circuit heights
What happened to 'see and avoid'? Appreciate what you guys are posting but after countless years of operating into CTAF's/ MBZ's have never....NEVER had a problem. Have had to extend downwind more times than I care to remember but it's not ever been a problem. Just sharing the airspace. WTF!!!
It's been a while since I looked it up, and my Jepps are out in the car
, but I'm fairly certain in one paragraph in Dep/App/Ldg Procedures it defines circuit heights.
Also, your downwind spacing should be larger if you're higher, and you should turn base later, as your 45deg / 2 wing chords / whatever measurement you use from the threshold for your base turn, should stay the same, and since you're higher you will be further down downwind when you turn.
Since you turned later, you would have a wider base leg than the 1000', and shouldn't come down on him from above. Just need to keep a good eye out for him on late base / early final (No 'S' ScottyDoo!
)
Arrr!
, but I'm fairly certain in one paragraph in Dep/App/Ldg Procedures it defines circuit heights.- Downwind speed < 60kts (i think) = 500' AGL
- Downwind speed 60kts - 120kts = 1000' AGL
- Jets or Higher performance pistons (Downwind speed >120 kts) = 1500' AGL
Also, your downwind spacing should be larger if you're higher, and you should turn base later, as your 45deg / 2 wing chords / whatever measurement you use from the threshold for your base turn, should stay the same, and since you're higher you will be further down downwind when you turn.
Since you turned later, you would have a wider base leg than the 1000', and shouldn't come down on him from above. Just need to keep a good eye out for him on late base / early final (No 'S' ScottyDoo!
)Arrr!
Last edited by Cap'n Arrr; 10th Dec 2007 at 01:07. Reason: I had a nice diagram drawn up, but it wouldnt show properly. =(
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cap'n Arrr yr quite correct as to the exact regs & have recited them here in parrot fashion, (tnxs 4 that) but the only trouble is we ain't dealing with 'parrots'(well some might think we are!). Humans tend to not do things the same every time esspecially when the pressure is on even if well trained, CFIT it a good Eg of that failing.
Krusty 34, good post. There's some good feedback here now so lets ignore the few that contribute nothing to this very important issue. I brought it (circuit heights) up 'cause of a few potential accidents/incedents I have either been a part of or have witnessed in recent times. Now that it's been a while since the regs where introduced some concerns are showing up here already.
"SQK".....excellent point about not being able to see the wind sock at
1500 AGL. In times of poor light due haze etc it is quite difficult to see the direction of the wind via the sock esspecially in some older types of A/C that have poor vision thru ageing side windows. You can in this case where weather maybe of a concern enter or descend (safely that is) to a lower circuit height for a better judgement as to what rwy to use. Of course in doing so it's good airmanship to say as much via the R/T as a general call before hand. Even tho one could ask a fellow aviator already in the circuit (if there is someone obviously) what the wind direction & strength is. I tend personally not to make my landing direction based on that entirely. No disrespect to others but over the years have been told via the radio a wind direction that was nothing like what it actually was. And bringing 5 tonnes or so of bucking craft in gusty conditions to land into a short strip one needs everything going for them including correct analysis if wind direction.
Some good stuff to read so far, tnxs guys/gals
Capt Wally:-)
Krusty 34, good post. There's some good feedback here now so lets ignore the few that contribute nothing to this very important issue. I brought it (circuit heights) up 'cause of a few potential accidents/incedents I have either been a part of or have witnessed in recent times. Now that it's been a while since the regs where introduced some concerns are showing up here already.
"SQK".....excellent point about not being able to see the wind sock at
1500 AGL. In times of poor light due haze etc it is quite difficult to see the direction of the wind via the sock esspecially in some older types of A/C that have poor vision thru ageing side windows. You can in this case where weather maybe of a concern enter or descend (safely that is) to a lower circuit height for a better judgement as to what rwy to use. Of course in doing so it's good airmanship to say as much via the R/T as a general call before hand. Even tho one could ask a fellow aviator already in the circuit (if there is someone obviously) what the wind direction & strength is. I tend personally not to make my landing direction based on that entirely. No disrespect to others but over the years have been told via the radio a wind direction that was nothing like what it actually was. And bringing 5 tonnes or so of bucking craft in gusty conditions to land into a short strip one needs everything going for them including correct analysis if wind direction.
Some good stuff to read so far, tnxs guys/gals
Capt Wally:-)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 43 S
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Das
Been outa the country for a while now but they both used to be on 126.7 when I last flew there.
Had a look at the online ersa, current 22 Nov both on 122.65 now is how I read it
Had a look at the online ersa, current 22 Nov both on 122.65 now is how I read it
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: France
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
300 ft per nautical mile
Capt Wally
If you use a descent of 300 ft a nautical mile and a stabilized approach, the higher (faster) aircraft will be on a wider circuit than the lower & slower aircraft. (on downwind leg about 3+ nm & 5nm). The pilot sits on the left of the overtaking aircraft so there is a better chance of seeing the lower slower aircraft.
The idea of flying or turning over a visual position is defeating the concept of look and judge. You can not do it on a black night at a dark hole airport.
Even if there is no DME information you can still judge the approach by the "apparent" distance between the approach end of the runway cone markers, runway lights etc. When you think of all the times that pilots make approaches to runways, using ILS or VASI systems and then do not use all the means available to judge the slope, it is a waste.
In the earlier times at Broome, there were no VASI or ILS installations to help with the approach slope and yet Corporate Jet operations were not a problem day or night.
Tmb
If you use a descent of 300 ft a nautical mile and a stabilized approach, the higher (faster) aircraft will be on a wider circuit than the lower & slower aircraft. (on downwind leg about 3+ nm & 5nm). The pilot sits on the left of the overtaking aircraft so there is a better chance of seeing the lower slower aircraft.
The idea of flying or turning over a visual position is defeating the concept of look and judge. You can not do it on a black night at a dark hole airport.
Even if there is no DME information you can still judge the approach by the "apparent" distance between the approach end of the runway cone markers, runway lights etc. When you think of all the times that pilots make approaches to runways, using ILS or VASI systems and then do not use all the means available to judge the slope, it is a waste.
In the earlier times at Broome, there were no VASI or ILS installations to help with the approach slope and yet Corporate Jet operations were not a problem day or night.
Tmb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Tmbstory" what you say is correct I doubt anyone here with experience would say otherwise but you miss the point (the point I was trying to bring across that is) a little I feel. We are dealing with pilots from all walks of life here, some wouldn't even know how to interpret a vasi or papi system day or night. Dme is a luxury at most country strips but GPS is more common but I doubt a lot of private pilots use it to assist in Cat. circling limitations.
I'm more concerned at the basic country strip where lots of basic pilots visit & know little else other than to maintain basic flight standards. Sometimes flying over a visual fixed position is required by local rules so that kind of throws out yr theory there of 'look & judge". In fact flying over a fixed landmark due to local rules (such as avoiding houses) is better at least you would know pretty much where to look for someone if you believe they are where they are meant to be. Still I respect yr post just that it may go over the heads of some here who fly with limited knowledge & not aspiring to do it better the next time.
I'm not having a go at anyone here esspecially those that do their best am more concerned that some out there just don't know any better of managing their circuit standards & R/T proceedures for that matter & like I said before that comes from education.
The original concept of separation of varying A/C types due to speed using diff circuit heights works to a point but does have it's downfalls, afterall we all flew at the same height for many years with the same radio problems but now we have to descend sometime to the lower guys level & we used to only do that on the dead side of a circuit, now we do it with the added risk of someone being right under us at the wrong time & we may not even know about it!
Regards
Capt Wally :-)
I'm more concerned at the basic country strip where lots of basic pilots visit & know little else other than to maintain basic flight standards. Sometimes flying over a visual fixed position is required by local rules so that kind of throws out yr theory there of 'look & judge". In fact flying over a fixed landmark due to local rules (such as avoiding houses) is better at least you would know pretty much where to look for someone if you believe they are where they are meant to be. Still I respect yr post just that it may go over the heads of some here who fly with limited knowledge & not aspiring to do it better the next time.
I'm not having a go at anyone here esspecially those that do their best am more concerned that some out there just don't know any better of managing their circuit standards & R/T proceedures for that matter & like I said before that comes from education.
The original concept of separation of varying A/C types due to speed using diff circuit heights works to a point but does have it's downfalls, afterall we all flew at the same height for many years with the same radio problems but now we have to descend sometime to the lower guys level & we used to only do that on the dead side of a circuit, now we do it with the added risk of someone being right under us at the wrong time & we may not even know about it!
Regards
Capt Wally :-)
The same wallahs who teach phrases such as "finalS", "over the top", "this time", etc etc etc.............
On topic, i havent flown the 1500ft circuit and i am in a turboprop. Mainly because its hardly a high performance aircraft. Problem i can sort of see is it is very hard to spot an aircraft below you blending in with all the houses than in front of you against sky. Not saying that's easy either but maybe a little bit. As for the no radios thing, well thats when the eyes should be doing their thing. I just wish everyone had radios and used them.
Since when is there more than one leg called final in the circuit.
1) Really really long final
2) Not quite so long but still pretty long final
3) Long final
4) Not really long final, but not exactly short final
5) Mid-final
6) Not too short final
7) Short final
8) Really short final
9) Really really short final
10) Any shorter final and we might as well call it a landing final
So what's your problem with "turning finals" again?
Dr
1) Really really long final
2) Not quite so long but still pretty long final
3) Long final
4) Not really long final, but not exactly short final
5) Mid-final
6) Not too short final
7) Short final
8) Really short final
9) Really really short final
10) Any shorter final and we might as well call it a landing final
So what's your problem with "turning finals" again?
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 10th Dec 2007 at 22:39.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately complaining about about downwind spacing and the size of other people's circuits is just like complaining about slow play in golf. It always happens and there isn't much you can do about it in an unregulated area.
The concept behind different circuit heights is to initially separate aircraft based upon performance and prevent a faster aircraft overtaking/descending into another aircraft. By the time they are at base turn and commencing final descent (remember - base and final is where most mid airs occur) hopefully the pilots have heard 1 or 2 radio calls from other aircraft and have positioned themselves appropriately.
For this to occur all pilots must be diligent in ensuring they have a good visual scan and using the radio (transmitting the standard radio broadcasts and LISTENING). Obviously this doesn't always occur, people do make mistakes, but other than education there is not a lot else you can do in a unregulated area. The next option is a third party to pass traffic information.
The concept behind different circuit heights is to initially separate aircraft based upon performance and prevent a faster aircraft overtaking/descending into another aircraft. By the time they are at base turn and commencing final descent (remember - base and final is where most mid airs occur) hopefully the pilots have heard 1 or 2 radio calls from other aircraft and have positioned themselves appropriately.
For this to occur all pilots must be diligent in ensuring they have a good visual scan and using the radio (transmitting the standard radio broadcasts and LISTENING). Obviously this doesn't always occur, people do make mistakes, but other than education there is not a lot else you can do in a unregulated area. The next option is a third party to pass traffic information.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I have ..err....Borrowed this from someone else, but its applicable here!
Ever noticed that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
Ever noticed that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not much better in a "controlled" environment either. I joined downwind in GAAP on Saturday, was doing 140-150knots @ 1,000ft and had actually passed inside an aircraft on crosswind @ 700ft that was now outside me, but was then asked to go "wide" because he was already number one and on what the controller called a "tight" circuit. He was probably travelling at less than half my speed so I had to turn over the top of him as he climbed up underneath me so I could go "wide" and be number 2 behind him and ended up doing a 5 mile final. Wasn't impressed and should have stood my ground.
Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?
Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?
Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Third party??
A third party to pass traffic increases the gabble on the radio, with much overtransmitting etc and is often much the same as not having radio at all.
If you have a controller actually controlling traffic flow, that's fine, but even they have to abbreviate and streamline procedures sometimes to cope with a really big traffic flow. (airshows etc.)
If you have a controller actually controlling traffic flow, that's fine, but even they have to abbreviate and streamline procedures sometimes to cope with a really big traffic flow. (airshows etc.)
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ever noticed that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
Does anyone have the correct terminology for when you can't comply with ATC direction for safety reasons?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Howard old mate......you missed something there
that could well read
Unable to comply due "Peckerhead" @ etc etc....
Unable to comply due (insert reason here)?
Unable to comply due "Peckerhead" @ etc etc....
In a GAAP if you are sequenced and it ain't going to work, request to make number one to the other aircraft. Majority of the time it is then a simple case of saying approved and telling the other aircraft they have been resequenced and follow the XXX overtaking on your right/left (as the case may be). Obviously there may well be occasions that you can't be resequenced for whatever reason so you might find you are trying to follow or going around and making another circuit. However if you don't ask you may well find yourself going around from base or final anyway.