PDA

View Full Version : Circuit joining


chillindan
17th Feb 2015, 22:39
So I was flying the other day and was established on base leg and another pilot stated he was joining long final. Instantly I'm looking everywhere to see him and eventually see him on a course that would almost certainly bring us into conflict. As I'm deciding on the correct course of action, he sees me and breaks off his approach. In that situation what would you have done? My thoughts are that I was established in the circuit and he was joining the circuit so he should have given way (which he did do)...

skyhighfallguy
17th Feb 2015, 23:35
I think the priority goes to the lowest (altitude) plane. Which of you was lower?

It is generally thought that approaching an uncontrolled airport on a straight in is not a good idea, as someone may be in the traffic pattern ( US term).

Too bad both of you couldn't have worked it out on the radio, could you have extended downwind to allow his straight in? I know you said you were on base leg, but did you hear any radio calls of position and intention?

Before you turned from downwind to base, did you report your position, or look for traffic on straight in/final?

here is the regulation in the USA. do you have something like it?

(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to
make way for an aircraft on final approach. <<<<When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake
that aircraft.>>>>

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 04:05
Hi Dan.

You both did the right thing. There's nothing wrong with joining 'straight in', so long as you accept that, as the one joining the circuit, you are the one who must give way if you come into conflict with an aircraft on base leg, and that, in that situation, the only safe method of giving way is to 'go around'.


MJ:ok:

Andy_P
18th Feb 2015, 04:48
Not relevant to most here, but joining straight in is highly discouraged in Australia. According to CAAP 166, If you join straight in, you have to give way to all other aircraft in the circuit. You also have to establish on final at least 3nm out and broadcast your intentions.

OpenCirrus619
18th Feb 2015, 06:13
It's one (of the very few) things about flying that really p*sses me off ...

I'm on base and someone, who's still outside the zone, pops up on the radio bleating "there's an aircraft encroaching, I'm on final".

Wish they would learn the rules.

OC619

ChickenHouse
18th Feb 2015, 06:58
Thank goodness not everybody is going down the rules rule way. Joining circuit should always be accompanied by a high degree of respect to others, not by the "I am right because its in the rules" cowboys. If you ever fly to locations in countries where the Prussians brain are deadalive you will encounter quite some strange things. As far as I recall the traffic circuit has no legal binding, but only guideline character.

Yes, there are rules, actual more guidelines. Yes, in most countries one is asked to join 45 on downwind. Yes, going long final straight is not very polite to others on many occasions, but there may be a reason for it. Yes, the rule cowboys sometime state that everybody in circuit has priority over approaching plane, but as they are landing only on final, this is doubtful. Some even try to argue you have to keep a published altitude to be "officially in circuit", which is quite bad for i.e. fast ones which easily go 2.000ft instead of 1.000ft to get it fit to theier brick-like landing performance.

Discussion: the guidelines tend to give way to an a/c in landing not mentioning any right of way relationship to circuit traffic, so if I am only on base and someone is declaring long final landing, who is right (polite or not) - the long final is landing, but me on base not yet?

Flyingmac
18th Feb 2015, 06:59
There's a straight in approach, and a Final approach. There are some who don't know when one ends and the other starts. Calling Final 3 miles out in a 150 won't win you any friends.:*

Johnm
18th Feb 2015, 07:00
ATZ are 2 miles in diameter for a reason. A circuit height of 1000ft and 500ft per min descent at 60 KIAS gets you to a landing and that's about right for most spam cans. Straight in is OK for controlled fields but anywhere else just fly the circuit like everybody else FFS.

mary meagher
18th Feb 2015, 07:30
OK, guys, I'm flying a glider. I am on base (diagonal leg). I HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY!

As of course, a glider has the priority over a power plane! you have the option to go around. I have no option except to land.

One of our young pilots had just completed his FIVE HOURS SOLO in a non radio basic type glider - a K6. At our gliding club, his home field.
I was launchpoint coordinator. And heard NO radio calls of any sort.
Watching the K6 on approach, suddenly right in front of him, and in his way, up pops a helicopter which had evidently been visiting somebody in the village.
What a PRAT! the pilot claimed after we filed an Airmiss report, that he had phoned the day before to obtain permission! talking to the cleaning lady, perhaps....and radioed on the day, I certainly didn't hear a call!

He never looked around before taking off, that's for sure.

Our K6 pilot kept his cool. Landed OK. He is now an instructor, he had definitely displayed the Right Stuff on that day! 5 hours, and then a surprise...

piperboy84
18th Feb 2015, 07:50
If nobody's in the circuit I join on base or straight in, If anyone in the circuit I overhead it.

ChickenHouse
18th Feb 2015, 07:58
Isn't a glider almost always in some kind of landing?
Yes, glider is a special case.

Yes, declaring final out 5 miles straight won't make you friends.
But, in that case that one is landing and declares right-of-way.
If you are on base, you are busted, or?

Sometimes it does make sense to go in straight in, i.e. for noise abatement or if you are not in the typical tin can, but a 120 down 100 base 90 final 1,300ft/min descending flying brick - if the traffic circuit is overcrowded by 40 knots ML it may be the better chance to get down. BUT, in that special case respect is the most wanted challenge.

Last weekend I had to extend downwind two times, going far out published traffic circuit, at a crowded uncontrolled airfield, because of these straight-in-very-late-call cowboys, which was annoying, but so what - what was the other option? Yell at them on radio? I lived from the feeling to be the better one.

Baikonour
18th Feb 2015, 08:04
This happened to me on my first solo :*

As I reported downwind, I heard another aircraft report long final. Some way downwind I saw him, further out and high. I thought he'd also see me. Getting closer to turning base he was still well above me, doing a fair rate of knots and appeared not to see me. :rolleyes:

Extending downwind is discouraged at Elstree, so I went around. He never made any signs of having seen me. Tower (Elstree is AFIS) had never heard of him before he called 'long final'.

One for the books, but, ultimately, one to learn from. Whether inadvertently or not, these things happen and you may as well expect it. The good news was that one of us at least had seen the other one. Doing an extra circuit is, at the end of the day, a nuisance but not the end of the world.

B.

Tarq57
18th Feb 2015, 08:25
So I was flying the other day and was established on base leg and another pilot stated he was joining long final. Instantly I'm looking everywhere to see him and eventually see him on a course that would almost certainly bring us into conflict. As I'm deciding on the correct course of action, he sees me and breaks off his approach. In that situation what would you have done? My thoughts are that I was established in the circuit and he was joining the circuit so he should have given way (which he did do)...
Probably the only thing I might have done differently would be to use the radio to advise the other pilot of my position. Maybe try to elicit a more accurate position/intentions from him.

Scoobster
18th Feb 2015, 08:33
the lower aircraft has priority

I will check this also because I was aggreived by this the other day in a circuit which is a LH normal circuit pattern. Here is what happened..

After 2 go arounds already due to the said airfield being busy and aircrafts on the runway, I went for my third go around. Positioned downwind and just for reference the wind was Easterly at 10kts.

There was an aircraft in front of me on the downwind leg and an aircraft behind on the crosswind leg.

I turned base on the correct heading and correct positioning, only to see the aircraft that was in front.. really lower down than me and further out to the right in the wrong position. I called "Final" and "Contact/Visual with aircraft lower".

On the radio the Instructor in the plane quips "Aircraft on base are you visual with one lower and BEHIND". ... "Affirm.. Visual".

Then in an arsy voice when Im 400ft approx and short final she quips.. "Are you intending to Land".

Thinking that I am right and have right of way I was tempted to be arsy back and say "Well i am positioned on final in the correct position so YES I was intended to land".

However, I politely said "Affirm that was the intention but will go around".. thinking that I might have been wrong..

It later transpired I was correct and had right of way. Said Instructor was just arsy!

What else can one do if you encounter an out of position aircraft with arsy instructor?

Scoob.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
18th Feb 2015, 08:44
At non-ATC fields, the overhead join is the way to go. Works very well, especially if it's busy. Barton is a case in point.

Meldrew
18th Feb 2015, 08:44
Scoobster. Wasn't that well known airfield just east of Abridge per chance?

Talkdownman
18th Feb 2015, 08:47
UK, Rule 12(a):
conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft intending to land at that aerodrome
No traffic = No Pattern.
Yes Traffic = Yes Pattern = Yes Conform.
Not difficult.

Scoobster
18th Feb 2015, 08:53
Meldrew - It was in the general vicinity yes..

BackPacker
18th Feb 2015, 08:55
What else can one do if you encounter an out of position aircraft with arsy instructor?

Are you 100% sure he was out of position? Did you check the radar tracks, or possibly compare SkyDemon tracks?

What I have found is that it is *incredibly hard* to judge the position of other aircraft in the circuit accurately against their ground track. The only really reliable way would be to look at their shadows - something that doesn't work all that often.

I was once approaching a controlled airfield and I just happened to have an instructor on board. We were fairly close to an aircraft ahead. We were to stay at 1500', the preceding was instructed to descend to 1000'. We watched the aircraft descend and descend further and we would swear that it was breaking the low-flying rules in a big way. It was only when we were instructed to descend to 1000' as well, that we saw them back on the horizon. ILAFFT.

In your case, that aircraft may well have been in a proper position. Maybe not ace-perfect, but close enough for a student. Maybe a little higher or lower than normal, but that happens. And the solution is simple: When you are behind another aircraft in the circuit, you follow that aircraft. Do not simply fly the normal circuit track as if there's nobody ahead of you. In your case you turned base before he did, effectively cutting him off.

Scoobster
18th Feb 2015, 09:01
I am sure it was out of position as the traffic pattern the aircraft was flying was not flown by aircraft before and after.. also i had already done 3 approaches. There are some pretty distinct features which would be your base turning point such as Power Lines, a distinct farm etc.. the only time you would likely deviate is for a without flap landing.

The other aircraft in the pattern also turned at the same point as I did...

I agree with the point about comparing tracks etc and it can be difficult to judge but it was clear in this instance even to the chap in the RHS. However considering there was an instructor on boad that plane I just wondered about the semantics etc.

But fully take on board what you and others have said.

S.

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 19:22
Flight in the vicinity of an aerodrome
12.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a flying machine, glider or airship flying in the vicinity of what the commander of the aircraft knows, or ought reasonably to know, to be an aerodrome shall—
(a) conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft intending to land at that aerodrome or keep clear of the airspace in which the pattern is formed; and
(b) make all turns to the left unless ground signals otherwise indicate.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the air traffic control unit at that aerodrome otherwise authorises.


Order of landing
13.—(1) An aircraft landing or on its final approach to land shall have the right-of-way over
other aircraft in flight or on the ground or water.
(2) An aircraft shall not overtake or cut in front of another aircraft on its final approach to land.
(3) If an air traffic control unit has communicated to any aircraft an order of priority for landing, the aircraft shall approach to land in that order.
(4) If the commander of an aircraft is aware that another aircraft is making an emergency landing, he shall give way to that aircraft.
(5) If the commander gives way in the circumstances referred to in paragraph (4) at night then, notwithstanding that he may have previously received permission to land, he shall not attempt to land until he has received further permission to do so.
(6) Subject to paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), if two or more flying machines, gliders or airships are approaching any place for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude shall have the right-of-way.


So I was flying the other day and was established on base leg and another pilot stated he was joining long final. Instantly I'm looking everywhere to see him and eventually see him on a course that would almost certainly bring us into conflict. As I'm deciding on the correct course of action, he sees me and breaks off his approach. In that situation what would you have done? My thoughts are that I was established in the circuit and he was joining the circuit so he should have given way (which he did do)...

In my opinion the a/c conducting the straight in was not "conforming to the pattern of traffic formed by other a/c" and therefore technically in breach of the Rule.

Talking purely UK here - when in Rome do as the Romans

thing
18th Feb 2015, 20:01
Bearing in mind of course that it's no good laying in the morgue knowing that you were in the right.

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 20:02
It would also help if pilots would use the terms 'Final' = Up to 4nm out, and 'Long Final' = between 4 and 8 miles out, correctly.

Or, even better, make final calls with distances, when joining 'straight in'. eg. ' Final Rwy 28 at 3 miles


MJ:ok:

thing
18th Feb 2015, 20:03
Final at four miles? Jeez, are we all flying jumbo jets?

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 20:10
Bearing in mind of course that it's no good laying in the morgue knowing that you were in the right.

Of course not but being aware of the Rules (which like many are based on hard experience) you can educate the culprit should you feel inclined to do so.

No traffic = No Pattern.
Yes Traffic = Yes Pattern = Yes Conform.
Not difficult.

Talkdownman, an excellent summary thanks!

150 Driver
18th Feb 2015, 20:18
I think from previous posts that one of those posting one of the scenarios (Scoobster) is a relatively new PPL, don't therefore think it likely that he's going to try and 'educate' an instructor (arsy or otherwise) in the other plane ! I suppose if he felt so inclined he could file an Airprox that would at the very least cause some inconvenient paperwork.

One for the experience bucket methinks.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
18th Feb 2015, 20:18
'Long Final' = between 4 and 8 miles out.

Crikey, even a 747 can turn final at less than a mile, VFR, and well flown. I suppose you advocate PA28s approaching at 3 degrees when on a visula approach to please the VASIs as well? :ugh: :rolleyes:

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 20:19
Final at four miles? Jeez, are we all flying jumbo jets?

Not all of us, but some may be!

I suppose you advocate PA28s approaching at 3 degrees when on a visula approach to please the VASIs as well? rolleyes:

No. I actually suggest that visual approaches in light aircraft with 3 degree PAPIs available should be flown with 3 white/one red, whatever that may have to do with the definition of 'Final'

MJ:ok:

Gertrude the Wombat
18th Feb 2015, 20:25
Final at four miles? Jeez, are we all flying jumbo jets?
?? - I've been on final at ten miles, when offered straight in by ATC.

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 20:29
?? - I've been on final at ten miles, when offered straight in by ATC.

10 Miles is neither on 'Final' or 'Long Final'


MJ:ok:

Talkdownman
18th Feb 2015, 20:35
From UK CAA Policy Statement - Establishment and Dimensions of Aerodrome Traffic Zones (ATZ) (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/DAP_ATZEstablishmentAndDimensions.pdf):

An ATZ is airspace of defined dimensions established around an aerodrome for the protection of aerodrome traffic (ICAO). ICAO defines ‘aerodrome traffic’ as “all traffic on the manoeuvring area of the aerodrome and all aircraft flying in the vicinity of the aerodrome”.

An aircraft is in the vicinity of an aerodrome when it is in, entering or leaving an aerodrome traffic circuit.
…so 'Long Final' probably isn't applicable at an uncontrolled aerodrome with an ATZ...

thing
18th Feb 2015, 20:38
I've been on final at ten miles, when offered straight in by ATC. No, you've been approaching the airfield in the same direction as the runway at ten miles...:).

Different story if you've been offered it by an ATC controlled airport rather than an a/g grass strip. I've often been offered a straight in where I fly from at 15 nm.

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 20:43
…so 'Long Final' probably isn't applicable at an uncontrolled aerodrome with an ATZ...

Except perhaps, when joining 'straight in, and on 'Long Final'.


MJ:ok:

Talkdownman
18th Feb 2015, 20:51
The traffic situation could change significantly whilst flying those 4 miles…

:ok:

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 21:00
The traffic situation could change significantly whilst flying those 4 miles…

Indeed it could, and, calling 'Long Final' doesn't give you right of way. You may still be joining an established traffic pattern with an aircraft turning from base to 'Final' at anything up to 4 miles, and so should be prepared to give way by 'Going Around'.


MJ:ok:

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 21:00
Whilst the semantics about "Long final" etc is an interesting one I think we are straying away from the basic issue.

If you are satisfied there is no other traffic it is perfectly reasonable, subject to noise issues, to perform a straight in approach at an uncontrolled airfield assuming one is familiar. (Although non radio/radio failure traffic is still a threat).

What is not reasonable and potentially hazardous is to barge into the circuit and disrupt traffic which is already established in the pattern.

It should be a part of any pilot's training to learn how to join the circuit pattern at all types of airfield. I observe that some pilots who have learned at locations with full air traffic are somewhat lacking when they fly to airfields with no ATSU.

The reverse sometimes applies to those who have learned at airfields without ATSU etc.

Mach Jump
18th Feb 2015, 21:08
I agree. Bob.

It seems more and more the case now though, that each aerodrome has circuit patterns, and joining procedures unique to that aerodrome.


MJ:ok:

150 Driver
18th Feb 2015, 21:13
I learned something once doing a long final - as a result I don't do them any more. Uncontrolled grass strip, talking to the local military who gave me wind. It was obvious that no-one else was flying so I positioned on long final into wind.

I probably should have twigged this before, but as I crossed the threshold it was obvious something was very wrong, the plane was floating far more than it should and halfway down the runway it was clear I wasn't going to get down and stopped before the hedge.

As I was going around I couldn't help but notice the windsock was showing a tailwind !

We're only a couple of miles from the military base and about 12 from the coast, but it would seem that we had a sea breeze conflicting with what the military had.

Since then I've always avoided long finals even when the circuit is obviously empty and religiously either join overhead or fly the circuit to inspect the windsock.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
18th Feb 2015, 21:16
Quote:
I suppose you advocate PA28s approaching at 3 degrees when on a visual approach to please the VASIs as well? rolleyes:

No. I actually suggest that visual approaches in light aircraft with 3 degree PAPIs available should be flown with 3 white/one red, whatever that may have to do with the definition of 'Final'

Try 'all white' (better yet, ignore them).

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b132/GZK6NK/DSC03621res-1.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/GZK6NK/media/DSC03621res-1.jpg.html)

And watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6q2VKsvQEQ

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 21:26
It seems more and more the case now though, that each aerodrome has circuit patterns, and joining procedures unique to that aerodrome.


MJ, yes good point - pilots need to do their homework on any local procedures published in AIP etc.

Today we had a case of two visiting aircraft who were clueless as to how to taxi to the holding point - don't people carry charts these days? Resulted in much RT chat between them and verbose A/G operator!

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 21:30
As an aside once you are in the overhead you are in a more favourable position should the engine fail.

The early aviators were well aware of this given less reliable engines and would prefer to get overhead and then stay within gliding distance.

Level Attitude
18th Feb 2015, 21:42
Scoobster,
From your own Post you were Downwind following another aircraft and instead of following them as you are required to do (conform to the pattern formed by other aircraft) you turned Base where you thought you should due to 'Landmarks' and effectively cut in front of them.

You do not know why they, in your opinion, extended their Downwind Leg - maybe they needed to increase the spacing between themselves and an aircraft in front of them?

They were aware of you and once you were established on Final they requested your intentions. This was perfectly reasonable (and we only have your opinion that this was said in an 'arsy' voice) - they probably wanted to know whether you intended to Land, in which case they would probably immediately have initiated a Go Around; or whether you intended a Touch & Go, in which case they could probably have continued with their Approach.

To the OP: You were on Base when someone said they intended joining for a Long Final - this means they were at least 4 miles out so (although you should obviously check) you should have had plenty of time to complete your Landing without interfering with them.

Emergencies excepted, I believe an aircraft on Final has priority over all other aircraft and that for Straight Ins this Rule trumps the need to conform to Circuit Traffic - not least because they are not intending to join the Circuit Pattern.

Good airmanship does dictate that at uncontrolled airfields good position reporting is required and it would be very poor to call "Final" at 4 miles.

fireflybob
18th Feb 2015, 21:54
From your own Post you were Downwind following another aircraft and instead of following them as you are required to do (conform to the pattern formed by other aircraft) you turned Base where you thought you should due to 'Landmarks' and effectively cut in front of them.


A better option though would be to Go Around from Base Leg onto the Dead Side and join again. This also enables traffic behind to fly a "normal" pattern. Notwithstanding local noise rules any extending should be done upwind and not downwind.

Emergencies excepted, I believe an aircraft on Final has priority over all other aircraft and that for Straight Ins this Rule trumps the need to conform to Circuit Traffic - not least because they are not intending to join the Circuit Pattern.


Level Attitude, sorry beg to disagree with you here! An aircraft flying a straight in is not conforming with the pattern formed by other aircraft.

Good airmanship does dictate that at uncontrolled airfields good position reporting is required

As is also keeping a good lookout - even now there are some airfields which are non radio as are some a/c. Exceptional I agree these days with Unicom (or whatever UK call it) but still possible.

skyking1
18th Feb 2015, 22:15
Mind you, this is not pointed at anyone, but just a general observation. It seems the patterns are getting stretched to the point that an engine inoperative situation will leave a plane well short of the runway environment. Flying straight in is a fine way to end up in this position, unless you really have taken into account the winds, etc. Being on the PAPI or VASI 3 miles out will leave you in the dirt.
This is a bit more than embarrassing. If it gets so busy that the downwind keeps getting pushed out, maybe it is time to fly some circuits elsewhere, or go do air work. :ok:

Level Attitude
18th Feb 2015, 23:26
A better option though would be to Go Around from Base Leg onto the Dead Side and join again. if you had just said 'Go Around from Base' that would make sense but to then say go "onto the Dead Side and join again" is, in my opinion, really asking for trouble as you are leaving the circuit from a very unusual position and will likely conflict with other (eg Joining) traffic.

Level Attitude, sorry beg to disagree with you here! An aircraft flying a straight in is not conforming with the pattern formed by other aircraft.
Yes it is.

Conforming with the pattern means flying over (roughly) the same track, at (roughly) the same height and in the same direction as other aircraft.
It does not mean the whole pattern has to be flown and it states nothing about priority or giving way.

An aircraft joining Straight In will fly the same last portion of the final approach track as all other aircraft so once they are 'Final' they have right of way to land.

I do agree this is confusing at uncontrolled airfields where different joins can be used but, unless anyone can reference where it says that Final traffic, in certain circumstances, must give way to circuit traffic then ' Them is the Rules'

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 00:09
Mind you, this is not pointed at anyone, but just a general observation. It seems the patterns are getting stretched to the point that an engine inoperative situation will leave a plane well short of the runway environment. Flying straight in is a fine way to end up in this position, unless you really have taken into account the winds, etc. Being on the PAPI or VASI 3 miles out will leave you in the dirt.

Flying away from the airfield will also leave the aircraft well short of a runway environment. Should we not do that or do engines only fail when approaching the field? Why fixate on engine failures only in the circuit? Would high approaches and constant tightly flown low power glide circuits increase the likelihood of the very engine failure the consequences of which you are trying to avoid?

skyking1
19th Feb 2015, 00:51
Searching for more of a middle ground, Mike. I see patterns fit for a bizjet at small airports for no good reason that I can think of. I do climb above pattern altitude when leaving the airport, not high enough to glide to another but still a better situation than 90 seconds from touchdown.

fireflybob
19th Feb 2015, 06:24
if you had just said 'Go Around from Base' that would make sense but to then say go "onto the Dead Side and join again" is, in my opinion, really asking for trouble as you are leaving the circuit from a very unusual position and will likely conflict with other (eg Joining) traffic.

So please tell me how you Go Around from Base Leg then?

BEagle
19th Feb 2015, 06:51
Extending downwind is a bad habit, if it is any further than the point appropriate to a flapless approach and often leads to absurdly huge circuits.

Going round from base leg means crossing to the deadside, then fitting into the circuit as required. Other traffic joining must give then way.

Straight in joins should only be flown if there is no other traffic - or on an instrument approach, of course. If there's any other traffic, then join on the deadside and fit in as necessary.

I was once duty pilot at Benson supervising solo students bouncing Bulldogs off the runway. Whereupon a plummy-voiced corgi-carrier in a 146 announced he was joining straight in, having dropped off the royal at some venue or other.

I directed ATC to tell him to join on the deadside as there were 3 others in. He queried this, so I told them to repeat it. But he did as instructed and fitted into the circuit without difficulty. Later in the bar he queried this with the CFI, who backed me up and advised him to read the Flying Order Book.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ga_srgwebStandardOverheadJoinPosterJan09.pdf provides a good depiction of the standard overhead join.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 07:03
(a) conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft intending to land at that aerodrome or keep clear of the airspace in which the pattern is formed

I think it has long been accepted by most people as implicit in this statement that the onus is on traffic joining the circuit to make adjustments to their track and speed to 'fit in' with traffic already established in the circuit pattern, whatever size, or shape of circuit the established traffic is makiing, and that, once established in the circuit, each aircraft must follow the one ahead.

The problem is: When does the 'joining' aircraft become part of the 'established' circuit traffic?.

In my opinion, an aircraft joining the circuit straight in, from a 'long final' position is not part of the circuit pattern until it is inside whatever 'base leg' any already established aircraft is flying at that time.

This means that any such aircraft coming into conflict with any aircraft on the 'base leg' must, by definition, be still 'joining', and not yet 'part of' the established circuit traffic. It must therefore, make an adjustment to allow the aircraft established on 'base leg' to continue unhindered, and the only safe way to do this at this point, is to 'go around'.

As to the 'Always be witiin gliding distance of the runway whilst in the circuit' argument;

It must be appreciated, and accepted, that any form of 'powered approach' must, by definition, leave the aircraft, at some point, and for the remainder of the circuit, unable to make it to the runway in the case of an engine failure .

The only way to avoid this situation, whilst at the same time maintaining the order of traffic in the circuit, would be for everyone to make glide approaches from the 'downwind' position, in the style of WW2 Tiger Moth practice.

I would suggest that, considering the wide range of aircraft we have in circuit patterns today, and the general unwillingness amongst many people to conform with the conventions we already have, this would be impossible to achieve.


MJ:ok:

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 07:22
Thank God for someone else who doesn't believe that the mantra of always within gliding distance of the field is always appropriate.

mary meagher
19th Feb 2015, 08:07
Dead side, live side, overhead join, good grief! Every airfield in the UK must be so pleased to have its own unique arrangement! Far be it from Brits to follow the KISS principle......like they do in the US of A. Where they call unicom, prefaced by the NAME of the airfield to avoid misunderstanding. And left turn circuits are de riguer, unless otherwise specified in the literature....

So in the US, you call on the universal frequency, eg. " Enstone traffic, Echo Romeo joining downwind for Two Five. " And you then slot in downwind. Simples.

As the UK likes to be different in every way, I am more than ever reluctant to welcome power traffic to a gliding site, where THERE IS NO DEAD SIDE, FOLKS....gliders can come from any direction as necessity requires. and furthermore, THERE IS NO OVERHEAD JOIN! ! As we have seen some power planes attempt, despite the winch which has just launched a glider up to 1,400 feet and is still connected with a braided steel cable which might just possibly get in the way of an overhead join.......

And yet, on a gliding site, if the thermals all quit at once, as does sometimes happen, you can have eight or ten gliders landing at the SAME TIME and they mostly manage to avoid each other.

Talkdownman
19th Feb 2015, 08:20
Straight in joins should only be flown if there is no other traffic - or on an instrument approach, of course
In which case ATC would be in-situ to integrate the VFR with the IFR on the IAP.

What is not reasonable and potentially hazardous is to barge into the circuit and disrupt traffic which is already established in the pattern
Totally agree. In my humble opinion any pilot conducting a straight-in approach to an uncontrolled busy circuit is overly optimistic, or arrogant, or mad, or a combination of all three. In my humble time watching aeroplanes going round and round I have witnessed such behaviour on many occasions. Frequently it turned out that the PIC was a very experienced and highly qualified aviator who should otherwise be setting an example.

Flyingmac
19th Feb 2015, 08:33
I recently flew with an out of practice pilot at his request. We did 11 circuits in 33 minutes. Flying a 1.2 mile final would have put us into a neighbouring ATZ. Normal Base to Final turn is around 800mtrs out. A mile out is a Long Final call.


I've flown this approach countless times, and it's been perfectly adequate for anything from fixed wing microlights to light twins.


We don't allow overhead joins as there's a noise sensitive area on the dead side. So no dead side descents, and our circuit height is 800ft.


Complaints from visitors that they've been 'Cut up' on a two mile final are usually met with :rolleyes:.

Pittsextra
19th Feb 2015, 08:42
As to the 'Always be witiin gliding distance of the runway whilst in the circuit' argument;.....

I would suggest that, considering the wide range of aircraft we have in circuit patterns today



Thank God for someone else who doesn't believe that the mantra of always within gliding distance of the field is always appropriate

Why thank God? Trying to remain within gliding distance of the field sounds completely sensible to me. Very rarely does one share the circuit with a modern passenger jet and so quite why - for example - a circuit containing the usual mix of PA28 and 172's needs to be a size suitable for a Boeing B52 is beyond me.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 08:43
A mile out is a Long Final call.

A call of 'Long Final' indicartes that you are on the centreline, and between 4 and 8 miles out.

Complaints from visitors that they've been 'Cut up' on a two mile final are usually met with :rolleyes:.

If you are behind another aircraft downwind, and you then turn final in front of it, you have 'cut them up', regardless of where you, or they are based.




MJ:ok:

Talkdownman
19th Feb 2015, 08:43
One airfield I can think of has published two separate, non-integrated circuits, one for 'GA', and one for microlights. They meet on short final. That is simply engineering 'cutting-up' and proximity.

Flyingmac
19th Feb 2015, 08:51
. A call of 'Long Final' indicartes that you are on the centreline, and between 4 and 8 miles out.


Try it on 06 at Bagby then, and see what Topcliffe has to say.
Or 24 and make friends at Sutton Bank.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 08:59
Try it on 06 at Bagby then, and see what Topcliffe has to say.

Why would you indicate that you were between 4 and 8 miles away from Bagby, or any other airfield, when you were, in fact only 1 mile away?


MJ:ok:

bingofuel
19th Feb 2015, 09:00
I am curious as to how many aircraft could safely operate in a "standard" circuit pattern and stay within the 2 or 2.5 nm radius of an ATZ of a typical GA field?

Assuming only one aircraft occupies the runway at any time, as that would probably dictate the spacing required in the circuit.

What do people think?

rarelyathome
19th Feb 2015, 09:05
So is a "longfinal" call the point at which the aircraft is established on 'final' and, therefore, has the right of way, or is that not until a proper "final" call is made. It is something that has always niggled my mind.

The earlier quoted 4 mile final leaves between 3.45 and 4 mins at most GA approach speeds which will really screw up somebody half way along a reasonably tight base leg. At 2 of the airfields I fly from, there isn't a deadside due to glider flying so a go around would involve a pretty tight turn to fly down the runway. High workload, tight bank angle climbing from approach speed - only a matter of time!

DaveW
19th Feb 2015, 09:14
"Long Final" according to CAP 413 is between 8 and 4 miles, as has been said.

GA pilots calling "Long Finals" correctly should be (a) complimented for correctly applying the detail of CAP413, and then (b) shot.

Flyingmac
19th Feb 2015, 09:21
"GA pilots calling "Long Finals" correctly should be (a) complimented for correctly applying the detail of CAP413, and then (b) shot." :ok:

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 09:23
So is a "longfinal" call the point at which the aircraft is established on 'final' and, therefore, has the right of way, or is that not until a proper "final" call is made. It is something that has always niggled my mind.


The calls are just position reports, and should not constitute a claim to 'right of way'

This is a grey area, as the rules regarding rights of way, and flight in the vicinity of an airfield are rather vague and conflicting in places. In my opinion, an aircfraft joining 'straight in' cannot claim to be even in the circuit pattern, let alone on 'final approach' for the purpose of 'right of way'. until it is inside any aircraft on base leg.

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 09:42
Quote:
As to the 'Always be witiin gliding distance of the runway whilst in the circuit' argument;.....

I would suggest that, considering the wide range of aircraft we have in circuit patterns today

Quote:
Thank God for someone else who doesn't believe that the mantra of always within gliding distance of the field is always appropriate

Why thank God? Trying to remain within gliding distance of the field sounds completely sensible to me. Very rarely does one share the circuit with a modern passenger jet and so quite why - for example - a circuit containing the usual mix of PA28 and 172's needs to be a size suitable for a Boeing B52 is beyond me.
You are obviously not based at a large international airport like I am, together with many other private and training aircraft.

Talkdownman
19th Feb 2015, 09:50
GA pilots calling "Long Finals"...should be...shot
…because it's singular!

In my opinion, an aircfraft joining 'straight in' cannot claim to be even in the circuit pattern, let alone on 'final approach' for the purpose of 'right of way'. until it is inside any aircraft on base leg
Agree with MJ.
… :ok:
(BTW MJ, tip the toast crumbs out of your keyboard…)

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 09:53
I am curious as to how many aircraft could safely operate in a "standard" circuit pattern and stay within the 2 or 2.5 nm radius of an ATZ of a typical GA field?

It's an interesting question, Bingo, and the answer would depend, very much, on what you consider to be a 'standard circuit'

If we consider a few commonly followed conventions we could suggest a standard cirtcuit to be, straight ahead to 500' agl, left turn 90 degrees, level at 1,000', limmediately left 90 degrees again, 90 left again at the end of the downwind leg when the threshold is about 45 degrees behind us, descending on base, to be wings level after the final turn at a miin. of 500'(1nm), final approach as required to land, making a go around decision at 200'agl, and vacating the runway, or performing a 'touch and go'

This would take aroud 6 mins per circuit to complete in a typical training aircraft like a C152, or PA38, and would be just about contained within a standard 2 mile radius ATZ.

Spacing in the cirtcuit would be determined by the need for aircraft on final to have a clear runway at 200'agl, so a min of 30 secs apart.

Assuming that all the aircraft were doing 'touch and goes', this would mean that our 'standard circuit', under ideal conditions, with perfect discipline and accurate flying, could accommodate a maximum of 12 identical aircraft.


MJ:ok:

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 09:58
(BTW MJ, tip the toast crumbs out of your keyboard…)

:eek: Surely you don't mean these ', 'toast crumbs'? ;)


MJ:ok:

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 10:13
Quote:
I am curious as to how many aircraft could safely operate in a "standard" circuit pattern and stay within the 2 or 2.5 nm radius of an ATZ of a typical GA field?
It's an interesting question, Bingo, and the answer would depend, very much, on what you consider to be a 'standard circuit'

If we consider a few commonly followed conventions we could suggest a standard cirtcuit to be, straight ahead to 500' agl, left turn 90 degrees, level at 1,000', limmediately left 90 degrees again, 90 left again at the end of the downwind leg when the threshold is about 45 degrees behind us, descending on base, to be wings level after the final turn at 500', final approach as required to land, making a go around decision at 200'agl, and vacating the runway, or performing a 'touch and go'

This would take aroud 6 mins per circuit to complete in a typical training aircraft like a C152, or PA38, and would be just about contained within a standard 2 mile radius ATZ.

Spacing in the cirtcuit would be determined by the need for aircraft on final to have a clear runway at 200'agl, so a min of 30 secs apart.

Assuming that all the aircraft were doing 'touch and goes', this would mean that our 'standard circuit', under ideal conditions, with perfect discipline and accurate flying, could accommodate a maximum of 12 identical aircraft.


MJ
I wouldn't fancy flying in that circuit...

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 10:15
I wouldn't fancy flying in that circuit...

Not been to a PFA rally then -:)

bingofuel
19th Feb 2015, 10:20
MJ,
I would agree with your comment, and admit it would be the ideal situation. It is interesting that quite often having 4 training aircraft in a circuit can create the extended downwinds etc which seen so common.
I recall from an FI seminar some years ago, the speaker suggesting it should be taught that if you cannot turn base at the correct position then you should initiate a go around from downwind and re establish in the circuit. If I recall the speaker explained he taught go arounds from every part of the circuit and regarded a landing as a bonus!

With regard to calling long finals at 4 miles, I seem to remember that any flight more than 3 miles from an airfield was categorised as a cross country, so are we now calling final whilst still on the nav leg?

Interesting thread though.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 10:25
Not been to a PFA rally then

Ah yes. I went to one of those once. :eek:

perfect discipline and accurate flying ;)


MJ:ok:

Level Attitude
19th Feb 2015, 10:25
So please tell me how you Go Around from Base Leg then?
By maintaining, or climbing back up to and then maintaining, circuit height; turning on to a final approach track at the appropriate point and flying along (but just to one side of) the Runway until it was appropriate to turn Crosswind.

Technically, by flying just to one particular side of the Runway, an aircraft could be said to be on the Dead Side of the Runway BUT it would never have left the circuit so would not need to rejoin and, at all times, would be conforming to the circuit pattern.

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 10:31
Quote:
I wouldn't fancy flying in that circuit...
Not been to a PFA rally then -
Many, that's why I wouldn't fancy it.,..
You are showing your age. It's LAA these days.;)

englishal
19th Feb 2015, 10:40
I don't think there is such a thing as a Standard join these days. Try joining overhead when there is parachuting going on and you might be in for a surprise. Try joining overhead where there is a MATZ above and Typhoons flying around and you might get a surprise.

At airfields like this I favour a base leg or straight in join. At airfields with a SOHJ when I am arriving from the dead side I'd join on crosswind over the upwind numbers.

At "home" I like to join overhead just for fun, and see how accurately and quickly I can crank it around, lose 1000' before crossing the numbers. Our circuit is quite tight due to noise abatement so I think final is typically 0.2 - 0.4 nm.

However if joining from a straight in or Base then I'd be prepared to give way to anyone in the circuit. I shudder to think of someone on base having to "go around" to someone on final as this doesn't really do anything to increase separation. Better would be to extend downwind if there is any ambiguity before turning base, or for the person on long final to adjust speed etc., or go around.

What annoys me more is incorrect position reports...Someone calls up "on final" when in actual fact they are 6 miles out. I had that at Bembridge one time, I was downwind for the westerly runway and someone called in final. I decided to extend downwind and I was half way to shoreham before they passed me !

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 10:48
You are showing your age. It's LAA these days.


I resemble that remark about my age... I claim that was a typo. Remember being at Wroughton with 5 inside of me downwind. That made for a crick in the neck looking around. I couldn't do it now because of my age, and my neck wont turn like an owl anymore. -:)

Pittsextra
19th Feb 2015, 11:00
You are obviously not based at a large international airport like I am, together with many other private and training aircraft.

Thats fair enough but the issue in this thread wouldn't apply in this case given one assumes your large international airport has an air traffic control service rather than air/ground.

Flyingmac
19th Feb 2015, 12:22
Not a criticism. just an observation. Two approaches here to the same airfield. The first aircraft turns final about a half mile out and takes about 30 seconds to the threshold. The second turns about a mile out and spends around a minute on final.


It's me dragging the 172 in to miss the un-matted (soft) first 200mtrs.:\
It's also me in the tower on the second clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41s12mQ7Jtk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMVKKI7vtsk

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 12:38
Not quite sure what you want us to observe from the two clips, Mac. :confused:


MJ:ok:

Flyingmac
19th Feb 2015, 12:58
Just that there's no right way, but there's a quick way and a slower way.
If I'd been behind the Eurostar I might have slipped in ahead of him when I saw him Disappearing into the downwind distance. I have to pay for my fuel.

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 13:02
Don't know the cruise speed of a Eurostar, but I have slowed down an Archer II and a stage of flap to stay a proper distance behind a slower aircraft. I'm sure (and know) you can do it in a 172.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 13:11
If I'd been behind the Eurostar I might have slipped in ahead of him when I saw him Disappearing into the downwind distance. I have to pay for my fuel

Ah, I see.

...stay a proper distance behind a slower aircraft. I'm sure (and know) you can do it in a 172.

I don't think Mac meant that he wasn't able to do that, PA, just that he didn't want to.


MJ:ok:

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 13:15
OKee doke...

flybymike
19th Feb 2015, 13:19
Well I think this is where we start talking about being cut up in the circuit again

The less flying you do, the less fuel you buy. If you don't fly at all you won't have to buy any fuel at all.

fireflybob
19th Feb 2015, 13:23
Technically, by flying just to one particular side of the Runway, an aircraft could be said to be on the Dead Side of the Runway BUT it would never have left the circuit so would not need to rejoin and, at all times, would be conforming to the circuit pattern.

LevelAttitude, poor choice of words on my part - I didn't mean to imply that said a/c would need to rejoin the circuit. That's how I teach it also.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 13:28
The less flying you do, the less fuel you buy. If you don't fly at all you won't have to buy any fuel at all.

Nobody could argue with that, Mac.;)


MJ:ok:

Scoobster
19th Feb 2015, 15:23
From your own Post you were Downwind following another aircraft and instead of following them as you are required to do (conform to the pattern formed by other aircraft) you turned Base where you thought you should due to 'Landmarks' and effectively cut in front of them.

You do not know why they, in your opinion, extended their Downwind Leg - maybe they needed to increase the spacing between themselves and an aircraft in front of them?


Maybe I am missing something.. The landmarks are the turning point that is taught at the airfield for the circuit - aside from if someone is in a faster aircraft etc like an arrow.

There was no aircraft in front - they were the lead aircraft. 4 in the circuit including myself behind the lead aircraft and 2 behind.

The traffic pattern at home airfield is a pattern which is otherwise flown according to landmarks, headings, visual references etc - I turned base at the spot (as taught by the instructor) and so did the aircraft behind me which also had an Instructor on board.

Aircraft on the previous 2 approaches also turned in the same spot and flew what I would deem as a standard circuit..

Said aircraft that I was following was outside of the ATZ by extending their circuit. There is no 2 ways about it.

So according to the rule .. are you saying I should put myself also out of the ATZ ?? and what constitutes the traffic pattern - because IMHO this would mean that if you are "following an aircraft" and said aircraft is flying a non standard circuit - you would also be flying a non standard circuit..and the aircraft behind will be doing the same and if there is an aircraft behind they will also do the same due to the domino effect.

So for that "1 hour" - the lead aircraft will be putting all other aircraft out of the ATZ..

What would you do in that situation??

I apologise if I am nit picking or have confused the situation and I am far from the thousands of hours on SEP - but as my instructor once said - Air Law is one thing and the practical is another- people will do a free for all and you have to keep your wits about you.

If I have missed something then I welcome the education :ok:

Scoobster

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 15:36
Only picking up on the aspect of "landmarks" when flying a circuit.

Not heard the point that when away from base those "landmarks" are gone. All that's left is the age old runway threshold at 45 degs rule (Not the start of the runway always, due to displaced thresholds) Landmarks for circuits at night may well work due to street lighting and other lights at your home airfield etc, but again, anyone relying on landmarks for circuits when landing away, is not doing it right IMHO.

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 15:54
Said aircraft that I was following was outside of the ATZ by extending their circuit. There is no 2 ways about it.

So according to the rule .. are you saying I should put myself also out of the ATZ ?? and what constitutes the traffic pattern - because IMHO this would mean that if you are "following an aircraft" and said aircraft is flying a non standard circuit - you would also be flying a non standard circuit..and the aircraft behind will be doing the same and if there is an aircraft behind they will also do the same due to the domino effect.

So for that "1 hour" - the lead aircraft will be putting all other aircraft out of the ATZ..

Yes, Scoob. That's how it's supposed to work.

Have a word with the 'big circuit' pilot on the ground later to find out what was the reason for the long downwind.

Having said that, it could also be said that, if the aircraft in front extends the downwind far enough, then it has left the 'circuit ' and has lost the right of way that being in the circuit would normally provide.

Where you draw the line is hard to say, and would depend a lot on how big you think a 'normal' circuit should be, and that will depend on what you are used to. I would suggest that any extension significantly outside the size of an ATZ, without any obvious reason could be a candidate for this line of thought.


MJ:ok:

Scoobster
19th Feb 2015, 15:55
Agreed when away from home.

I'm just wondering about following or conforming to the traffic pattern if lead aircraft at 'base' airfield is out of the ATZ.

Would one still be expected to conform just because they are setting the traffic pattern and would affect all other aircraft being outside also?

I do not advocate cutting up any aircraft and just trying to work out a how air law would fit into the scenario above

Ah okay.. Thanks MJ

skyking1
19th Feb 2015, 16:39
In the US, the final rule of law is "see and avoid". Being behind the other plane you have the benefit of "see" and if you take action that fails to "avoid" a potential conflict, it would be on you.
Is the wording similar in the UK?
This is fun hearing other terms like "cut up". here it would be "cut off".
This is what I pictured when I first saw cut up.
Sliced Seminole (http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/VH-KBZ-ShreddedSeminole.htm)

Mach Jump
19th Feb 2015, 17:21
In the US, the final rule of law is "see and avoid". Being behind the other plane you have the benefit of "see" and if you take action that fails to "avoid" a potential conflict, it would be on you.
Is the wording similar in the UK?

Your point about keeping the other aircraft in front of you to more easilly keep it in sight is a good one, Sky. When we 'cut up' or 'cut off' another aircraft, we often loose sight of it, and thus create another potential hazard.

I think that, although there are many procedural differences in the details of joining and flying the circuit pattern between the US and UK, the basic 'see and avoid' principle still holds good either side of the Atlantic.


MJ:ok:

skyking1
19th Feb 2015, 17:44
The other problem with the outsized pattern pertains to my usual ride, a light twin.
104 knots is a good safe speed for all legs and turns, until short final. A big pattern of 100 KT downwind planes like 172's does not seem a problem, till we get to that long final leg.
Now the planes slow to 65 KTs or less, and I cannot negotiate a safe landing at all. With the big pattern, they get two planes on the final many times, dragging it in at a perfectly appropriate speed. It is just the time involved that is unworkable.
So we look at it with the tighter pattern. I blend in on a 200 yard wider downwind, in a good spot. I fly a slightly larger downwind leg, keeping well ahead of the plane behind by virtue of more speed. I am well in sight of following traffic. Now my downwind was longer, base leg a little longer, and when I get on final the leading plane is just touching down. I can now slow to 90 KT, and it works fine. Nobody has to do anything to their work to get me in.
When the thing gets big and slow, I have to beg a slot from one of my fellow aviators to arrive. Not usually a problem, but not necessary IMO.

fireflybob
19th Feb 2015, 18:42
What would you do in that situation??


Scoobster, Go Around from Base Leg - usually means you can fly the "normal" circuit next time round.

Pittsextra
19th Feb 2015, 19:06
To the point on see and avoid... it also plays well to those not flying huge circuits.

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2013093.pdf

skyking1
19th Feb 2015, 19:27
That report was astounding to me and reinforces the need to carefully study the laws and common practices of another country before flying there. That sort of thing is simply not done in the US, outside of restricted airspace or on designated Military Training Routes (MTRs). A 210KT Hercules @250 AGL would be something to behold :)
I had one opposite direction on an IFR flight with minimum separation once. We were in and out of the crud, and here he is at about half mile, and closing speed of 420 knots or so.

chillindan
19th Feb 2015, 19:36
Thanks all for the observations and debate, very interesting. I only recently qualified and hence wanted to check my understanding. If things had progressed I would have applied power and gone around whilst also making a call on the radio to announce my intention.

Cheers,
Dan

Ps - it was at Barton, and it was busy (4 or 5 in the circuit I think from memory)

skyhighfallguy
19th Feb 2015, 19:53
PA28181 and I are thinking the same thing.

IF you are new to flying, you will say something like: I turned base over granny's farm house.

That' s the problem. We use crutches like turn base over the power lines, when we should use the constants like the 45degree etc.

to the original poster: take some more lessons with instructors that might be out of your normal envelope (respected instructors).

I've always found it hard to fathom that flight instructors in england can do so without being commercial pilots.

Gertrude the Wombat
19th Feb 2015, 20:13
A 210KT Hercules @250 AGL would be something to behold :)

Seen one which seemed much lower than that ... I was in a car at the time, not an aircraft, it gave the impression of just clearing the treetops, and the noise was something else entirely ...

(Yes I know that untrained ground observers rarely get within an order of magnitude when they estimate heights of aircraft. But it was still quite impressive.)

Scoobster
19th Feb 2015, 21:14
All that's left is the age old runway threshold at 45 degs rule (Not the start of the runway always, due to displaced thresholds)

That rule being that from downwind to base the runway should be at a 45 degree angle as you look over your shoulder.

This is the same rule that you are referring to.. correct?

You might phrase it slightly more better than I have though :\

Scoobster

PA28181
19th Feb 2015, 21:39
I'm just wondering about following or conforming to the traffic pattern if lead aircraft at 'base' airfield is out of the ATZ.


If you leave the ATZ depending on track, at Fairoaks, White Waltham, & Denham, you may get a phone call from EGLL:rolleyes:

150 Driver
19th Feb 2015, 21:48
Isn't it interesting though that for something we all do, all the time, every time we fly, there are so many opinions from so many with so much experience, some of which is contradictory !

Guess it goes to show that rules are all well and good but what matters is commonsense, good radio use, airmanship and courtesy. And if everyone makes it on the ground safely then that's a job well done.

skyhighfallguy
19th Feb 2015, 22:41
150 driver, flying is not commonsense.

We have rules that have been around longer than you and I have been around

Why not follow them? I realize you have to actually read them, understand them and maybe even ask others to help you understand them. And be sure you ask someone who actually knows something like an FAA inspector here in the USA or whatever you call them in your country.

Commonsense? Hardly. It is well thought out rules that keep things safe, the only problem seems to be when they are not obeyed or understood.

When I was instructing, I would teach people on how to judge distance (without the use of DME, VOR, or GPS etc). Just having someone say: turn base over the power lines might work for one airfield, but what do you do if you don't have power lines at the next aerodrome?

Level Attitude
20th Feb 2015, 01:00
Commonsense? Hardly. It is well thought out rules that keep things safe, the only problem seems to be when they are not obeyed or understood.Very true. Although courtesy (not to mention self preservation) means aircraft joining a circuit pattern tend to give way to those already in it I can, which surprised me, find no Rule that actually states that Circuit Traffic has any specific right of way.


All Quotes from CAP393
Avoiding aerial collisions
8 (5) Subject to sub-paragraph (7), an aircraft which has the right-of-way under this rule shall maintain its course and speed.Since a pilot certainly wants to do this when concentrating on landing it is no surprise that:
Order of landing
13 (1) An aircraft landing or on its final approach to land shall have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or on the ground or water.
(2) An aircraft shall not overtake or cut in front of another aircraft on its final approach to land.Flight in the vicinity of an aerodrome
12 (1) …a flying machine flying in the vicinity of … an aerodrome shall:
(a) conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft intending to land at that Aerodrome ….A single pattern allows for an orderly single flow of Aircraft on to a final approach (0 to 4 nm from Threshold so ATZ, or not, is irrelevent) ie no multiple Base Legs, a variety of distances out from the threshold, which could be interesting, if not chaotic. However, due to 13, all aircraft are still required to give way to aircraft already on Final - no matter how they got there.

Converging
9 (3) Subject to paragraphs (1) and (2), when two aircraft are converging in the air at approximately the same altitude, the aircraft which has the other on its right shall give way.The above means that an aircraft joining a L/H Circuit Crosswind would be required to give way to existing Downwind Traffic.
But what about an aircraft that has Gone Around and is now flying along the runway at circuit height? The Rules state they are the ones who must now give way to an aircraft joining from the Deadside.
What about a R/H Circuit?

Pilots flying a Straight In approach to an airfield with a busy circuit pattern may not be popular but that does not mean they do not have right of way.

Level Attitude
20th Feb 2015, 01:38
At "home" I like to join overhead just for fun, and see how accurately and quickly I can crank it around, lose 1000' before crossing the numbers. Our circuit is quite tight due to noise abatement so I think final is typically 0.2 - 0.4 nmChallenging and fun certainly but, even though you only do this at your "home" airfield, may I suggest this (a steep gliding turn on the Dead Side, close to the runway) is not good airmanship.

150 Driver
20th Feb 2015, 07:12
I wasn't suggesting that you chuck the rules away and just use commonsense.

FWIW I have read the read the rules and like to think I follow them. But when you're in a situation where someone else isn't following the rules as you understand them (bearing in mind that there are what appear to be experienced aviators on here who are expressing differing opinions !) then commonsense/self preservation/good airmanship (call it what you will) must play a part in getting you down safely.

ChickenHouse
20th Feb 2015, 08:13
Pihutze, what a discussion and they are all there - the rule-rules-all, the cowboys, the few common-sensers and even some pilots ;-). Folks, I read all the discussion and summarize for me: it all depends.

One question to the UK flyers. Do you have published VFR traffic patterns and what is their legal status? I remember the very annoying discussion in Germany, you know that country with the hard-headed citizens, on traffic patterns and in the end the lawyers had to clear that traffic patterns are just guidelines, nothing else (there even is a published expert opinion, can't find it now).

I would treat a "log final" call at an uncontrolled airfield the same as "ILS established" on a controlled airport, where this is just an information and if time permits the controller will clear to land you well before the established machine is in final. Once the "long final" guy enters final, it has to fiddle emself into the traffic at the pattern, that easy?

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 10:46
Order of landing
13 (1) An aircraft landing or on its final approach to land shall have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or on the ground or water.
(2) An aircraft shall not overtake or cut in front of another aircraft on its final approach to land.

Pilots flying a Straight In approach to an airfield with a busy circuit pattern may not be popular but that does not mean they do not have right of way.

Depends where you think the 'final approach to land' starts. If someone calls 'Final at 15 miles' does that mean that you can't turn 'base' in front of them?

My view is that, for traffic joining 'straight in', 'final approach to land' starts once you are inside a point on 'final' where you might reasonably expect the 'base leg' traffic to be, or inside the actual position of base leg traffic, whichever is the closer.

I realise that others may interpret the rules to suit themselves.


MJ:ok:

ChickenHouse
20th Feb 2015, 12:23
My view is that, for traffic joining 'straight in', 'final approach to land' starts once you are inside a point on 'final' where you might reasonably expect the 'base leg' traffic to be, or inside the actual position of base leg traffic, whichever is the closer.

That is a long version of what I meant. If you have a published traffic pattern, I would assume someone "on the published final line on the chart" to have right of way and somebody on 15nm "long final" definitely not. Isn't there a setting in the UK with something like 8nm long final, 4nm final, less 4nm short final?

skyhighfallguy
20th Feb 2015, 12:54
I just want to make sure I understand the situation as described by the OP.

There are only two planes in the sky near some airport. Just two planes. And they can't work out something on the radio to the satisfaction of both pilots?


I haven't heard anyone say something like: I offered to cross final and do a right 270 turn and rejoin final behind the plane calling on final.

Or: Plane on final offering to do a 360 turn to allow base traffic to go ahead.

And did both planes have recognition, landing, or other intense lights on over and above strobe and beacon?

flybymike
20th Feb 2015, 13:14
I can think of at least one unlicensed uncontrolled airfield in the UK where an orbit on final will bring forth shouts of derision on the radio about what a dangerous manouvre this is ( possible traffic behind) and where a wrong directional turn on final into the dead side against the traffic direction would bring a similar result ( notwithstanding that your suggestion may otherwise be completely sensible.)

rarelyathome
20th Feb 2015, 13:21
An orbit on final :eek:

Please broadcast any intention to do that so I can leave the FIR!!!

phiggsbroadband
20th Feb 2015, 13:24
My version of 'Bing' didn't translate that...

As for Long Finals....

At Hawarden, a Baluga on a 10 mile final has precedence even over a PPL student pilot doing his first ever Solo Circuit (Me.)....

It's something to remember, as I had not done 'Orbits' before.

DaveW
20th Feb 2015, 13:44
That wasn't very clever of somebody. (Not you).

Your story brings to mind a similar situation (G-BABB at Southend in 2006 (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Cessna%20F150L,%20G-BABB%2007-07.pdf)) which ended with a 16 y.o. student fatality.


As an aside, I've received an ATC instruction to orbit on final before now.

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 13:52
I haven't heard anyone say something like: I offered to cross final and do a right 270 turn and rejoin final behind the plane calling on final.

Or: Plane on final offering to do a 360 turn to allow base traffic to go ahead. :eek:


Of all the things I see in uncontrolled circuits, I think orbiting on base and final are the most dangerous!

As an aside, I've received an ATC instruction to orbit on final before now.

I hope you respectfully told them where to shove that instruction.

I remember that 'accident', Dave. It was tragic.:sad:

MJ:ok:

150 Driver
20th Feb 2015, 14:02
Perhaps a question for ATC to answer, how do they differentiate (indeed, should they ?) a first student solo from a second or more student solo ?

When I was training, flying solo and giving a 'Student G-ABCD' call sign I was more than once given instructions to orbit (although not on final !) and extend downwind due to heavy commercial traffic. Fortunately by the stage this started happening I was close to test, no dramas but would they have known that ?

I suppose the ATC view would be that whilst not ideal, the solo student was up to dealing with whatever emergencies or instructions were given otherwise the Instructor wouldn't allow the student to go solo.

Lest it be taken out context, the question is posed out of idle curiosity, not to have a pop at anyone.

DaveW
20th Feb 2015, 14:11
I hope you respectfully told them where to shove that instruction.

You say "shove"; I said "going around".


In my head, though, I said... :}

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 14:12
Perhaps a question for ATC to answer, how do they differentiate (indeed, should they ?) a first student solo from a second or more student solo?

Usually, the Instructor will give ATC a 'heads up' that this student is a potential First Solo when booking out, or tell them on the radio just before you go.

I suppose the ATC view would be that whilst not ideal, the solo student was up to dealing with whatever emergencies or instructions were given otherwise the Instructor wouldn't allow the student to go solo.

Nobody should be sent solo unless they are prepared for anything that could reasonably be expected to happen to them.


MJ:ok:

flybymike
20th Feb 2015, 14:16
Orbiting on Final or base under ATC instructions not particularly unusual in my experience. Maybe I'm unlucky.
Certainly it's extremely common on downwind.

skyking1
20th Feb 2015, 14:24
I think an orbit called for below pattern altitude is a very risky maneuver indeed. If a controller can't figure things out before that point he needs a little remedial training.

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 14:30
Isn't there a setting in the UK with something like 8nm long final, 4nm final, less 4nm short final?

In the UK the only rule we have is that, for position reporting, 'Final' can be anywhere between 0 and 4 nm, and 'Long Final' anywhere between 4 and 8nm.

There is no official definition for 'Short Final' but it is commonly used to indicate that the call is being made much later than it would have been normally, in the same sense as 'Late Downwind'.

If someone called 'Short Final', I would expect them to be almost oner the threshold.


MJ:ok:

Scoobster
20th Feb 2015, 15:48
On the notion of "orbiting" this once happened in my early stages of the PPL landway under dual instruction.

Southend ATC instructed an orbit on the downwind leg.

So my instructor took the controls and did the orbit.

Watching some You Tube videos for a LGW Transit - there is an instruction similar to "Proceed to North Terminal Build and hold North of Runway xx".

The P1 then obliges.

Question - Would the "hold" be an orbit - and would the "orbit" be a 15 degree Angle of Bank rate 1 turn with the turn co-ordinator on the first notch?

Or are would a quick calculation have to be worked out to establish according to TAS what AoB is required subject to the speed you are flying?

Same question applies if instructed to orbit on downwind...

Scoobster

BackPacker
20th Feb 2015, 16:04
I don't think there is a set time for an orbit. You've got to consider the actual situation and the reason for the orbit. If it's to provide spacing for a departure of an aircraft, or to slot you in behind GA traffic, ATC may only need you to orbit for a minute or so. So something faster than a rate-one turn would be appropriate (say 30 degrees AoB at 100 knots). But if you need to orbit because there's an A380 landing, ATC may need to hold you for three minutes or even more. In that case a rate one (17 degrees AoB at 100 knots) would be more appropriate.

Gertrude the Wombat
20th Feb 2015, 16:14
I've received an ATC instruction to orbit on final before now.
Like many here I would refuse such an instruction. They can't tell you not to go around FFS!

Scoobster
20th Feb 2015, 16:16
In that case a rate one (17 degrees AoB at 100 knots) would be more appropriate

How would one expect to work this out?

At PPL I was told a Rate 1 turn is 30 degree AoB at 90-100 kts

So in this situation.. if instructed to orbit for 3 minutes.. I would (if i knew no better) -(will look this up in ATPL stuff also/calculations etc) -I would just orbit at 30 AoB for 3 minutes.

This would probably take me around quicker than the 3 minute mark.

Just a reminder I guess that you need greater awareness of the situation you are in.

S.

dobbin1
20th Feb 2015, 16:23
I would not let a student solo unless they knew what to do if asked to orbit, or go around, or "continue approach", or divert to an alternative aerodrome.

If asked by ATC to orbit on final, I would expect them to decline and go around instead. I would probably be beating the controller around the head at the same time.

Helicopterdriverguy
20th Feb 2015, 16:40
Don't bother overthinking orbits. Just choose a point on the ground and keep a constant turn around said object. Holds, however, are a different kettle of fish.

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 17:14
Don't bother overthinking orbits. Just choose a point on the ground and keep a constant turn around said object.

Just what I was thinking. When asked to orbit downwimnd by ATC, just circle over a landmark, at whatever angle of bank you would feel comfortable making any of the level turns in the circuit.

Same applies when asked to hold in a certain position whilst en route.

IFR holds are a different thing altogether.

The angle of bank to maintain a rate one turn increases with speed, and can be found by TAS/8 + 3, or TAS/10+7. depending on who taught you. (Around 15 degrees in most light aircraft.)

You are not expected to calculate this whilst in flight for your actual speed though. Just have a rough Idea what it is, then adjust it slightly to achieve rate one on the Turn Indicator/Turn Coordinator.


MJ:ok:

fireflybob
20th Feb 2015, 17:45
As a footnote orbiting should not be conducted in the circuit at an aerodrome without an ATSU as, apart from being potentially hazardous with respect to traffic following in the circuit, to do so is not "conforming with the pattern of traffic".

As regards how to fly an orbit what's wrong with a medium level turn with circa 30 degrees of bank?

(Jez I never knew this flying was so complicated)

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 17:48
As a footnote orbiting should not be conducted in the circuit at an aerodrome without an ATSU as, apart from being potentially hazardous with respect to traffic following in the circuit, to do so is not "conforming with the pattern of traffic

My thiughts exactly, Bob.

(Jez I never knew this flying was so complicated)

PPRune is a great place to find out what you have been missing! ;)


MJ:ok:

fireflybob
20th Feb 2015, 17:49
At PPL I was told a Rate 1 turn is 30 degree AoB at 90-100 kts


Scoobster, you were told wrong!

The basic rule of thumb for angle of bank for a Rate 1 turn is to take the airspeed, knock of the last digit, and add 7.

Eg IAS 100 kts, delete the right hand zero and add seven equal 17 degrees of bank.

skyhighfallguy
20th Feb 2015, 18:10
You guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill. All this talk of orbits at a little tiny airport in a little tiny airplane are more work than making an orbit of the earth in a spacecraft.

When we teach people to fly here, we include such things as turns about a point (u guys might call it an orbit), S turns along a road (which can be used in a traffic pattern to space traffic out) and other maneuvers.

I wouldn't solo someone who couldn't do a 360 on downwind, or S turns on final. I also make darn sure they would know what to do if the airport runway was blocked immediately after the student's takeoff.


I've done S turns or 360's in pipers to jets and you know what? They are all the same. Safe airspeed, bank angle at a conservative degree and keep your head moving and your mind moving.

Two planes, little airport, radios working and all this fuss.

ChickenHouse
20th Feb 2015, 18:16
Wow, quite some confusion here around, but this orbiting thing starts to fear me. When at a controlled airport, tower may ask to do a 360, yes, but usually before entering traffic pattern at beloved holding pattern location, or if something goes wrong and they don't see an issue on downwind, BUT neither ever orbit on base, nor final, nor at an uncontrolled airfield - Jesus, that is simply one thing, dangerous! I never heard of a control tower suggesting orbit in final, you are LOW and the options are landing or go around.

I kind of remember that "orbit" usually involves a 2 minute standard 360, as we all learned in training and frequently train, don't we?

skyhighfallguy
20th Feb 2015, 18:33
What we have here is a failure to communicate.

ON a 3 mile final, a plane may be almost 1000'

How is making a turn about a point or just a 360 dangerous?

now, if someone told you to do a circle at 200', maybe not, but come on

fireflybob
20th Feb 2015, 18:37
When we teach people to fly here, we include such things as turns about a point (u guys might call it an orbit), S turns along a road (which can be used in a traffic pattern to space traffic out) and other maneuvers.

I wouldn't solo someone who couldn't do a 360 on downwind, or S turns on final. I also make darn sure they would know what to do if the airport runway was blocked immediately after the student's takeoff.


skyhighfallguy, all good stuff I am sure but those items are not in the syllabus for the licences in the UK. Operation at "minimum level" is in the syllabus which would include turns/orbits at that height.

When in Rome do as the Romans.

I kind of remember that "orbit" usually involves a 2 minute standard 360, as we all learned in training and frequently train, don't we?

ChickenHouse, maybe in your part of the world but not here in the UK (or indeed Europe as far as I am aware).

skyhighfallguy
20th Feb 2015, 18:57
thanks for pointing out that the UK doesn't teach that stuff. Good to know.

glad to also know you have heard of such things. I remember our sylabus at the 141 school demanded s turns, turns about a point and rectangular patterns all under the banner of "GROUND REFERENCE MANEUVERS".

carry on then, just be careful, sounds like your tool box is a little light over there.

Gertrude the Wombat
20th Feb 2015, 19:12
GROUND REFERENCE MANEUVERS
What problem do they solve? - genuinely curious.

ChickenHouse
20th Feb 2015, 19:14
ChickenHouse, maybe in your part of the world but not here in the UK (or indeed Europe as far as I am aware).
I do refer to my PPL training, which was indeed in Germany. I am pretty sure the tower where I learned would have shot me right away while still in the air when I would try to attempt 360 on final ... have to confirm next time I see these guys.

India Four Two
20th Feb 2015, 19:33
What problem do they solve? - genuinely curious.

Me too. As far as I am aware, Ground Reference Maneuvers are a requirement unique to the US.

fireflybob
20th Feb 2015, 19:34
carry on then, just be careful, sounds like your tool box is a little light over there.

skyhighfallguy, I can assure you it isn't!

I am pretty sure the tower where I learned would have shot me right away while still in the air when I would try to attempt 360 on final ... have to confirm next time I see these guys.


ChickenHouse, that is another issue about which I would agree. Your post implied that there was only one way of conducting an "orbit" usually involves a 2 minute standard 360, as we all learned in training and frequently train, don't we? which is not the case - it all depends why and in what situation you are "orbiting".

chillindan
20th Feb 2015, 19:39
There were another 3 planes behind me in the circuit, so 5 planes in the sky. The 3 behind me were late downwind, downwind and climb out.

Also turning right in a LH circuit is something I was taught is a big no-no by my instructors.

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 20:00
skyhighfallguy, all good stuff I am sure but those items are not in the syllabus for the licences in the UK. Operation at "minimum level" is in the syllabus which would include turns/orbits at that height.

carry on then, just be careful, sounds like your tool box is a little light over there.

I think when Bob said that those items are not in the syllabus here, he mant that they are not specifically included, but covered under another exercise. 'Operation/navigation at minimum level' includes direction reversals over line features with a crosswind, whilst maintaining balance against the illusion created by the drift, which amounts to the same thing.

Perhaps the main difference here is that this is considered to be an advanced, rather than a basic exercise, and not covered prior to solo.

Also turning right in a LH circuit is something I was taught is a big no-no by my instructors.

Your instructors were quite right, Dan. That is not just not 'conforming to the pattern of traffic', but specificly prohibited by the rules.


MJ:ok:

fireflybob
20th Feb 2015, 20:04
MJ, thanks - that is what I did mean - been another long day!

mary meagher
20th Feb 2015, 20:05
After a sightseeing tour along the beach at St. Petersburg, Florida, joined the pattern at Albert Whitted Airport, and was on final approach for 36 - in a rented Cessna 172. Tower asked me nicely could I do an orbit for slow traffic that was ahead of me on approach; he mentioned there were two experimental aircraft flying in formation.

Sure enough, there they were, flapping along at about 30 knots. So I did a leisurely 360, giving them plenty of time to get out of the way. Straightened up again on approach, and ..... the little bogies had disappeared! where did they go to? should have been on the ground by now, I looked at 36, no, nobody there.....and then I looked to my right, and there they were, only this time they were on final on 27....

"Hey," I said to the Tower, "You've changed the runway!"

Tower replied "We wondered when you would notice....."

Love it. They are laid back in Dixie, that's for sure. Y'all go careful, now!

Mach Jump
20th Feb 2015, 20:10
MJ, thanks - that is what I did mean - been another long day!

Always happy to help, Bob. We Limeys have to stick together! ;)


MJ:ok:

Ps. Dan, It's good to see you are still with us after 8 pages. Most OPs would have lost the will to live by now! :D

skyhighfallguy
20th Feb 2015, 22:55
chillindan

really, you would never make a right turn in a left hand pattern? ever?

so, let's say you were on base leg and encountered another plane head on? he had made a mistake and was making right traffic to the same runway you were making (correctly) left hand traffic.

you were head on, you wouldn't turn right under any circumstance? two planes head on should both turn right in my part of the world. (assuming all else was equal)

IF you turned left and he kept turning right wouldn't you end up pretty close?

Wombat and others: what do they solve? It gives you a keen awareness of the wind. Compensating for the wind to achieve a ground track that is desired. As in the case of a rectangular pattern associated with a traffic pattern. Not understanding the wind might make you overbank to hurry a turn, instead of planning ahead. Overbanking/steep turning in the traffic pattern might put you closer to a stall.

IF you are not aware of wind and you simply make 90 degree heading changes to make a traffic pattern, the wind will drift you away making a pattern that doesn't really look rectangular.

Circling an object on the ground allows for observation, simply maintaining a bank angle will cause you to drift away and not allow for observation of something on the ground (like a wind sock).

Some pilots never really understand how the ground speed changes over the course of a simple rectangular pattern. I can't imagine a pilot really having a feel for the plane and maneuvering in a prescribed fashion without practicing ground reference maneuvers.

flybymike
20th Feb 2015, 23:14
Other reasons to turn right in a left circuit might include overtaking, or simply leaving the circuit.

Mach Jump
21st Feb 2015, 02:17
really, you would never make a right turn in a left hand pattern? ever?

Never say never, Sky.

The rule says all turns must be to the left, but in an emergency avoiding a collision takes presedence.

Other reasons to turn right in a left circuit might include overtaking, or simply leaving the circuit.


Aircraft shouldn't overtake others in the circuit, and aircraft leaving the circuit should either climb straight ahead out of the circuit, or follow the circuit around until they are facing the direction they want to go.


MJ:ok:

flybymike
21st Feb 2015, 06:57
Aircraft shouldn't overtake others in the circuit, and aircraft leaving the circuit should either climb straight ahead out of the circuit, or follow the circuit around until they are facing the direction they want to go.
Next time I'm in a twin on the downwind leg and I come across a flexwing microlight immediately in front of me, I'll remember not to overtake.

And next time I'm in an empty circuit with time to waste and fuel to burn I'll keep going round in circles.

newaviator
21st Feb 2015, 08:19
Chillindan

To the best of my recollection , I may have been one of the 5 in the circuit , I heard an aircraft call and advise joining long final , and eventually observed two aircraft , one had turned base and became final , the long final aircraft approaching straight in , and eventually observed two aircraft in trail but apart , I was on the downwind leg and could see both at all times , it only needs a bit of speed control and distancing to allow adequate spacing in this situation – it certainly didn't appear to me to be anything more than usual weekend busy circuit traffic , if in doubt about spacing or positioning I'd opt for a go around myself or depart the circuit and re-join , which is what appeared to happen in this case.

I seem to see something different every time I fly, and then learn from it, if in doubt about something, I’ll always ask one of my former instructors for advice or opinion,
I’m no longer a student.

This is a good thread with plenty of info/opinion being given with regard the original question posted.

Chillindan continue to enjoy your flying J

flybymike
21st Feb 2015, 08:48
I trust that when you leave the circuit you will be able to do so without turning against the traffic pattern.....

chillindan
21st Feb 2015, 09:27
"really, you would never make a right turn in a left hand pattern? ever?"

In that situation I would turn to the right.

What I'm learning as a new PPL is that I encounter new things all the time. Things I hadn't done during training, or things that surprise me. I departed the circuit at the end of downwind, which I'd not done before, I joined dead side at circuit height because the cloud base was low. I am always speaking to my previous instructors about things that are new because I realise that although newly qualified i am certainly still a student. There are so many things I haven't done because I've barely done anything except the syllabus yet. I've taken passengers now, that was new, and I'm hoping to fly into a controlled airport next week, something I only did once during my training and then only dual.

I'm loving the debate on here and didn't think my question would spark so many contrasting answers, which makes me glad i did.

pulse1
21st Feb 2015, 09:43
"really, you would never make a right turn in a left hand pattern? ever?"

It used to be quite a common ATC instruction at EGHH if the controller needed time to think. I have often carried out 3 or 4 opposite direction orbits at the end of the downwind leg.

Gertrude the Wombat
21st Feb 2015, 10:11
Not understanding the wind might make you overbank to hurry a turn, instead of planning ahead. Overbanking/steep turning in the traffic pattern might put you closer to a stall.
I wondered whether that was the motivation.

I was taught that stuff as a natural part of being taught to fly the circuit, particularly the base to final turn, and I can apply it elsewhere if/when I need to. It just wasn't a separate exercise.

flybymike
21st Feb 2015, 10:16
It used to be quite a common ATC instruction at EGHH if the controller needed time to think. I have often carried out 3 or 4 opposite direction orbits at the end of the downwind leg.

Orbits away from the runway are common in an ATC environment.

Mach Jump
21st Feb 2015, 11:39
Orbits away from the runway are common in an ATC environment.

Of course it's ok to do this downwind, when requested in a controlled environment.

Not at an uncontrolled airfield though.


MJ:ok:

skyhighfallguy
21st Feb 2015, 13:45
mach jump you can do a circle at an uncontrolled field, good practice would say to advise local traffic on the radio that you are circling on downwind or making S turns on final.

love the way you guys talk! Dead Side of the traffic pattern. We don't call it that.


On a busy day at a local ATC field, there can be a huge amount of traffic in the pattern and waiting to depart the pattern. ATC will often ask downwind traffic to extend downwind to allow for departures. They have even asked to fly through final on base leg and rejoin downwind on the opposite side.

AS to departing the pattern, departing the upwind leg (takeoff leg) on a 45degree turn is normal. Departing the pattern in an overhead 270 is normal. Departing on the downwind is normal. And just departing ON COURSE is normal to. All with advisory on radio/ctaf or via ATC instruction.

WE all keep our landing lights on in the pattern to help increase our visibility. Wondering of the OP did traffic on final have his landing light on?DID YOU?

We will even have aircraft flash their landing light (daytime too) to help sort out who is who.

Wombat, do you ever practice descending spirals around a point, keeping a constant distance from the point? Do you ever circle an airport at altitude well above pattern altitude to observe wind sock at an airport with no communications?

All are important tools of the trade. The spiral for emergency landings, or for use when only the airport is clear of clouds.

Mach Jump
21st Feb 2015, 13:59
mach jump you can do a circle at an uncontrolled field,..

Not over here, Sky. Not that it stops people doing just that! I've met such aircraft head on downwind and final, several times now!

Dead Side of the traffic pattern. We don't call it that.

What do you call it?

A small, but significant proportion of aircraft still fly 'non-radio' at uncontrolled airfields here. Is it the same there?


MJ:ok:

skyhighfallguy
21st Feb 2015, 14:06
just to clarify mach jump, is there a regulation in england that says: no circles on downwind?

or is it just accepted procedure?

skyhighfallguy
21st Feb 2015, 14:11
MJ , if LEFT pattern was standard, we would refer to the other side as RIGHT PATTERN.

vice versa.

While left hand pattern is usual for many airports, it is not always the case. But we never call it the dead side.

Gertrude the Wombat
21st Feb 2015, 14:14
Wombat, do you ever practice descending spirals around a point, keeping a constant distance from the point?
No, I've never come across a need to do precisely that, although a PFL to land on an airfield (which I have practiced) has some similarities.

The other reason to do a spiral descent - to get down through a hole - is with reference to the cloud not the ground, and these days I'd probably just fly through the cloud anyway (icing level permitting).
Do you ever circle an airport at altitude well above pattern altitude to observe wind sock at an airport with no communications?
No, I've never wanted to land at an airport with no communications - there aren't any round here. (There are farm strips, which we wouldn't usually call "airports", but I've not wanted to land at one of those either. If I did I'd talk to the farmer first and follow his/her local procedure.)

Actually I did land at Rottnest once, and I don't recall it having any communications. The instructor was careful to point out to me that it had more than one wind sock, and that they often pointed in completely different directions, and that one had to check them all out before deciding how, or indeed whether, to land. So I have been exposed to this type of decision making even though I've never had to do it for real on my own.

just to clarify mach jump, is there a regulation in england that says: no circles on downwind?
The regulation is no turns against the circuit direction other than with the permission of ATC. Which means that at a controlled airfield orbiting on downwind is a perfectly normal thing to be asked to do, at other airfields it's against the regulations.

Mach Jump
21st Feb 2015, 14:23
just to clarify mach jump, is there a regulation in england that says: no circles on downwind?

It's a little of each.

There's a rule that says that aircraft must conform with the traffic pattern, and make all turns to the left, unless otherwise indicated from the ground.

Most people consider an aircraft orbiting in the circuit to be failing to conform with the traffic pattern.

MJ if LEFT pattern was standard, we would refer to the other side as RIGHT PATTERN.

We refer to whichever side is not in use by the circuit traffic as the 'dead side', and the the side with the circuit traffic, rather unsurprisingly, as the 'live side'.


MJ:ok:

skyking1
21st Feb 2015, 18:03
Quote:
Dead Side of the traffic pattern. We don't call it that.
What do you call it?

A small, but significant proportion of aircraft still fly 'non-radio' at uncontrolled airfields here. Is it the same there?

We sure do have plenty of Non Radio traffic (NARDOs).
We tend to avoid terms like dead engine or dead side. Dead anything gets the passengers upset. The media loves terms like that too. I was replying to a thread in a non aviation forum about that recent ATR crash and one of the posters said the plane was in a "death stall". I am positive that was coined by the media somewhere to incite more drama.

We call any operation in runway heading "upwind", the opposite of downwind.
We also make upwind entries to traffic patterns, often to a midfield crosswind. This puts the whole pattern in your view and avoids crossing over high and descending which has its own portion of hazard.
When I was training, a go around from final was a small step to the right, to keep the runway (and probably the reason you went around) in view out your left side. We did not jump all the way over to a proper upwind for many reasons, including complying with noise abatement at one sided airports.

DaveW
21st Feb 2015, 18:16
"Final" oo-err, sounds a bit worrying. :ooh:

"Terminal" - that's another one. :eek:

Mach Jump
21st Feb 2015, 23:26
Next time I'm in a twin on the downwind leg and I come across a flexwing microlight immediately in front of me...

I think this would qualify as a collision avoidance, Mike. ;)

We also make upwind entries to traffic patterns, often to a midfield crosswind. This puts the whole pattern in your view and avoids crossing over high and descending which has its own portion of hazard.

This is similar to our 'Deadside Join', Sky, but our Overhead Join is very different to yours, in that, rather than descending outside the pattern, on what we would call the 'live side', then joining midfield downwind at 45 degrees, we descend on the 'dead side' and join crosswind like your 'upwind entry'.

One added advantage of this is that it effectively separates the climbing(live side) traffic, from the descending(deade side) traffic.

When I was training, a go around from final was a small step to the right, to keep the runway (and probably the reason you went around) in view out your left side.

That, at least, is just the same here! :)


MJ:ok:

Gertrude the Wombat
22nd Feb 2015, 10:39
"Final" oo-err, sounds a bit worrying. :ooh:

"Terminal" - that's another one. :eek:
And I learned in the 1980s that when producing an American version of a piece of software, translated from the English, the "abort" function had to be renamed to something else.

Flyingmac
22nd Feb 2015, 14:29
Yesterday I flew with my wife to a nearby airfield for lunch. I did it all by the book. OHJ with a deadside descent. When I called 'Descending deadside' there was one aircraft climbing away, one touching down on a touch and go and one turning final. I was visual with the first two.


On turning right, and calling crosswind, I was visual with the first two aircraft climbing away on the runway heading as I crossed the upwind numbers.
The third aircraft then announced that he was making an early turn onto downwind!


I shot a look at my other half who'd already sussed that something was amiss and she said "I've got him, directly below us, same track".
As I went for the throttle to climb out of circuit height, he announced that he was remaining 'low level'. I carried on to a wide downwind and gave him plenty of room.


This was a based aircraft used for training, as was the aircraft in a previous incident at the same airfield. This one came off the deadside at the midpoint of the runway, straight at me when I was downwind.


I have the times and call signs but I'll keep them to myself. I will say however, that the airfield was Sherburn.


I'll keep going there, as their steak pie is almost worth dying for.

flybymike
22nd Feb 2015, 14:56
Reminiscent of an incident I experienced at Breighton a few years ago.

Short final behind another aircraft which for no apparent reason after landing, simply decided that he would stop in the middle of the runway at the end of the landing roll, and then wonder to himself whether he would actually just park there and get out for a stroll, or whether he might possibly ask for a clue about a more convenient place to park.

While he decided, I went around and immediately afterwards heard an aircraft behind me ( with an instructor on board) announce that they too were going around behind me. Naturally I expected them to follow me around the circuit and didn't consider their presence in the circuit as an issue to me at all.

However, as I levelled off on the downwind leg, I heard the same instructor calling short final. His go around had evidently simply been to do a low level orbit over the runway threshold.

Whilst I found this mildly irritating, it did not create any problems for me so I left it at that without remark.

It simply shows how interpretation of what constitutes "a circuit" is rather variable, and can include questionable airmanship from no less than an instructor. Doubtless if challenged his response would have been " I had no intention of following you on a cross country around the circuit."

Of course, if I had simply decided to do a low level orbit at the threshold myself as well, things might have been very different.

Hey ho..

skyhighfallguy
22nd Feb 2015, 18:47
Some of these situations are indicative of poor communications and lack of understanding of intention.

Simply saying: First plane going around, I am right behind you and will follow...waggle your wings so I know for sure you are the only one on upwind.

Non standard patterns, like a quick circle back to the threshold is worthy of a radio call to let others know that you are a bit insane or on fire and need to land.

Some will say: I can't possibly work the radio while circling at 50'. WELL DON'T do something stupid. Assume everyone else in the pattern is about to do something stupid.

Work em, think em, watch for traps. And there are traps out there. Everyone is sometimes just thinking of themselves, and therein lies the problem.

FullWings
23rd Feb 2015, 02:15
I think skyhigh has a point here: we do seem rather reticent in the UK to use the radio (from the POV of the pilots) to actually organise circuit traffic.

Sometimes I think people come into conflict because even if they see one developing, they can’t think of the right phrase from CAP 413 to defuse the situation, so end up doing a last-minute manoeuvre or complaining to all and sundry well after the incident.

If I heard “Joining finals for XX” and there were five aircraft in the circuit, including one on base leg, I’d say something like “it might be a good idea to do an overhead join as it’s very busy” or “you are number six to land, BTW” or if I felt really snarky, “negative Ghostrider, the pattern is full”. ;) Equally I could say something like “there’s one on base leg but quite a gap between him and me, I’ll extend and come in behind” or something neighbourly like that.

I prefer to think that very few (if any) pilots deliberately cut other people up, just that their situational awareness is not as good as they think it is. Just look at all the airproxes that could have been averted just by passing a bit more information...

skyhighfallguy
23rd Feb 2015, 02:30
FullWings


There is a theory of leadership, that in the absence of a leader, one will come forth.

If I was in my home little airport(back when), I wouldn't hesitate to say something like:

Yankton traffic, Cherokee 1234 10 south at 2000', planning straight in to the runway in use (36) does anyone object? Is there anyone in the pattern? HELLO?

And if someone objected, we , repeat WE, would work it out.

Someone might just say: HEY FRED, listen we got five on the downwind and ten waiting for takeoff how about entering on the 45 to left traffic instead?


AND if you can't come up with the right aeronautical phrase, just say it in plain (plane?) english...its your language you know!

O_K_
23rd Feb 2015, 08:54
When I did my solo flights i 2013 it was on a controlled airport with a substantional amount of commercial 737 / Dash8 operations, and an active flight school. I got to orbit on downwind on my first solo. Instructions such as extended downwind and beeing ordered to shorten downwind an go stright a short final also common during my solo flights in order to get me down before a 737, or to keep me away from wake turbulence.

For me this was completely normal, and something I was used to from all the lessons with my instructor. However most students on my flight school solo quite late, and I suspect that the busy airport is one of the reasons for this.

ShyTorque
23rd Feb 2015, 09:47
For me this was completely normal, and something I was used to from all the lessons with my instructor. However most students on my flight school solo quite late, and I suspect that the busy airport is one of the reasons for this.

Chances are, you will be a better pilot because of the inconvenience you have learned to deal with and learned to be flexible in your approach, in both senses of the word.

There is no perfect solution to joining a busy circuit. The rules are a guideline. Many pilots over-rely on saying the minimum, iaw the "rules" in CAP 413 and say nothing more, even when it could improve the safety of the situation.

For example, two aircraft joining via the overhead. A potentially dangerous situation. Pilots obviously need to look out for other aircraft but also for purpose of correct positioning over the field. The initial call could/should include the direction from which you are arriving in the overhead, for the benefit of all. Many pilots do not do this, simply calling "joining overhead".

The most frightening thing is for two pilots to announce that they are "overhead" at the same time because by definition, iaw the standard procedure, they will be in exactly the same location at the same altitude. If the other aircraft isn't seen, it leaves at least one, or both pilots in a quandary - do you carry on with the procedure, do you maintain altitude, or what?

I had this happen at Tatenhill a few years ago. We called for join in good time, giving our location i.e. joining overhead from the North, entering the ATZ from the north, then overhead. Just as we made our call in the overhead and began the deadside descent, another pilot called "deadside, descending". We had seen nothing, heard nothing from him before that call. We could still not see any other aircraft. To say that a few tense seconds followed was an understatement. :eek:

It turned out that he could see us, we were (thankfully) slightly ahead of him and had simply closely followed us into the ATZ, omitting his initial call, copying the airfield details from the response to our call.

We had a conversation on the ground.

BackPacker
23rd Feb 2015, 09:57
Many pilots over-rely on saying the minimum, iaw the "rules" in CAP 413 and say nothing more, even when it could improve the safety of the situation.

The way I see this is simple. CAP413 lists the standard radio calls so that standard announcements are as short and concise as possible. This leaves room on the airways for non-standard, more elaborate calls if and when required.

If you need to make a safety call but you don't know the CAP413 phrase for that, and as a result you keep silent, you're a muppet. IMHO.

Heck, there have been several situations already where ATC did not know the phraseology to use, so they switched to plain Dutch on me. If that's what's required to clear up a misunderstanding, then that's what's going to happen. Fine with me.

phiggsbroadband
23rd Feb 2015, 10:29
At our airfield we all normally give a radio call on Downwind and then on Final.
So imagine my quandary when descending through 750ft on base leg, when someone announced that they were on base leg.... Was he above or below me? I just could not see him. So fearing he was either 20ft above or below me, I announced that I was also on base and at 700ft and I would continue at that level for a go-around.
After I turned onto RW heading, I saw him about 300ft below turning onto Final.... Where he came from, nobody knows...

fireflybob
23rd Feb 2015, 14:17
The most frightening thing is for two pilots to announce that they are "overhead" at the same time because by definition, iaw the standard procedure, they will be in exactly the same location at the same altitude. If the other aircraft isn't seen, it leaves at least one, or both pilots in a quandary - do you carry on with the procedure, do you maintain altitude, or what?


If you are doing a proper standard join you don't actually fly precisely "overhead".

This is the way I teach it:-

Imagine a bicycle wheel with the axle centred on the middle of the airfield/runway. The rim of the wheel encompasses the boundary of the airfield (or the ends of the runway).

When you are visual with the field (assuming a left hand circuit) turn the a/c to place the airfield on the left (about ten o'clock) and now fly around the rim (notice this will not place the a/c overhead the airfield but a short distance away from the zenith at the axle) until the threshold of the runway on which you intend to land is at nine o'clock (in a low wing out of sight under the left wing).

You are now proceeding towards the dead side and can start descent (below 2,000 ft) still following the rim of the wheel as it is safer to descend turning as a) you are clearing airspace below you and b) able to see traffic taking off or going around and you can intelligently decide where to fit into the pattern.

From certain directions this means it will take a little longer to join the circuit. The difficulty arises when other airspace users decide to "short circuit" the procedure if they are already approaching from the deadside. Eg approaching from the north for RW 27 with a left hand circuit.

Essentially what we are discussing is a non radio join in which case you would need to look at the Signals Square.

For me the term Overhead Join is a misnomer because if flown correctly you are never actually overhead the airfield but on the perimeter.

Logically if all a/c follow the proper full joining procedure whoever calls "Deadside Descending" is ahead of other joining who have yet to make that call.

That said some of the joins which I see the occasional aircraft perform are far from standard so it's essential to maintain a good lookout at all times.

Flyingmac
23rd Feb 2015, 14:35
"For me the term Overhead Join is a misnomer because if flown correctly you are never actually overhead the airfield but on the perimeter."


On my planet that statement doesn't compute.

fireflybob
23rd Feb 2015, 14:40
On my planet that statement doesn't compute.

Well yes it's a question of semantics but at a large aerodrome "overhead" could mean a mile or two west of the aerodrome reference point to the same on the east side.

On a correctly flown standard join you don't actually fly precisely overhead the ARP or if you do you're not flying it correctly.

Even on the CAA graphic here the Overhead is in inverted commas:-

The Standard "Overhead" Join (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ga_srgwebStandardOverheadJoinPosterJan09.pdf)

And what we "name" things has a big impact on how the brain processes information.

Flyingmac
23rd Feb 2015, 14:59
I know that if I get a clearance to 'Transit via the Overhead' that's precisely what I do.


On an OHJ I'll enter the dead side with the downwind numbers below me and cross to the live side from overhead the upwind numbers. I'd call that Overhead. Any further out, you're risking conflict with departing traffic.

fireflybob
23rd Feb 2015, 15:14
Any further out, you're risking conflict with departing traffic.

I agree and that's not what I have said!

I know that if I get a clearance to 'Transit via the Overhead' that's precisely what I do.

All very good but this thread is titled "Circuit Joining".

Flyingmac
23rd Feb 2015, 15:21
I've just eaten my sock.

ShyTorque
23rd Feb 2015, 15:36
FFB, Thanks for the free lesson. I am already aware of the overhead joining procedure (since I was first taught and practiced it in 1973) and subsequently taught it to RAF SEP students.

The problem I was trying to highlight is that (irrespective of where you want to call the actual overhead position) two aircraft could be heading for the same point in space at the same time without prior warning. As far as sequencing goes, one pilot might call early, the other in the ideal position, or slightly late. Lookout, effective use of the radio and common sense/airmanship are the answer to keeping it safe for everyone.

fireflybob
23rd Feb 2015, 15:48
FFB, Thanks for the free lesson. I am already aware of the overhead joining procedure (since I was first taught and practiced it in 1973) and subsequently taught it to RAF SEP students.

Well it's not a competition but seeing as you brought the subject up I was first taught the OHP in 1967. I have also taught same on numerous occasions to a diversity of students both in the civil and military environments. There is nothing wrong with reiterating the basics and besides that's how we learns new things or ways to teach - as a professional instructor I am always interested to listen to what others have to say.

two aircraft could be heading for the same point in space at the same time without prior warning.

Like anywhere then? (Especially Class G airspace).

Lookout, effective use of the radio and common sense/airmanship are the answer to keeping it safe for everyone.

As always.

skyhighfallguy
23rd Feb 2015, 18:25
overhead join?

the best way is to join the PATTERN on downwind is at a 45 Degree angle. you should have your landing light on in the pattern for recognition and avoidance. HIGH wing planes should always be clearing above during climb and low wing planes should CLEAR below in descents.

During turns to base and final, high wing planes lose sight of the airport. Low wings have better views in the turns toward the field

fireflybob
23rd Feb 2015, 20:12
the best way is to join the PATTERN on downwind is at a 45 Degree angle. you should have your landing light on in the pattern for recognition and avoidance. HIGH wing planes should always be clearing above during climb and low wing planes should CLEAR below in descents.

By "best way" do you mean the "safest way"?

If so please show me the statistical evidence that this is a better way to "join the PATTERN"?

If I fly in another country I would expect to comply with the procedures and protocols of that country.

When in Rome do as the Romans.

ShyTorque
23rd Feb 2015, 21:51
FFB, I know your father taught you well and I wasn't trying to make it a competition, merely responding to your rejoinder to my post, which seemed intentionally condescending, as if I was unfamiliar with the OHJ.

Like anywhere then? (Especially Class G airspace).

Which is where many ATZs lie, of course.

Again, my point was that the OHJ procedure, by definition, brings aircraft to the same point in space. The overhead join requires pilots to position their aircraft quite precisely, which in some cases means the pilot is working at high workload with little extra capacity - they quite naturally look down into the circuit and this can reduce overall awareness with regard to other aircraft which may be in very close proximity at a similar level. Any "choke point" brings extra hazard and this is one of them so pilots should not be afraid to use the R/T sensibly and effectively, rather than just sticking very rigidly to the terms of CAP413.

skyhighfallguy
23rd Feb 2015, 21:52
fireflyblob

I won't show you the statistics. I don't have them. It is my opinion after 40 years of flying.

Why is it the best? Entering on the 45 at pattern altitude allows you to see and be seen by those in the pattern, descending into the pattern means you will have a greater chance of descending upon another plane. Those on the crosswind will have a chance of seeing you, you will have a chance of seeing them and those on the downwind. Once in the pattern, good luck to you all.

AND if you all agree to join on the 45 then you will all be looking there for the incoming traffic instead of fooling around with all the other methods. Standardization, try it, you will like it.

When in Rome, its time to go home. I understand the Romans helped build some of the roads in England. But I really don't think the roads in the US lead to rome, now do they?

Mach Jump
23rd Feb 2015, 23:40
I don't think anyone is advocating descending directly into the pattern, Sky. We don't do that here, or in the USA.

I think that the 45 midfield downwind join is best for you, because that's what most pilots do over there.

The deadside join crossing the upwind threshold at pattern altitude and making a pattern direction turn into the downwind leg opposite the upwind threshold is still the most common way pilots join here.

I don't think there's much to choose between them in terms of safety. That comes from getting as many people as possible to follow the established and accepted method appropriate to where you happen to be.

One of the problems we have here is that, because learning to fly is so expensive (around $200 for an hour in a beat up old Cessna), people go all over the world, including the USA, to learn to fly, and then bring back whatever method they learned there.

Shy Torque:

I think that any 'standard join' will, by it's very nature, create a choke point somewhere, but I do agree that people could often be a bit more forthcomming with information, wherever they join.

MJ:ok:

Ps. I think that maybe, after 10 pages, this thread is running out of steam, and people are starting to get a bit tetchy. (Or 'over tired' as your Mums might have said?)

fireflybob
24th Feb 2015, 08:01
Ps. I think that maybe, after 10 pages, this thread is running out of steam, and people are starting to get a bit tetchy. (Or 'over tired' as your Mums might have said?)

Me tetchy? Never! (I just don't believe it).

MJ, Nice summary and I agree.

ShyTorque
24th Feb 2015, 08:46
The method described by Machjump is similar to the standard dead side join taught to military pilots and is arguably safer.

It does however require the pilot to work out in advance where the live and dead sides are, so by implication, radio communication is required.

The OHJ was designed for non radio aircraft to arrive at an airfield, assess the circuit pattern and fit into it.

fireflybob
24th Feb 2015, 08:54
pilots should not be afraid to use the R/T sensibly and effectively, rather than just sticking very rigidly to the terms of CAP413.

Agree 100% on that one - nothing wrong with broadcasting to the world where you are if you think it may be appropriate.

ShyTorque
24th Feb 2015, 09:14
Hurrah! :ok:

One example: Pilot of an aircraft calls up, with the intention of transmitting overhead. He is given airfield details and requested to call again when overhead.

Pilot of second aircraft calls up, same intentions, not having heard the first pilot call. He is advised of the first aircraft doing similar.

Neither pilot yet in visual contact with the other.

First pilot reaches the overhead and calls simply "Overhead", because that's what he was told to do.

Great, but far more helpful if he called "Overhead, 2500 feet, heading north" or whatever, as appropriate.

Not clogging up the frequency and certainly helping to improve the big picture for everyone.

ChickenHouse
24th Feb 2015, 10:03
I find this thread exhausting to read and one reason is the mixture of different "standards". Can we find a way to label the geo we are referring to?

For example: in the UK you have the "standard" overhead join with life side and dead side of the traffic pattern, which is very uncommon in other countries, the US and parts of Europe I know use the 45 entering downwind, other parts of Europe use a straight in to downwind as does many African countries usually do, besides from common standard T-shaped entering base and no downwind.

All these techniques do have benefits and drawbacks, so we have to chat - especially if somebody is joining from another standards geo. When I first entered a UK overhead join I was frightened, because I never used it in central Europe, mainly because on my frequent airfields we had glider activity directly overhead the fields and this would have been dangerous - but I clearly broke the rule to radio short and said to the others in traffic pattern sorry and explained this is my first time for such a thing. Very british they guided me down very politely, which may be different at other places, where the buttheads rule.

rarelyathome
24th Feb 2015, 10:28
I quite like the idea of a standard 45deg join to down wind as it should give plenty of time to see & be seen.

The chances of a "standard" OHJ these days seem about as high as a "standard" circuit. I certainly don't like the idea of thinking of a bicycle wheel and keeping a constant turn as, in a low wing ac, that means a wing will be blocking the direction the conflict is likely to come from. If we are going to stick with SOHJs why not follow the published method?

Gertrude the Wombat
24th Feb 2015, 11:40
a bit tetchy. (Or 'over tired' as your Mums might have said?)
We were a little more explicit with ours.


"Have you got tired and cross and horrible then?"


"Yes." (In a tired and cross and horrible voice.)

fireflybob
24th Feb 2015, 13:59
keeping a constant turn as, in a low wing ac, that means a wing will be blocking the direction the conflict is likely to come from. If we are going to stick with SOHJs why not follow the published method?

I never meant to imply that the turn (in terms of angle of bank) was constant - in fact with wind it cannot be to achieve that track over the ground.

Lookout is a given and if you need to clear airspace you can waggle the wings (without turning) if you need to.

By "published method" I presume you mean the one shown on the CAA Standard "Overhead" Join? This including others which I sometimes see shows the descent on the dead side in a straight line which I consider is poorer for lookout for a/c below you. In short I don't think the descent on the dead side should be in a straight line. Another benefit of being in banked flight is that it is easier for other traffic to see you.

There is more than one way of skinning a cat but I wish people would stop bleating on about the US 45 degree join. If I go and fly in USA I would expect to obey their conventions and customs. There may well be merit in doing it that way but it's not the procedure we use in the UK.

Jez, I never knew this was so difficult!

rarelyathome
24th Feb 2015, 14:20
I never meant to imply that the turn (in terms of angle of bank) was constant - in fact with wind it cannot be to achieve that track over the ground.

Lookout is a given and if you need to clear airspace you can waggle the wings (without turning) if you need to.

By "published method" I presume you mean the one shown on the CAA Standard "Overhead" Join? This including others which I sometimes see shows the descent on the dead side in a straight line which I consider is poorer for lookout for a/c below you. In short I don't think the descent on the dead side should be in a straight line. Another benefit of being in banked flight is that it is easier for other traffic to see you.

There is more than one way of skinning a cat but I wish people would stop bleating on about the US 45 degree join. If I go and fly in USA I would expect to obey their conventions and customs. There may well be merit in doing it that way but it's not the procedure we use in the UK.

Jez, I never knew this was so difficult!

Didn't think I was bleating on. I hadn't really considered it much before but perhaps we should consider whether the merit means it should be the way we do it here. Just coz it's different doesn't make it wrong!

ShyTorque
24th Feb 2015, 15:03
By "published method" I presume you mean the one shown on the CAA Standard "Overhead" Join? This including others which I sometimes see shows the descent on the dead side in a straight line which I consider is poorer for lookout for a/c below you. In short I don't think the descent on the dead side should be in a straight line. Another benefit of being in banked flight is that it is easier for other traffic to see you.

The RAF do teach a turning descent on the deadside.

ChickenHouse
24th Feb 2015, 15:30
By "published method" I presume you mean the one shown on the CAA Standard "Overhead" Join?
Published method may contain things like this "nice" example (http://www.edkb.de/Download%20Angebote/FGH%20Platzrundenbild%20A5.pdf), or involve traffic patterns like this one (http://u.jimdo.com/www43/o/s8f2a839f2c1b6ee4/img/i6529c81eaae00152/1329157032/std/kartenausschnitt-mit-freundlicher-genehmigung-durch-das-bayerische-landesvermessungsamt-c-topographische-karte-1-50000-lvg-bayern-2625-07.jpg) - ok, these are among the most strange overrulings I encountered, but you have to be open for such things to impinge on you

chillindan
24th Feb 2015, 18:05
Can I just say I've never started a thread that's run to 10 pages before... :)

Thanks to all the contributors though as its certainly increased my embryonic knowledge of circuit joining, being a new PPL.

MJ - my Mum used "over tired" too, and that tradition has continued with my kids, because I remember how much I hated it :)

Level Attitude
13th Mar 2015, 22:07
I think the following is relevant to the topic of this Thread:

OCCURRENCE LISTING --- Aircraft Below 5700kg
OCCURRENCES RECORDED BETWEEN 01 February 2015 and 28 February 2015

CESSNA F152 --- LYCOMING 235 FAMILY --- Circuit pattern - downwind
EGPG : Cumbernauld --- 21/02/2015 --- 201502141

Alleged poor airmanship demonstrated by C152(1) during circuit traffic pattern to R/W26. Aircraft infringes on established finals traffic.PA28 calls and reports rejoining the circuit and makes intentions of a right base join for touch and go's clear to the traffic in the area. The only traffic at the time was C152(1) in the circuit just starting the downwind leg. PA28 reports joining right base for 26 and C152(1) then reports downwind 26. PA28 completes a touch and go and C152(1) does a go around from their approach. At this point, C152(2) calls inbound from the north to rejoin the circuit from right base. PA28 then reports established downwind for another touch and go. This call is followed by C152(2) reporting joining base leg and is made aware of PA28 midfield downwind. C152(2) then reports right base for 26 and PA28 reports turning right base at the water features, which is an unofficial turning point in the circuit due to noise abatement. C152(1) reports late downwind and asks PA28 to make clear his intentions to which PA28 replies that they are turning right base 26 for a further touch and go. C152(2) reports final to land. C152(1) instructor then calls PA28 over the radio and states that they (PA28) are, "way outside the circuit" and that they, C152(1), were going to position number two in traffic. C152(1) then prematurely turns right base which puts PA28 on their left hand side. PA28 turns and reports established on a 4 mile final for 26 with C152(1) in front on a 1 mile final which put them number two in traffic. Then, C152(1) turns final and goes in front of PA28 and behind C152(2). This put three aircraft on finals within 3 miles of each other. The PIC of PA28 made an avoidance orbit on finals as he felt that safety had been compromised

thing
13th Mar 2015, 22:24
Then, C152(1) turns final and goes in front of PA28 and behind C152(2)Shouldn't that be the other way round? C152 (2) turns final behind C152(1)? Unless I'm visualising it wrong. No hang on

PA28 turns and reports established on a 4 mile final for 26 with C152(1) in front on a 1 mile final which put them number two in traffic. Then, C152(1) turns final and goes in front of PA28 and behind C152(2). This put three aircraft on finals within 3 miles of each other.The aircraft on 1 mile final in front of the 28 should be 152 (2) shouldn't it?

Mach Jump
13th Mar 2015, 22:33
The PIC of PA28 made an avoidance orbit on finals as he felt that safety had been compromised

I think that this was the most dangerous action taken during this incident.

The PA28 claims to have turned base over a recognised feature (the lakes) although it seems unlikely that any recognised noise abatement circuit would have an aircraft turning final at 4 miles.

152(1) (after what sounds like some rather pointed, non standard RT) then cut in front of the PA28.

The PA28 then found himself No.3 on final, and should have gone around. Instead, he chose not to conform with the traffic pattern, and performed an orbit on final, endangering any unknown traffic behind him.

The two of them are as bad as each other, and someone at Cumbernauld should crack their heads together!

Thing:

The aircraft on 1 mile final in front of the 28 should be 152 (2) shouldn't it?

Yes, and then C152(1) turned final between them. (If I've read it correctly.)


MJ:ok:

ChickenHouse
14th Mar 2015, 08:24
Alleged poor airmanship demonstrated by C152(1) during circuit traffic pattern to R/W26. Aircraft infringes on established finals traffic.PA28 calls and reports rejoining the circuit and makes intentions of a right base join for touch and go's clear to the traffic in the area.
Q: What does "rejoining" mean, were they at the circuit before, leaving the field and returning, so in the end - familiar with the airfield and its training specific?
Q: What was the purpose to join right base, instead of go 45 down? What traffic circuit is regular at the field, left hand, right hand, or both? Any special traffic circuit paths published?
The only traffic at the time was C152(1) in the circuit just starting the downwind leg. PA28 reports joining right base for 26 and C152(1) then reports downwind 26.
Q: Why did PA28 set itself in front of the C152, instead of extending approach and join downwind?
PA28 completes a touch and go and C152(1) does a go around from their approach. At this point, C152(2) calls inbound from the north to rejoin the circuit from right base.
Q: Is it usual procedure at this field to join right base?
PA28 then reports established downwind for another touch and go. This call is followed by C152(2) reporting joining base leg and is made aware of PA28 midfield downwind. C152(2) then reports right base for 26 and PA28 reports turning right base at the water features, which is an unofficial turning point in the circuit due to noise abatement.
Q: Was C152(2) joining right base? Is the "unofficial" turning point published, or just a tale?
C152(1) reports late downwind and asks PA28 to make clear his intentions to which PA28 replies that they are turning right base 26 for a further touch and go. C152(2) reports final to land. C152(1) instructor then calls PA28 over the radio and states that they (PA28) are, "way outside the circuit" and that they, C152(1), were going to position number two in traffic.
Q: Is the standard pattern an ICAO 1-1-1 rectangular? Then C152(1) FI is quite right to remind PA28 of its leaving of the - by two training sessions occupied -pattern.
C152(1) then prematurely turns right base which puts PA28 on their left hand side. PA28 turns and reports established on a 4 mile final for 26 with C152(1) in front on a 1 mile final which put them number two in traffic. Then, C152(1) turns final and goes in front of PA28 and behind C152(2). This put three aircraft on finals within 3 miles of each other.
Q: What means premature? If this was following the usual pattern it is not nice, but understandable for the usual ab initio training.
Q: PA28 does know about the two machines already in student traffic pattern circling. Why did they go that far out the pattern. In my opinion at almost no airfield flying VFR there exists a 4 miles final. This flying straight in from far away and not part of pattern, or?
The PIC of PA28 made an avoidance orbit on finals as he felt that safety had been compromised.
Q: Isn't it PA28 compromising safety at this stage? If there was enough altitude to safely perform a 360 instead of a Go-Around, there must have been a very large safety margin, much better then performing a Go-Around?

My resumee, wrong communication and lack of situational awareness, plus an obvious breach of regular procedures by believing to be part of traffic pattern while far outside. Mixing PA28 and C152 in pattern needs more thoughtfulness then shown. Without knowing the answers to above Q's, I would assume the PA28 should not have done a long final, but break the approach and join standard procedure 45 down again. If a long final approach was part of the training PA28, then a clear announcement and coordination with the two C152 should have been done before attempting. Subjections?

bingofuel
14th Mar 2015, 11:07
Maybe they should all read the AIS

Which says:-

Circuit height: 1000 ft QFE. Join overhead at 2000 ft QFE, descending dead-side to join the circuit.

And not join direct to base leg.

Mach Jump
14th Mar 2015, 12:17
Q: What was the purpose to join right base, instead of go 45 down?

We don't have a 45 degree downwind join in the UK.


MJ:ok:

150 Driver
14th Mar 2015, 15:21
Thing, just drawn this and agree the one on 1 mile final should be C152(2)

Somewhere on this thread (sorry, if I retread all of it I will lose the will to live) I'm sure I've read a suggestion that if you are behind someone who flies a bomber circuit then the answer is a radio call 'GABCD has left the circuit, GDEFG now number 2'

This scenario proves the problem of such a testosterone fuelled approach.:ugh:

Whether C152-1 did what he (probably was a he) did out of frustration, being behind schedule or whatever, surely it's better to be patient, later and alive ? And wouldn't this have led to a great deal of inconvenient paperwork ? I'm guessing that it didn't happen because he wasn't aware of PA28.

Did PA28 extend final because of slow approach speed of C152(2) compared to PA28 (never flown a PA28 so don't know what it approaches at)

The PA28 orbit (unless under ATC instruction) was dangerous for all the reasons mentioned. Go around would have been the safer option

I agree with MJ that heads should be knocked together, but only when safely in the ground

Anyway, what's the hurry ? We spend most of our lives on the ground, we learned to fly to leave it so why rush to get back down

Jan Olieslagers
14th Mar 2015, 15:35
We don't have a 45 degree downwind join in the UK.

Is there any rule or law forbidding it? Please quote official source?

Or is there a list limiting the ways one can legally join the circuit? Please quote official source?

150 Driver
14th Mar 2015, 16:08
Out of interest, just looked at the AIP for Cumbernauld.

"Noise Abatement:-
Runway 26 Departures: After take-off continue over golf course then turn right over the canal avoiding the old town of Dullatur.
(b) Circuit Traffic: Circuit traffic on crosswind should turn downwind and avoid overflying the small villages of Banton and High Banton.
(c) On right base for Runway 26 righthand avoid overflying small row of seven houses at Braeface."

They must be seriously large houses to cause a four mile Final !!!

ChickenHouse
14th Mar 2015, 16:10
We don't have a 45 degree downwind join in the UK.
Is there any rule or law forbidding it? Please quote official source?

Or is there a list limiting the ways one can legally join the circuit? Please quote official source?
In this case it is clearly the AIP for that airfield: overhead join at 2000ft AGL descent to 1000ft AGL is published as VFR procedure. (And ATZ is 2nm around the field, so 4 nauticals is Lord Farquart ... far far away kingdom.

Jan Olieslagers
14th Mar 2015, 16:49
But I wan't questioning whatever rules apply at this particular field - there may be many, imposed either by higher or local authority, and of course they have to be respected.

I was - and continue to be - questioning the very generalistic "We don't have _____ in the UK". It seems a large assumption.

fireflybob
14th Mar 2015, 17:20
Quote:
We don't have a 45 degree downwind join in the UK.
Is there any rule or law forbidding it? Please quote official source?

Or is there a list limiting the ways one can legally join the circuit? Please quote official source?

Jan Olieslagers, if you read the whole of this thread I think you will find this has been indirectly covered in the sense that the Rules of the Air state that a) all turns in the ATZ must be to the left (unless ground signals indicate otherwise) and b) aircraft joining must conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other a/c.

I am not very familiar with the "45 degree join" but I believe a turn against the circuit direction would have to be made when joining somewhere along the downwind leg. Also if there are a/c already in the pattern you are not "conforming...etc".

I was - and continue to be - questioning the very generalistic "We don't have _____ in the UK". It seems a large assumption.

I suppose one could pose the question "Don't you have an overhead join in the USA (or any other State)?".

Whilst not technically legislation this is published by the CAA so notwithstanding local airfield procedures this is how the CAA expect aircraft in the UK to join the circuit at an airfield with no ATC:-

"Overhead" Join (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ga_srgwebStandardOverheadJoinPosterJan09.pdf)

When in Rome do as the Romans.