VFR Departure Question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VFR Departure Question
Hi,
Just wanted to ask what experienced pilots would do in this situation.
Say I am on an east/west runway at an uncontrolled aerodrome and my departure track is say 060 degrees but due to wind direction, I have to take off on runway 27. (Assume left hand ccts)
Do I depart by flying to the mid down wind position and then taking up my track of 060 or do I fly the entire downwind leg and then intercept my track of 060??
And what would the radio call be......
"All Stations ......, ABC is rolling runway 27 for a downwind departure to the east north east, climbing to 5,500'"
Does that sound right?
Just wanted to ask what experienced pilots would do in this situation.
Say I am on an east/west runway at an uncontrolled aerodrome and my departure track is say 060 degrees but due to wind direction, I have to take off on runway 27. (Assume left hand ccts)
Do I depart by flying to the mid down wind position and then taking up my track of 060 or do I fly the entire downwind leg and then intercept my track of 060??
And what would the radio call be......
"All Stations ......, ABC is rolling runway 27 for a downwind departure to the east north east, climbing to 5,500'"
Does that sound right?
You could climb ahead to 1500' above the airfield elevation off the runway, then turn right.
If keen to do the left turn, I'd stay with the circuit spacing until 1500' AGL anyway before manoeuvering onto track.
If keen to do the left turn, I'd stay with the circuit spacing until 1500' AGL anyway before manoeuvering onto track.
T/O 27, continue Left hand turn right through to 060.
Departure call "Departing overhead the field".
Depending on traffic.
No need to fly downwind when you can turn onto heading.
Departure call "Departing overhead the field".
Depending on traffic.
No need to fly downwind when you can turn onto heading.
In answer to the original question you can depart off the first three legs of the cct at any time as long as you follow the AIP requirement to be established on track by 5nm in a non radar environment, and if departing off upwind a right turn at no lower than 1500' or three miles.
OpsN.
OpsN.
Depending how remote your field is. It may well be the only fix for a bit. So it wouldn't hurt to depart O/H the field on your hdg. Only takes a couple of minutes compared to climbing upwind for 3nm or 1500ft to turn right onto heading. In your case with a 27 t/o and 06 departure turning overhead the field would be the most direct.
"Why must you climb to 1500'AGL before turning over the field??"
Because the circuit traffic will probably be at 1000, so if you turn across through downwind and then upwind you'll be conflicting pretty seriously; see and be seen is OK, but it's easy to miss them, so better to fly in such a way as to minimise the likelihood of hitting someone.
Because the circuit traffic will probably be at 1000, so if you turn across through downwind and then upwind you'll be conflicting pretty seriously; see and be seen is OK, but it's easy to miss them, so better to fly in such a way as to minimise the likelihood of hitting someone.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, disagree with both of you there. It's no different to joining crosswind if there's traffic on early downwind or anywhere else in the circuit. Again, if people make the correct calls and conduct a proper lookout there is no more chance of conflict than anywhere else in the circuit.
There is no requirement to be at 1500' before turning overhead the field.
There is no requirement to be at 1500' before turning overhead the field.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: WA
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Ovum, Disagree with you there.
There is a big difference between a "no requirement" and "sound airmanship". The two are not equal. eg No requirement not to fly a single engine aircraft over rugged terrain with no safe forced landing area, but not good airmanship, or no requirement not to take off from an intersection, but once again not good airmanship.
"IF people make the correct calls AND conduct a proper lookout there is no more chance of conflict than anywhere else in the circuit."
See there are the assumptions - IF and AND. The reality is THEY DON'T therefore the BEST AIRMANSHIP solution is to go over at 1500ft.
Cheers.
There is a big difference between a "no requirement" and "sound airmanship". The two are not equal. eg No requirement not to fly a single engine aircraft over rugged terrain with no safe forced landing area, but not good airmanship, or no requirement not to take off from an intersection, but once again not good airmanship.
"IF people make the correct calls AND conduct a proper lookout there is no more chance of conflict than anywhere else in the circuit."
See there are the assumptions - IF and AND. The reality is THEY DON'T therefore the BEST AIRMANSHIP solution is to go over at 1500ft.
Cheers.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After take-off turn and climb until you are pointing in the right direction, and set course overhead. Make an appropriate b'case and exercise a good look out. As said... all good airmanship.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The entire system is based on the assumption that people follow the rules. If every pilot from every different type of operation assumed that every other pilot wasn't conforming to regulations, the sky would be a very messy place.
Imagine 3 IFR aircraft inbound to an uncontrolled aerodrome in IMC each responsible for their own separation and neither one trusting the others to do what they have broadcast regarding holding levels and postion in the approach. What you're basically suggesting is that every person in the sky is an idiot...the reality is that most people do the right thing.
It is better airmanship to make the correct the broadcasts and follow the regulations as they are written rather than each person attempting to make his/her own version of the regulations.
Triadic nailed it.
Imagine 3 IFR aircraft inbound to an uncontrolled aerodrome in IMC each responsible for their own separation and neither one trusting the others to do what they have broadcast regarding holding levels and postion in the approach. What you're basically suggesting is that every person in the sky is an idiot...the reality is that most people do the right thing.
It is better airmanship to make the correct the broadcasts and follow the regulations as they are written rather than each person attempting to make his/her own version of the regulations.
Triadic nailed it.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well.....according to the NAS changes on the 24th Nov aircraft at non-"towered" aerodromes as they call it, aircraft departing the circuit on the live side will need to climb on the extended runway centreline straight ahead to circuit height before turning 45degrees, when clear of the circuit traffic and can continue the turn if required.
Aircraft departing contrary to circuit direction the change remains unaffected.
Aircraft departing contrary to circuit direction the change remains unaffected.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1500 AGL because when you pass overhead you would not be following the usual circuit pattern ie up/cross/downwind, base and final, and furthermore 1500'AGL is the minimum overfly height which is essentially what you are doing.
They are the rules and always have been.
They are the rules and always have been.
