Circuit joining
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
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.
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.
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.
two aircraft could be heading for the same point in space at the same time without prior warning.
Lookout, effective use of the radio and common sense/airmanship are the answer to keeping it safe for everyone.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Last edited by skyhighfallguy; 23rd Feb 2015 at 18:36.
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.
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.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
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.
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.
Like anywhere then? (Especially Class G airspace).
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
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
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?)
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
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?)
Last edited by Mach Jump; 24th Feb 2015 at 00:33. Reason: Added Ps.
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?)
MJ, Nice summary and I agree.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
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.
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.
pilots should not be afraid to use the R/T sensibly and effectively, rather than just sticking very rigidly to the terms of CAP413.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
Hurrah!
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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?
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?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
a bit tetchy. (Or 'over tired' as your Mums might have said?)
"Have you got tired and cross and horrible then?"
"Yes." (In a tired and cross and horrible voice.)
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?
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!
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!
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!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
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.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By "published method" I presume you mean the one shown on the CAA Standard "Overhead" Join?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochdale
Age: 48
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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