I thought we were discussing the merits or otherwise of the OH join?? standard or otherwise?
I hear you re: the 90 turns but i can't see the alternative that hasn't its own set of potential issues..Don't get me wrong its not perfect and i'm not wedded to the OH I just don't see the issues as so huge
Edited to add:-
Your original posting on this makes a lot of assumptions.
It harps back to the days of non radio aircraft with minimal navigation equipment who needed to go over head and were pure VFR with minimal navigation aids
Firstly to be sure they were in the right place, to view the runways and read the signal square and look at the wind sock.
Very few aircraft do not have GPS and accurate DME readouts. so many of our regulations are still stuck in by gone eras which are not relevant today.
Very many aircraft today don't have very much in terms of avionics. Whilst we assume having a radio in the aircraft is normal its fairly common for very many GA airfields not to have the radio manned 100% of the time, and that is during what many would consider to be normal hours in mid-week. For example I flew to Sleap recently mid-week at 4pm-ish and couldn't raise anyone.
Sadly the number of full time people working that can be sustained by a handful of movements is very often not more that 1 and if that chap needs to go to the toilet, have a tea or lock up the pumps etc what does he do?
So the need to look at the signal square and wind sock isn't as uncommon as one might think.
Further many microlights, light sport, aerobatic and gyroplanes don't have anything by way of nav aids other than perhaps the pilot using his own ipad type application.
The point is you can't just apply the thinking to a Piper/Cirrus spam can type, which often have different avionics fit which means if you are SFH many pilots haven't the first idea what is available even when its fitted!
Lets be pragmatic, if the pilot that cut you up in your example can't be bothered to give his position, height and his inability to maintain VMC what are the chances that same chap reading all the gen on the full suite of his avionics fit... none of which would have actually stopped the cloud base and his need to join the circuit anyway..
For me the OH join increases collision risk mixing high wing and low wing aircraft all making blind 90 degree turns and all homing into one spot like honey bees over an airfield.
flying straight in why make up to six extra blind 90 degree turns to end up in the position you were already in? why make your PAX uncomfortable and why add needless time to an already expensive flight.
Flying straight in, OH join, downwind... it doesn't matter at some point isn't your argument about heading to "one spot" always going to be the same? After all where do I head straight in from??
Actually an OH join would have saved this accident:-
https://assets.digital.cabinet-offic...IICI_11-12.pdf
Why mix fast and slow high and low wing together? its all a collision risk?
What do you do at a place like Oxford then?
I too had to take avoiding action when an aircraft attempted an OH joint at 1200 feet with a 1400 foot cloud base cutting through the down wind leg
Just as easy to blame bad RT as the OH join isn't it?
Oh well the wheels of aviation turn very slowly and are stuck in the past
until there is an obviously better solution why change something?