga]

And this thread is reaaaally awesome too :ok:

[ACMS]

Mmmmmmm, get rid ahhhhhhh leave the first wife and I'd have even less dosh to splash on private flying.........better stick with what I've got :ok:

[Adsie]

Use a radio, be very situational aware and get along with everyone in circuit.

Get into Birdsville on race weekend with all types of aircraft will get it sorted

Fly a PA31 into there [ not that it is a very fast a/c in circuit ] but when your against a flock of brumbies, a PC12, a couple of helis, a heap C172's with flight school students from everywhere with very "limited" english, and those who forgot to read the AIP SUP it can be busy

Again - "use radio , be very situational aware and get along with everyone in circuit !!!!!"

[ANCPER]

Adsie,

Thanks for mentioning RADIO, where is it best to fit the 5 calls in for the average circuit?

[Adsie]

ANCPER

I have been with a few instructors and all have a different view on what should be said or not said.

I personally give calls for 10 NM inbound with circuit joining time, anticipated RWY, overhead field, joining downwind, turning base and on finals. And then back tracking or clear of runway call.

Call sign, type and whether IFR / VFR on initial contact to CTAF, then just call sign after that.

Again traffic will dictate what your actions are. But like I said before " get along with everyone"

I find manners do go a long way - I think it is all part of airmanship.

While we are on this subject, I had a check pilot tear me a new a*se because I gave a "rolling" call on take off.

Been unable to find in the AIP if it is required or not.

Thanks in advance

PS: I still give a rolling call, just in case someone is around

[Adsie]

rmcdonal

Are you saying that you fly direct to the FAF on an RNAV approach without going through the IAF and IF ?

[ANCPER]

I was just joking on that as that subject on radio calls in general will run for 100 pages, agree with the rolling call.

Though in general too much unnecessary talking takes place clogging up the freq.

[Wally Mk2]

'Adsie' I think you'll find that 'rmc' was ref to the FAF as a tracking point for a straight in under visual conditions. handy/easy for accurate Rwy alignment:ok:


Wmk2

[Di_Vosh]

Are you saying that you fly direct to the FAF on an RNAV approach without going through the IAF and IF ?

CAVOK day, why not?

DIVOSH!

[Adsie]

Di_Vosh

CAVOK - fair enough but you are doing a 5 mile straight approach so you will have to give all relevant calls.

ANCPER

Sorry - missed that one about radio calls.
Yes a lot of unnecessary calls do block up freq.

And thanks for agreement with rolling call

[Di_Vosh]

ADSIE

My comment was made re: your questioning about tracking to the FAF without going through the IAF and IF, not about making radio calls.

DIVOSH!

[Adsie]

Di_Vosh

And I replied that in VMC that approaching through the FAF was fair enough, I just added that the 5 mile final calls are required.

Just agreeing with you and adding comment

[Capn Bloggs]

I just added that the 5 mile final calls are required.
It's "not less than 3nm". ;)

[Jack Ranga]

I give a 15, 10, 5 & 3nm call, just in case :ok:

[Tee Emm]

PS: I still give a rolling call, just in case someone is around


Why not add few more such as "lifting off now" and "200 feet gear is up and locked now" "500 feet checking all clear left and right now."
All good situational awareness for those in the circuit :ok:

[Squawk7700]

I like the "midfield crosswind" call. Seems that when you call this you can do whatever you want as everyone's interpretation seems different on what it is.

[Jack Ranga]

What's wrong with doing anything you want??

[ANCPER]

TM,

"rolling call". Because the time of first taxing to departing can vary, with a rolling call anyone inbound now has a better idea time wise of where they'll be by the time you are setting track instead of waiting for you dep call, which if a jet could mean they'll be anywhere up to 7 miles out. While it's a double edged sword on busy freqs could be the last chance for conflicting traffic who missed your taxi call.

[Oktas8]

I make the absolute bare minimum calls - only those strictly required by CASA. Two calls for each of the inbound & outbound cases seems to cover it.

Then, if there is someone else in the area, I talk to them with other calls as appropriate. The rolling call is occasionally a good option in this case.

That said, reading this thread is like holding a public belly button inspection.

You learn something unique about everyone, but at the end of the day the things you've learned about each person are not especially useful. :)

[Capn Bloggs]

"rolling call". Because the time of first taxing to departing can vary, with a rolling call anyone inbound now has a better idea time wise of where they'll be by the time you are setting track instead of waiting for you dep call, which if a jet could mean they'll be anywhere up to 7 miles out.
Second-guessing "I think he should be there about now" shouldn't be part of it. If there is ANY doubt, the aircraft should call the other to find out where they are, or pre-empt by saying "give us a call when you start rolling".

While it's a double edged sword on busy freqs could be the last chance for conflicting traffic who missed your taxi call.
That is precisely why there are TWO distinct and separate calls before takeoff: the first when commencing taxiing, the second when entering the runway.