Cretin in the circuit

[150 Driver]

I need to vent my spleen on this one. It won't do any good but I might feel better as a result.

Flew to Sandown, Isle of Wight today. Lovely strip to visit btw. V busy, the world and her partner had chosen to fly there, it felt like Heathrow quite often with one on the runway, one on final, one on base and at least one downwind at any given time.

They have an A/G service, which clearly gave 05 L/H. Joining instructions as published are let down to circuit height in the bay, cross wind join.

So I'm descending over the bay and get confused when I see a plane on the ground that wasn't there a moment ago at the far end of 05 looking like it's backtracking quite fast. You've guessed it, he had landed on 23.

There was a fairly exasperated radio operator telling him this, at which our hero was arguing that it wasn't his fault, he couldn't see the numbers on the ground.

To be fair, there aren't any numbers on the strip - nor are there are on many grass strips. But even in the absence of these, (a) he would have ignored his DI, (b) should surely have wondered why he was going a different direction to the rest of the circuit traffic, (c) on inspection of the windsock (of which there is one at each end of the runway) might have wondered why the prevailing landing direction was a tailwind and (d) might have thought his approach speed was a little fast.

Now, we all make mistakes, and all feel stupid when we do, especially when witnessed by an airfield teeming with pilots. But...FFS, this is a serious one and the time was right to say 'sorry' and to simply obey the instruction to exit the runway to the right 'urgently'. He did eventually exit but with no sense of urgency.

When in a hole - especially one that could have fatal implications - it's time to stop digging. I hope he learned from this one.

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

I had an aircraft approach the opposite end of the runway today as I was taking off. He realised on short finals to the (wrong) runway and turned into the correct circuit. Never said a word...

Last week, as I met him head on in the circuit, I was told over the RT by another visiting aircraft that I was flying the wrong way round the circuit (at my home airfield of nearly 30 years).. For him to then announce a minute later that he was actually in the wrong.

Happens all the time, an occupational hazard in the air it seems. :rolleyes:

[Jan Olieslagers]

This chap/chapess was not particularly bright, admittedly. Still I can't help playing the devil's advocate: Imagine there was no R/T available, as can happen for many reasons, what were her/his options for knowing what runway to use? Is there a signal square, and if so, what are its implications? Round here in BE, landing against the indicated heading would be considered very grave - but there is no obligation to carry, or use, a radio. In France, OTOH, signal squares are being phased out rapidly, and pilots have every liberty to pick their runway as seems best to them. At non-controlled fields, that is. But they must and do communicate what they are doing with great ability - mostly.

[Almost]

When Sandown Tower is not available, one simply Joins overhead, looks down at ground and check direction of the windsocks, decend over the bay and join crosswind (LH on 05 or RH on 23), while making blind traffic calls, to advise anyone else on the frequency who you are and what your doing.

Its really simple. It really is.

And keep a good lookout as there could be someone non radio.

There are actually numbers in the grass at sandown. Big white ones. One end even has a displaced threshold with a couple of massive pointy white arrows.

[piperboy84]

Don't feel bad, I had a brain donor who came into the strip this weekend, again with no radios, taxied up to the end of the strip swung around onto the opposing threshold, parked it up and pissed off for his lunch leaving it parked to face others landing and taking off for THE THIRD TIME IN 2 YEARS ! His "parking spot" just happens to be the closest place to the path for the cafe. I cleared the runway by pushing his plane into the rough tall grass and sent a text letting him know he was finally barred. I'm patient guy who does everything I can to encourage GA and make my strip available to all but this was taking the piss. Prior to this, the same guy couldn't decide where on the 14 acres clear of the runway he wanted to park so put it in the ditch, tried to power it out causing a nose over and lost the last 6" of his prop, then suggested it would be fine to fly home in that condition with an elderly non pilot passenger.

The mind boggles.

Edit to add: To be more accurate, he didn't taxi up to the end of the runway after landing, he touched down 2/3 of the way down the 1600ft strip and just managed to stop prior to the fence, this was after his first landing attempt was aborted and a go around made thank god.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Piperboy;

A potential Darwin Award candidate! Some of the behaviour you see around GA suggests to me that there are people flying who really should be in care in the community programs!

Some years ago I saw a motorised paraglider in the Luton zone crossing the 26 final approach, above cloud when Luton was in LVP's (cloud tops were about 800'agl). That would have made great reading in the AAIB/airmiss reports.

SND

[On Track]

Jan, I had to google "signal squares"!

I don't know if they ever existed in this part of the world.

[sharpend]

We have all screwed up at times. But proper pilots put their hands ups, admit they did and, above all, learn from it.

[NorthSouth]

To be honest I think we are very lucky to be so lightly regulated around unlicensed (and even licensed) A/G airfields in the UK. It all relies on common sense/airmanship. But that in turn is heavily dependent on the standard of instruction in pilots' original training, and in club check rides, the reval one hour with an instructor etc. I think instructors are generally very forgiving of bad habits or lack of knowledge shown during dual checks etc. Joining procedures and circuit flying are potentially the most hazardous bit of most PPL flying and I think it is incumbent on instructors to ensure that people are doing it safely and help them to do it better when they see poor procedures/knowledge.

[Parson]

Probably the same guys/gals who think they own the road and cut up whoever they like, whenever, as long as they get their way.

[foxmoth]

Joining procedures and circuit flying are potentially the most hazardous bit of most PPL flying and I think it is incumbent on instructors to ensure that people are doing it safely and help them to do it better when they see poor procedures/knowledge.

Something I see frequently on dual checks, and from some surprisingly experienced pilots - frequent faults are:-
Turning against circuit direction within the ATZ
Descending to circuit height in the wrong place.
Carrying out a standard join when the brief tells you otherwise.

[JW411]

"He couldn't see the numbers on the ground"

Did it never enter the mind of our hero that if he was on finals to 05 at Sandown, the English Channel should be on his right and not on his left?

[Local Variation]

That's just it Foxmoth. People don't brief. They are either assuming, lazy, ignorant or arrogant. Take your pick. Seen them all in action.

Too many examples to cite. Straight in approaches in an active circuit is the worst, followed by overtaking in the circuit. People calling up Sywell asking for join instructions for their Expo. For crying out loud.

Last year, we had someone flying abeam our approach to the same runway via their own straight in approach. Radio call was akin to "joining from the SW"' only followed by "final". Bloomin formation flying !

This, despite a firm overhead join notification from the airfield in question. Butter didn't melt in the mouth when the individual was confronted, neither did the airfield (not Sywell btw) share any concern. Needs a number of collective party activities to eradicate and there in lies the problem.

[Bigears]

piperboy84,
Whilst I am certainly not faultless with a cross-country overhead join that must have really confused a student and instructor at Fife a few years ago (it did have the added benefit for the instructor/student of a practical example of how not to do one!), I was unfortunate to recently witness an overhead join in the same general area as yourself where the pilot reported overhead then announced they were descending deadside and turned against the circuit direction. Their initial call that they were joining direct to a left base was met with a suggestion that they should join overhead like the other five inbound aircraft.
I'd be interested if it was the same aircraft, so to keep this simple, was the aircraft a standard design or was their something different about it ? (Y/N) I'll understand if you'd rather not answer.

[Martin_123]

I know I'm going to get a lot of noise out of this, but will ya get off your high horse for a moment? Sound's like the guy wasn't exactly in his comfort zone, I'm sure he learned his lesson, but do you honestly need to call him cretin (as per title?) Do you honestly think the way training happens these days it gives a lot of chance to even take in a fraction of the different variables that might come into play?

I have my own story - just a few hours after getting my PPL, did my first trip down to one of the Irish regional airports (zone C), landed no issue, had a nice day at the beach, came back and I was starting to consider, as per my training, what would I do in case the engine quits on take-off.. The problem was - runway direction led straight into Atlantic after take-off so you had to choose wisely which way you would go, what would you do should the engine quit. I was so focused on the runway direction in which I landed that I simply MISSED the fact that rather slack winds had made the controller happy enough to instruct me to enter the runway and taxy in the opposite direction.. After a short exchange we had a bit of laugh at my expense and I ended up turning back and finally taxying the right direction.

It takes at least 2 pilots to make VFR safe and if you honestly think confirmation bias is just some nonsense they use to plot documentaries, I think it's time for you to hit the good aul books.
DON'T discourage the young and the silly
and DO expect the unexpected.. it is his fault, but that doesn't make him a cretin, now does it?

[piperboy84]

I'd be interested if it was the same aircraft, so to keep this simple, was the aircraft a standard design or was their something different about it ? (Y/N) I'll understand if you'd rather not answer

It's the guy that reamed out the bolt holes on his prop because he thought they were too tight but made then too big so he wrapped cellotape round the prop studs as padding to tighten the fit back up again.

[RatherBeFlying]

I remember being on final to see the departing aircraft coming uncomfortably close to an aircraft landing in the opposite direction:eek:

Then there's gliders that decide to land in the opposite direction to takeoff to mimimise ground retrieve. Works fine if handhelds in retrieve vehicles and calls made and acknowledged.

[Jan Olieslagers]

... AND if all others in or near the pattern carry a radio too - and listen. Neither is a given.

[150 Driver]

"it is his fault, but that doesn't make him a cretin, now does it?"

The reason for the word wasn't so much as for the mistake, I accept we all make them and we all learn from them (assuming we live to do so). I have made (and sadly continue to make) my own fair share of them.

But I do think there is a time when it's best to put your hands in the air and do what you can to make amends. And if ever the time was right, sitting on a runway facing the wrong way with incoming traffic is the time !

Arguing black is white (or that 05 is 23) and that no mistake has been made justifies the use of the word.

[flybymike]

Too many examples to cite. Straight in approaches in an active circuit is the worst, followed by overtaking in the circuit.

What action should the pilot of a twin take when he comes across a microlight in front of him in a busy circuit?

[flyinkiwi]

We have all screwed up at times. But proper pilots put their hands ups, admit they did and, above all, learn from it.

Proper pilots would never allow themselves to get so far behind the aircraft that they cannot definitively know that the runway they are on final approach for is the correct one in use.

[this is my username]

Any instructor who spends a good chunk of their working life in the circuit at a small airfield will tell you that this type of stuff is "normal", and that it is almost a surprise to see a correctly performed join or a circuit flown anywhere near the published noise-abatement procedure. A complete lack of contrition from the guy who nearly hit you head-on in the circuit is also standard.

It's pretty depressing really but its hard to see how to fix it when "Captain Average" flies about 20 to 30 hours a year, may have trained decades ago and their only contact with officialdom is a biennial flight with an instructor which has no fixed format, syllabus or standard. I do my bit but you can only cover so much in an hour.

Had a call yesterday from an owner-pilot whose class rating had expired and wanted to reval by test. He wanted to book a date so that he could fly in for it .....

[NorthSouth]

I agree. It's the "where do I start?" syndrome. So much to correct, so much to advise, but at the same time you are reluctant to ground someone that had no idea when they came to you that they had so many bad habits or gaps in knowledge/skill.

In a good club, there should be ample opportunities for refresher training, e.g. in a series of workshops combined with flying. But of course you can't force people to come, and it's often the ones that don't really need it that do come. Plus, even the ones that know they need it are very often loath to admit their need, especially in front of other club members.

And this does nothing for the owner-pilots who are not part of any club.

[dont overfil]

Guys, pay attention now. You need to read all the stories Piperboy has written about this guy to understand the language used.

I know who it is and the description is accurate. He should not be allowed out without his carer.

[cjm_2010]

It's the guy that reamed out the bolt holes on his prop because he thought they were too tight but made then too big so he wrapped cellotape round the prop studs as padding to tighten the fit back up again.

I'm laughing so hard at this and I know I shouldn't be.

How has he managed to avoid being Darwin'd?

[sunday driver]

What action should the pilot of a twin take when he comes across a microlight in front of him in a busy circuit?

Well I don't do twins (too many knobs and dials for my limited brain power) but I resolved a similar situation earlier this year with an orbit in the circuit direction at the start of the downwind leg, notified to the tower.
But then I'm a very relaxed chap and I wasn't pressed for time, fuel, daylight, rental cost or whatever, and nobody was up my behind.

SD

[bingofuel]

Guys, pay attention now. You need to read all the stories Piperboy has written about this guy to understand the language used.

I know who it is and the description is accurate. He should not be allowed out without his carer.

Why has nobody reported this reaming of the propeller to either the CAA or LAA depending on the aircraft involved, think of the potential danger to others, if or more likely when the propeller detaches in flight?

[squidie]

Yes plenty of indicators there suggesting he’s using the wrong traffic pattern. Although it does happen, even with runway numbers visible and I’ve even known people accidently take off on taxyways too.

[Jan Olieslagers]

I fully concur with @bingofuel: I would certainly report such a situation, if I came across, and could not persuade the owner/operator/pilot to correct the installation.

[foxmoth]

What action should the pilot of a twin take when he comes across a microlight in front of him in a busy circuit?

A pilot with good SA will have allowed for this when joining and spaced himself accordingly, if he still finds himself close up behind then he should go around. Just because you are in a faster machine you do not have the right to push in front.
As far as straight in approaches and non standard joins goes, no problem IF you can fit into the traffic without getting in anyone elses way, this needs good SA and unfortunately too many people are not capeable!

[flybymike]

A pilot with good SA will have allowed for this when joining and spaced himself accordingly, if he still finds himself close up behind then he should go around.
Theoretically yes, but for example, on a downwind leg this then means a turn towards the active runway, the overhead, or the climb out, not always the best place to be in a busy circuit.
And for example on base leg effectively means overtaking (possibly on the "wrong" side) and cutting up on final.
I don't fly twins any more but did find it all problematical.
Final solution, don't go to busy fly-ins in a twin.;)

[Katamarino]

It's pretty depressing really but its hard to see how to fix it when "Captain Average" flies about 20 to 30 hours a year, may have trained decades ago and their only contact with officialdom is a biennial flight with an instructor which has no fixed format, syllabus or standard. I do my bit but you can only cover so much in an hour.

A good start would be for the "authorities" to do away with some of the punitive taxes and bureaucracy that leads to the cost of flying in Europe being 2-3x the cost in the US, for absolutely no valid reason. Everyone would be much more current then...

Of course, safety is not what the authorities are interested in.

[flyinkiwi]

A good start would be for the "authorities" to do away with some of the punitive taxes and bureaucracy that leads to the cost of flying in Europe being 2-3x the cost in the US, for absolutely no valid reason. Everyone would be much more current then...

Of course, safety is not what the authorities are interested in.

They're not called the Campaign Against Aviation for nothing... :ugh:

[mikehallam]

On the interesting subject of the effects of high cost on safety - concluding it therefore drives safety down.

a) Reduce cost, increases hours and perhaps proficiency (?). Result, fewer accidents per hour, but overall a potential increase in number per annum.

or

b) Raise cost even more, even fewer hours, in extreme zero hours flown = zero accidents !

mikehallam

[piperboy84]

Drop the tax and duties on avgas for flight schools like they do with farmers with Ag diesel or the tax breaks they give Google, Philip Green and oil companies etc for exploration credits.This will make training significantly more affordable and encourage both initial training for careers in aviation and recurring training for duffers like us who would hire planes and instructors for more than just ratings and reviews. It would get the flight school business back off its knees, encourage more foreign students (Chinese etc) create jobs and would make private ownership less desirable if flight schools had large rental fleets operated under their safety rules and give the UK GA and commercial aviation business the fresh wind of change it needs.

Bottom line, look at how much revenue the duties from avgas are bringing in, stop charging it, and deduct the shortfall to the public purse from the "drunken sailor" government programs like going on senseless wars, foreign aid to African dictators, development programs to countries that are in reality richer than ours, and if there really is a need for "democracy building" round the world instead of sending money and "experts" burn a few CD's of the US constitution and mail it to them 3rd class and end all the other touchy feely sanctimonious moral high ground bull**** projetcs our elected "leaders" feel the need to spunk our money on. RANT OVER

Sorted :ok: