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?