straight in approaches
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Age: 46
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
straight in approaches
officially, what are the rules regarding stright in approaches at an airfield thats a CTAF ALA.
Had an incident at an ALA where a pilot was conducting a straight in approach on a 5 mile final and they got on the radio and said dont...
COmmercially i would prefer a straight in approach to get the thing on the ground as quick as possible
Biz
Had an incident at an ALA where a pilot was conducting a straight in approach on a 5 mile final and they got on the radio and said dont...
COmmercially i would prefer a straight in approach to get the thing on the ground as quick as possible
Biz
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say I am suprised that a commercial pilot can't find this themselves, however here are the relevant sections:
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/.../1_1_1-112.pdf Paragraph 64.6 (Page 82 of the PDF)
CAR 166 Operations in vicinity of a non-controlled aerodrome
(3) The pilot in command of an aircraft may carry out a straight-in
approach to a non-controlled aerodrome only if:
(a) the aircraft is equipped with serviceable radio; and
(b) the pilot broadcasts the intention to do so on the VHF frequency
in use at the aerodrome; and
(c) before starting the approach, the pilot determines wind direction
and runways in use; and
(d) the pilot carries out all manoeuvring, to establish the aircraft on
final approach, at least 5 miles from the threshold of the landing
runway intended to be used; and
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in
the circuit pattern at the aerodrome.
(3) The pilot in command of an aircraft may carry out a straight-in
approach to a non-controlled aerodrome only if:
(a) the aircraft is equipped with serviceable radio; and
(b) the pilot broadcasts the intention to do so on the VHF frequency
in use at the aerodrome; and
(c) before starting the approach, the pilot determines wind direction
and runways in use; and
(d) the pilot carries out all manoeuvring, to establish the aircraft on
final approach, at least 5 miles from the threshold of the landing
runway intended to be used; and
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in
the circuit pattern at the aerodrome.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wherever the hotel drink ticket is valid
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't what???
Was this another pilot saying don't to the aircraft on final? Since when (with the exception of emergency situation) do we get on the radio and instruct another pilot what/what not to do???
Was this another pilot saying don't to the aircraft on final? Since when (with the exception of emergency situation) do we get on the radio and instruct another pilot what/what not to do???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Age: 46
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im not going to say the airfield but someone was there at the aeroclub and heard the pilots call..... got into an aircraft called the aircraft and said please join the circuit no straight in approach. The pilot did as requested relunctantly...
WHen skydivers are in operation well then thats a different story but aircraft would hear the transmissioin before getting there...
Jetstar1 I can find that out myself and i knew those rules but i was wondering if i was missing something here...
WHen skydivers are in operation well then thats a different story but aircraft would hear the transmissioin before getting there...
Jetstar1 I can find that out myself and i knew those rules but i was wondering if i was missing something here...
Not sure what the "don't" person was thinking, but I guess requesting a person not to do a straight in is completely ok. I also think that the airborne aircraft could've said, "sorry, we're doing a straight in anyway" and THAT, also, would've been completely ok.
The AIPs state (further to our learned colleagues points above...and which you undoubtedly already know) that straight in traffic shall give way to circuit traffic on base or final.
Anyway, I don't think you missed something...I think, perhaps, the person who made the radio call didn't completely understand the rules. Nice of the inbound aircraft to comply, but he certainly wasn't under any legal obligation to do so.
HP
The AIPs state (further to our learned colleagues points above...and which you undoubtedly already know) that straight in traffic shall give way to circuit traffic on base or final.
Anyway, I don't think you missed something...I think, perhaps, the person who made the radio call didn't completely understand the rules. Nice of the inbound aircraft to comply, but he certainly wasn't under any legal obligation to do so.
HP
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brissvagas, Australia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the guy on the ground said dont conduct a straight in? Who does he think he was. If your flying and want to conduct a straight in via the rules set out in jepss (for us IFR guys) then do it. Conducting a straight in approach is often a less time consuming, fuel saving, safter option for us IFR RPT ops PROVIDING everyone tells us there in the circuit. Not always the case !!. But if the PIC wants to conduct a straight in he can, the skydiver can wait...and if it was a RPT acft the skydiver would have to wait a further 15mins before he can drop.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Victoria
Age: 56
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just PERHAPS.....
I can think of one CTAF ALA that
1) Is at risk of closure/curtailed ops due to complaints of noise
2) Has a 'fly neighbourly' advice to try and avoid (1) above
3) Has a PUBLISHED account of such in ERSA
4) Has PPR in big letters in ERSA.
5) Is privately/club owned/operated/maintained.
Perhaps this airfield is fed up with noise complaints due due 'visiting' pilots from elsewhere NOT getting PPR, Upsetting the neighbours and endangering its ongoing existence.
This may not be the airfield that you refer to, but such a place exists, and CLEARLY instructs pilots to avoid straight in approaches unless operationally required (which would be rare)
I can think of one CTAF ALA that
1) Is at risk of closure/curtailed ops due to complaints of noise
2) Has a 'fly neighbourly' advice to try and avoid (1) above
3) Has a PUBLISHED account of such in ERSA
4) Has PPR in big letters in ERSA.
5) Is privately/club owned/operated/maintained.
Perhaps this airfield is fed up with noise complaints due due 'visiting' pilots from elsewhere NOT getting PPR, Upsetting the neighbours and endangering its ongoing existence.
This may not be the airfield that you refer to, but such a place exists, and CLEARLY instructs pilots to avoid straight in approaches unless operationally required (which would be rare)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the Dr. Complete the approach unless the was a VALID reason for not doing so. Then when on the ground, find the clown who made the radio call and tell him not to interrupt you when you are busy. Such calls are at the least bad airmanship and could be construed as unlawful interferance.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Age: 46
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah ok all very vaild points. I told the pilot not to listen to him but I wasnt there and i only know of this by speaking to the pilot and the guy at the airfield after it all happened.
He did as told in order to keep the piece so when he went in to pay the landing fee's there wasnt going to be any problems and a fight breaks out
Bizz
He did as told in order to keep the piece so when he went in to pay the landing fee's there wasnt going to be any problems and a fight breaks out
Bizz
or it could be Merridan.... there are plently of airports out there where they dont want you to use straight in approaches.
Your dicing with death out there if you do.. trust me
Your dicing with death out there if you do.. trust me
"Your dicing with death out there if you do.. trust me"
With all due respect - I think that is complete rubbish!
If a straight-in approach is carried out within the rules, as below:
"CAR 166 Operations in vicinity of a non-controlled aerodrome
(3) The pilot in command of an aircraft may carry out a straight-in approach to a non-controlled aerodrome only if:
(a) the aircraft is equipped with serviceable radio; and
(b) the pilot broadcasts the intention to do so on the VHF frequency in use at the aerodrome; and
(c) before starting the approach, the pilot determines wind direction and runways in use; and
(d) the pilot carries out all manoeuvring, to establish the aircraft on final approach, at least 5 miles from the threshold of the landing runway intended to be used; and
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in the circuit pattern at the aerodrome."
Compliance with the last point will take care of the busy circuit issue!
Dr
PS: Like much in aviation - stick within the rules and you will probably be OK!
With all due respect - I think that is complete rubbish!
If a straight-in approach is carried out within the rules, as below:
"CAR 166 Operations in vicinity of a non-controlled aerodrome
(3) The pilot in command of an aircraft may carry out a straight-in approach to a non-controlled aerodrome only if:
(a) the aircraft is equipped with serviceable radio; and
(b) the pilot broadcasts the intention to do so on the VHF frequency in use at the aerodrome; and
(c) before starting the approach, the pilot determines wind direction and runways in use; and
(d) the pilot carries out all manoeuvring, to establish the aircraft on final approach, at least 5 miles from the threshold of the landing runway intended to be used; and
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in the circuit pattern at the aerodrome."
Compliance with the last point will take care of the busy circuit issue!
Dr
PS: Like much in aviation - stick within the rules and you will probably be OK!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Once again I find myself agreeing the with the FTDK.
bodex666 - I agree less time in the circuit equals less time to hit another aircraft - ACCURATE, CONCISE, TIMELY communication is the key. The 5nm requirement increases the chances that if you're in a faster aircraft you'll have to complete a circuit if there is a slower aircraft ain front on a straight in approach - IMHO 3.5nm would be a better distance - I would be interested in your thoughts.
One thing that confuses me - how is joining upwind quieter than completing a straight in approach?
More time flying equals more noise. If there is an area that should not be flown over say B020 due noise abatement then it should be published that way.
W
bodex666 - I agree less time in the circuit equals less time to hit another aircraft - ACCURATE, CONCISE, TIMELY communication is the key. The 5nm requirement increases the chances that if you're in a faster aircraft you'll have to complete a circuit if there is a slower aircraft ain front on a straight in approach - IMHO 3.5nm would be a better distance - I would be interested in your thoughts.
One thing that confuses me - how is joining upwind quieter than completing a straight in approach?
More time flying equals more noise. If there is an area that should not be flown over say B020 due noise abatement then it should be published that way.W
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question that I've always thought about...
RPT Turoprop/Jet is conducting straight in approach. Other lighties conducting circuit to land. Who has right of way?
I fully understand this part..
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in the circuit pattern at the aerodrome.
But doesn't it also say in the CAR's that smaller aircraft should give way to larger aircraft?
RPT Turoprop/Jet is conducting straight in approach. Other lighties conducting circuit to land. Who has right of way?
I fully understand this part..
(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in the circuit pattern at the aerodrome.
But doesn't it also say in the CAR's that smaller aircraft should give way to larger aircraft?
I don't believe it does. Everyone is equal. At a past operation I worked at, we occasionally had problems with an unnamed jet operator, trying to tell us to 'hold out there until we land'. Needless to say, it went down like a lead fart, and more often than not we'd refuse to do so, and continue on our merry way. Always worked out that we'd create little, if any, disruption to their service.
Just because you're flying around in a 70 tonne metal tube, doesn't mean you have automatic right over 2.5 tonne metal tube,
.
Airmanship can change it slightly though. But that's out of courtesy of the PIC, not because "they're bigger than us".
morno
Just because you're flying around in a 70 tonne metal tube, doesn't mean you have automatic right over 2.5 tonne metal tube,
.Airmanship can change it slightly though. But that's out of courtesy of the PIC, not because "they're bigger than us".
morno
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Coral,
Please read the rules before you go flying.
Case 1
Refer CAR 1988 Subparagraph 166 (3) (e)
Case 2
Refer CAR 1988 Paragraph 162 (5) & (8)
Refer CAR 1988 Subparagraph 166 (2) (f)
(f) to the extent practicable, land and take off into the wind; and
In both of these cases the rules are quite clear on who has to give way.
W
Just because the rules say you can , doesn't mean you should.
Those shouting loudly about the rules and proclaiming their rights in the face of glaring common sense make me wonder aloud about our society.
Those shouting loudly about the rules and proclaiming their rights in the face of glaring common sense make me wonder aloud about our society.
Case 1
Refer CAR 1988 Subparagraph 166 (3) (e)
(3) The pilot in command of an aircraft may carry out a straight-in
approach to a non-controlled aerodrome only if:(e) the pilot gives way to any other aircraft established and flying in
the circuit pattern at the aerodrome.Case 2
Refer CAR 1988 Paragraph 162 (5) & (8)
(5) An aircraft in flight, or operating on the ground or water, shall give
way to other aircraft landing or on final approach to land.
(8) An aircraft that is about to take-off shall not attempt to do so until
there is no apparent risk of collision with other aircraft.way to other aircraft landing or on final approach to land.
(8) An aircraft that is about to take-off shall not attempt to do so until
Refer CAR 1988 Subparagraph 166 (2) (f)
(2) The pilot in command of an aircraft that is being operated in the
vicinity of a non-controlled aerodrome must:(f) to the extent practicable, land and take off into the wind; and
In both of these cases the rules are quite clear on who has to give way.
W
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Morno / Cost Index
Actually gliders and the lower aircraft have right of way (which will probably be the lighty)
Refer CAR 1988 Paragraphs (6) & (7)
Good airmanship though may result in the right of way aircraft doing a little extra sightseeing.
W
Actually gliders and the lower aircraft have right of way (which will probably be the lighty)
Refer CAR 1988 Paragraphs (6) & (7)
(6) When two or more heavier-than-air aircraft are approaching an
aerodrome for the purpose of landing, aircraft at the greater height
shall give way to aircraft at the lesser height, but the latter shall not
take advantage of this rule to cut-in in front of another that is on final
approach to land, or overtake that aircraft.
(7) Notwithstanding anything contained in subregulation (6), powerdriven
heavier-than-air aircraft shall give way to gliders.aerodrome for the purpose of landing, aircraft at the greater height
shall give way to aircraft at the lesser height, but the latter shall not
take advantage of this rule to cut-in in front of another that is on final
approach to land, or overtake that aircraft.
(7) Notwithstanding anything contained in subregulation (6), powerdriven
Good airmanship though may result in the right of way aircraft doing a little extra sightseeing.
W