Innovative approaches to PFA rally
Thread Starter
Innovative approaches to PFA rally
Some highly - shall we say - exotic approaches to Kemble today. Almost half the aircraft I saw were not flying the routes in the AIC (remember: there is a TRA around Kemble, and it is mandatory to read and follow the AIC). People approaching from the N, crossing the approach to the grass runway (effectively 26R) and lining up on the hard runway (effectively 26L). Or flying straight-in approaches over Kemble village.
I had to go around twice to avoid aircraft approaching from seriously incorrect routes. It appears that they were not unaware of their position, just unaware that special procedures apply to Kemble for the rally.
Rather a pity: apart from the obvious danger, many aircraft were unnecessarily flying over Kemble and other noise-sensitive areas, and risking the future of the rally.
Or maybe I was the only one to see (or imagine?) such unorthodox approaches.
I had to go around twice to avoid aircraft approaching from seriously incorrect routes. It appears that they were not unaware of their position, just unaware that special procedures apply to Kemble for the rally.
Rather a pity: apart from the obvious danger, many aircraft were unnecessarily flying over Kemble and other noise-sensitive areas, and risking the future of the rally.
Or maybe I was the only one to see (or imagine?) such unorthodox approaches.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FREDA,
If you read the AIC carefully, it says that the routes are 'recommended'. To me, this means not mandatory. Bloody silly idea anyway, funneling all those aircraft into one place at one time...
If you read the AIC carefully, it says that the routes are 'recommended'. To me, this means not mandatory. Bloody silly idea anyway, funneling all those aircraft into one place at one time...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zlin 526
If you read your NOTAM you will see there was a TRA rad 2.5nm SFC to 2500' ALT in force with an exemption for those following the procedures.
Anyone who didn't follow them was busting the TRA. (That's aside from being generally inconsiderate, stupid, and breaching the Rules of the Air Regulations by not conforming to the established pattern)
Unless of course the aircraft concerned was flying in accordance with a permission granted by the PFA FISU or was in the service of the Chief Police Officer for Gloucestershire, as it said in AIC 22/2005 (Mauve 141)
Kemble Village, mentioned in the original post, is well inside the TRA.
The routes were of course "recommended" outside the TRA.
Mike
If you read your NOTAM you will see there was a TRA rad 2.5nm SFC to 2500' ALT in force with an exemption for those following the procedures.
Anyone who didn't follow them was busting the TRA. (That's aside from being generally inconsiderate, stupid, and breaching the Rules of the Air Regulations by not conforming to the established pattern)
Unless of course the aircraft concerned was flying in accordance with a permission granted by the PFA FISU or was in the service of the Chief Police Officer for Gloucestershire, as it said in AIC 22/2005 (Mauve 141)
Kemble Village, mentioned in the original post, is well inside the TRA.
The routes were of course "recommended" outside the TRA.
Mike
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
Thanks for quoting the AIC, but I meant outside the TRA the routes are 'recommended'. Obviously, once inside the TRA you NEED to follow procedures otherwise you are in breach of the conditions, of which I am well aware.
20 pages of AIC in an open cockpit aeroplane without elevator trim is a flight safety hazard and as always, pages of rules and regs don't necesarily make for a safe event! Personally, I chose to go non-radio (making my own decisions), and routed VFR at a sensible height to the Northside hold where I landed on the grass having only seen one other aircraft....
As always, having a TRA and pages of joining instructions relies on the fact that ALL of the pilots flying in fly in a safe and professional manner. At Kemble this year, this seemed to be forgotten, as well as the rules concerning Permit to Fly aircraft flying in IMC!
Thanks for quoting the AIC, but I meant outside the TRA the routes are 'recommended'. Obviously, once inside the TRA you NEED to follow procedures otherwise you are in breach of the conditions, of which I am well aware.
20 pages of AIC in an open cockpit aeroplane without elevator trim is a flight safety hazard and as always, pages of rules and regs don't necesarily make for a safe event! Personally, I chose to go non-radio (making my own decisions), and routed VFR at a sensible height to the Northside hold where I landed on the grass having only seen one other aircraft....
As always, having a TRA and pages of joining instructions relies on the fact that ALL of the pilots flying in fly in a safe and professional manner. At Kemble this year, this seemed to be forgotten, as well as the rules concerning Permit to Fly aircraft flying in IMC!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree with you about the 20 pages. The AIC definitely needs to go on a diet, as I said on the FFF thread. Apart from being a pain it scares people off. I've never found flying in to the Rally a problem, but then I learned to fly in gliders where you get used to having other aircraft near you and not having someone on the ground directing you.
Re the IMC bit I flew in on Saturday from Popham. Just under the base at around 2000 ft until South Marston, then we got down to around 1500 ft just north of the Malmesbury VRP. Got on the Northside racetrack with no problem, spotted a Jodel inside us and followed him in. Straightforward and all legal.
Return trip we departed at 18:00 and had around 1800 ft cloudbase most of the way. We were well above the top of the Membury mast and passed about 3nm abeam. Again all legal.
I understand that to the north it was a different story with most people returning.
Certainly the weather I saw to the south of Kemble was not IMC providing you were legally able to stay below the cloud. The visibility was 10k+ below cloud and only slightly less in the drizzle.
Mike
Re the IMC bit I flew in on Saturday from Popham. Just under the base at around 2000 ft until South Marston, then we got down to around 1500 ft just north of the Malmesbury VRP. Got on the Northside racetrack with no problem, spotted a Jodel inside us and followed him in. Straightforward and all legal.
Return trip we departed at 18:00 and had around 1800 ft cloudbase most of the way. We were well above the top of the Membury mast and passed about 3nm abeam. Again all legal.
I understand that to the north it was a different story with most people returning.
Certainly the weather I saw to the south of Kemble was not IMC providing you were legally able to stay below the cloud. The visibility was 10k+ below cloud and only slightly less in the drizzle.
Mike
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We had to go around once and 2nd time followed the approach routes EXACTLY (I have the track on my GPS to prove it!) i.e we turned base at the lake flew a base to a short final INSIDE of kemble village. And then got loads of abuse on the radio from about 4 or 5 aircraft all on an INCORRECT long final approach, who said we were pushing in!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Burgess Hill, UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alex,
the AIC says "turn left onto base leg after the railway, then onto final keeping south of Kemble village", but of course if aircraft infront of you have had to extend downwind to fit in with other traffic, then you need to follow them and fit in, not turn base at the earliest opportunity and cut in to traffic on final, no wonder they complained. The circuit you flew would have been correct if no one else was there, but when there is a lot of traffic, you are going to have to extend.(hopefully not as far as south cernay!)
Granted they should have been flying over Kemble village and should have been on an offset final to the south.
It is unfortunate that some people didnt follow the AIC for example as someone reported effectivly joining final from the north. Luckily most people did follow it more or less correctly and it worked well.
I didnt notice any permit aircraft climbing off into the clouds, but I guess I wasnt watching all day.Worst I saw was the Bonanza appearing out of the clouds at 300ft (probably less) over the field heading north on Friday night, then proceeding with a low level orbit before eventually getting to the runway.
Agree with Mike that the AIC needs to go on a diet!
the AIC says "turn left onto base leg after the railway, then onto final keeping south of Kemble village", but of course if aircraft infront of you have had to extend downwind to fit in with other traffic, then you need to follow them and fit in, not turn base at the earliest opportunity and cut in to traffic on final, no wonder they complained. The circuit you flew would have been correct if no one else was there, but when there is a lot of traffic, you are going to have to extend.(hopefully not as far as south cernay!)
Granted they should have been flying over Kemble village and should have been on an offset final to the south.
It is unfortunate that some people didnt follow the AIC for example as someone reported effectivly joining final from the north. Luckily most people did follow it more or less correctly and it worked well.
I didnt notice any permit aircraft climbing off into the clouds, but I guess I wasnt watching all day.Worst I saw was the Bonanza appearing out of the clouds at 300ft (probably less) over the field heading north on Friday night, then proceeding with a low level orbit before eventually getting to the runway.
Agree with Mike that the AIC needs to go on a diet!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didnt notice any permit aircraft climbing off into the clouds
Either way, departing into a 600' overcast in an aircraft that is not authorised for IMC flight is optimistic in the extreme.
2D
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Burgess Hill, UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2D, yes there were a few very optimistic pilots departing into the crud on Friday afternoon, most of them came back again. Problem was that others seemed to think that aircraft were still departing and other still coming in, so it must be ok. problem was it was the same aircraft going out and coming back!
ended up with quite a few staying overnight who hadnt intended to!
ended up with quite a few staying overnight who hadnt intended to!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ready to Depart
Age: 45
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cubfyer wrote:
That is utter bolleux. 
The circuit pattern is not a snake of aircraft determined to get in on the first approach and streching the downwind leg in to the next county in order to do so.
What everyone else SHOULD have done was go-around from the downwind leg as soon as it appeared obvious that they were too close to the aircraft in front.
The circuit should ONLY be extended upwind, with the expection of flapless circuits, or under the control of ATC (where they are controlling the overall picture).
I have no problem with turning base, on track, if I'm not going to endanger an aircraft already established on finals. Too often people blindly extend so far downwind that they leave the ATZ - that's when I'll happily "cut them up" - why shouldn't I? They've left the circuit!
if aircraft infront of you have had to extend downwind to fit in with other traffic, then you need to follow them and fit in, not turn base at the earliest opportunity and cut in to traffic on final, no wonder they complained.
The circuit pattern is not a snake of aircraft determined to get in on the first approach and streching the downwind leg in to the next county in order to do so.
What everyone else SHOULD have done was go-around from the downwind leg as soon as it appeared obvious that they were too close to the aircraft in front.
The circuit should ONLY be extended upwind, with the expection of flapless circuits, or under the control of ATC (where they are controlling the overall picture).
I have no problem with turning base, on track, if I'm not going to endanger an aircraft already established on finals. Too often people blindly extend so far downwind that they leave the ATZ - that's when I'll happily "cut them up" - why shouldn't I? They've left the circuit!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ashwell, U.K.
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite right Dusty B. Perhaps it needs another line in the already weighty tome to explain that process. I guess it's a lot to do with nervous pilots wanting to get on the ground asap.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It IS explained. The AIC makes it totally clear that if you can't maintain a sensible distance from the aircraft in front, you break off and join the racetrack pattern at Malmesbury. Pilots must have been either fed up, impatient to get on the ground, or more likely hadn't read the AIC. Or even if they'd read and digested all 20 pages, they couldn't remember it all, so forgot the really essential bits. Yes, the AIC needs to be shorter...but we've been here before, haven't we.
