When is a/g no longer safe?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cubflyer, then I guess you are flying out of the midlands airfield in question. Spend some time watching the behaviour of some of the inconsiderates when it is busy and you will understand better what we are talking about.
I did find it a little windy today but nothing too bad, the windshear was the main problem, 30kts at 100ft dropping off quite suddenly..
Are you by chance the flyer of the nice yellow cub?
I did find it a little windy today but nothing too bad, the windshear was the main problem, 30kts at 100ft dropping off quite suddenly..
Are you by chance the flyer of the nice yellow cub?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a general comment (I have no idea what this airfield with 3 runways is) what I find the biggest problem is aircraft cutting me up on downwind/base.
I fly downwind at maybe 110kt initially, slowing down to 90kt as the gear comes down and 10deg flaps and turn final at 90kt, slowing (when on final) to 80kt with 40deg flaps and trimming back to 75kt, flaring down to 70kt or so. I have been to airfields where I make all the right radio calls and still somebody cuts me up and turns final, forcing me to G/A. Then it happens again. Once I had to do it 3 times in a row (that was Wellesbourne I think). It makes me wonder if some of these people (which appear to be instructors in some cases) have a PPL. I have always been taught that one should follow the aircraft in front and not cut it up - is this wrong?
Doubtless the people that do this think they will get away with it because they see a big gap between them and me, but they fail to realise that I am also going to fly the base leg and final a bit quicker than their C150, or whatever.
But there is no way I am going to fly downwind with 40deg flaps and 70kt - it is simply not safe to turn base and final if the stall speed in that config is 59kt.
People who fly twins must have a lot of fun getting into some of these fields.
Most likely, if you know your local field then you can fly a tighter circuit that someone who is struggling to spot the grass runway against a surround of very similar looking fields. Some grass fields I've been to are very hard to see. But the locals are also in a better position to behave correctly, for the same reason.
I fly downwind at maybe 110kt initially, slowing down to 90kt as the gear comes down and 10deg flaps and turn final at 90kt, slowing (when on final) to 80kt with 40deg flaps and trimming back to 75kt, flaring down to 70kt or so. I have been to airfields where I make all the right radio calls and still somebody cuts me up and turns final, forcing me to G/A. Then it happens again. Once I had to do it 3 times in a row (that was Wellesbourne I think). It makes me wonder if some of these people (which appear to be instructors in some cases) have a PPL. I have always been taught that one should follow the aircraft in front and not cut it up - is this wrong?
Doubtless the people that do this think they will get away with it because they see a big gap between them and me, but they fail to realise that I am also going to fly the base leg and final a bit quicker than their C150, or whatever.
But there is no way I am going to fly downwind with 40deg flaps and 70kt - it is simply not safe to turn base and final if the stall speed in that config is 59kt.
People who fly twins must have a lot of fun getting into some of these fields.
Most likely, if you know your local field then you can fly a tighter circuit that someone who is struggling to spot the grass runway against a surround of very similar looking fields. Some grass fields I've been to are very hard to see. But the locals are also in a better position to behave correctly, for the same reason.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi IO-540
I don’t want to appear patronizing, but the biggest key to success at our airfield is pilots flexibility. Everything from non radio homebuilts, to turboprop twins operates on the same circuit. My partner and myself operate aircraft with final App speeds between 45-80kts. Circuit speeds of up to 100 (book figures). It works because of our overhead join and ability of pilots to project Plane and path. It helps eliminates go arounds. Sometimes a yak or a pits will give you a radio call and fly a tighter circuit (with your approval). It works because of aware and flexible pilots. The main problem being visitors who deviate from our published circuit pattern and have 2-3 mile finals. But everybody has to learn.
Please feel free to come down to WW fly with one of our excellent instructors or any of our experienced club members. I’m sure FFF will take you up in his slippery Europa or PM me. And if you get cut up, there is always a log fire and real ale in which to destress
Safe and considerate flying
Wide
I don’t want to appear patronizing, but the biggest key to success at our airfield is pilots flexibility. Everything from non radio homebuilts, to turboprop twins operates on the same circuit. My partner and myself operate aircraft with final App speeds between 45-80kts. Circuit speeds of up to 100 (book figures). It works because of our overhead join and ability of pilots to project Plane and path. It helps eliminates go arounds. Sometimes a yak or a pits will give you a radio call and fly a tighter circuit (with your approval). It works because of aware and flexible pilots. The main problem being visitors who deviate from our published circuit pattern and have 2-3 mile finals. But everybody has to learn.
Please feel free to come down to WW fly with one of our excellent instructors or any of our experienced club members. I’m sure FFF will take you up in his slippery Europa or PM me. And if you get cut up, there is always a log fire and real ale in which to destress
Safe and considerate flying
Wide
Guest
Posts: n/a
IO540
The same thing happened to me when I first started flying a PA32 not so long after getting my PPL.
It seemed like a 'hot ship' to me with my low hours and I was flying the famous 'tri-county' circuits, wondering why people where cutting me up.
Then the penny dropped and I realised that I was extended downwind beyond their visual range
(or at least they weren't looking for me where I was!)
Fortunately practice converted my perception of the hot ship into the docile friend and I became a better pilot, flew tighter circuits and didn't get cut up so much. (Still never let the asi get under 9okts until final though.)
Of course, this tale may have zero relevance to you, but it seemed worth recalling.
The same thing happened to me when I first started flying a PA32 not so long after getting my PPL.
It seemed like a 'hot ship' to me with my low hours and I was flying the famous 'tri-county' circuits, wondering why people where cutting me up.
Then the penny dropped and I realised that I was extended downwind beyond their visual range
(or at least they weren't looking for me where I was!)Fortunately practice converted my perception of the hot ship into the docile friend and I became a better pilot, flew tighter circuits and didn't get cut up so much. (Still never let the asi get under 9okts until final though.)
Of course, this tale may have zero relevance to you, but it seemed worth recalling.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wide,
Yes, I'll quite hapilly take anyone for a blast around the WW circuit in my aircraft, or else the club will supply you with an instructor free of charge to show you the circuits in your own aircraft.
But I don't think that's the point. You or I could show any one individual how the WW circuits operate. If it's busy enough, we can show that individual how to fit in with other aircraft with, possibly, very different speeds. But that won't stop that individual from being cut up back at his home airfield. In order to stop that, we'd need to educate everyone who regularly flies from the airfield in question. And that's something which only the management at that airfield can arrange.
FFF
---------------
Yes, I'll quite hapilly take anyone for a blast around the WW circuit in my aircraft, or else the club will supply you with an instructor free of charge to show you the circuits in your own aircraft.
But I don't think that's the point. You or I could show any one individual how the WW circuits operate. If it's busy enough, we can show that individual how to fit in with other aircraft with, possibly, very different speeds. But that won't stop that individual from being cut up back at his home airfield. In order to stop that, we'd need to educate everyone who regularly flies from the airfield in question. And that's something which only the management at that airfield can arrange.
FFF
---------------
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Vancouver, BC.
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been said many times before on this forum, file an MOR, and speak with the CAA Aerodrome Standards at Gatwick. The rules of the air are rules and if they are being breached then safety is likely to be compromised.
AFIS can indeed contribute to a safer operating environment, if for no other reason then they have the SOP's and the weight of the CAA and the aerodrome operator on their side. AFIS is also a means to monitor aerodrome operating standards and may, as a representitive of the aerodrome operator take action against offenders by refusing them approval to operate from the aerodrome.
If things are that bad then you are obliged to take action and I suggest the above.
and Tinstaafl, be careful when offering advice like that when in an ATC/AFIS environment. Of course a pilot must act to ensure the safety of his aircraft and by all means if an immediate dangerous situation can be resolved by speaking directly to another aircraft or broadcast then do so, but remember it may also lead to confusion. You should preface that post with a 'where available and if time permits always route your call though the local ATC/FISO'. And I am sure any ATCO/FIS is happy to entertain an MOR/ASR if a dangerous situation occurs.
AFIS can indeed contribute to a safer operating environment, if for no other reason then they have the SOP's and the weight of the CAA and the aerodrome operator on their side. AFIS is also a means to monitor aerodrome operating standards and may, as a representitive of the aerodrome operator take action against offenders by refusing them approval to operate from the aerodrome.
If things are that bad then you are obliged to take action and I suggest the above.
and Tinstaafl, be careful when offering advice like that when in an ATC/AFIS environment. Of course a pilot must act to ensure the safety of his aircraft and by all means if an immediate dangerous situation can be resolved by speaking directly to another aircraft or broadcast then do so, but remember it may also lead to confusion. You should preface that post with a 'where available and if time permits always route your call though the local ATC/FISO'. And I am sure any ATCO/FIS is happy to entertain an MOR/ASR if a dangerous situation occurs.
Last edited by no sig; 16th Dec 2003 at 01:57.
Beg to differ. Why on earth should I 'be careful' with that advice? It's through being careful that I've had cause to use it.
As long as it's MY & MY passengers necks then I & I alone have the final responsibility to make the decisions that affect my flight. Not A/G. Not FISO. Not ATC. That's why the term pilot-in-command is used. IF I consider that the safety of MY flight is compromised by routing comms through ATC/FISO/AG then I WILL bypass ATC/FISO/AG. That's my job. ATC are more than welcome to submit an MOR/ASR if they get upset. Fine. I'll happily defend my decisions later.
If they still get their nose out of joint & I consider the situation warrants then I'll start using terms like 'require', 'pan' & 'mayday'. NO ATC has the authority to compromise my flight's safety. I can guarantee that I will take whatever action I consider necessary to protect my & passenger's necks.
You seem to have forgotten that ATC instructions & procedures are to be followed AS LONG AS the PIC believes they will not adversely affect the safety of the flight.
And that's the crux of it.
As long as it's MY & MY passengers necks then I & I alone have the final responsibility to make the decisions that affect my flight. Not A/G. Not FISO. Not ATC. That's why the term pilot-in-command is used. IF I consider that the safety of MY flight is compromised by routing comms through ATC/FISO/AG then I WILL bypass ATC/FISO/AG. That's my job. ATC are more than welcome to submit an MOR/ASR if they get upset. Fine. I'll happily defend my decisions later.
If they still get their nose out of joint & I consider the situation warrants then I'll start using terms like 'require', 'pan' & 'mayday'. NO ATC has the authority to compromise my flight's safety. I can guarantee that I will take whatever action I consider necessary to protect my & passenger's necks.
You seem to have forgotten that ATC instructions & procedures are to be followed AS LONG AS the PIC believes they will not adversely affect the safety of the flight.
And that's the crux of it.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi No Sig
I know there is a place for the official reports, but these should be a very last resort. There would also be a tendency to minimize their effectiveness if too many reports are received. I have a personal problem with AFISO; the standard is just too variable. The majority are excellent and facilitate safe flight, but there are some whose god like attitude are a positive detriment to safety.
The UK full ATC service is the best in the world. (No I am not an ATCO).
FFF. Twice on this thread I have to agree with you (My street cred will be going down the PAN). However, I think if Pilots set examples to there base airfield management, then good things can only come out of it. (See I still have faith in humanity) In fact the more we as pilots can do this the less need for regulation. If we keep cocking up (Controlled airspace infringements etc), then we can expect the CAA to come down on us. So (again a personal opinion) if all pilots can be flexible, aware, considerate and perhaps professional (with a small p) then long term we will be far better off. FFF see you at WW wed?
Cubflyer. How dare you be so correct about the state of Waltham green and pleasant land
Regards to all
Wide
PS: Heard a disgraceful display of airmanship the other day on Farnborough Radar. A light aircraft pilot arguing with a very calm Irish ATCO. I will get round to starting a thread on that one. A/C without clearance was 2 miles east of Ascot @2000 for those who know the local.
Now that was a case for paperwork ( I hope).
Tinstaafl
There are time where a quick curt call a fellow aviator is an appropriate response to a problem. I would question this when dealing with full ATC. They are aviation Professionals (with a big P this time). Have used both PAN and Mayday for real, I trust you would not abuse the rights and responsibilities that go with them. No ATC unit would ever deliberately compromise your flight safety, they will always attempt to improve the safety integrity of your operation
I used to get a little stressed sometime with the actions of others. Then I thought that I don’t get it right all of the time. So for the benefit of me and my passengers necks I chill. That is not a bad thought whether you are flying a 152 or a 747!
Relaxed flying to all
Wide
I know there is a place for the official reports, but these should be a very last resort. There would also be a tendency to minimize their effectiveness if too many reports are received. I have a personal problem with AFISO; the standard is just too variable. The majority are excellent and facilitate safe flight, but there are some whose god like attitude are a positive detriment to safety.
The UK full ATC service is the best in the world. (No I am not an ATCO).
FFF. Twice on this thread I have to agree with you (My street cred will be going down the PAN). However, I think if Pilots set examples to there base airfield management, then good things can only come out of it. (See I still have faith in humanity) In fact the more we as pilots can do this the less need for regulation. If we keep cocking up (Controlled airspace infringements etc), then we can expect the CAA to come down on us. So (again a personal opinion) if all pilots can be flexible, aware, considerate and perhaps professional (with a small p) then long term we will be far better off. FFF see you at WW wed?
Cubflyer. How dare you be so correct about the state of Waltham green and pleasant land
Regards to all
Wide
PS: Heard a disgraceful display of airmanship the other day on Farnborough Radar. A light aircraft pilot arguing with a very calm Irish ATCO. I will get round to starting a thread on that one. A/C without clearance was 2 miles east of Ascot @2000 for those who know the local.
Now that was a case for paperwork ( I hope).Tinstaafl
There are time where a quick curt call a fellow aviator is an appropriate response to a problem. I would question this when dealing with full ATC. They are aviation Professionals (with a big P this time). Have used both PAN and Mayday for real, I trust you would not abuse the rights and responsibilities that go with them. No ATC unit would ever deliberately compromise your flight safety, they will always attempt to improve the safety integrity of your operation
I used to get a little stressed sometime with the actions of others. Then I thought that I don’t get it right all of the time. So for the benefit of me and my passengers necks I chill. That is not a bad thought whether you are flying a 152 or a 747!
Relaxed flying to all
Wide
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wide body & Final 3 Greens
I would not regard any answer as patronising; we all learn all the time and my question was basically whether people are supposed to follow the aircraft in front of them. I am pretty sure this is the case - even if the one in front appears to be flying an unusually wide circuit.
The issue about them not seeing the aircraft in front... well the cases I refer to are radio-equipped aircraft, and if you have a radio you should be listening to it, or have an instructor with you doing so. Then if you hear "G-xxxx late downwind" or "G-xxx turning base" you will know there is somebody about to do what you are thinking of doing. So WHY do it?
I suspect a major part of the reason for this behaviour is that an extra 5 minutes is an extra £7 or so. An overhead join is an extra £5. A large % of PPLs are skint. Which is why I see a lot of people get stupidly impatient on the ground... but then at my airfield everybody pays brakes off to brakes on.
I would not regard any answer as patronising; we all learn all the time and my question was basically whether people are supposed to follow the aircraft in front of them. I am pretty sure this is the case - even if the one in front appears to be flying an unusually wide circuit.
The issue about them not seeing the aircraft in front... well the cases I refer to are radio-equipped aircraft, and if you have a radio you should be listening to it, or have an instructor with you doing so. Then if you hear "G-xxxx late downwind" or "G-xxx turning base" you will know there is somebody about to do what you are thinking of doing. So WHY do it?
I suspect a major part of the reason for this behaviour is that an extra 5 minutes is an extra £7 or so. An overhead join is an extra £5. A large % of PPLs are skint. Which is why I see a lot of people get stupidly impatient on the ground... but then at my airfield everybody pays brakes off to brakes on.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Io540
Yep I agree with all you say(all this agreeing with people
). I think its called Situational Awareness (some great terms these days to replace airmanship). A radio (if you have one) does help ESP if you have to ask a pilot of VP retract if you can cut inside
I would love to have a good short reply to your last paragraph. But sadly you have hit a Major problem with GA. And that sir is another Thread.
Off to bed
Night night
Wide
Yep I agree with all you say(all this agreeing with people
). I think its called Situational Awareness (some great terms these days to replace airmanship). A radio (if you have one) does help ESP if you have to ask a pilot of VP retract if you can cut inside I would love to have a good short reply to your last paragraph. But sadly you have hit a Major problem with GA. And that sir is another Thread.
Off to bed
Night night
Wide
I'm well aware that ATC are professionals. Some of my friends are one... 
But the final call is mine. If I decide I need to talk directly, I do.
Of course I would not abuse Pan & Mayday. I know what they're there for. MY safety.
But the final call is mine. If I decide I need to talk directly, I do.
Of course I would not abuse Pan & Mayday. I know what they're there for. MY safety.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wide,
Well, I figured that if I post enough times, eventually I'd have to post something that someone would agree with
Sadly not - I'll be at work. I will be there in spirit, though, if not in body.
FFF
---------------
FFF. Twice on this thread I have to agree with you
See you at WW wed?
FFF
---------------
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Burgess Hill, UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like a lot of agreement lately on this thread, that must be a good thing!
Do we have to follow aircraft around the circuit, I think that probably is in the rules, but it is also probably in the rules that aircraft should comply with the circuit pattern.
So when some slow aircraft extends downwind a mile or so, with no one infront, are they still in the circuit??!! I often leave the circuit from the downwind if Im going that way and haev seen others doing similar. If its a fast aircraft then you might wait for them to be a bit further out to see if they are going to turn base, before turning base yourself. But in general if fast aircraft are flying the circuit correctly it will be fairly obvious what they are doing and although they will maybe fly a wider circuit, it shouldnt actually take them any longer to get to the threshold. I also fly an RV-6 which usually ends up downwind slowing from 120kt towards 90kt by abeam the threshold, then slowing to 75 on final, but if I get it right I can still fly the same circuit as a well flown Cessna 150.
There is some bad airmanship of too large circuits being flown and there is some bad airmanship of people cutting in when they shouldnt, both need to learn.
Similarly people need to learn when they can line up infront of an aircraft on approach. If they are going to do a rolling take-off, then that is a lot different to if they are gonig to sit on the runway adjusting the DI, reading their checklist and whatever else people find to do! before eventually putting the power on and going. And people on finals need to realise that people might be lining up infront of them and thats all right as long as they are airborne before you need to land!
Ive regularly only been cleared to land at 100-200ft as the aircraft infront rotates, at a full ATC commericial airfield flying at their speeds but still landing at 120kt, no problems there. Occasionally there is a go-around, but most of the time it works and thats the only way to cope with the traffic flows.
Ive heard someone moaning that someone was cleared to line up and take-off infront of them at a GA airfield with full ATC. It was tight, but they could easily have landed behind after the aircraft had taken off and of course could have gone around if they didnt like it.
The early part of this thread seemed to be promoting the use of MORs to report to the CAA anything you didnt like. I dont see any real dangers here, maybe some poor airmanship but nothing that shouldnt be able to be sorted out by talking to those involved.
I rember an earlier thread on here where someone was being berated for filing an MOR regarding low level aerobatics taking place on a busy airfield with non radio arrivals.
A bit of double standards here, maybe different people and a different situation. But lets think before we get the CAA involved. After all I think a lot of this is just inconvenience (even if caused by poor airmanship) rather than real flight safety
Happy flying!!
Do we have to follow aircraft around the circuit, I think that probably is in the rules, but it is also probably in the rules that aircraft should comply with the circuit pattern.
So when some slow aircraft extends downwind a mile or so, with no one infront, are they still in the circuit??!! I often leave the circuit from the downwind if Im going that way and haev seen others doing similar. If its a fast aircraft then you might wait for them to be a bit further out to see if they are going to turn base, before turning base yourself. But in general if fast aircraft are flying the circuit correctly it will be fairly obvious what they are doing and although they will maybe fly a wider circuit, it shouldnt actually take them any longer to get to the threshold. I also fly an RV-6 which usually ends up downwind slowing from 120kt towards 90kt by abeam the threshold, then slowing to 75 on final, but if I get it right I can still fly the same circuit as a well flown Cessna 150.
There is some bad airmanship of too large circuits being flown and there is some bad airmanship of people cutting in when they shouldnt, both need to learn.
Similarly people need to learn when they can line up infront of an aircraft on approach. If they are going to do a rolling take-off, then that is a lot different to if they are gonig to sit on the runway adjusting the DI, reading their checklist and whatever else people find to do! before eventually putting the power on and going. And people on finals need to realise that people might be lining up infront of them and thats all right as long as they are airborne before you need to land!
Ive regularly only been cleared to land at 100-200ft as the aircraft infront rotates, at a full ATC commericial airfield flying at their speeds but still landing at 120kt, no problems there. Occasionally there is a go-around, but most of the time it works and thats the only way to cope with the traffic flows.
Ive heard someone moaning that someone was cleared to line up and take-off infront of them at a GA airfield with full ATC. It was tight, but they could easily have landed behind after the aircraft had taken off and of course could have gone around if they didnt like it.
The early part of this thread seemed to be promoting the use of MORs to report to the CAA anything you didnt like. I dont see any real dangers here, maybe some poor airmanship but nothing that shouldnt be able to be sorted out by talking to those involved.
I rember an earlier thread on here where someone was being berated for filing an MOR regarding low level aerobatics taking place on a busy airfield with non radio arrivals.
A bit of double standards here, maybe different people and a different situation. But lets think before we get the CAA involved. After all I think a lot of this is just inconvenience (even if caused by poor airmanship) rather than real flight safety
Happy flying!!
Not so N, but still FG
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wide Body makes good points about situational awareness based on a mixture of looking out, and (if radio equipped) listening to what others announce, and making judgments by reference to that. You can to some extent provide your own ATC if you switch on your mental radar screen plotting where people are in the circuit or making joins. We can't all carry in our heads a full list of likely downwind, base and approach speeds for other GA types, but we can make judgments on the basis of "that other aircraft is likely to be much faster/much slower/about the same as me" and "that is an old aircraft with reduced forward visibility when landing which will likely fly a tight circuit and a curved/slipped approach". Flying downwind in an aircraft a little faster than the average, it’s not too much of a chore to maintain spacing by setting up in the base leg configuration. Conversely, it’s no big deal to keep your speed up to give the guy behind a chance, if you know the aircraft well enough to get rid of the speed further along.
Of course, none of this helps if people have got into a habit of flying like selfish yobs.
Of course, none of this helps if people have got into a habit of flying like selfish yobs.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst not condoning the practice, I'm sure that one of the reasons for a 'cut up situation' to develop on finals is the size of the circuits people fly these days.
Flying a Cub in the circuit (80mph downwind) on Sunday, A/G service and I am able to land back on the airfield if the engine quits. No extraneous chat on the R/T, just position calls. As I turn crosswind, an aircraft (C150) calls downwind. As I turn downwind, I see it......about 2 miles in my 3 o'clock (LH circuit).
Why do Pilots need to fly such wide circuits? Do they need a long time to set up finals in such a complex and slippery type such as the C150?
Anyway, my point is that I was on the ground and taxying back to the hangar before the other aircraft had even landed. A small bit of decision making as I was flying kept generous separation at all times, and all without the intervention of the guy in the A/G shack.
Maybe if my smaller circuit had been misjudged and was allowed to get in the way of the other aircraft, who was technically No.1 in the circuit, then that maybe could be the cause of a cut-up.
Maybe I should have just followed the C150 and done a 20 min circuit instead of a 5 minute one, the circuit gradually growing in size as the day went on?
At our airfield, it's all about integrating with all the other operators, from Vintage types to fast Twins and even faster warbirds..It all works without any bad feelings....
Flying a Cub in the circuit (80mph downwind) on Sunday, A/G service and I am able to land back on the airfield if the engine quits. No extraneous chat on the R/T, just position calls. As I turn crosswind, an aircraft (C150) calls downwind. As I turn downwind, I see it......about 2 miles in my 3 o'clock (LH circuit).
Why do Pilots need to fly such wide circuits? Do they need a long time to set up finals in such a complex and slippery type such as the C150?
Anyway, my point is that I was on the ground and taxying back to the hangar before the other aircraft had even landed. A small bit of decision making as I was flying kept generous separation at all times, and all without the intervention of the guy in the A/G shack.
Maybe if my smaller circuit had been misjudged and was allowed to get in the way of the other aircraft, who was technically No.1 in the circuit, then that maybe could be the cause of a cut-up.
Maybe I should have just followed the C150 and done a 20 min circuit instead of a 5 minute one, the circuit gradually growing in size as the day went on?
At our airfield, it's all about integrating with all the other operators, from Vintage types to fast Twins and even faster warbirds..It all works without any bad feelings....
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Why do Pilots need to fly such wide circuits? Do they need a long time to set up finals in such a complex and slippery type such as the C150?
Yes. Never understood that method of placing the turn onto downwind.
To be fair a large circuit can be needed by students in the early stages of their training when they're still rather slow to comprehend & react to what's happening. That's self limiting though once they've learned to cope.
To be fair a large circuit can be needed by students in the early stages of their training when they're still rather slow to comprehend & react to what's happening. That's self limiting though once they've learned to cope.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know what they're there for. MY safety.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zlin,
While you were flying your circuit inside of the C150, did you communicate with him?
On a frequency with AFIS in that situation, I'd be tempted to say something along the lines of "G-CD, could I ask the C150 on downwind if he'd mind me cutting inside him." You say the airfield had A/G, in which case I'd either use similar phrasing as with AFIS, or else just ask the pilot directly, depending on how "involved" the A/G station liked to be at the airfield in question.
(Absolutely nothing wrong with cutting in front of him in that scenario as far as I'm concerned, by the way - as long as you are sure you will be clear in time, which you obviously were.)
FFF
-------------
While you were flying your circuit inside of the C150, did you communicate with him?
On a frequency with AFIS in that situation, I'd be tempted to say something along the lines of "G-CD, could I ask the C150 on downwind if he'd mind me cutting inside him." You say the airfield had A/G, in which case I'd either use similar phrasing as with AFIS, or else just ask the pilot directly, depending on how "involved" the A/G station liked to be at the airfield in question.
(Absolutely nothing wrong with cutting in front of him in that scenario as far as I'm concerned, by the way - as long as you are sure you will be clear in time, which you obviously were.)
FFF
-------------
Well of course it's all about me AND my passengers. They're the people I'm particularly charged with keeping safe. As you're charged with keeping YOUR passengers safe. At greater & greater remove are other people affected by my flight. But convenience doesn't get a look in at the expense of safety.
To argue otherwise would negate such things as imposing radio silence for a MAYDAY, transferring priority to the one in difficulty.
Are you trying to tell me you would accept compromising your & your passenger's safety if it meant inconveniencing some one? Or not talking directly to another aircraft?
You don't seem to be able to distinguish between your safety obligations towards your passengers and, when that is not an issue, all of OUR desires to act co-operatively. Notice the difference. At every point I've stated that when I think it necessary for the safety of my flight etc etc...
I'm sure that in the - hopefully never - accident investigation you don't really think that the convenience of other persons is considered justifiable for not taking what ever actions are appropriate to maintain the safety of your flight?
To argue otherwise would negate such things as imposing radio silence for a MAYDAY, transferring priority to the one in difficulty.
Are you trying to tell me you would accept compromising your & your passenger's safety if it meant inconveniencing some one? Or not talking directly to another aircraft?
You don't seem to be able to distinguish between your safety obligations towards your passengers and, when that is not an issue, all of OUR desires to act co-operatively. Notice the difference. At every point I've stated that when I think it necessary for the safety of my flight etc etc...
I'm sure that in the - hopefully never - accident investigation you don't really think that the convenience of other persons is considered justifiable for not taking what ever actions are appropriate to maintain the safety of your flight?