The overhead join

[merlin45]

A question,

Should turns in the overhead always be LH ?

I was joining an unfamiliar aerodrome recently with LH and RH circuits (Depending on runway in use) following traffic about 3nm ahead. I had a fair idea of the wind direction but was not confident enough of it to join a base so i decided to enter the overhead to make sure. So keeping the aerodrome on my left i headed for the overhead to start my LH turns (expecting to dumbbell turn and descend none traffic side to cross the same threshold IF the RH circuit was in use). The traffic ahead of me (possibly a local more aware of the local conditions) also decided to join overhead, but instead headed for the opposite threshold and joined overhead using RH turns (something that was new to me) as he was likely expecting the RH circuit. This put us on a possible collision path..... :ugh: but it was all avoided well before it got to that. I understand the AIP says that all turns must be made in the direction of the circuit but what happens when one pilot is unsure of the circuit direction?

Opinions?

[Sunfish]

Communicate! Ask the other aircraft! If they don't know, then come to some agreement. I wish I had done that once…..

[Squawk7700]

that was new to me) as he was likely expecting the RH circuit.



Therein lies the problem. Was one runway a right hand circuit and the other a left? Otherwise he should be doing left hand turns as you say. Also did you approach at 1,500 or 2,000 ft? (Just wondering as the 2,000 ft approach falls into a similar realm to the left only rules)

It's a tough one because the other aircraft may not even have a radio so that puts aviate and navigate ahead of communicate where is should be.

[fireflybob]

More details would be useful. Was it a non radio field, PPR, signals square etc?

[c100driver]

The NZ AIP has the answer.

5.1.2 The following procedures should be followed by pilots:
(a) If the aircraft is RTF equipped, advise aerodrome traffic of joining intentions.
(b) Approach the aerodrome by descending or climbing to 1500 ft or above aerodrome elevation. If a circuit height other than 1000 ft is specified on the aerodrome chart, join at not less than 500 ft above circuit height, or if applicable, the specified joining altitude.
(c) (c) Pass over the aerodrome (keeping it on your left) in order to observe wind, circuit traffic and any ground signals displayed in order to establish the runway-in-use and sequence safely; if these cannot be fully ascertained, continue (wings level) to a point beyond the circuit area (approx. 2 NM) and turn left to return to the aerodrome at or above the joining height as specified in (b) to reassess circuit direction.
(d) Once the circuit direction is established, make all subsequent turns in the direction of the traffic circuit.

[thorn bird]

Ahh, those Kiwi reg's, short, concise, completely understandable.

[Hasselhof]

Just remember that if you are joining 500' above a 1000' circuit height you are going to be mixing it up with high performance aircraft if they are present. If there are regional turboprops or similar in the area then overflying at 2000' agl might be the smarter move, or alternatively waiting until they are out of the way.

[Capn Bloggs]

The NZ AIP has the answer.

The problem as I see it was that the circuit direction had not been established.

Just remember that if you are joining 500' above a 1000' circuit height you are going to be mixing it up with high performance aircraft if they are present.
Talk talk talk. It'll be a CTAF so you will have a radio. If in doubt, pipe up. In uncontrolled environments, A-N-C doesn't work. If you don't communicate,you may well not be aviating soon after, since ****'s preferred method of separation in CTAFs, see-and-avoid, DOES NOT WORK. I will never have a problem with a lighty talking too much.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Doesn't really matter, does it? Just keep good situational awareness from well out and don't hit anything!

How do I know? :O

Dr :8

[c100driver]

The OP said he had a fair idea of the wind direction so all turn should be in the expected runway into wind.

I don't really see what the problem is unless it is airmanship and situational awareness.

If you try to write rules for every possibility then you end up with Aussie Rules! No thank you.

[On Track]

Signals square? What the hell is that?

If it's Australia or NZ, very unlikely that it's PPR.

[ACMS]

Just ask for radar vectors to an ILS.....:}:}

Yes tongue in cheek...:ok:

[27/09]

fireflybob: More details would be useful. Was it a non radio field, PPR, signals square etc?

What are these wonderful terms you use? Sounds rather complicated old chap, especially when there's no need for complication.

The OP was at an unattended field (i.e.no ATC/Flight service) that's all that needs to be known.

[27/09]

Capn Bloggs: Talk talk talk. It'll be a CTAF so you will have a radio. If in doubt, pipe up. In uncontrolled environments, A-N-C doesn't work. If you don't communicate,you may well not be aviating soon after, since ****'s preferred method of separation in CTAFs, see-and-avoid, DOES NOT WORK. I will never have a problem with a lighty talking too much.

Please no Talk talk talk. It should be talk when appropriate and pipe up if in doubt, and then look look look and listen, listen listen. We have two ears and eyes and one mouth, they should be used in that proportion.

With there being several airfields on the same frequency too much talking clutters the frequency to the point important calls get talked over. Too much talk, talk talk is counter productive.

P.S. Not all airfields are in airspace that requires a radio, there can be non radio equipped aircraft about.

[merlin45]

On the day, it was all sorted (with a bit of communication) well before we were even close to the overhead. It just stuck me as a situation that could possibly turn a bit sour. Its common for pilots to just call "joining via the overhead" giving no indication of which RWY they plan to use, threshold they are crossing and which direction they are turning......

[27/09]

merlin45: Its common for pilots to just call "joining via the overhead" giving no indication of which RWY they plan to use

Isn't that the point of the overhead join, - to establish which runway is in use? Once overhead and it's established which runway to use then a call should be made announcing which runway the pilot intends to use.

Unless conditions dictate otherwise, there should be three calls; a joining call 5 to 10 miles out, an overhead call stating which runway they're joining for and a downwind call. If the overhead call doesn't contain information on the intended runway then those pilots need some education as that's the main point of that radio call.

If you're joining after an aircraft which has made an overhead join stating which runway they're using, there is no need for you to join overhead. By the mere fact the other pilot has broadcast his choice of runway you have in effect established the runway in use.

Unless you have strong evidence to the contrary that the preceding pilot has it wrong you can just slot in after that aircraft and join in the circuit direction behind them. Unless of course you cannot easily establish the other aircraft's position and an overhead join is considered a safer option.

I admit some pilots get their windsock interpretations arse about face and you do need to be careful when taking note of their runway choice. I try to take note of smoke drift, cloud shadows and wind lanes as I approach a field to get an idea on the likely runway.

[fireflybob]

What are these wonderful terms you use? Sounds rather complicated old chap, especially when there's no need for complication.

The OP was at an unattended field (i.e.no ATC/Flight service) that's all that needs to be known.

27/09, you seem to be offended that I would have the temerity to ask for more information?

I had assumed, wrongly it seems, that this was a question appertaining to a UK airfield.

It would seem you folk down in the Antipodes use a different language and somewhat different "rules".

Vive la difference!

[27/09]

fireflybob: 27/09, you seem to be offended that I would have the temerity to ask for more information?

I had assumed, wrongly it seems, that this was a question appertaining to a UK airfield.

OK Fair comment, however that fact the OP's location is NZ and the post was in
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.
section might have been an indication the questions wasn't about a UK airfield.

[fireflybob]

OK Fair comment, however that fact the OP's location is NZ and the post was in
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.
section might have been an indication the questions wasn't about a UK airfield.

27/09, That's because on the phone app "Home" does not show which section the post is in.

I promise to do better in the future.