Circuit joining and departure in non-ATC environment

[FormationFlyer]

Hi folks!

Today I made a join at an a/d in the S where the runway circuit was RH and I joined Left Base with A/G radio present.

Now having had a conversation with an instructor I know down there Ive investigated, and indeed the ANO states all turns in the direction of the circuit unless an ATC authorises otherwise. Coming from a mostly ATC based environment where base joins of LH or RH are regularly given the join didnt seem alien to me - and additionally forgetting the 'unless ATC...' bit above I followed a published arrival procedure.

With hindsight this wasnt right - even instructors/examiners get it wrong sometimes!

However, this also leads to an interesting point. It means that unless ATC exists at an airfield no aircraft should ever perform a departure with a turn out which is against the circuit direction. This is interesting because instead of potentially deconflicting aircraft it actually increases the traffic density by having a/c remain in the vicinity of the A/D. Whats particularly interesting is that even at one (sometimes) unmanned airfield where I fly from the left/right turnout against the flow is used all the time (when ATC are not present) with no issue at all indeed it works exceedingly well.

Indeed this goes even further - it means that (technically) on departure ALL aircraft have to continually circle around until they come to a point in the natural turns in the circuit are facing the direction they wish to depart. For instance this would preclude a t/o to mid-point d/w followed by a turn away from the circuit....

Curious. To be honest I would say that the rule regarding departure appears to be at odds with sensible practice and merely forces a/c to remain attached the the a/d causing higher traffic density and associated noise.

Opinions please...(yes I am aware im probably in for a public hanging for the join but hey...thats what aviation is about - if you cant put your hand up and admit when youre wrong then to be honest you shouldnt be flying...).

[FormationFlyer]

Heres another thought Ive just had.

One a/d I know with its ATZ situated in its own class D airspace, its published VFR joining procedures are NOT std overhead but direct base or midpoint downwind joins from VRPs. The VRPs are located on OPPOSITE sides of the class D.

For the most part this class D include 24x7 ATC. However, there are a couple of times a year when the class D airspace is unmanned completely. Yet club operations from this still continue (and works fantastically). It is published that a/c will use the normal std joining procedures. This means that for either runway a left or right base join may be used simultaneously, regardless of circuit direction (which is mandated in the published procedures covering the time ATC are not present).

Does this mean that rule 17's 'Unless ATC authorise otherwise' can also mean a piece of paper published to those pilots who are operating out of that airfield have been so briefed and 'authorised' by ATC in advance? Does this count as an authorisation?

In which case, if it is OK for ATC to do this in advance (and I hasten to add I have NEVER had any problems with this procedure and its always worked brilliantly - on an unmanned station pilots just sort it out themselves on the RT transmitting to 'X Traffic') then should it not be possible for a non-ATSU a/d to publish similar procedures allowing left/right base joins regardless of circuit direction. Admittedly it works better where there is a dedicated radio station (i.e. A/G radio or INFO) who may not always be present. Where would the difference be?!

[Whirlybird]

I know several A/G airfields that operate exactly as you're describing - joining and leaving the circuit wherever is sensible. It works very well. I never knew the rule you quoted....and I'm now going to forget it as quickly as possible, in the interests of safety and common sense.

[hugh flung_dung]

I'm now going to forget it as quickly as possible :uhoh: I wasn't aware that following the rules of the air (ANO rule 17.5) was optional ...

HFD

[3 Point]

Rule 17 (5) actually states ...
"... in the vicinity of ... an aerodrome ... shall unless ATC ...; (a)conform to the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft ... and (b) make all turns to the left unless ground signals otherwise indicate."
This rule to keep traffic flowing in the circuit direction when departing or joining without ATC is very sensible and simple - it works very well. Don't forget, you dont have to turn after T/O, you can go straight ahead so ...
Example 1; R/W 27, left hand circuits and you want to take off and go south. Just take off, turn left and go.
Example 2; R/W 27, left hand circuits and you want to go north. Take off, climb straight ahead till clear of the circuit area then, when you are no longer "in the vicinity of the aerodrome", turn right and off you go! How far straight ahead? I'd say till clear of the circuit but you could argue till clear of the ATZ, either way you have complied with rule 17(5) so you are both safe and legal!
Happy landings
3 Point

[Islander2]

I wasn't aware that following the rules of the air (ANO rule 17.5) was optional ...True enough, but there is the matter of interpretation.

Plenty of scope here for arguing about what constitutes "vicinity", "pattern of traffic" and "ground signals otherwise indicate".

Flying has changed dramatically in the UK since that rule was originally drafted, for example the replacement of signal squares by radio comms, the use of non-standard patterns because of the threat of restriction/closure due to noise pollution, the growth in helicopter traffic, etc.

Operations that are routinely undertaken at a number of airfields around the country as a result of these changes would fall foul of a narrow interpretation of Rule 17(5). Fortunately, in most cases, a more pragmatic interpretation is taken!

To give but one example, how does a non-radio aeroplane legally undertake a right-hand circuit at an aerodrome that has no signal square?

At Leicester, I'm told you're for the high jump if you use anything but the strictest interpretation ... although they do still have an operational signal square!

[BEagle]

FF - the 'unmanned ATC' procedures at the aerodrome-in-Class D are local military-approved procedures. Can you imagine any other aerodrome in Class D airspace with its tower unmanned?

Have a look at the SAFETYCOM posters - they suggest a 'standard overhead join' for those aerodromes which do not have ATC/FISO/A-G. Use the published frequency or, if none available, then SAFETYCOM.

The situation you originally described would be fine by me IF you were the only person joining AND ATC had agreed to it. But otherwise, it should be a standard overhead join. I went to Gamston the other day and was permitted to join direct from the south on right base; this was mainly for noise abatement and there was no-one else flying at the time.

Departing - either depart downwind in the circuit direction, climb in the overhead in the circuit direction or just extend upwind until outside the circuit, then direct on course avoiding anyone else joining, I would suggest.

As an aside, I once flew to Old Warden on a display day. The arrival procedures give you a slot and require an overhead join. Although it wasn't completely clear whether the slot was overhead time or landing time. I arrived at the precise time and flew an overhead join - only to encounter "GolfAlfaGoodMorningBravoCharlieDeltaSir - I'm a PA28 180 form err, Thruxtonerr, inbound, err for landing" - who promptly barged into the circuit downwind as I was on my cross-wind leg. So I was obliged to give way - the idiot then flew half-way to the North Sea as he set up for his airliner landing over the noise sensitive villages...... Total discourtesy and lack of airmanship!!

Overhead joins are a very good idea - joining any other way is ONLY suitable if ATC (and there was only a FISO that day) sanction it and traffic is light.

An (airliner-driver) FI with whom I was flying wanted to do a straight in join at Wellesbourne Mountford one busy hazy day - he'd forgotten that he wasn't in his people tube and would have to find out where everyone else was before sequencing himself into the circuit..... So we agreed that an overhead join would be best!

However, people who fly ginormous navigation exercises around aerodromes rather than normal circuits should not be surprised to find others turning inside them.....:mad:

[Dried ears]

Doesn't the rule exist merely for those wishing to remain in the circuit and to prevent a circuit in the opposite direction (ok - unlikely, but this is the law after all) or on the wrong side? If you are leaving the circuit there is no sensible need to continue to conform to the pattern of traffic, or you will stay in there forever, or rather until a full stop landing at the same aerodrome. As long as you make all the turns you need to, prior to departing the circuit, in the correct direction, and you are sufficiently situationally aware by listening out, and visual anyway to provide your own separation, I think you have satisfied the rule. Having made your safe right turn out in the above example I would argue you are no longer ruled by the "vicinity of the airport" part, as it is clearly your intention to depart the vicinity and very shortly later you have done so anyway.

I don't think Wirlygig even needs to ignore the rule, I think he is conforming to it until he choses to safely depart the vicinity.

[hugh flung_dung]

I was taught (and teach) that, unless approved otherwise by ATC, all turns within an ATZ must be in the circuit direction. Do the same thing at airfields without an ATZ and life remains safe and consistent. This is so simple to understand and implement that I'm rather surprised by this discussion.

If joining the circuit you either join on the appropriate leg (please: no straight-in approaches without ATC!) or fly overhead and descend into the ATZ on the dead side while turning in the circuit direction.
If leaving the circuit you simply turn and climb in the circuit direction until you're pointing in the right direction or are outside the ATZ (vertically or horizontally).

This is not difficult or time-consuming, avoids surprise head-head moments at a high'ish workload phase and conforms with rule 17.

(fixed typo)

HFD

[Whirlybird]

I don't think Wirlygig even needs to ignore the rule, I think he is conforming to it until he choses to safely depart the vicinity.

Just a point of information....

I'm WhirlyBIRD not WhirlyGIG. I don't think my good friend Whirlygig generally frequents this particular forum. And, as it happens, we're both female, ie SHE.

Sorry, back to the topic.....

[Dried ears]

Mea culpa on both counts. Apologies. Washing fixation obviously, probably treatable.

[VFE]

Always check if overhead joins are permissable. I fly from an airfield where they are not permitted!

VFE.

[FormationFlyer]

hugh flung_dung This is so simple to understand and implement that I'm rather surprised by this discussion.

Oh I agree completely. At the time the confusion in my mind arose not because of a lack of knowledge of rule 17, far from it. But forgetting that a base leg join against the flow IS NOT ALLOWED *unless* ATC give clearance. Flying from a/ds where 75%+ of the time we have ATC present just reinforced the use of the base leg join against the flow.

Then having thought more about it...it seems that there are many procedures around the place which dont tally with this...henceforth you may be suprised about the discussion - but there again its surprising that a/ds with non-ATC environments using RH circuits seem to have procedures which are contrary to rule 17 - but that this may come down to interpretation i.e. a published L turnout from a RH circuit for noise reasons, and could potentially come down to a conformance with the pattern of traffic is a curious point which is certainly worthy of discussion.

And..my thanks once again to you for pulling me up!

[hugh flung_dung]

Sorry FF - I didn't intend to say what I said :O
What I meant was that I was surprised by some of the comments, not surprised that you brought it up in the first place - fully agree that it's a good topic.

HFD

[QNH 1013]

At Leicester, I'm told you're for the high jump if you use anything but the strictest interpretation ... although they do still have an operational signal square!
Unless things have changed recently, all circuits (10 runways) at Leicester are left-hand, i.e. standard.

[Islander2]

Unless things have changed recently, all circuits (10 runways) at Leicester are left-hand, i.e. standard.Indeed.

So, leaving aside the issue of whether or not the following complies with Rule 17(5), the answer to which is not black & white, can someone tell me why this is inadvisable: take-off, announce intention to make a right turn out, receive response "nothing known to affect", climb straight ahead to a point well beyond the upwind end of the runway, then climbing turn to the right to exit the ATZ? Yet I understand you get drummed out of the Brownies if you do that at Leicester.

[QNH 1013]

So, leaving aside the issue of whether or not the following complies with Rule 17(5), the answer to which is not black & white, can someone tell me why this is inadvisable: take-off, announce intention to make a right turn out, receive response "nothing known to affect", climb straight ahead to a point well beyond the upwind end of the runway, then climbing turn to the right to exit the ATZ? Yet I understand you get drummed out of the Brownies if you do that at Leicester

Possibly because more than one runway may be in use at any one time. e.g. twins using 10/28, vintage tailwheel a/c using 16/34 or 06/24. It helps if everyone is going around in the same direction. If you draw it out on a piece of paper it becomes clearer. Any "conflicts" (for want of a better word) occur with slower closing speeds if everyone goes around the same way, which should make see-and-avoid easier. I assume this is the reason, but it is just what I have concluded. Its their airfield, and if they want me to do standard left hand circuits, then I'll happily comply.

[Islander2]

Its their airfield, and if they want me to do standard left hand circuits, then I'll happily comply.Me too ... but we are talking departures, not circuits!

Oddly, those people that argue against the departure I described for safety reasons seem quite happy instead with a departure climb through the overhead. I have no doubts at all about the relative safety of those two options!

[3 Point]

I agree.

The rule says that turns should be in the direction of trafic flow. It does not say you have to turn - there is nothing wrong with climbing straight ahead till clear of the vicinity then turning as required. But do make sure you are well clear and stay well clear of the traffic parrern!

happy landings (and Take Offs!)

3 Point

[ShyTorque]

All this chat about circuit direction is fine BUT the discussion needs expanding a little further.

Who, at an uncontrolled airfield, considers they can decide on the runway in use from a base leg join, left or right? For example, what if there is an unseen non-radio aircraft already in the circuit, in a light and variable wind? :E

[FlyingForFun]

Who, at an uncontrolled airfield, considers they can decide on the runway in use from a base leg join, left or right?Anyone with a radio?

As for the unseen non-radio aircraft in the circuit, he will use the runway indicated by the signal square. Which will (hopefully) be the same one as the radio operator informs radio equipped aircraft is the runway in use. (I say hopefully because I have, in the past, had to point out to the radio operator that the runway in use he's told me is not the one shown on the signal square.....)

FFF
--------------

[ShyTorque]

Anyone with a radio?

Yes, Provided someone answers the radio. I know of some fields where there isn't necessarily anyone full time to answer a pilot's initial call and non-radio aircraft are often operating. At one of these fields, which is licensed, I have twice seen aircraft on final to one end, with another one taking off from the opposite direction.

My point is that a call from a joining aircraft may not always be answered, even if the airfield has an active circuit. Bearing in mind that aircraft in the circuit have priority it may not be a good idea to join an assumed base leg without being absolutely certain that it is for the correct runway in use.