Overhead Joins

[Rabbs]

Hi,

Low hour ppl here with a question, ideally I'd like an instructor or ATC to answer as I have flown with several long hour ppls and have gotten different answers when discussing.

When approaching for an overhead join should you always position yourself initially as per http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_gad_oheadjoin_poster.pdf (90 degrees to the runway and turn runway heading deadside)

or is it acceptable to join deadside (eg if you are tracking 180 degrees and deadside/runway heading is 180) and then go into the cct (descend deadside, crosswind and into downwind)

The debate started when I turned left of an airfield (at about 10 miles out) so I could position myself for the initial approach for the overhead join. The pilot I was with told me that if I was already lined up on the deadside leg just go straight on and call overhead when abeam the runway deadside... (His view was why make it more difficult if you are already on the runway heading)

Thoughts...

[jxk]

Do as it says: 'join overhead' 2000' qfe, determine circuit direction (windsock or signals square), if circuit is left-hand (default) make your turns to left vice- versa right-hand, descend on dead-side to circuit height, cross the end of the runway (cross-wind ie other end to threshold) at circuit height, downwind, base-leg, finals.
It doesn't matter which direction you join from you're going to ascertain circuit direct etc whilst over-head. This is the theoretical standard over-head join, however a lot of airfields have their own instructions depending on local restrictions in which case you need to consult the AIP or Pooleys etc..

[omcaree]

I agree with jxk.
Starting your join from 2000ft overhead means that you'll be flying a similar path to all other aircraft who might also be joining. So assuming you don't bump into anybody in the overhead, you shouldn't be conflicting with anyone through the rest of your join.
If the standard proceedure at an airfield is to join overhead, and you decide to join on the deadside, chances are you wont be descending in the same profile as people joining overhead (because you'll have started at a different point). So in this scenario there is every possibility that someone joining from overhead could descend into you when you are deadside (if you were sufficiently low not to be seen).

[VictorGolf]

I can see the point of an overhead join at an unmanned field or one without radio but I don't buy it for a manned field. If you ask for joining and traffic info and there isn't any of the latter why annoy the neighbours by spending longer in the circuit if you can join on final, base or downwind without upsetting any other traffic?

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

I’m not normally a fan of overhead joins, but there have been a couple of occasions recently (Henham Park & Project Propeller at Old Warden) where it has been useful in sorting out arriving traffic of radically differing airspeeds.

The usual caveat of checking Pooleys / VFR Guide / AIP and PPR applies. This will get you the information and probably the reason for any specific procedure. In the case of Headcorn you will be advised in no uncertain terms NOT to join over head…

Safe Flying,
Richard W.

[Julian]

Rabbs,

Its always worth getting an early radio call into your destination, that will give you all the info you need to plan your approach. I fly out of Donny and by doing this I usually get a straight in which reduces the workload vastly.

J.

[cirruscrystal]

it is published at most airfields i fly into, for a standard overhead join. I dont like it personally when people decide to do their own thing and 'just slot in behind' and come streaking accross the pattern at circuit height, makes things dangerous when people dont follow procedures i think.

Unless on test i wouldnt worry about specific direction to join into deadside.

[robin]

Some airfields do ask you to join overhead for particular reasons. At those fields, you won't be popular is you don't.

Similarly, there are other airfields, especially those with parachuting, who don't wan't overhead joins under any circumstances.

All airfields have their little quirks, NIMBYs obstructions etc, so i you are not sure, phone them and ask before you launch - all part of preflight preparation

[18greens]

I think overhead joins are fab (second only to the RIAB), especially where non radio traffic is involved or if you are sorting out an approach to a scary new field.

But one thing I must add. When is the CAA going to come up with a readable version of the OH join pattern. The coloured fields add loads of 'colour' but you can't read the words without a magnifying glass and (Rabbs you are right to ask) the poster does not make it clear but you CAN make an OH join from ANY direction - thats the idea.

[PompeyPaul]

The debate started when I turned left of an airfield (at about 10 miles out) so I could position myself for the initial approach for the overhead join. The pilot I was with told me that if I was already lined up on the deadside leg just go straight on and call overhead when abeam the runway deadside... (His view was why make it more difficult if you are already on the runway heading)This was discussed on here in some detail a while back. If you approach the airfield deadside, and descend before reaching the airfield then what you are doing is technically a cross wind join. In practice I've found there's nothing wrong with that, and at airfields that require an overhead join they seem happy with the cross wind join when approaching deadside. This is the way I tend to fly it.

If you absolutely have to perform an overhead join, and you are arriving from deadside then you should overfly the airfield, at circuit join height (usually 2000ft QFE) and do a 180 when you get to the live side, to go back to the deadside where you perform your descent to circuit height.

However, in the world of flying this is all open to interpretation and one man's "normal aviation practice" can be another's "I've never seen airmanship like it". As long as you stay safe that's the important thing.

[Whopity]

The original purpose of the overhead join was to allow either non-radio aircraft, or aircraft arriving at a non radio airfield, to overfly the airfield at a safe height, to observe the signal square, determine the runway in use and circuit direction, and then descend into the circuit pattern. To do this you must arrive in the overhead at 2000 ft; descending on the Deadside as you approach is as stated, a crosswind join.

Whilst I find most pilots understand the pattern, the choice of speeds and power settings leaves something to be desired; many glide down at glide speed (best suited for range!) often leaving the ATZ; only to rejoin on an unannounced crosswind leg. A few weeks ago I joined overhead at an airfield where I heard two other aircraft report Deadside Descending ahead of me; I was crossing the centreline and could see no other aircraft, I called, descended and was well established Downwind before the other two aircraft appeared on a crosswind leg about a mile behind me. Nobody watching would have had a clue what they were doing.

[jxk]

Why does this simple over-head join procedure seem so difficult? I suppose in this modern over controlled environment pilots need to be told what to do from t/o to landing.

[effortless]

Surely a deadside approach is a cross wind join. An overhead join is what it says on the tin.

[tonker]

When joining crosswind if you are crossing the end of the take off runway try and position your self so you can at least see it.

Just in case a Pitts takes off and decides to go vertical.;)

ps when turning Final call "final" not "finals". Stops ATC asking if you joined "downwinds"

[IO540]

The original purpose of the overhead join was to allow either non-radio aircraft, or aircraft arriving at a non radio airfield, to overfly the airfield at a safe height, to observe the signal square, determine the runway in use and circuit direction, and then descend into the circuit pattern

which dates back to WW1 :)

The OHJ is dangerous because - ignoring for the moment the 'people' who insist on the OHJ even when there is no known traffic, just to wind up visiting pilots (a certain airfield in the Luton area being one well known example) - it gets invoked when there are too many planes inbound at the same time, which is precisely when you do NOT want to be heading for the same spot at the same altitude!

The OHJ is also used at ATC airfields when the ATCO cannot handle the incoming traffic so he just sends everybody into the overhead and people then have to take care of themselves. And one finds some people cheating. For example the other day I arrived in the overhead, only to hear a certain other plane which was way behind me call "overhead". He got what he wanted (the clearance to descend deadside) ahead of me as a result. I wasn't bothered (never would have thought of that trick myself, but then I am not paying a club hire rate) but it shows the system is far from foolproof; the first person to call 'overhead' is likely to get a descent clearance regardless of where he actually is.

[englishal]

Actually I can't remember the last time I did an OHJ :D Pretty much everyone I've come across recently seems to join by whatever is easiest for them - me included - and unless an airfield *specifically requests* an OHJ I'd rather joing on a base / downwind etc....

I agree the "deadside" or "crosswind" join, which is half an OHJ is useful if approaching from the deadside and I'd always do this, but wouldn't fanny about doing a proper OHJ which would require crossing the airfield twice and tons of messing around in the most dangerous bit of airspace. I'd do an OHJ if there is no person on the radio or the airfield is closed though unless someone else was on frequency to tell me the weather / prefered runway etc.......

[Cusco]

The US system of joining the downwind leg at 45 degrees has much to commend it.

Particularly if, in non- towered fields everyone is self - announcing on Unicom.

But of course the Brits could only come up with safetycom which lacks many of the brilliant features of Unicom and is half-baked enough to have many peeps refuse to use it.

Overhead joins give me the willies especially when people announce that they're overhead when they patently aren't.

Cusco.

[jxk]

Can quite remember when this was BUT the procedure was OHJ and non radio - some hundreds of aircraft all landed safely. Of course there were a few (idiots) who couldn't understand this procedure and just cut up the circuit.

[scooter boy]

I'm with Cusco and IO540 on this one.
The overhead join is for the twirly tash brigade flying slow non-radio aircraft using their monocled mark one eyeballs.

Too many aircraft in the same place at the same time can easily result and the US system of joining downwind on the 45 wins hands down as it is NOT open to misinterpretation and also allows for safe overtaking so people have less incentive to lie about their position (as IO experienced).

Aircraft are now too quick for this, having to lose 2000ft in the confines of the circuit can be difficult for those of us who fly aircraft with half decent aerodynamic qualities. The added dimension of having to descend deadside during the OHJ makes it less easy to see and you less visible to others - much easier if everyone arrives at the same height.

The OHJ is hazardous and should be scrapped.

SB

[eharding]

I'm with Cusco and IO540 on this one.
The overhead join is for the twirly tash brigade flying slow non-radio aircraft using their monocled mark one eyeballs.


Ah....excellent. We haven't had a good OHJ punch-up for simply ages.

I'd counter with the proposal that any pilot who calls for the banning of the OHJ is clearly a habitual IFR-fondling agoraphobic, prone to panic attacks when required to look outside the aircraft, and who should be repeatedly smacked in the goolies with a Pooley's until they see the light of day (or faint from the inevitable panic attack).

[jxk]

I wish the CAA would publish diagrams of what do do is you (to do if you) are NOT approaching from the live side.

It doesn't matter where you join from! This is the point, you join overhead above circuit height to observe the airfield, access wind direction and check for other aircraft until you do this you don't know which is the 'live' side. Very simple really. This procedure probably hasn't been been built into the EFIS type systems yet that's why some people find it difficult:)

[shortstripper]

I'm with Cusco and IO540 on this one.
The overhead join is for the twirly tash brigade flying slow non-radio aircraft using their monocled mark one eyeballs.

I'll take the second punch then! Apart from the twirly tash bit, I kinda fit that group. However, I think the OHJ is daft and is the time I feel most exposed to a midair. I hate arriving overhead to hear two or three others doing the same (where are they?) I tend to ask for a downwind, crosswind or straight in approach and usually get it .... much safer. OK, I have a radio (handheld but good range) and accept that without any contact the OHJ has merit. But few fly these days without any radio, and those that do, tend to fly non radio into private strips or airfields where non radio is common. G-VFWE works well because by and large, the pilots are very experienced and have good situational awareness, so the odd non radio a/c can easily fit themselves in.

SS

[Captain Smithy]

Have always been taught the standard overhead join, works fine for me, keep a good look out and all is OK. Also helps if everyone sticks to the same join procedure, much simpler... instead of all sorts of folks joining from everywhere, downwind, base, long final, and from **** knows where else. :rolleyes: Of course at a larger controlled airfield circuits per se may not exist and you may be instructed to join downwind or base, which on the other hand is fine under the instruction of ATC, if the controllers are trying to slot you in between 757s and Scarebuses for example.

I would think the best course of action when visiting an aerodrome is to check the arrival procedures first before leaving... I know that some airfields like Fife have odd circuit patterns/procedures due to noise abatement etc.

No big deal if you check the procedures before leaving and then follow it. Mountain, molehill etc.

[scooter boy]

"any pilot who calls for the banning of the OHJ is clearly a habitual IFR-fondling agoraphobic, prone to panic attacks when required to look outside the aircraft"


What is clear from the responses here is that everyone has a different interpretation of what constitutes a correct OHJ - and in their own minds everyone is right of course! Positional ambiguity when joining overhead at closing speeds of 250+ kts can lead to hairy moments even for the most steely eyed sky gods among us.

E-hardon (or what ever your monicker is), a healthy degree of agoraphobia has kept me alive for 2000+ flying hrs. Agoraphobia in pilots is a healthy trait, unlike bravado which can be fatal.

SB

[englishal]

If they had a simple diagram showing a plane approaching from the dead side - flying over head - doing a 180 - and then continuing the join "as normal" (or as per the safetysense leaflet), if would save a lot of confusion.
Why do you need to do all that? If coming from the deadside, and I know it is runway 25, then I fly over the 07 numbers at circuit height, turn onto downwind and fly the circuit. Easy peasy. Why fly overhead, turn, fly over head again, turn, fly overhead again, when there is no need.

We often talk about midair's in class G airspace and everyone has come to the conclusion that they are thankfully very rare. However when they DO occur, stats show that *most* of them happen within two miles of an airfield.....so buggered if I'm going to hang around above one for too long ;)

I flew into Bembridge the other day, and one chap joined straight in, one on downwind and I joined on base. No problem whatsoever, we all slotted in nicely....

[italianjon]

Why is fearing a Marketplace a good thing in Pilots?

Transair would go under!....












I'll get my coat...

[foxmoth]

Too many aircraft in the same place at the same time can easily result and the US system of joining downwind on the 45 wins hands down as it is NOT open to misinterpretation and also allows for safe overtaking so people have less incentive to lie about their position (as IO experienced).

Personally I have no problem doing an OHJ non radio and whatever fits in an R/t situation, I am not though a fan of of the 45 downwind join - to me this gets even more people aiming for the same place than the OHJ, with less room to manoeuvre and cutting up others already in the circuit!:mad:

[Islander2]

I am not though a fan of of the 45 downwind join - to me this gets even more people aiming for the same place than the OHJ, with less room to manoeuvre and cutting up others already in the circuit!
Agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment, foxmoth!

In any event, the 45 degree downwind join breaches the spirit, if not the actual letter, of Rule 12 of the Rules of the Air Regulations ... that all turns made within the vicinity of the aerodrome should be to the left (or right, if that is the indicated circuit direction) unless otherwise authorised by an ATCU.

[windy1]

The US 45 deg joins work well, but so does a UK DW join, but only if you happen to be approaching the field from the live side. The question was about airmanship/safety when coming in from another direction. In that case, even the US system can require some extensive manouevering, loss of height, potential conflicts with other joining traffic etc.

I agree that the CAA advice could be modernised: many aerodromes have ATIS and/or active ATC chatter to reveal circuit direction, so there is no need to arrive o/h for that reason alone.

[Crash one]

I also believe the OHJ is a throwback to the days when you could easily lose 1000ft in the length of the runway. My, not exactly state of the art, Emeraude has to be slipped to do that, taking my attention away from the big picture, hence I join with the call "Decending dead side for a crosswind join" or "Passing aunty Mary's at 1000ft, will join left base/downwind XX" etc. A/G field by the way. ATC fields, do as yr told.
Edit:- Obviously if it's an unmanned non radio strip, then fly overhead to have a look, still dangerous though if someone else is doing the same.

[Pace]

Let me be arguementative :-) I will describe a scenerio I was on the down wind leg for landing at 1000 agl under a 1400-1500 cloud base.
A student pilot tried to join overhead effectively at circuit height cutting right across the downwind leg in the process.

No overhead join should be allowed without at Least a cloudbase of 2500 feet but how many airfields call for such a join when it is impossible and dangerous to do so.

Then lets look at two scenarios an aircraft joining long finals and giving dme distances on his approach. He is visual left and right of his track.

Now put him overhead. To get to the same point he flies overhead turns 90 degrees onto deadside, descends and turns to the left, he then makes another 90 degree crosswind turn, followed by another 90 degree turn onto downwind another 90 degree onto base another 90 degree onto final.

That is a total of six 90 degree turns to get onto final. Any turn adds danger not just from the physics but add high and low wing aircraft and you have the added danger of blind turns and collision potential.

Everyone homing into the same spot over an airfield also adds danger.
Aircraft of different speeds also adds danger.

For me the overhead join is outmoded and fraught with risk especially with todays aircraft equipt with GPS where the ability to give distances on non dme airfields exists.
It is also often used when the cloudbase does not allow it what do you do then?

Okay years ago when aircraft where non radio and you had to join overhead to check the windsock and signal square ok but to use it as the be end and end all of joining today?

Apart from all that what about the comfort of your passengers being thrown into needless blind turns.

The O/H is one form of join or should be but one which should only ever be used in good weather and vis.

Nothing changes fast in aviation. It was good enough for our grandfathers its good enough for us?

Pace

[foxmoth]

I also believe the OHJ is a throwback to the days when you could easily lose 1000ft in the length of the runway. My, not exactly state of the art, Emeraude has to be slipped to do that,

Either you are flying it wrong or the airfield you fly from has a runway too short for the Emeraude!

[Supersport]

I think both the for & against brigade have valid points with regards to joining overhead. One thing you can be sure of though is that whenever or however you rejoin the circuit or approach an airfield to land, you're definitely going to be keeping a very very good look out and listening intently to the radio to try and get a feel for where everyone is.

The main problem in my opinion seems to be those pilots whom say they are somewhere they're not e.g... "Golf bla bla bla is overhead the numbers 2000ft" when the reality is they are still a good 1/2 mile from the airfield.

I personally like the OHJ, not because it more / less safer than others, I just f*cking enjoy it! :ok: It's good fun and all passengers I flown it with have thoroughly enjoyed it!

Supersport.

[Pace]

Supersport

The other problem is pilots idea of a circuit. You have those who consider down wind on a circuit more fitting of a 747 those who consider downwind with the runway literally vertically below, those whos idea of finals is six miles out.

If you place a racecourse pattern around the airfield the most obvious is to join it at whatever position you arrive. The height of that pattern then adjusts with a good clearance to the cloudbase but aiming to be 1000 feet or whatever and as you said communication and a good eye is all important.

Pace

[BackPacker]

My 2 cents worth:

In the early days of aviation, there was one spot where all traffic converged. That spot was the aiming point on the runway.

So we created the circuit with a direct downwind join. All of a sudden we now have a different spot where all traffic converges. Roughly mid-downwind.

So we created a new procedure so that you can see the circuit traffic before joining it, by flying overhead. Now all traffic converges overhead.

And when the Mk 1 eyeball didn't work due to speed or cloud, and we started flying on instruments, we moved that spot somewhere else and called it the IAF.

So let's face it. Whatever procedure you follow, there will always be a spot somewhere in space where the traffic converges.

Personally I prefer the direct downwind join under a 90 degree angle like what's prescribed in the Netherlands, or under a 45 degree angle like what's done in the US. The advantage is that at that point in space traffic is at the same altitude (at least in theory), that there's only a few places where traffic can come from and there's only one direction it'll be flying to.

With the OHJ, traffic can come from 360 degrees around you and might at that spot actually be turning head-on towards you. Plus, the CAA OHJ requires two distinct altitudes (circuit plus OHJ altitude) each offering sufficient clearance from terrain and from each other.

[Crash one]

Quote:
I also believe the OHJ is a throwback to the days when you could easily lose 1000ft in the length of the runway. My, not exactly state of the art, Emeraude has to be slipped to do that,


Either you are flying it wrong or the airfield you fly from has a runway too short for the Emeraude!


600 metres grass. 60 knots. = 18 seconds end to end. 1000ft in 18 seconds. Forgive me if I am wrong but that equates to a decent rate of 3000ft per min or thereabouts, Angle of decent about 30deg.
I suppose we could muck about with acceleration rates etc but it doesn't look very comfortable / safe to me. I'll give it a practical next time.
What exactly am I doing wrong? because I can get it on the ground & stopped in about 400 metres.

[Spitoon]

I agree that the CAA advice could be modernised: many aerodromes have ATIS and/or active ATC chatter to reveal circuit direction, so there is no need to arrive o/h for that reason alone.At an aerodrome that has ATIS and ATC you're not going to arrive in the o/h unless instructed to do so.

[robin]

Just out of interest - from the AAIB stats how many collisions have happened in the overhead or ATZ of an active airfield in the last 25 years?

Are we not getting a bit wound up over something that concentrates the mind, but actually isn't that much of a problem. And given the way fewer hours are being flown, this risk is reducing.........right :ok:

[gasax]

There are issues with interpretation, so the CAA drawing could usefully be improved. But in 20 odd years of lfying I have no recollection of an incident in the OH, so the 'big sky' theory applies just as well there as elsewhere. That compares very well with a variety of serious events at various points around the circuit which I recall - although to be fair some of them have been 'radio asisted'.

Crash one - the intention is to loose the height from a point on the runway centreline, inside the finals turn to the runway centreline on the crosswind leg. This will typically give you at least 3 times the runway length to do this - much more if the airfield fly the typical 'transport command' type circuits. But I'll grant the CAA drawing is a bit mixed - compare the ground track to the runway.

[Pace]

Robin

It is not just the risk of collision overhead but the added risks of multiple blind turns with high and low wing aircraft which are not needed.

Take my example of a striaght in approach. To get to the same point with an overhead requires six ninety degree turns and a desent as well.

I fly commercially and want my passengers to complete their journey as quickly as possible and as smoothly as possible so why would I want to lengthen the trip and add numerous turns?

Then we have the cloudbase issue. There are rules for cloud seperation flying VFR but how many times are you asked to join overhead and end up skud running to the overhead or when the cloudbase is below a proper OHJ level make your join at 1500 feet instead of 2000 feet?

Yes the OHJ has a place but to use it as a standard in this modern age is outmoded and has to increase the danger factor.

Pace

[gasax]

A straight in approach is fine at an ATC field. Without radio straight in will put circuit and approach traffic into conflict, I for one certainly remember a number of incidents where this has happened.

OHJ is essentially a non-radio procedure. And I would certainly accept that if the ceiling comes down then it cannot work properly.

[Crash one]

gasax / foxmoth. I aggree with what you are saying, but the way I see it is, most a/c today have a radio of some sort, airfield info is obtained from outside the circuit, so what is the point of flying overhead for a look?
One scenario: East West runway, elevation 400ft, G-AB departing the circuit (left hand) to the North through the overhead (common at the field I have in mind) at 2500ft QNH, G-CD joining overhead from the North at 2000ft QFE, also common & regular. Does this not produce a separation of just 100ft? +/- numerous student pilot / low hrs inaccuracies.
Also the departing a/c may still be climbing from the (high downwind) point towards or through the point of separation.
Which brings me neatly to the issue of the QNH / QFE debate!!

[BackPacker]

Which brings me neatly to the issue of the QNH / QFE debate!!

Plus the debate about whether it's a good idea to depart the field/circuit through the overhead.

(Yeah, I know that instructors sometimes teach students to depart through the overhead so that the first leg is flown wholly at cruise speed and levels, making timing of your first leg easier. I've never done that, but it sounds dangerous to me. I'd rather use an easily identifiable point a few miles away.)

[Spotthedog]

I've just read this thread and endorse the view that reading Pooleys etc is important to establish if there are unusual joining procedures. But there are pitfalls even there ...

I got caught out at Lydd a few months ago. I was familiar with their published joining procedure .. which is (in summary) approach from the deadside at 1500', descend over the airfield to circuit height, turn downwind (left or right depending on the runway in use), then base and final as usual.

On this particular day ATC asked me to report for the 'overhead' join. I took that to mean a standard overhead join. I thought it was odd but I just assumed procedures had been updated or something. (OK I should have asked ATC and will next time it happens) but anyway I reported for a standard overhead join as requested and got a sarcastic bollocking from the controller: "We don't do standard overhead joins ... don't you read the published procedures etc etc" := := :ouch: :ouch:

Now ... I wouldn't call the published Lydd join as described in Pooley's, an overhead join because that is simply confusing; it's probably better described as a high crosswind join in my view. Whaddya reckon? Are there other types of overhead joins other than 'standard' ones?

[Pace]

Gasax

Straight in in the way you describe can cause a conflict but with modern aircraft equipt with GPS it is quite usual to call at six miles three miles and finals.

If someone is on base ahead ok on a left circuit break right onto the dead side and fly a normal pattern but at circuit height.

Conflicts are not just with aircraft on straight in approaches but can happen downwind with aircraft on different width of downwind and differing speeds and at any time in the OHJ.

Obviously you would not take a straight in on a busy day and always with communication with other aircraft its not the circuit I have a problem with but the OHJ!

Non radio aircraft are a rareity nowadays and that itself is an arguemnt for updating the status of a standard overhead join to just one method of joining.
The standard overhead was created in just those times when aircraft were non radio.

Pace

[vee-tail-1]

Please don't try an OHJ in France...if you survive you may well be jailed for endangering life!
At controlled airfields ATC will tell you where to join. At uncontrolled fields you should have been listening out on French unicom of 123.5 to get proper situation awareness before arriving. You then make an all stations call prefixed with the airfield name on the same frequency to let people in the circuit know you are coming. French law requires a downwind join, joining from any other direction is an infringement liable to prosecution. Needless to say an understanding of aviation French is essential.

[gasax]

The bigger picture is that a very large number but probably not the majority of 'aircraft' do not have radios installed.

My old aircraft did not - and obviously that colours ones perception. Flying from a licensed field in club aircraft - surely everyone has a radio? Well nearly.

Without a radio the OHJ works, well it has for 80 year odd. IF you can invent something as reliable that does not depend upon a radio great, I'm all for it.

I'm sure many of the 'issues' with the OHJ are around people's unfamiliarity with it - due to ATC controlled fields and radio and not having the freedom / responsibility to do it themselves.

You see this to some extent in the number of fields that are beginning to restrict non-radio traffic. But at the majority of strips - where these days there are more light aircraft based than at licensed fields you can have a dedicated frequency, Safetycom, microlight or gliding requencies in use. Not surprisingly the OHJ is about the only near universal procedure.

[Piper.Classique]

gasax / foxmoth. I aggree with what you are saying, but the way I see it is, most a/c today have a radio of some sort, airfield info is obtained from outside the circuit, so what is the point of flying overhead for a look?I have a radio, sure. Quite often I turn it on. But there isn't anyone on the ground to talk to me at most small airfields, so we all say what we are doing, remembering to give the name of the airfield we are flying to or from, as we are all on 123.5 here in sunny france except for the airfields who do have a tower. The frequency can get a bit busy on a nice day :)
The overhead join suits me fine, I do like to take a look at the windsock, and any other traffic. Controlled airfield, then the controller can give me the wind and I can have a nice argument about not having a ten knot tailwind please.....:}

[Piper.Classique]

French law requires a downwind join, joining from any other direction is an infringement liable to prosecution. Needless to say an understanding of aviation French is essential.

Chapter and verse, please? Is it on the DGAC or SIA sites? I DO understand aviation french......

[vee-tail-1]

DGAC L'arrete du 17 juillet 1992 precise que: "l'integration sur un terrain non controle s'effectue au debut de la vent arriere, a la hauteur du circuit d'aerodrome en assurant une separation visuelle avec les autres aeronefs deja engages dans la circulation d'aerodrome et en leur laissant la priorite de passage"

The same arrete indicates in a paragraph that joining should not be effected without prior reconnaissance of the aerodrome, but that this reconnaissance should not be obtained by a passage a' la verticale unless this is a practice that is often used at that aerodrome.
So I may have over egged the chances of being jailed for doing an OHJ, but it sure is not considered a safe procedure.

[172driver]

but it sure is not considered a safe procedure

Sounds like for once the Frogs have it !:D

[betterfromabove]

Vee-Tail-1: Just need to correct something here if you don't mind....what's strictly required is MINIMUM 3 sides of the rectangle when joining overhead in France at a non-ATC controlled airfield.

In reality, what is expected - & desirable - is an UPWIND join along runway axis on QDM & then descent in the circuit. Essentially you mimick the real circuit but at a slighter higher height until downwind (easier to explain graphically than with words perhaps...?!?)

In my mind, is vastly superior to the outdated & more sweeping UK OHJ:
- Better visibility all the way round the CX, as turns are punctual rather than continuous
- Spatial awareness is much better, as you spend more time S&L & on circuit headings
- Gives a far better idea of wind conditions in the circuit, as you are essentially flying it, albeit slightly higher, from the join point onwards.

Another positive is that you will be following a slightly larger pattern than those already in the circuit, doing T&G's....this aids visibility of existing traffic & distributes the noise footprint slightly.

While indeed a UK-style join would cause some confusion & would not be brilliant airmanship, a French instructor once told me it would "probably be OK if it's not too busy"

There are some quirks of French rules that are less attractive, but the circuit join is not one of them....;-))

Happy flying...BFA

[vee-tail-1]

Its just amazing how many different ways there are for joining a circuit.
Hope EASA never get involved :eek:

[Pace]

It does not matter what walk of life straight in and sod the rest gets the best results :-) flom flying to W :-) forget all the flaffing around. (only joking)

Pace

[betterfromabove]

Vee-Tail-1: Thinking about it, there is one occasion where the French seem to do a UK style overhead join / descent into the circuit & that is when doing a practice engine-off, which they seem to often like doing from the overhead.

At St Cyr l'Ecole, we used to do it from 1500' QNH & was about the only time we ever entered the "dead-side".

Think the French model also works well where there is a mix of gliders & microlights, who will usually be operating an opposite, non-radio, circuit, which was the case at several places I regularly flew from (Dreux, Chartres, Fayence...). Provides a more sensible arrangement than the hybrid type arrangement we have at places like 06/24 at Booker, well as that seems to work.

Remember places like St Cyr, which has a full ATC service (& very strict entry-exit routes) reverts to the circuit join I described after-hours or when ATC on strike (yip...you need a SOP!) /holiday.....

Sorry, but can't help but think this is something that EASA might do well to get involved in....!?!

BFA

[Deano777]

If you fly from an airfield where the SOJ is the norm then it does become extremely 2nd nature, i.e. Staverton.
A few rules I have applied to my students for the SOJ are reasonably fool proof, made easier by the fact that we already know circuit direction & wind etc as we ask ATC for rejoins. But basically.

If it's a RH circuit keep the airfield on the right (& Visa Versa)
No turns inside the ATZ opposite to circuit direction
Once overhead, when you can read the active runway numbers the right way up out of your window (or your pax window) you have to be deadside.
Keep your eyes out the cockpit or one day (could be today) it'll kill you (& me).

As for joining from the dead side this was argued by a student who I did a mock test for once, he joined from the deadside at 2,000ft and then just descended to circuit height & went xwind, my argument is that never was he really overhead the airfield, so he should have done an orbit above the airfield first. Another instructor disagreed, so we asked one of the ATCOs, and he said that for the OHJ you can't just descend deadside without having been overhead because this did not constitute an OHJ.

[bonniejack]

I am a very inexperienced pilot and last week end did my first O/H join. Fortunately I had a more experienced right seat buddy. My comments are that first I tracked to cross O/H as per the diagrams from the live side for a right hand circuit. In a PA28 I lost sight of the airfield completely for a minute or more before crossing O/H I would have needed to be well downwind to have maintained visual with the field. Fortunately i picked another feature to provide clue for starting descent. descent went well searching for the student doing circuits. Turned out he was on bomber circuit and dilemma arose over if we should cut inside and be accused of poor airmanship. Chose to extend upwind a little and fall in behind. Now following miles downwind I found that during turms towards final I lost the field completely. Passenger still had sight and took over to position us but on my own I would perhaps have had to go away and start again ( should mention this was into a grass field known to be hard to spot)

Any comment? My own feelings were that L/H circuits only for O/H join to keep field in sight. Also I think we should have asked for join on downleg as we had the only other known traffic in sight on finals as we approached.

[jxk]

An OHJ is what it says on the tin, an overhead join; it doesn't matter whether you join from N,E,W or S. Others in this discussion have related their experiences at joining in all kinds of other situations but what they are describing is something different. Others have pointed out possible dangers in doing OHJ but this not answering the question.
Please take a look at Pooleys entry for Shoreham: they require you to carry out an OHJ so it's just as well to understand this procedure.

[mark sicknote]

Obviously there is no need for an overhead join at a controlled field where the tower guy can give you a straight in approach.

I find the OHJ very useful though when arriving at unfamiliar fields. It buys time to assess the lie of the land ( or even the location of the runway).

On one occasion my GPS was convinced i was approaching my destination,but I simply could not locate the field. As I crossed a a safe height the field came into view and I was able to descend and join at crosswind.

Best,

Sicknote:ok:

[MoateAir]

Probably one of the most useful tips I ever gleaned from my instructor about OHJ's was that you can stay up there orbitting until you have built a complete picture of what is going on. There is no urgency to get down to circuit height and slot. Where I learnt was a particularly busy airfield, so knowing that I could stay up there until I had absolute situational awareness, knowing where everybody else was, and being able to plan my descent with this info really helped my confidence level, and ensured that I did'nt cut in front of anyone.

Nowadays, I can understand why some people want to get down quickly, but it's usually down to the high cost of renting the average spam can. I've actually heard someone say that they will avoid an OHJ, because it will add £30:00 to the bill:hmm:

[172driver]

There is a US variation on the OHJ theme, called the 'teardrop arrival', which, IMHO, works a bit better.

Essentially, you overfly the rwy 1000ft above pattern alt (or at whichever alt is published) midfield and determine wind and rwy in use. You then proceed outside the pattern and initiate a descending turn against the direction of traffic. This way, you have anyone else entering the pattern in sight, but do not conflict as you are outside. Once at pattern alt you proceed to do a standard 45deg join.

The main advantage of this is that you have all other traffic in view at all times and do not have to cross the departure end of the rwy. Due to this, it is also very easy to adjust to other traffic entering on the 45 - you simply extend or shorten your descending turn.

[robin]

But surely you all phone in advance to check the runway in use and plan your arrival before you take off - I know I do......;)

[Maoraigh1]

Who do you phone at unmanned airfields? What if the wind has changed? I've had ATC change the active runway while I was in the circuit, due to wind change.

[vee-tail-1]

I don't get it? :confused:
If you have ATC they will give you the runway in use, cct direction, joining instructions, so no need for an OHJ.
At an uncontrolled field where aircraft with radios are operating, a call on the new UK unicom 135.475 should provide the same information. So no need for an OHJ.
Armed with the full airfield information obtained from ATC (or French style from other flyers,) it is easy to position yourself to join downwind at cct height.
Why perform a potentially dangerous manoeuvre when a bit of prior reconnaissance avoids it.

Edited to say that my instructor thinks few UK ppls are familiar with the use of unicom, so they are more likely to do an OHJ instead.:(

[robin]

Well perhaps the operators of Gloucester and Goodwood could explain why they want OHJs.

[vee-tail-1]

Last time I visited Gloucester they asked for an OHJ, but I requested a join on the extended downwind which they approved. Saved a lot of quite unnecessary turning over the airfield.

[jxk]

The original poster was just asking for more information about the OHJ. I believe that everyone flying in the UK should have a thorough understanding of the OHJ procedure - OK so you can circumvent it when ATC is available etc. But, as has been pointed out in other posts, at airfields like Shoreham, Goodwood you may be asked to do an OHJ and it would make sense to know what to do and not make a fool of yourself.

[vee-tail-1]

jxk good point, essential to know how to do an OHJ if required. But it would be interesting to have an explanation from Shoreham & Gloucester ATC as to why they prefer OHJs.
Last time I visited Shoreham on a sunny Sunday it was seriously busy. Joining overhead felt like diving into rush hour traffic at Hyde park. :eek:
Quite scary really and did not seem a safe procedure, good lookout being vital.
Perhaps that is the reason some ATC units use OHJs, it shifts safety responsibility more to the pilots and reduces stress on the controller?

[jxk]

V tail
The OHJ might be a better option than say 'join at your own discretion'.
I once remember going to Shoreham and the controller was handling 14 aircraft; well I was told I was number 14 to land. It would have been interesting if all 14 of us were cleared to final at the same time. Anyway, II think this subject has probably been done to death now

[Mixed Up]

a call on the new UK unicom 135.475 should provide the same information


This is not a unicom but a Safetycom. The CAA say that should be used by pilots to state their intentions and there should be no responses from the ground - so no such information should be provided on this frequency.

[vee-tail-1]

Mixed Up I think you are a bit mixed up. 135.475 is provided for pilots to give each other safety related information. If I had just landed at an uncontrolled grass strip, I would certainly give information on that airfield to other approaching aircraft. I would also expect aircraft in the cct to give the required info to approaching aircraft. This is SOP in France, but may be a bit new to Brits.

[robin]

Here is the CAA's view of Safetycom. I think you'll find that they have a very simple view of the system.

4 SAFETYCOM

4.1 SAFETYCOM is not an air traffic service.

4.2 SAFETYCOM is made available to pilots flying in the vicinity of locations having no notified VHF ground radio frequency. It is available to assist pilots to avoid potential collisions between arriving and departing aircraft and should normally be used only to broadcast the pilot’s intentions.

4.3 SAFETYCOM shall only be used at locations having no notified ground radio frequency. If a frequency is notified for a location, it must be used even outside the notified operating hours, using the procedures and phraseology published in CAP 413 Radiotelephony Manual (Chapter 4, Section 6).

4.4 Transmissions shall be made on SAFETYCOM only when aircraft are below 2000 ft above aerodrome or location elevation or below 1000 ft above promulgated circuit height (if applicable). Transmissions shall be made only within 10 nm of the aerodrome or location of intended landing.

4.5 The frequency shall be used only to transmit information regarding the pilot’s intentions, and there should be no response from the ground, except where the pilotof an aircraft on the ground also needs to transmit his intentions.

Exceptionally, where the pilot of an aircraft on the ground has information critical to the safety of an aircraft in a condition of distress or urgency, the frequency may be used to transmit that information.

4.6 Use of the frequency by pilots operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome that has no frequency assigned for communications is recommended, although it should be noted that its use is not mandatory.

4.7 Pilots remain responsible for obtaining any clearance that may be necessary to enter controlled airspace etc.

4.8 SAFETYCOM is only available within UK airspace.

[igarratt]

yay I thought I'd add some to this as I can't sleep lol

I prefer atc fields, this is just as I trained at them, maybe on my own but I would be happy with uk wide controlled airspace.

Barton in Manchester use OHJ, I think there it needs it, there can be 6 or 7 in the circuit at some times with only a flight info.
In the circuit with Manchester smog it can be hard work enough looking for other circuit traffic without a/c coming in from other places.
Coming into the circuit via an OHJ you can figure out better where you are going to slot in.

The BIGGEST problem here and at other places IMO is Muppet pilots reporting where they are when you can see them next/ahead of you and are most definitely not. Why do it ? is it just being slack ? stupid and dangerous :mad:

At ATC airports yes it's nice to join base or a partial downwind but then I'm assuming ATC know exactly what is going on and separate us accordingly (Liverpool and Manchester def do).

I got very used to strange joins and circuits as I trained at airfield that would often have left and right circuits active as well as standard ILS commercial arrivals. There was no OHJ and things often got VERY messy with 2 or 3 aircraft all joining downwind with circuit traffic.
There was full ATC but it was rare for them to organise ordering.

Sleap airfield use a non standard join, there you join down the runway centerline to be at circuit height ready to turn crosswind, does make seeing where you are in relation to the runway a little tricky but works, there is no cutting in as you are on the same line and no chance of missing someone taking off.

Personally I like the differences, I fly what I've been told, having lots of variation and different practices keeps me on the ball and makes flying more interesting. I fail to see the issue with having to make extra turns.

One plus for OHJ is you get a good look at the airfield and it's layout, AIP is good but there is nothing like orienting yourself before your on the ground.
Also found that 'join downwind' can be a bit fuzzy, I was taught: if told to join downwind in theory you should be joining where you would call downwind, but that seems to often end up as joining on the downwind leg as some point.

Though lots of disagreements is some good tips and info in the posts.:ok:

Ian

One question: I asked the question to my CFI: if you are joining via OHJ ,you know there is traffic and could be in conflict with but you cant spot them what do you do ?
Any opinions welcome, current answer is climb back up and re-join.

[vee-tail-1]

Robin & Mixed Up

A question: Why are Brits more interested in exactly following the letter of the law, rather than achieving the intention of regulations?

Could this be one of the reasons we have more trouble with EU regs than other nations. :rolleyes:

[dont overfil]

It's an illness.
Here you can do nothing unless there is a rule for it.
In the USA you can do anything unless there's a rule against it.
DO.

[batninth]

The BIGGEST problem here and at other places IMO is Muppet pilots reporting where they are when you can see them next/ahead of you and are most definitely not. Why do it ? is it just being slack ? stupid and dangerous :mad:

Some of the smaller airfields / farm strips may have areas where you cannot see the whole circuit when you're on the ground. At the airfield I fly from, a couple of the runway hold points has trees on the opposite side of the runway which block your view of parts of th ecircuit.

I can think of another airfield locally which has a similar problem - a line of trees block your view of any traffic on final if you are departing to the west.

Why do it? So some of us that are positioned where we can't see the whole picture can still build it up from the radio traffic? I would suggest it's not being a muppet, more sound common sense.

[Mixed Up]

Vee-tail:

Robin & Mixed Up

A question: Why are Brits more interested in exactly following the letter of the law, rather than achieving the intention of regulations?

Could this be one of the reasons we have more trouble with EU regs than other nations. :rolleyes:


This is a bit rich (and inconsistent) from you given your previous posts:

Please don't try an OHJ in France...if you survive you may well be jailed for endangering life!
At controlled airfields ATC will tell you where to join. At uncontrolled fields you should have been listening out on French unicom of 123.5 to get proper situation awareness before arriving. You then make an all stations call prefixed with the airfield name on the same frequency to let people in the circuit know you are coming. French law requires a downwind join, joining from any other direction is an infringement liable to prosecution. Needless to say an understanding of aviation French is essential.

I don't get it? :confused:
If you have ATC they will give you the runway in use, cct direction, joining instructions, so no need for an OHJ.
At an uncontrolled field where aircraft with radios are operating, a call on the new UK unicom 135.475 should provide the same information. So no need for an OHJ.
Armed with the full airfield information obtained from ATC (or French style from other flyers,) it is easy to position yourself to join downwind at cct height.
Why perform a potentially dangerous manoeuvre when a bit of prior reconnaissance avoids it.

Edited to say that my instructor thinks few UK ppls are familiar with the use of unicom, so they are more likely to do an OHJ instead.:(


In my experience, pilots use SafetyCom to announce their intentions. At some fly-ins someone on the ground may have chipped in with airfield details but that has not been the norm. The French system seems to reflect this according to your first account (and my experience).

[Slipstream86]

Im a very low hours PPL.

I went to OBA Florida for my training (so no overhead joins) and the only flying I've done in the UK is local from Hawarden.

Im planning on a trip to Caernarfon this fri. I don't see the overhead join procedure as a problem but I had to ask my dad for advice on the radio calls I should make. He told me that I needed to be requesting joining information at uncontrolled airports rather than joining instructions.

So, I have recieved joining information and decide to make a OHJ.


what other calls would I make?

[robin]

Robin & Mixed Up

A question: Why are Brits more interested in exactly following the letter of the law, rather than achieving the intention of regulations?

Could this be one of the reasons we have more trouble with EU regs than other nations.

I'm confused by this comment. All I do is point out that there are airfields where they ask for OHJs. There are others who absolutely ban them, for good reasons. As part of pre-flight preparation you should always be aware of the local requirements. Given the NIMBYs around most airfields these days it is getting more important to follow the local rules so you don't drop the airfield operator into the filth.

At Gloucester and Goodwood, if they tell you to join overhead, then you are supposed to obey that instruction - at Gloucester they do have air traffic control, although, they may be open to negotiation.

Similarly, try going into Popham on a big event day and join for a base-leg join. Yes, you can do it but you will really p*ss off a lot of people. I've seen pilots held up against a wall by the throat at one event at another airfield by someone flying the notified circuit who was baulked by someone nipping in on an 'efficient' join.

Personally I try to negotiate for the most effective join, as an OHJ would normally involve me in climbing above my preferred cruise altitude. But if the OHJ is required, then that is what I do.

[vee-tail-1]

:ugh::ugh:

[robin]

:ugh::ugh:

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[BackPacker]

what other calls would I make?

I'd say you need to make a call to an instructor (or a very experienced pilot) to schedule a bit of x-country flying with him/her.

Flying in Florida is different from flying in the UK and it will not hurt to do a few flights with an instructor before you go off on your own. And not just as a club checkout, but specifically all those things that the US does not have. OHJ, landing on grass, MATZ penetration, flight levels, talking to AFIS or A/G, you name it.

Been there, done that.

[jxk]

Joining on the 45 for 'nina' - going to point 5. What?

[Crash one]

"Decending dead side" "Crosswind" "Downwind" "Final" "Backtracking/Vacated at X"

Edit: otherwise go with Backpacker.

[Piper.Classique]

I would also expect aircraft in the cct to give the required info to approaching aircraft. This is SOP in France, but may be a bit new to Brits.

Actually, it isn't. :}We make circuit calls, but 123.5 is not used to talk between aircraft. At least not officially, anyway. All flying below 3000 outside controlled airspace is normally on QNH and we look at the windsock. I fly at a small airfield, uncontrolled. The no wind situation is dealt with by having a preferential runway used in winds of less than 2 metres/second. Circuit direction at our field is left hand on one runway, right hand on the reciprocal. All airfield charts are free download so no excuse for getting it wrong.
And calls in french, of course, unless at a controlled field, where you can choose english or french.

[172driver]

... more likely 'decimal 7' ;)

[jxk]

172 driver - NO in the US they use point not decimal and hence my initial confusion and okay not point 5 but certainly point 6. Also found things like 29.98 strange at first after hearing millibars (hecto thingys) most of flying time.

[172driver]

Not worth an argument - but it most certainly used to be 'decimal' in the US a few years ago, although I've heard both.

[Slipstream86]

I'd say you need to make a call to an instructor (or a very experienced pilot) to schedule a bit of x-country flying with him/her.

Flying in Florida is different from flying in the UK and it will not hurt to do a few flights with an instructor before you go off on your own. And not just as a club checkout, but specifically all those things that the US does not have. OHJ, landing on grass, MATZ penetration, flight levels, talking to AFIS or A/G, you name it.

Been there, done that.


I envy your experience backpacker... I have only limited X-country experience in the UK.

Perhaps you are right, although....Grass landings aside, I feel confident I could more than cope with the RT differences without relying on an instructor now.

Its just the RT section of my air law textbook seems to be missing the required calls specifically for an overhead join which is why I asked the question.

[BackPacker]

I envy your experience backpacker... I have only limited X-country experience in the UK.

Well thanks for the compliment but to be honest... I now have my license a little over two years, with just a little over 100 hours PIC. Just last weekend I did my largest x-country ever, way larger than anything I had done before... Rotterdam to Berlin Tempelhof and back. Total flying time eight hours over one weekend. There's plenty people here who have far more experience than me, and for whom such a flight is a walk in the park. It wasn't for me: I must have spent at least double that amount of time preparing.

But yes, when I returned from Florida I flew two flights with an instructor (one local, one x-country), then one or two solo flights duplicating what I did with that instructor, before I ventured out further and with passengers. And I still fly regularly with other pilots to learn from them, and they from me. It's all got to do with filling your bag with experience before running out of the bottle of luck, or whatever the proverb is.

So take it slow, build your experience gradually and prepare the flights outside your comfort zone and area religiously. Don't get sucked into stressful situations because of get-there-itis, i-should-be-able-to-handle-this-by-now-itis, others-can-do-it-so-why-can't-i-itis or anything like that. But most of all, have fun.

[Slipstream86]

Well thanks for the compliment but to be honest... I now have my license a little over two years, with just a little over 100 hours PIC. Just last weekend I did my largest x-country ever, way larger than anything I had done before... Rotterdam to Berlin Tempelhof and back. Total flying time eight hours over one weekend. There's plenty people here who have far more experience than me, and for whom such a flight is a walk in the park. It wasn't for me: I must have spent at least double that amount of time preparing.

But yes, when I returned from Florida I flew two flights with an instructor (one local, one x-country), then one or two solo flights duplicating what I did with that instructor, before I ventured out further and with passengers. And I still fly regularly with other pilots to learn from them, and they from me. It's all got to do with filling your bag with experience before running out of the bottle of luck, or whatever the proverb is.

So take it slow, build your experience gradually and prepare the flights outside your comfort zone and area religiously. Don't get sucked into stressful situations because of get-there-itis, i-should-be-able-to-handle-this-by-now-itis, others-can-do-it-so-why-can't-i-itis or anything like that. But most of all, have fun.


Good post....Thanks for the advice mate :)

[Rabbs]

Many thanks to all who have posted, interesting that for something so critical as aproach we have such a wide range of opinions on this. I have had airfields ask me to do OHJ (Cambridge unexpectedly did on my QXC :bored:) and there are airfields that state OHJ as part of the joining instructions - but then didn't seem fussed when we joined crosswind (I wasn't PIC), which is why I asked the question - I would be interested in an ATC answer to get their view as I think all the answers here are from pilots.

I will keep the excellent piece of advice to hand though - that there is no rush to get into the cct :cool:

Now can I have some decent weather at the weekend to fly????