Redhill - do they want any flying?

[Aeropig1]

Anyone been to Redhill recently? Was allowed to taxi the otherday all the way round the airfield did the run up watched the plane in front depart and was then told that due to ATC shortages the airfield was closing for half an hour. I wanted t(and was ready) to depart but was told that I could not so I shut down and sat on the taxiway on the far side of the field in the sun for half an hour. No bloody apology or anything and they still charged a bloody fee.

There are so many restrictions placed by the aerodrome management that it takes all the fun out of it. I wish someone would buy Dunsfold and open that up :mad:

[Cough]

Too right about Dunsfold - I fly over it just about every day and I feel that it is a crime. Big X's everywhere. Someone go and paint them off, please!

[wysiwyg]

Fully agree. I find it amazing that Redhill (and Fairoaks for that matter) have managed to survive despite their attitude towards the people that provide their revenue.
C'mon Fairoaks, how exactly do you justify charging me over £40 for a VFR arrival in a Seneca a couple of years ago? And the attitude from the tower - well beam me up snotty (as Delboy would say)!

[skua]

And in the same mould, what about 1/2penny Green, or Wolverhampton Intergalactic Global Airport, or whatever they call themselves now?

I was quoted £32 + £20 overnight parking, for a 1.6 tonnes single. Complete joke. Needless to say, I am going elsewhere.

[Hersham Boy]

I'm a PPL-er out of Redhill and am losing a lot of potential evening flying (got to work 9 to 5!) due to the ATC enforced breaks and early closings.

That said, I'm also close enough to the action to understand that the tower are down on controllers to an extent that has made this necessary. Shame - and hope it is resolved soon!

[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Hersham Boy ]

[Bouncy Landing]

Fairoaks is owned & operated by Alan Mann Group, and as I understand it, they are really only interested in the sales & engineering aspect - private & small GA is not of major interest to them. HOWEVER, I've never found the "tower" (it's AFIS) anything but friendly & helpful - next time you are there go up & have a chat. :)

[Genghis the Engineer]

I fly, amongst other places, from Popham. When ATC go away, we just talk to each other. Fiver landing, 2 quid a night to park, and last landing at 2000.

Anybody got some development money?, Dunsfold would make a fantastic USA-style airpark!

G

[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]

[New Bloke]

Ghengis,

That is not possible at Redhill, no staff in the tower, no aerodrome movements. I had to circle south of Biggin for about 15 minutes the other day as the tower staff were on a break.

With the dreadful winter and waterlogged field it has not been a good year at Redhill so far. As one of our group said, Even Goering didn't close Redhill as much as this lot have!!!

[Aeropig1]

Aerodrome management won't let the flying continue without ATC and I was given the explaination that it was too close to Gatwick so how do the farm strips in the zone manage?

[SOHCAHTOA]

I did my PPL at redhill quite a few years ago and even then before 'atc shortages' they always gave an impression they were not that interested.
I think Im right in thinking that the airfield is now owned by a group of property developers, could explain why they are reluctant to attract any growth in GA business (at least not the prop type).

Just on the posters point about having to shut down his engine and wait for half an hour. Is it still not possible to depart? The airfield just becomes unlicenced for the half hour. Or is it different due it being within the Gatwick zone?

[Lawyerboy]

Just to pick up on something that SOHCAHTOA said: I do most of my flying out of Stapleford because my flying club's airfield is unlicensed. Stapleford is 'Radio' only, and particularly in summer they tend to shut down while a/c are still in the circuit and using the airfield. Am I to understand it that once Radio has shut down for the night, the airfield is no longer licensed?

[stand37r]

One has to ask how much longer ATC will be provided at Redhill. The aerodrome was closed from about Oct. to Mar. due the weather(waterlogging) and with the reduction in Bristow heli. training and now the removal of the Helitech Show to Duxford, what exactly do the owners get for their money. The proximity of Gatwick is no excuse as many other airfields operate quite happily without AT Control alongside 'major' airports eg. Andrewsfield and North Weald (Stansted) White Waltham, Denham (Heathrow)etc. Goodwood lost their ATC service many years ago and their training establishments continue to survive. If NATS is struggling to find controllers what hope does Redhill have? AFISO or Radio ops. would I imagine be much cheaper & easier to obtain to allow a full days service. The present situation is unacceptable.As for Dunsfold, there have been numerous rumors inc. ATC ENG. moving from Lasham, Bernie Ecclestones F1 outfit moving from Biggin, but alas we are almost a year on from it's closure now and the weeds are starting to make themselves known in the runway!The fact that the land was redesignated 'brown land' and therefore increased its value dramatically to BAe just before it announced the closure, should come as no suprise. Too many big houses surrounding and too much money to be made from further 'executive housing'. For Dunsfold read West Malling!Poor infrastructure and the development of Farnboro' as a GA airfield mean the future is bleak. :(

[Zlin526]

At last, other pilots agreeing what a complete bunch of T*s*ers the management at Redhill are! Ever since the mid eighties, they have done everything possible to treat the average pilot like scum, the very pilots that pay their wages! One only has to dare to fly in to Redhill to experience the "Standard Reigate Departure" whatever that maybe! Do they think they are at a major international airport with controlled airspace? Come on guys, leap into the real world.
I once had the audacity to ask for a non-radio departure from Redhill, ferrying a vintage aircraft back to its base. You would have thought I'd asked to shag the ATCO's wife!! Lets face it, flying would be sooooo much easier if air traffic at Redhill would just pack up, go home and leave it all to the pilots to sort out - Just like it used to be in the good ole days.
Nothing against professional ATCO's in general you understand, just the no-hopers at Redhill. :D

New Bloke - You should have done a precautionary landing non-radio and talked about it afterwards.

Stand back, light blue touch paper.........

[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Zlin526 ]

[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Zlin526 ]

[pilotwolf]

I thought Redhill was closed on Sunday's for the local Boot Sale?

Perhaps they could hold one to raise funds for another ATCO or maybe a kettle, microwave and portaloo in the tower so they wouldn't have to shutdown for 1/2 hr? :D

[New Bloke]

Thanks but no-thanks Zlin, I think a precautionary landing would have resulted in a chat with the CAA and a letter of explanation.

A word of warning, if they think that you have been a bit,...er...how shall we say...dodgy, they will report you to the CAA in a flash.

I think it is a bit harsh to say they are all tossers, I blame the management for not supplying enough staff. We all need a break once in a while.

[18greens]

Totally agree with Redhill being a place to avoid. I've had several bad experiences there including being bo***kd by ATC on a CAA test. Fortunately ATC then went on to B*** every one else in the circuit. The examiners comment was that 'Its only a grass stip, not Gatwick'

I've never worked out what ATC at redhill provides. Go for A/G like Waltham.

[Simon W]

I like the development idea of Dunsfold. Anyone got a spare 25k floating around? I figure a group of 20 people (willing not to see that money again until sale of the airfield) put 25k in the pot. That's 0.5 million straight away for re-development of the airfield. Get it back to a state where it's making profit and then sell the place for alot more than paid, that's where your profit comes in.

hahaha, just a dream I'm sure. I just enjoy working things like this through in my head.

Regards,

Simon

[FlyingForFun]

Hmm - if I had that kind of money floating around, I'd by myself an aerolplane with it!

FFF
---------

[Bouncy Landing]

Sadly, Surrey council Structure Plan says reopening Dunsfold for flying operations would not be permitted.

[JuicyLucy]

Lawyerboy - Stapleford stays licenced as long as the Fire & Rescue boys are on the field. They may not give a service on the RT but they do hang around within earshot of the radio.

[Mr moto]

Its not just the management of Redhill we're slagging off and I don't know who the ATCO's are now but its sounds like it hasn't changed much in the last 10-15 years.

What do you get when you mix indifference, arrogance and incompetence?
The same as a visit to Redhill!

[wysiwyg]

If the likes of Redhill and Fairoaks (who are and have always suffered from NIMBY problems) really want to stay in existence in the long term they really should buck up their ideas and avtually start giving some service to their GA customers.
When requested to support a campaign recently to fight a proposal to restrict light aviation in Surrey, I came very close to siding with the opposition for the treatment I have recieved from these two Gestapo airfields. Take a leaf out of White Waltham's and Popham's books rather than just sitting there heah in hands saying why don't people visit us any more.

[Lawyerboy]

Thanks JuicyLucy, getting a bit panicky there.... :D

[Squadgy]

Hi,

Sounds like Redhill should really become FIS,at Barton we handle more traffic then Redhill on FIS.

FISOs aren't covered by the rules governing breaks, just the health and safety break of once every four hours; although when busy we usually work dual shifts, one hour on, one off.

FISOs have the authority to issue taxy instructions, and limit access to a busy circuit by holding traffic at the holding point until safe. Additionally we provide traffic info to circuit and local area traffic under a FIS.

Training wise the FISO licence requries self study for a two written exams (or be exempted by holding an ATCO licence or part exempted for a PPL), followed by 40 Hours OTJT followed by a practical test with CAA SRG and a revalidation every 24 months.

IMHO a FIS provides a level safety almost equal to ATC (if pilots are used to it), without the regulation, but with the knowledge that the guy or girl on the R/T is properly licenced and trained.

Squadgy

[ 30 July 2001: Message edited by: Squadgy ]

[Vortex what...ouch!]

Couldn’t agree more about Redhill controllers being unhelpful. I flew in there a few months ago in a helicopter they told me to hover taxi to one point when they knew I wanted to walk to another. After shut down they said no I would have to hover taxi over there in the aircraft. To$$ers. Wasting my time and money.

I refused to fly into there after that. Now I am based in south London I will be spending my time at Biggin or Denham NOT Redhill. Their loss not mine.

[Knobrot]

Up until recently Redhill did have the capacity to provide FIS and for some reason this has been perm withdrawn. On occasions that FIS were in operation at Deadhill they were found to be very helpful and enjoyed their Jobs,only for the ATCO's to return weilding their so called power on a little grassy field with certain controllers clogging up the airwaves loving the sound of their own voice I feel the Dog would have provided a better service. Professional ATCO's are expeditious and have the best interests of the pilots when they are providing their service but Redhill seem to be bored and the inbounds are their targets for light relief.

It's a shame the field could be far better but there seems to be little interest from management to promote movements and more interest in next years company cars......

[ 31 July 2001: Message edited by: Knobrot ]

[Aeropig1]

My vote is for the dog :p

[Yogi-Bear]

Perhaps they're playing snooker. Y'know:
R-Y-R-G-R-B-R-etc. Gives you a much earlier chance of landing if your 'plane is painted red! :rolleyes: :eek:

[Multp]

The 'Standard Departure' terminology at Redhill was introduced to reduce RT clutter since, particularly when in the Bristow training school heydays of the 90s with its two B206, six R22 and two T67s, let alone all the other aircraft,it was difficult to get a word in edgeways. Other airfields, like Bournemouth, use the same terminolgy and it works.
So why is RH ATC only? AFIS worked even in those busy days.
For cheering news of August closures, see the latest NOTAMS!!

[FlyingForFun]

Yogi, what if I fly a white aircraft? Presumably if the ATCO allows me to land, that means he's not very good? And if he's excellent, I've got no chance???

:D :D :D


FFF
----------

[Yogi-Bear]

Well, either you go in-off and lose your insurance excess, or ATC put you in a hold until the game is over. Qed? :p :rolleyes: :eek:

[SKYYACHT]

Having flown from Shoreham for a number of years, and before that, Popham, I decided to check out on a new aeroplane type, the Katana. The nearest field offering the DA20 was Redhill. I arrived at "Dreadhill" at the appointed time, and check instructor and myself climbed into aircraft. Did checks, started the clockwork, called Tower. (This about 1055 BST.) Requested taxi for the runway (A 1 minute jaunt) and was denied! Due to closure of ATC at 1100BST. The circuit was near enough empty! Instructed to shut down and wait 30 minutes. This was an embarassment for the club (Although I certainly dont hold them responsible for the Tower controllers action), and a pain in the 'arris for both of us.....What a shambolic operation. It makes you wonder if they need our business? I also have a surprising story about Fairoaks. I visited the Flying club there some years ago, when I was building hours, to obtain rental prices. I walked into the clubhouse, and was studiously ignored by ALL the staff for some minutes. When I eventually asked to see someone about prices, I was grudgingly given a tatty price list (A year out of date would you believe!). I asked what (If any) discount would be given if I chose to invest a £1000 up front. "NONE" was the surly reply! Needless to say, I departed rapidly, and went elsewhere. And then they wonder why we go to the USA to fly - in better aeroplanes, with no landing fees, and staff who genuinely want to offer customer service. Some airfields DESERVE to close, and Fairoaks is one of them.

I can recommend Shoreham which is generally quite good, with some nice countryside.

Tailwinds

Gad! I feel better for that! :mad:

[stand37r]

Following on from SKYYACHTs comments I would agree. After a recent visit to Fairoaks we have made it our policy never to return. The extremely high landing fee provided us with no ATC service, a miserable radio operator,limited parking space and few facilities for our passengers.Emergency services available appeared to be a guy in a LandRover with a bucket of sand. For that sort of fee I would expect a lot more eg see what Southend and Manston offer and both are cheaper! The same goes for Redhill. If we need to get to that neck of the woods Blackbushe or Biggin are our prefered choices now.Shoreham is one place we often find ourselves operating out of.Always a warm welcome and excellent facilities. ATC however appears to be undermanned and the freq. is often on the side of dangerous, with no time to get in even essential calls. Pity any student on a first solo or cross country trying 123.15 for the first time.When they can split the freq. the ATC service is excellent. But be warned.

[wysiwyg]

I wonder just how many pages will have to appear on this thread before either of these two apalling airfields get round to replying. No doubt they would probably deem that to be beneath them!

[PIC1DAY]

It's happened to me too at Redhill. Taxied to A1 ready to depart (4th in line) and guess what? Too late and taxied home!

A week later and more of a worry though was the traffic circling over Sevenoaks waiting for the airport to re-open. Several confused pilots not sure why there was no response on 119.60. Wonder what the Surrey Plan has to say about all that?!

Spare a thought for the controllers though - Not exactly overpaid for what can be a pretty stressful job. Still, a bit of customer service would be appreciated by those on the receiving end.

[meslag]

Must admit i used to avoid flying into redhill like the plague. Then i went and bought a share in an aircraft there.
Have found that once they get to know your aircraft they are not so bad. As my aircraft is pretty nippy they let you cut the circuit with early turns up the north south runway on take-off and cut infront of people who require larger circuits.

Must be said that lots more flying would get done at these places if there was less talking. Also find shoreham a pain... giving you clearance limits with noone else about?

My opinion is in agreeance with the unicom, check out your own wind, runway, traffic etc.

Trouble is too many schools now train the pilot to be a future commercial pilot and expect those services. eg teaching students to fly the finals on papi etc etc. More grass roots aviation needs to be taught.

Finally.... Dunsfold. Lots of people have spent many many days trying to get rid of it as a airfield. Please dont open it up again. The reason? It is where i practise my display sequence and aeros..... perfect.

Chaps and chapesses please look out when flying around dunsfold as i will be overhead in the pitts :) :)

[matspart3]

Whilst I don't work at Redhill, I feel it's relevant to this thread to explain the rules regarding ATCO's breaks.
All UK ATCO's are legally obliged to comply with the Scheme for the Regulation of ATC Officers Hours (SRATCOH) which is laid down in a delightful publication called CAP670 Air Traffic Services Safety Requirements.
Basically, after working a maximum of 2 hours, we have to have a break, out of the ATC environment, of at least 30 minutes. At some quiet airfields (this may apply at Redhill, but I doubt it) Providers of Air Traffic Services can apply to modify the requiremnet, extending the duty period to 4 hours.
Incidentley, Redhill have been advertising in Flight recently for 2 ATCO's, which obviously shows some degree of commitment to keeping ATC running.
Surely, they publish the times when ATC will be closed? Bit silly to ask for taxy 3 minutes beforehand, perhaps??

[Aeropig1]

I called for taxi a full fifteen mins before closure and they still stopped me :mad:

[Genghis the Engineer]

Simple solution I should have thought. Simple declare the airfield unlicensed for that period of controller break. It stops any ab-initio flying training, but if the local school expects it, they only do conversion training, etc. during that slot. Then everybody makes traffic calls, the controllers drink tea, and everybody's happy.

G

[Stampe]

Nice idea but I believe when ATC go off watch at EGKR most of the zone is handed back to the Gatwick zone controllers and for that reason no out of hours departures and arrivals are allowed.I regularly instruct out of there and drive in the 40 miles rather than fly my light aircraft which is hangared a mile from where I live but its the cost of landing as at Biggin that deters me.The controllers are good chaps but grossly overworked at peak times,sometimes a ground,tower and approach are needed!!.More enthusiastic management would help to.I,m told Dunsfold will be be dug up as that was part of the original planning conditions when the forerunners of Bae originally got permission to use the place,I,ve been down that road.

[TOT]

HAVING FLOWN OUT OF REDHILL FOR A GOOD FEW YEARS I HAVE FOUND THAT GENERALLY, ONCE THE CONTROLLERS KNOW YOU THE RELATIONSHIP TENDS TO MELLOW, HOWEVER THIS IS NOT GUARANTEED- YOU CAN STILL GET A BOLLOCKING. IF IT APPEARS THAT YOU ARE THE LEAST BIT UNFAMILIAR WITH THE PROCEDURES THE PRESSURE IS KEPT ON YOU. QUITE COMMON TO GET A BOLLOCKING OVER THE RADIO, NO SYMPATHY FOR LOW TIME SOLO PILOTS OR VISITORS!!! :mad: .

[meslag]

If you get ripped into by the atc tell them that you are filing an ASR due their nature been a hazard to flight safety. I did it not so long ago about that terrible service you get from southampton ("stay clear of the zone... commercial traffic expected next week.) The controller was just been rude and agressive. They are there for your use.... we could happily fly without them but they would have no job without us.. :D :D

[TheSilverFox]

Hello Aeropig1- Yes I have guessed your identity from your handle. Remember me? I tought you to fly!!!

Somebody on this thread was wondering how long it would be before someone from Redhill ATC would respond. I wouldn't hold your breath!

However as someone who at Redhill full time
perhaps I can update you on the state of play.

A new SATCO has now been employed but I believe that it will be some time before he has completed his training and is let lose on his own.( probably just in time for the airfield closures due to flooded runways!)

I can understand MOST of the comments that have been put forward mostly by one-off visitors from the sounds of it. Can you imagine what it is like for the people who have to fly there on a daily basis?

Anyway lets hope that with the introduction of the new SATCO the staffing problems will soon be resolved and possibly a change of attitude particularly towards student pilots who dont need the extra pressure of an ATC bollocking on air.As for all of you qualified pilots that are whineing about the bollockings that you have received-STOP SCREWING UP!!

Look forward to doing your IMC renewal next week AEROPIG1. See you then.

[FNG]

If rude shouty people on the radio are having a negative effect on flight safety, as may happen, then you could send a CHIRP. See http://www.chirp.co.uk/

This is of course only to be done when there's a serious concern, not just when a tired and overworked ATCO or FISO gets a bit tetchy when one of us does or says something stupid.

[Vortex what...ouch!]

I was told to hold the other day until I was visual with departing traffic. Then the departing traffic called that he had me in sight and one of the controllers cleared me in to rejoin. ANOTHER controller, the first I think, then changed it again and told me to hold until I had him insight. I picked him up and was then cleared in.

That is shows poor communication. Very poor service indeed. Then they have the nerve to bo||ock us at every opportunity.

Deffinately not on my Christmas card list :)

[Genghis the Engineer]

It all sounds like a chronic case of overcontrolling. Redhill isn't hugely busy, neither is it the only GA airfield close to a busy international airport. A complete contrast would be White Waltham, which operates under the same apparent constraints as Redhill and is probably busier, yet this overcontrolling culture doesn't seem to exist.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be fascinated for somebody to explain why.

G

[apruneuk]

I had to fight the radio operator at North Weald last week when I informed him that I would be taking off on their downhill runway (02)in a Jet Provost with full fuel, an oat of 28C and no wind. He told me that the circuit was 20 (uphill with 50' trees just off the end) and that the airfield manager wouldn't allow "mixed circuits".
Having departed on my chosen runway, he then announced that he was changing the circuit to 02. Now I was to land on the downhill runway! Does this sound like a radio operator acting like ATC? The bottom line is that had I done as he suggested I would have crashed on take-off and almost certainly would have over-run on landing. Arse!
PS
upon landing I was presented with an official written complaint from said arse which had been forwarded to the airfield manager. Arse!

[FlyingForFun]

PruneUk,

I posted a question about this on a different thread, but never got a reply. At White Waltham, the Flying Order Book states that no one is allowed to use a runway other than the runway in use, except for instructors giving cross-wind training. I asked what sanctions could, in theory, be taken if I chose to ignore the Flying Order Book, but didn't get a reply.

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

[FNG]

Genghis, good point. Although I have only been flying out of Waltham for the last 9 months or so, I have been struck by how smoothly the joining and circuit procedures work, despite the very high level of activity at the field and the proximity of Heathrow, whilst the a/g is run in a very low key way and never pretends to be anything other than a/g. Only once saw a potential nasty when an aircraft which appeared to be operating non-radio carved someone up on final.

This brings me to FFF's point. It does seem surprising that you should not be able to use your discretion to take the runway most favoured by wind, sun position etc, but I suppose that if aircraft are operating non radio, as some of the Waltham aircraft do, then the fact that you have announced to everyone that you are taking runway xx instead of runway yy may not assist the bloke in the non-radio biplane, and neither of you may have seen the other as you position for conflicting approaches.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Surely with a non-radio departure you have ample opportunity to discuss it with Ops before walking to the a/c.

Inbound, I quote Pooleys entry for White Waltham "Non-radio aircraft require telephone briefing from operations prior to each flight". I fly into OS fairly often which has a similar requirement.

If this is adhered to, surely any problems with inappropriate runways, etc. can be dealt with on the ground - which is the right time and place to do so. By and large, the pilot of a an aircraft that should have a problem should do this anyway, regardless of whether he or she is using RT?

G

[Southern Cross]

apruneuk

Not surprised to hear of your "discussion" with said Air/Ground operator. I am sure you have noticed a few changes around the airfield during recent months - some are unannounced changes to previously accepted procedures or practice. It can be annoying to get rebuked for doing something that is safe (eg your example) or no longer apparently acceptable to the airfield management but has not been publically and clearly promulgated.

Having said that, when 02/20 is in use but the wind is straight down 31 (not uncommon :D ), providing the circuit is quiet (also not uncommon), NW Radio has often been very accomodating to requests to use 31 for single take-offs / landings for my taildragger. It allows me to co-exist with guys like you who find 13/31 a "little" short... :D

So some swings and roundabouts perhaps. Overall it is still a great place to fly from but sometimes one needs to be firm in discussions with NW Radio.

[FNG]

Genghis, agreed, but consider this scenario:-

Aircraft A is a radio-equipped Tiger Moth inbound to Waltham. As the Moth arrives overhead, the pilot sees from the windsock that the wind has changed and now exposes the active runway to a crosswind which exceeds the limits of aircraft and/or pilot.

In Ops, they have not yet decided to change runways. Perhaps they are busy and distracted and have not noticed the wind indicator. Perhaps they have not yet heard from an instructor in the (unusually quiet) circuit that the wind has changed.

The pilot of Aircraft A tells Waltham Radio that he intends to use the runway which is now into wind. What does Waltham say in reply? Whatever is said, they can't stop him. He begins to position for his preferred runway.

Aircraft B is a non-radio Yak also inbound, having received a telephone briefing before setting off. Arriving in the overhead shortly after the Tiger Moth, the Yak pilot sees the signal square, with the T indicating the runway which he was briefed for. He also sees the windsock but knows the indicated crosswind to be safely within his capabilities and his aircraft's limitations. He starts to position for the signalled active runway.

The circuit is otherwise empty, but neither aircraft has seen the other. The radio operator, on his own in Ops, is distracted by an irate birthday trial-lesson punter complaining about the fact that no-one told him he'd have to go in a scary aeroplane with only one engine, and has therefore not noticed the Yak.

What happens next?

NB nothing said above implies criticism of any of the notional participants in this scenario, which is in any event taking place in a parallel universe that does not exist. I'm genuinely curious, and would welcome responses from Genghis, others using WW and similar fields, and any instructors or a/g people reading this.

Should maybe be in the a/g operators thread, but follows on from postings above.

[apruneuk]

Southern Cross,

I take your point, but radio operators at an unlicensed field such as NW should only be responding to pilots' requests for information, not giving instructions or establishing active runways. These guys (of which I happen to be one)are not trained on the operational requirements of different types of aircraft, and could cause an accident if they attempt to force pilots to operate as they see fit.
There is one particular a/g operator at NW who regularly acts as an ATC and this is the chap I had words with. Nevertheless, it is the pilot's responsibility to inform the radio operator of their intentions, not to respond to instructions. Obviously the pilot should, wherever possible fit in with what everyone else is up to - I think they call that Airmanship, don't they?

[BEagle]

FNG - another possible cause for the 'carving up' that some consider goes on might be caused by the totally ridiculously huge circuit which some people seem to use at WW. I was there a month or so ago and was astonished at the cross-country exercise that some people fly in the circuit. So if you were a non-radio joining as briefed, you might indeed not notice someone on a 4 mile final.......

But as for Redhill, what possible excuse can there be for such behaviour as has been reported here?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Being glib FNG, I might say that the Tiger lands on the numbers, stops well before the intersection, and then watches with a Yak-50 land in front of him quite safely....

A few months ago I was flying at Culdrose in something roughly Tiger sized (an X'Air if you know it), I joined left base and was told that I was No.2 to a Hawk with a fuel emergency. I did an orbit, watched him land and was then told that I was No.2 to a Jetstream. I briefly considered the wake-vortex picture of a 450kg X'Air behind a 6,000kg Jetstream and asked for safe separation. The Navy solution was to ask me to use the crosswind runway, which I did, landing on the numbers with a 10kn crosswind and stopping well before the intersection to watch 2 Jetstreams and another Hawk land in front of me before I taxiied across the active.

Second scenario, I fly from a place called Chilbolton in Hampshire. It's non-radio with a well defined join procedure (one of the reasons we're strictly PPR). Yesterday, I turned up, joined overhead, saw a 90° crosswind and because I was in a relatively slippery aircraft decided to use 06 which has no approach obstructions and allowed me to come in low. A few minutes after I landed somebody else turned up in a Thruster (glide ratio of a brick !), flew the same join procedure but selected 24. Had we arrived at the same time, because we both flew the same procudure which is designed to ensure that you see anything on finals for the wrong runway, we would have sorted ourselves out.

Anybody who flies from Popham during the May microlight show will be familiar with the use of 26 for light aircraft and 21 for microlights. Most of the microlights and a few of the light aircraft are non-radio. Procudures are published, and stuck to - the only near accident I've seen (and I've been there every year for the last 5, there are generally about 1000-2000 movements over the weekend) was a C150 taking off without checking around for microlight activity.

The bottom line I think is that in VFR airfield operations, radio or non-radio everybody needs to be utterly aware of what's going on throughout the circuit. There is no substitute to this - not the signal square, AFIS, ATC, whatever. If competent pilots behave well within this principle, then quite frankly an AFIS operator, etc. is a useful airfield facility - but he or she isn't, and shouldn't be, essential.

G

[FNG]

BEagle, Waltham is not as nimbified as some places but does face some pressures from its neighbours and has set up some rather large and in some cases irregularly shaped circuit patterns in an endeavour to minimise noise complaints. Some of these patterns seem odd to me as it is possible to fly close-in circuits over the green bits, avoiding villages and posh houses whilst keeping safely close to the airfield, but here we are back with the discussion that comes up so often about the way in which ppls are taught big square circuits.

Genghis, agreed again. I would only add that, not being an ex-test pilot, I would not fancy a 10 knot crosswind in a Tiger Moth or similar, so I had better keep my eyes open for that Yak.