circuit heights

[Capt Wally]

Am curious to hear of others feelings on the two main circuit heights now used in OZ, 1000ft & 1500ft depending on A/C speeds.(AGL of course)

I'm starting my descent (fm 1500ft) from say abeam the Ldg threshold & "Joe" pilot is beneath me at 1000ft. At some point we will be at the same height prior to Ldg (providing it's a stable app) only I won't see him 'till perhaps right on top of him! All this is of course with perhaps the lower guy not having R/T capabilities in a non CTAF/R


Good subject for debate am sure.

capt Wally :-)

[dreamjob]

If you're at 1500' then you should be faster than the Joe at 1000'. You would think he should see and avoid you and separate accordingly? :ok:

[Howard Hughes]

I think what Wally is getting at, is the guy/gal at 1000' may be in your twelve o'clock low, the you descend and catch up to him/her!

Anyway I thought the guy with no radio (ie: LSA, Ultralight) was at 500'? Still doesn't help though, you have to go through his level at some stage too!

[Capt Wally]

............sure 'dreamjob' but i could be back at min speed say 120 kts & 'Joe' could be close to that making our ground speeds very close. There's obviously a lot of other factors that could come into play here such as circling distances for various cats. It's also based on turbo-prop & jet types as well as speeds.But we all end up at the same place (the threshold) it's juust the bit before it that can concern:-)

Yr comment "you would think" is where a potential problem lies. Anyway am wanting to hear of others thoughts. I'd rather hear of others adventures rather than someone saying "you should".

I don't want this to become a slanging match, just some debate on the pros & cons of this topic:-):)

capt Wally

[Capt Wally]

Tnxs HH, how's SYD these days?:)

Capt Wally:-)

[ALLICEDUP]

Where I work we generally start the descent from 1500ft AGL on Base, but have a slightly wider circuit. The traffic should!!!! be inside of you.... should!!! is the word of caution....

[SmokingHole]

Capt Wal,
I'm pretty sure the 1000' cct was designed to keep the low performance singles away from the higher performance guys. If you're min speed is 120kts, that's a closure rate of 45kts on the PA28 doing 75kias on base, ie around 1500m/min closure. So in order for you to descend on top of him, at some point he was in front of you and you must give way. At the said rate of closure, even at the highly visible range of 250m, you still have 10 seconds to avoid a collision.
These smaller guys also fly a tighter curcuit generally so they should be inside you until finals.
I guess nothing replaces what ToweringQ refers to as the "Mark I Eyeball". Sadly, with the recent tragedy of that ultralight being "run down" on finals, curcuit heights were irrelevant.

[Kickatinalong]

Have you had a problem yet? I know I have not, it appears to work for me so far. I know I was against the changes BUT maybe Dick was right ( I hate saying that) but can we be big enough to admit it?
Kickatinalong.:ok:

[Capt Wally]

.........guys & gals we could have a situation here where the lower guy is a C210 & something faster perhaps flying at 120 kts dowwind. So I am fully aware that if there was a closure rate of say 45 kts then that situation maybe more suitable for seeing each othere. But it's not all like that. Yr correct 'smokinghole' that was the original idea.There's other considerations like local rules as in everyone flying over a fixed object for tracking purposes say prior to turning final 'cause of houses etc. thus making the lower guy being in the same place at perhaps the same time just a little lower & out of sight of myself despite perhaps a speed difference.
And yes "kick" I've had numerous occasions where this situation has arisen but fortunetly airmanship & correct R/T saved the day at the last moment, but as we have seen sadly recently at LTV that may not always be the case.

Good healthy debate can result in better awareness am sure

capt wally:-)

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

These smaller guys also fly a tighter curcuit generally so they should be inside you until finals.

Yeah, right!

I came into Toowoomba this afternoon in the Bonanza at 1500' AGL behind a C172 on downwind at 1000'.

He turned base just this side of Roma!

I could have easily turned inside him, landed and cleared the runway before he turned finals.

I don't know who teaches people this crap!

Dr :8

[SmokingHole]

These smaller guys also fly a tighter curcuit generally so they should be inside you until finals.

should ie will not always

All that stuff in the bonanza but you don't have TCAS?

[Capn Bloggs]

All that stuff in the bonanza but you don't have TCAS?
What's the point of having TCAS if they don't have a transponder?

[ScottyDoo]

cleared the runway before he turned finals.

I don't know who teaches people this crap!


The same wallahs who teach phrases such as "finalS", "over the top", "this time", etc etc etc.............

[Defenestrator]

What happened to 'see and avoid'? Appreciate what you guys are posting but after countless years of operating into CTAF's/ MBZ's have never....NEVER had a problem. Have had to extend downwind more times than I care to remember but it's not ever been a problem. Just sharing the airspace. WTF!!!

Edit.....I'm sure some of you guys are simply itching for something to bitch about. FMD...Grow up. Your making us look like twats. And before you post in humiliation have a think....or just post me. What rubbish...

D

[Sunfish]

I think you guys should look up the old thread on this.

The main point that wories me is that un-alerted (ie no radio) is orders of magnitude poorer than alerted see and avoid.

I don't understand in this day and age why radios and calls are not mandatory for all flying objects.

[Capt Wally]

"Sunfish" I couldn't agree with you more about all flying objects having radios. But the main problem here is about how there used & when, what's lacking is perhaps something called education.
Fortunetly most flying objects have radios but some use them in such an unprofessional manor that that alone causes more problems than not having one at all. Wrong position calls whether it be the wrong quadrant when calling inbound to simply talking on the radio as tho they are at the bar on a friday night telling everyone a short story !
I know it's never going to be perfect but we can all do it better am sure:-)

"Defenestrator" "see & avoid is almost everything these days in a circuit, no ones disputing that but it's not always possible to keep an eye out the window for an object that can change it's aspect at a seconds notice esspecially in varying light conditions as perhaps turning final into a setting sun. The R/T's are just as important in "building" a mental picture as to where someone is in the circuit. I started this thread in order for people in here to perhaps give their views on the subject matter & tell of some pertinent stories or experiences so that we may learn a little more, not to have anyone lower themselves to subject pilots to personal abuse.

EVERYONE who holds a license to fly is considered a professional, lets extend that priviledge to words in here:). I expected (sadly) for some to 'have a go' at others in here but can we just stick to the subject matter please.

Capt Wally :-)

[QSK?]

The only problem I have when flying the 1500ft AGL circuits is I CAN'T SEE THE BL@#DY WINDSOCK!

[KRUSTY 34]

I have noticed a worrying trend amongst some private pilots (not all I stress) to simply make the standard circuit calls "parrot fashion" if you like, without seeing a larger picture!

Case in point. Taxiing at a country aerodrome we make the mandatory calls. One aircraft is in the circuit doing touch and goes and making all his mandatory calls on the CTAF frequency. Another one inbound at 5 miles makes his standard call also on the CTAF frequency. So far so good. We call the inbound aircraft to clarify his intentions. Before he can answer, blogs in the circuit overtransmits the inbound aircraft's reply with his own turning base call! I politely ask blogs to standby while we ask the inbound aircraft to "say again". Before he can answer a second time, blogs overtransmits him again, this time during his turning final call! Now less politely I ask blogs to refrain from further transmissions untill we get an answer from the inbound aircraft.

As we depart, blogs calls me up and asks what was all that about. I point out what I thought was the bleeding obvious. His response was, "Oh! Was there another aircraft in the circuit?" And yes we were all on the one correct frequency!

I'm sad to say that this is not an isolated incident. A busy OCTA aerodrome can be a very fluid and dynamic place. Unless you are properly trained to deal with that reality, you have no place being there unless accompanied by a competent instructor. It's not rocket science. If you can be trained to fly an aeroplane, you should at least be trained to have some idea of what else is going on around you!

If you can't, (and lets face it some people fit into this category) then do us all a favour and stay on the ground.

[das Uber Soldat]

Case in point. Taxiing at a country aerodrome we make the mandatory calls. One aircraft is in the circuit doing touch and goes and making all his mandatory calls on the CTAF frequency. Another one inbound at 5 miles makes his standard call also on the CTAF frequency. So far so good. We call the inbound aircraft to clarify his intentions. Before he can answer, blogs in the circuit overtransmits the inbound aircraft's reply with his own turning base call! I politely ask blogs to standby while we ask the inbound aircraft to "say again". Before he can answer a second time, blogs overtransmits him again, this time during his turning final call! Now less politely I ask blogs to refrain from further transmissions untill we get an answer from the inbound aircraft.Sounds like the typical 1st / 2nd nav solo student. Its sad but with so many students these days , most of whom have English as a second language combined with the sausage factory nature of the larger flight schools, the general practice is get them to the point where they can get there and back without getting too lost and then send them solo. Such is the pressures from management to get them through.

Gone are the days where you would have a complete understanding of r/t and other aspects of nav before you went anywhere PIC.

This kind of thing in your example happens every day at airports popular with schools for early nav solo, in nsw places like ybth, yglb, ycnk & ymnd.

[aldee]

Its near impossible to get a call in at ymnd some days,having the same frequency as ycnk and all the fun they're having over there and all :\

you never know who's transmitted over you so see and avoid it is :ok:

aldee

[AerocatS2A]

What happened to 'see and avoid'? Appreciate what you guys are posting but after countless years of operating into CTAF's/ MBZ's have never....NEVER had a problem. Have had to extend downwind more times than I care to remember but it's not ever been a problem. Just sharing the airspace. WTF!!!

A higher faster aircraft descending can collide with a lower slower aircraft without ever having seen it. See and avoid is all well and good if the aircraft are in a position to be able to see each other.

[das Uber Soldat]

ycnk and ymnd have different frequencies.

[Roger Scramjet]

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_28_120.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZSYYYYYYYYAU)

[Cap'n Arrr]

It's been a while since I looked it up, and my Jepps are out in the car:{, but I'm fairly certain in one paragraph in Dep/App/Ldg Procedures it defines circuit heights.
Downwind speed < 60kts (i think) = 500' AGL
Downwind speed 60kts - 120kts = 1000' AGL
Jets or Higher performance pistons (Downwind speed >120 kts) = 1500' AGLI do remember in my twin endorsement having to make sure I was below 120 in the circuit if I wanted 1000' circuits.

Also, your downwind spacing should be larger if you're higher, and you should turn base later, as your 45deg / 2 wing chords / whatever measurement you use from the threshold for your base turn, should stay the same, and since you're higher you will be further down downwind when you turn.

Since you turned later, you would have a wider base leg than the 1000', and shouldn't come down on him from above. Just need to keep a good eye out for him on late base / early final (No 'S' ScottyDoo!:ok:)

Arrr!:ok:

[Capt Wally]

Cap'n Arrr yr quite correct as to the exact regs & have recited them here in parrot fashion, (tnxs 4 that) but the only trouble is we ain't dealing with 'parrots'(well some might think we are!). Humans tend to not do things the same every time esspecially when the pressure is on even if well trained, CFIT it a good Eg of that failing.

Krusty 34, good post. There's some good feedback here now so lets ignore the few that contribute nothing to this very important issue. I brought it (circuit heights) up 'cause of a few potential accidents/incedents I have either been a part of or have witnessed in recent times. Now that it's been a while since the regs where introduced some concerns are showing up here already.

"SQK".....excellent point about not being able to see the wind sock at
1500 AGL. In times of poor light due haze etc it is quite difficult to see the direction of the wind via the sock esspecially in some older types of A/C that have poor vision thru ageing side windows. You can in this case where weather maybe of a concern enter or descend (safely that is) to a lower circuit height for a better judgement as to what rwy to use. Of course in doing so it's good airmanship to say as much via the R/T as a general call before hand. Even tho one could ask a fellow aviator already in the circuit (if there is someone obviously) what the wind direction & strength is. I tend personally not to make my landing direction based on that entirely. No disrespect to others but over the years have been told via the radio a wind direction that was nothing like what it actually was. And bringing 5 tonnes or so of bucking craft in gusty conditions to land into a short strip one needs everything going for them including correct analysis if wind direction.

Some good stuff to read so far, tnxs guys/gals

Capt Wally:-)

[aldee]

Been outa the country for a while now but they both used to be on 126.7 when I last flew there.

Had a look at the online ersa, current 22 Nov both on 122.65 now is how I read it

[Tmbstory]

Capt Wally

If you use a descent of 300 ft a nautical mile and a stabilized approach, the higher (faster) aircraft will be on a wider circuit than the lower & slower aircraft. (on downwind leg about 3+ nm & 5nm). The pilot sits on the left of the overtaking aircraft so there is a better chance of seeing the lower slower aircraft.
The idea of flying or turning over a visual position is defeating the concept of look and judge. You can not do it on a black night at a dark hole airport.

Even if there is no DME information you can still judge the approach by the "apparent" distance between the approach end of the runway cone markers, runway lights etc. When you think of all the times that pilots make approaches to runways, using ILS or VASI systems and then do not use all the means available to judge the slope, it is a waste.

In the earlier times at Broome, there were no VASI or ILS installations to help with the approach slope and yet Corporate Jet operations were not a problem day or night.

Tmb

[Capt Wally]

"Tmbstory" what you say is correct I doubt anyone here with experience would say otherwise but you miss the point (the point I was trying to bring across that is) a little I feel. We are dealing with pilots from all walks of life here, some wouldn't even know how to interpret a vasi or papi system day or night. Dme is a luxury at most country strips but GPS is more common but I doubt a lot of private pilots use it to assist in Cat. circling limitations.

I'm more concerned at the basic country strip where lots of basic pilots visit & know little else other than to maintain basic flight standards. Sometimes flying over a visual fixed position is required by local rules so that kind of throws out yr theory there of 'look & judge". In fact flying over a fixed landmark due to local rules (such as avoiding houses) is better at least you would know pretty much where to look for someone if you believe they are where they are meant to be. Still I respect yr post just that it may go over the heads of some here who fly with limited knowledge & not aspiring to do it better the next time.
I'm not having a go at anyone here esspecially those that do their best am more concerned that some out there just don't know any better of managing their circuit standards & R/T proceedures for that matter & like I said before that comes from education.
The original concept of separation of varying A/C types due to speed using diff circuit heights works to a point but does have it's downfalls, afterall we all flew at the same height for many years with the same radio problems but now we have to descend sometime to the lower guys level & we used to only do that on the dead side of a circuit, now we do it with the added risk of someone being right under us at the wrong time & we may not even know about it!

Regards

Capt Wally :-):)

[Hailstop3]

The same wallahs who teach phrases such as "finalS", "over the top", "this time", etc etc etc.............

Beat me to it. So sick of hearing 'finals'. Since when is there more than one leg called final in the circuit. It's f&^king singular!

On topic, i havent flown the 1500ft circuit and i am in a turboprop. Mainly because its hardly a high performance aircraft. Problem i can sort of see is it is very hard to spot an aircraft below you blending in with all the houses than in front of you against sky. Not saying that's easy either but maybe a little bit. As for the no radios thing, well thats when the eyes should be doing their thing. I just wish everyone had radios and used them.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Since when is there more than one leg called final in the circuit.

1) Really really long final
2) Not quite so long but still pretty long final
3) Long final
4) Not really long final, but not exactly short final
5) Mid-final
6) Not too short final
7) Short final
8) Really short final
9) Really really short final
10) Any shorter final and we might as well call it a landing final

So what's your problem with "turning finals" again?

Dr :8

[Atlas Shrugged]

I suppose none really, as long as you also fly upwinds, crosswinds, and down winds as well(s):ugh:

[Vref+5]

Unfortunately complaining about about downwind spacing and the size of other people's circuits is just like complaining about slow play in golf. It always happens and there isn't much you can do about it in an unregulated area.

The concept behind different circuit heights is to initially separate aircraft based upon performance and prevent a faster aircraft overtaking/descending into another aircraft. By the time they are at base turn and commencing final descent (remember - base and final is where most mid airs occur) hopefully the pilots have heard 1 or 2 radio calls from other aircraft and have positioned themselves appropriately.

For this to occur all pilots must be diligent in ensuring they have a good visual scan and using the radio (transmitting the standard radio broadcasts and LISTENING). Obviously this doesn't always occur, people do make mistakes, but other than education there is not a lot else you can do in a unregulated area. The next option is a third party to pass traffic information.

[Jabawocky]

I have ..err....Borrowed this from someone else, but its applicable here!

Ever noticed that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?

[VH-XXX]

It's not much better in a "controlled" environment either. I joined downwind in GAAP on Saturday, was doing 140-150knots @ 1,000ft and had actually passed inside an aircraft on crosswind @ 700ft that was now outside me, but was then asked to go "wide" because he was already number one and on what the controller called a "tight" circuit. He was probably travelling at less than half my speed so I had to turn over the top of him as he climbed up underneath me so I could go "wide" and be number 2 behind him and ended up doing a 5 mile final. Wasn't impressed and should have stood my ground.

Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?

[Jabawocky]

Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?

Saving your ass!

J

[bentleg]

Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?


Standard terminolgy to me is "REQUIRE" when I MUST have it and in other cases "REQUEST". Not sure that that would have helped in your situation. It's hard to suggest what should have been done as I wasn't in the left seat on the day. Maybe you could have pointed out you were well ahead of the Number one aircraft, and REQUESTed you be number 1. I dont think you can REQUIRE to be number one as there were probably other safe options such as doing a full circuit.

[bushy]

A third party to pass traffic increases the gabble on the radio, with much overtransmitting etc and is often much the same as not having radio at all.
If you have a controller actually controlling traffic flow, that's fine, but even they have to abbreviate and streamline procedures sometimes to cope with a really big traffic flow. (airshows etc.)

[Howard Hughes]

Ever noticed that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
Jabba, I personally like the generic term 'Peckerhead', covers one and all really...;)
Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?
Unable to comply due (insert reason here)?:confused:

[Jabawocky]

Howard old mate......you missed something there

Unable to comply due (insert reason here)?

that could well read

Unable to comply due "Peckerhead" @ etc etc....

[Awol57]

In a GAAP if you are sequenced and it ain't going to work, request to make number one to the other aircraft. Majority of the time it is then a simple case of saying approved and telling the other aircraft they have been resequenced and follow the XXX overtaking on your right/left (as the case may be). Obviously there may well be occasions that you can't be resequenced for whatever reason so you might find you are trying to follow or going around and making another circuit. However if you don't ask you may well find yourself going around from base or final anyway.

[LeadSled]

Folks,

Just to remind everybody, the multiple circuit heights were NOT INTRODUCED by NAS 2C, they have been there for about as long as I have been flying, and that's quite a while now.

It was in the AIP back in the '60's, (probably since mid./late-50's) and has been ever since. More than likely, many of you just didn't know it, and the NAS 2C brought it to you attention. All NAS 2C did was suggested some rational speed guidelines.

As for anybody doing 150kt in a GAAP zone, all I can say is: "Grow up, and slow up" --- it is still see and be seen.

Tootle pip!!

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

I seem to recall a speed limit of 120 kts IAS, or the like, in the YBAF GAAP Zone when I learnt to fly there in the 70's, unless you couldn't manage that for operational reasons.

A well known lady pilot of the Qld Gov aircraft was regularly chipped by the tower for blasting into the circuit well in excess of that!

Dr :8

[Cap'n Arrr]

My personal favorite is "ABC request clearance to leave and reenter the GAAP zone to remain behind the aircraft ahead":E

[baffler15]

Helo arrivals rock!

Baffler:ok:

[Capt Fathom]

A well known lady pilot of the Qld Gov aircraft was regularly chipped by the tower for blasting into the circuit well in excess of that!

A well known lady pilot of the Qld Gov aircraft was regularly chipped for just about everything....:*

[Scurvy.D.Dog]

His Nib's good manAs for anybody doing 150kt in a GAAP zone, all I can say is: "Grow up, and slow up" --- it is still see and be seen. ... and from His Nib's on the other threadIt is obvious that we have archaic procedures for Class D airspace.
.
Controllers in Lihue simply give traffic information between IFR and VFR. .. and errrm what happens between VFR and VFR???
.
... hmmm :hmm: .... read on
.
His Nib's again The procedures are very similar to what we use at our secondary airports. i.e. GAAP Then again, why shouldn’t they be? Our secondary airports were copied in 1986 from the US Class D procedures.:hmm:
.
What speed should an A320 or B737/8 fly on downwind then ol bean/s?? .. you know, at say Dick's US D (Oz GAAP), at Avalon (and presumably the other D's) or HB or LT or CH or AS or MC or MK or RK or HM!? ..... what of base and final???
.
... SO .... Dick why would you want to introduce US D rules that mean IFR will not have 'Alerted See and Avoid'??? .... or do you think that occurs in US D and our GAAP??? .. in other words, do IFR or VFR receive Directed Traffic Information in a GAAP??? ( and I am not referring to TI some of the time) ...... be careful with the answer! ;)
.
... anyone have a penny? .... if so, do drop it! :cool:
.
.. as for CTAF
.
.... turbo jets and jabiru's .... circuit heights and widths .... not to mention radio (in)competence ... etc etc
.
tick ..... tick ...... tick :oh:

[Capt Wally]

"Leadsled" yr quite right the diff circuit heights have been around since Noah gave away flying & boated his way into fame but it was mainly for the separation of jets & the others I believe. When I first started to fly a jet it was 1500ft AGL in the circuit & everyone else high performnace or otherwise was at 1000ft AGL. The introduced two heights these days was based on performnace as in down wind speeds (as you mentioned) and was introduced in more recent times. "See & be seen" is fine but it's not fool proof hence my original post.
At least this post is making folks here think:)

Tootle pip !!.....ya gotta love that !

Capt Wally

[Capt Wally]

G'Day "dog"........drop us a PM sometime with yr contact details:)

Capt Wally :-)

[Scurvy.D.Dog]

... done :ok:

[Capt Wally]

....tnxs Dog............gotta go flying right now................there's never any rest for the wicked !

Capt Wally:-):}

[VH-XXX]

I thought I read somewhere online last week that circuit entry should be less than 200 knots. Perhaps that was for the 1,500ft circuit.

- I'll add detail to clear my impeccably clean CASA record. 140-150 knots "ground-speed." That ought to clear things up :ok: so 20-30 knots up the clacker.