What to do at the holding point?
Its a bit difficult for 4 172 to hold in a circuit at night while they wait for you to make an approach.
A little bit of careful planning makes plenty of room.
Also how one to make a strait in approach into an AD where App wont allow an instrument approach unless IMC
and hold you in CTA until 8 nm then only allow you down to radar lowest safe until you're within the circling area?
Lets not also forget you can descend from the LSALT when established within 5nm in the PAPI negating the need to remain at the LSALT until the circling area. If you are held at LSALT until the circling area as mentioned it is not difficult to get on profile quickly in a pressurised aeroplane. (2.66NM Cat B you can still be at 2600 feet)
Last edited by The Green Goblin; 10th Jan 2010 at 01:52.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sorry sir, but I know better than the AIPs".
Check Attitude
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight In Approaches
Straight In Approaches are a time saving and energy efficient alternative to joining the circuit in the conventional manner.
I use them where possible but within the published requirements.
Both the AIP and Jepps spell out the requirements quite clearly.
I dont have AIP references but Jepps, "Air Traffic Control", page AU-720, para 6.7.6 starts off:
"6.7.6.1 Only pilots of radio equipped aircraft may conduct a straight in approach at NON-towered aerodromes.
A straight in approach should only be used when it does not disrupt the flow of arriving and departing traffic.
Pilots conducting straight in approaches must give way to other aircraft in the circuit."
The section goes on to detail all the requirements.
The very last para, 6.7.6.4 d. says it all:
"an aircraft established on base leg or final approach for any runway has priority over an aircraft carrying out a straight in approach."
A straight in approach is a "concession", you cant disrupt the flow of traffic, you cant do it if an an aircraft is already on base or final,
you must be lit up like a Christmas Tree, you must listen to whats happening in the circuit,
you must make announcements, and communicate with circuit traffic.
No matter if you are punching into the aerodrome in a Metro, a wound up Baron etc, a straight in approach is just a concession, NOT a right.
Despite all that, a bit of common sense and good manners (also called airmanship)
will generally see a good outcome for the inbound and circuit aircraft.
Instructors, by the nature of their role, are teaching conventional circuit procedures to a student
and generally do not usually get to engage in straight in approaches.
On the other hand, pilots engaged in Charter or Aerial work often feel compelled to hurry up everything, hence the straight in.
There are many non towered aerodromes with Dash 8 or jet RPT wanting to make straight in approaches.
They dont have right of way by virtue of their speed or size and in places like Horn Island, Mt Isa etc,
instead they will tend to negotiate with other traffic to achieve the desired outcome.
It is regrettable that pilots who once trained at a training aerodrome forget that, when, as in the case mentioned, they try to force their way in.
Again, I'm all for the benefits of straight in approaches, but the rules and airmanship need to co incide, particularly at a training aerodrome.
I use them where possible but within the published requirements.
Both the AIP and Jepps spell out the requirements quite clearly.
I dont have AIP references but Jepps, "Air Traffic Control", page AU-720, para 6.7.6 starts off:
"6.7.6.1 Only pilots of radio equipped aircraft may conduct a straight in approach at NON-towered aerodromes.
A straight in approach should only be used when it does not disrupt the flow of arriving and departing traffic.
Pilots conducting straight in approaches must give way to other aircraft in the circuit."
The section goes on to detail all the requirements.
The very last para, 6.7.6.4 d. says it all:
"an aircraft established on base leg or final approach for any runway has priority over an aircraft carrying out a straight in approach."
A straight in approach is a "concession", you cant disrupt the flow of traffic, you cant do it if an an aircraft is already on base or final,
you must be lit up like a Christmas Tree, you must listen to whats happening in the circuit,
you must make announcements, and communicate with circuit traffic.
No matter if you are punching into the aerodrome in a Metro, a wound up Baron etc, a straight in approach is just a concession, NOT a right.
Despite all that, a bit of common sense and good manners (also called airmanship)
will generally see a good outcome for the inbound and circuit aircraft.
Instructors, by the nature of their role, are teaching conventional circuit procedures to a student
and generally do not usually get to engage in straight in approaches.
On the other hand, pilots engaged in Charter or Aerial work often feel compelled to hurry up everything, hence the straight in.
There are many non towered aerodromes with Dash 8 or jet RPT wanting to make straight in approaches.
They dont have right of way by virtue of their speed or size and in places like Horn Island, Mt Isa etc,
instead they will tend to negotiate with other traffic to achieve the desired outcome.
It is regrettable that pilots who once trained at a training aerodrome forget that, when, as in the case mentioned, they try to force their way in.
Again, I'm all for the benefits of straight in approaches, but the rules and airmanship need to co incide, particularly at a training aerodrome.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cecil,
AIP ENR 56.4:
To achieve the greatest degree of safety it is essential pilots of
radio equipped aircraft monitor and broadcast on the CTAF by 10
NM of a non-towered aerodrome.
radio equipped aircraft monitor and broadcast on the CTAF by 10
NM of a non-towered aerodrome.
Note: Carriage and use of radio is required at aerodromes depicted
on charts and in ERSA as CTAF <frequency> (R). At these
aerodromes pilots must commence monitoring and broadcasting
on the CTAF prior to and during all operations in the vicinity of the
on charts and in ERSA as CTAF <frequency> (R). At these
aerodromes pilots must commence monitoring and broadcasting
on the CTAF prior to and during all operations in the vicinity of the
aerodrome.
Pilots should make all of the recommended broadcasts unless operational
considerations preclude them from doing so.
Last edited by Ando1Bar; 10th Jan 2010 at 07:09. Reason: Hmm...not sure why the font is playing up
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got all that Ando, what I was after was the "REQUIRED" calls as against the "Recommended" calls. What do the AIP's say? Some say it's doing the right thing making 6 or 7 calls a circuit. Do that with anymore than two Aircraft doing close circuits and you can't get a word in, that's not the right thing.
GG I think you're really stretching the friendship to push strait into an AD with 4+ in the circuit at night without any priority and you're asking for trouble. If something happens no one will cover you.
Especially when its perfect reasonable to just join the circuit. Argue the point as much as you want but at the end of the day its outside the regs.
I have to admit if this argument came up a couple of years ago I would be right there laughing at what I'm saying but at the preservation of my career I do what the AIP and Ops manual says.
What if you were flying circuits at a RPT CTAF and heard a 737 call inbound and shortly later established on a 5 mile final. You shrugged turned base and continued on your merry way forcing the 737 to conduct a missed approach from about 2 mile into a congested circuit. What if the 737 pilots had asked you if they could make number 1 and you declined as you had right of way. What if they hit a light aircraft in the circuit who was not transponder equipped and their TCAS didn't pick it up? I bet CASA would be closely reviewing your interpretation of the regulations and I bet there would be some changes to the regs quick smart.
I don't demand right of way when I am the aircraft joining a straight in approach, but most of the time I am given it by the piston aircraft in the circuit from a common sense perspective.
Talk to your CFI and see what their opinion on this is. I bet it's the same as mine
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ringer Soak
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion everyone on here should listen to green goblin because all he ever does on here is make a lot of sense on a number of issues. I have never flown anything bigger than a cheiftain, however i think alot of these guys who have never flown bigger than a 172 would be more understanding if they had experience in a larger aircraft, and in a commercial operation.
Hey everyone, let's play pick the instructor that dreams of flying a twin...we will accept self nominations....
And as usual, GG is a straight talkin, sense makin, kiwi hater
j3
And as usual, GG is a straight talkin, sense makin, kiwi hater
j3
We WERE talking about your typical GAAP come CTAF-R at night with Turbines and pistons in the same cct. Not the oddities Rocky, KA, BRM, AY etc which typically speaking are much larger, can accommodate a much larger cct (god at KA you could fit 5 on downwind alone) and dont have high cct or RPT traffic at night. Rather 1 or 2 of each.
I'd be giving way to turboprops in the GAAP too outside tower hours. I'd even be slowing down or maneuvering as required to accommodate the piston twins.
I think the CFI would be a little confused as to why I'd come to him when my FIR lapsed 3 years ago.
And you still have not answered the question what are you flying?
Only recently did you state that you are a flight instructor. J3, time for some investigative PPruning
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what I was after was the "REQUIRED" calls as against the "Recommended" calls. What do the AIP's say? Some say it's doing the right thing making 6 or 7 calls a circuit. Do that with anymore than two Aircraft doing close circuits and you can't get a word in, that's not the right thing.
During a normal circuit the only calls you would expect from the training traffic would be the downwind, base and final calls. The only additional calls from the inbound traffic would be the inbound call, joining the circuit (or the straight in calls) and clear of the runway. With a bit of common sense and not crapping on during transmissions there shouldn't be too many problems on the radio.
I might be mistaken, but no where in the AIPs does it mention recommended vs required radio calls. The ongoing theme is:
Carriage and use of radio is required at aerodromes depicted on charts and in ERSA as CTAF<frequency>(R).
The GAAPs we are talking about all become CTAF(R)s once the tower closes.
Hey everyone, let's play pick the instructor that dreams of flying a twin...we will accept self nominations....
J3, not sure who you mean but I've been both the IFR twin inbound at night to a 'GAAP' in CTAF hours (4-5 Cessnas in the circuit), and the C172 conducting circuits. As a result I agree with most of the posts I've read, such as GG's, but I thought a couple of posts ago it was time to stand up for the circuit traffic, highlighting some of the airmanship issues we experience.
Personally I feel that straight in App's are dangerous. They where not allowed once upon a time & for good reason (except for the RPT boys under certain conditions, ground agent etc @ AD ) & now that we have multiple Asian students out & about it's even more dangerous, so no not for me I rarely do them & if so only at a CTAF/R.
As an Eg of arrogance existing in ALL sectors of aviation not just the boys in toy planes. I was in the circuit of a CTAF/R some time ago now conducting a std circuit & keeping a close eye/ear on a certain RPT A/C whom tried to barge their way in via a 5 mile final, (long story but they essentially lied about their position/time)end result? He did an orbit at around 1-2 miles from the threshold (somewhat low obviously) as I was on final for crossing rwy, & to think there could have been a couple of doz bods on board!.
I could tell a zillion stories as most could but some learn everything but remember nothing!
These threads usually end up a chest beating match & I guess that's human to do so especially with pilots but at the end of the day Airman-ship is the major concern, it pretty much no longer exists sadly. Courtesy is a rarity these days whether at the holding point or on final. I/we go from looong paved back rwy's to short dirt strips, we see 'em all, there's the arrogant at every port!
Roll on Class D where applicable, whoopy!
Wmk2
As an Eg of arrogance existing in ALL sectors of aviation not just the boys in toy planes. I was in the circuit of a CTAF/R some time ago now conducting a std circuit & keeping a close eye/ear on a certain RPT A/C whom tried to barge their way in via a 5 mile final, (long story but they essentially lied about their position/time)end result? He did an orbit at around 1-2 miles from the threshold (somewhat low obviously) as I was on final for crossing rwy, & to think there could have been a couple of doz bods on board!
.I could tell a zillion stories as most could but some learn everything but remember nothing!
These threads usually end up a chest beating match & I guess that's human to do so especially with pilots but at the end of the day Airman-ship is the major concern, it pretty much no longer exists sadly. Courtesy is a rarity these days whether at the holding point or on final. I/we go from looong paved back rwy's to short dirt strips, we see 'em all, there's the arrogant at every port!
Roll on Class D where applicable, whoopy!
Wmk2
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have an issue at a local field where there is no dead side due to para ops on one side of the field.
As a result if someone on base forces a go-around of someone on a straight-in approach things get very nasty because the go-around aircraft (subject to their height) has nowhere to go to avoid the para ops, another guy on base or the guy that caused the go-around.
In the real world, the guy about to turn base casually extends his downwind leg to let the faster straight-in aircraft go first. It's common courtesy or professional courtesy depending on how you look at it.
I give way (when I'm not required to) based on a number of factors, including the speed of the aircraft and the operating cost. If it's a $100 a minute S76 Sikorsky I'm happy to give way or a larger than normal hired aircraft that someone is paying $5 a minute for on his second mortgage
As a result if someone on base forces a go-around of someone on a straight-in approach things get very nasty because the go-around aircraft (subject to their height) has nowhere to go to avoid the para ops, another guy on base or the guy that caused the go-around.
In the real world, the guy about to turn base casually extends his downwind leg to let the faster straight-in aircraft go first. It's common courtesy or professional courtesy depending on how you look at it.
I give way (when I'm not required to) based on a number of factors, including the speed of the aircraft and the operating cost. If it's a $100 a minute S76 Sikorsky I'm happy to give way or a larger than normal hired aircraft that someone is paying $5 a minute for on his second mortgage
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XXX, big difference from your analogy, to 5 training aircraft doing night circuits. I'm all for helping each other out but even in the story you relate, the aircraft doing the straight in arrival, has already f*cked up by virtue of being on final when an aircraft is about to turn base. Sounds like a piss poor effort by the guy coming straight in. Where will it all end, when the rules are ignored because of 'how many dollars you pay to fly' is the deciding factor.
I find this rather amusing, as when the tower is open, if I can't fit the big guy in he joins upwind at 1500' then flies a circuit. I have not yet seen one not be able to do it. They all get on the ground eventually.
Relax and be Safe!
Flew in and out of Bangstown for about 4 years. In Metro (2/3/23) and Kingair.
Take a pill, take a number and join the circuit when you can. Being in a rush and thinking because you have a bigger plane gives you right of way is Bullsh!t and dangerous.
You should be more experience than the guys doing their night circuits and have an appreciation for safety. So what if you are 5 minutes later on the ground. This is new to these fellas in the circuit at night. They are nervous and doing the best they can. You arrive when everyone is out doing circuits, join the circuit, keep your eyes out for everyone and land when you can. Don't be a phuckwit and think your the man 'cause you plane is bigger or whatever!
I have had about half a dozen go-arounds on 11C during tower hours when cleared for that runway. Always from students over shooting the centre-line for 11R. Big deal. They are trainees learning at a busy airport and bound to make mistakes. You should be more understanding and realise that this is/was a potential threat because you should be more experienced, professional and have the big picture in sight.
The chest beating, macho man, little d!ck syndrome (my planes bigger) is dangerous and your cowboy tactics are not needed in Aviation anywhere. You think that this is just specific to a few airports in Australia? Try China sunshine. The planes are bigger and most of the time they speak Chinese 
Thanks for TCAS.
A few of you guys need to get over yourselves quickly. Your flying in a bigger plane than others around you "Bravo!"
From an ops manual a few years back, to use when making a decision and in the following order.
1. SAFETY
2. PASSENGER COMFORT
3. SCHEDULE
4. PROFITS
A lot of people get 1 and 4 mixed up! As long as 1 was ok, it was good to go. If it wasn't, no go. If you could get all 4 in that order of priority in your decision, golden. Didn't always happen, however, SAFETY always did. 
You guys ask yourselves, if it is SAFE pushing in and putting unnecessary pressure on beginers where they will get more nervous and more tunnel vision? Get over yourselves, get on with it and be SAFE!
Take a pill, take a number and join the circuit when you can. Being in a rush and thinking because you have a bigger plane gives you right of way is Bullsh!t and dangerous.
You should be more experience than the guys doing their night circuits and have an appreciation for safety. So what if you are 5 minutes later on the ground. This is new to these fellas in the circuit at night. They are nervous and doing the best they can. You arrive when everyone is out doing circuits, join the circuit, keep your eyes out for everyone and land when you can. Don't be a phuckwit and think your the man 'cause you plane is bigger or whatever! I have had about half a dozen go-arounds on 11C during tower hours when cleared for that runway. Always from students over shooting the centre-line for 11R. Big deal. They are trainees learning at a busy airport and bound to make mistakes. You should be more understanding and realise that this is/was a potential threat because you should be more experienced, professional and have the big picture in sight.
The chest beating, macho man, little d!ck syndrome (my planes bigger) is dangerous and your cowboy tactics are not needed in Aviation anywhere
. You think that this is just specific to a few airports in Australia? Try China sunshine. The planes are bigger and most of the time they speak Chinese Thanks for TCAS.A few of you guys need to get over yourselves quickly. Your flying in a bigger plane than others around you "Bravo!"
From an ops manual a few years back, to use when making a decision and in the following order.
1. SAFETY
2. PASSENGER COMFORT
3. SCHEDULE
4. PROFITS
A lot of people get 1 and 4 mixed up! As long as 1 was ok, it was good to go. If it wasn't, no go.
If you could get all 4 in that order of priority in your decision, golden. Didn't always happen, however, SAFETY always did. You guys ask yourselves, if it is SAFE pushing in and putting unnecessary pressure on beginers where they will get more nervous and more tunnel vision? Get over yourselves, get on with it and be SAFE!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trent, meant to say thanks for your comments back on the previous page.
Most of what is being said previously make sense, but it all depends on the situation. As Snoop Dog says above, the pilots of the faster/bigger aeroplanes shouldn't have the mentality that everyone should get out of their way, and I don't think that was the point Green Goblin was trying to get across.
A bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone in the circuit at night ensures a safe outcome. There is no correct solution for this topic.
Work together folks. Trying to slow a 180 kt + machine down to join the circuit (either overhead or on final) is bloody hard when multiple Cessnas are doing circuits. Teaching Bloggs to fly at night and get him/her ready for solo in 2 hours, with faster aeroplanes joining/departing, is bloody hard as well. Throw in an inconsiderate pilot from either 'side' and the problems begin.
Threat & error management = airmanship = common bloody sense.
Situational awareness + common bloody sense = everyone back on the ground safely.
Most of what is being said previously make sense, but it all depends on the situation. As Snoop Dog says above, the pilots of the faster/bigger aeroplanes shouldn't have the mentality that everyone should get out of their way, and I don't think that was the point Green Goblin was trying to get across.
A bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone in the circuit at night ensures a safe outcome. There is no correct solution for this topic.
Work together folks. Trying to slow a 180 kt + machine down to join the circuit (either overhead or on final) is bloody hard when multiple Cessnas are doing circuits. Teaching Bloggs to fly at night and get him/her ready for solo in 2 hours, with faster aeroplanes joining/departing, is bloody hard as well. Throw in an inconsiderate pilot from either 'side' and the problems begin.
Threat & error management = airmanship = common bloody sense.
Situational awareness + common bloody sense = everyone back on the ground safely.
Eovictim it's ok I am a controller at a GAAP
That's what I meant by if I can't fit you into the circuit you go to upwind. I haven't left one up there yet
But seriously this convo has morphed away from the busy GAAP environment to talking about aerodromes where you have a lot more space to work the situation out. A bit of communication from all parties normally sorts anything out I found from my old flying days.
At the GAAP I work at there is a limit on the circuit at night as well(or should I say out of tower hours), so it should never get so out of hand that one can't land. Admittedly the biggest that comes in is either a C550 or BE20/PC12 but it seems to work ok even we aren't there.
That's what I meant by if I can't fit you into the circuit you go to upwind. I haven't left one up there yet
But seriously this convo has morphed away from the busy GAAP environment to talking about aerodromes where you have a lot more space to work the situation out. A bit of communication from all parties normally sorts anything out I found from my old flying days.
At the GAAP I work at there is a limit on the circuit at night as well(or should I say out of tower hours), so it should never get so out of hand that one can't land. Admittedly the biggest that comes in is either a C550 or BE20/PC12 but it seems to work ok even we aren't there.
