Where does a downwind join officially start?
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
From: Hampshire, UK
Interesting thread. At my base aerodrome I usually make an OHJ at 2,000 ft QFE which is only 800 ft above the 1,200ft circuit, but that's not in itself a problem. What I have noticed recently is a number of aircraft tracking the located VOR and transitting via the overhead at 2,000 ft which if QFE puts them in direct conflict with me, and if QNH puts them 100 ft below me. Apart from the obvious (ie eyes and ears open) .... any suggestions?
Slip
Slip
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
From: Winchester.Hants.England
I don't see the problem ?
If they are on QNH which would be normal then they would have (should have) taken the airfield elevation into account which will put them ABOVE you not below you.
If they are on QNH which would be normal then they would have (should have) taken the airfield elevation into account which will put them ABOVE you not below you.
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
From: Winchester.Hants.England
You don't seem to have grasped what I said in my post 
Here it is again with the salient point highlighted.
I was assuming the pilot wasn't ******** 
You can't Transit at 2000ft on the QNH
Understand now ?
Here it is again with the salient point highlighted.
If they are on QNH which would be normal then they would have (should have) taken the airfield elevation into account which will put them ABOVE you not below you.
Transit at 2,000 ft QNH = 1,900 QFE = 100 ft below OHJ
Understand now ?
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,827
Likes: 7
From: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Assuming you're talking about Goodwood, since this is a licensed airfield with an ATZ, anyone flying through the overhead at 2000ft QNH will be inside the ATZ so if they're not talking to Goodwood Info they're flying illegally.
NS
NS
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
From: Hampshire, UK
Chill FBW. You seem to have taken offence when none was intended. If I was having a dig at you I would probably have used 
and not but heyho, whatever ...
I understand absolutely the QNH point, thank you. The key point I was trying to make is that routing through the overhead at 2,000 QFE at an airfield where OHJs are used (and within not a full ATC environment) puts such traffic in conflict with the standard OHJ starting at 2,000 QFE.
NS: absolutely true, of course; but I didn't imply not talking to the Info service. In the particular case I had in mind the passing traffic called 'routing via the overhead at 2,000ft' and was advised by the FISO of QFE and also traffic joining overhead. We all used 'see and avoid', so not a problem; however, if I had been the passing traffic I would probably have climbed 200 feet or so and advised ... but then I rarely use overhead routings in any case, whether beacon or ATZ - I try to avoid un-necessary conflict!
Slip
and not but heyho, whatever ...I understand absolutely the QNH point, thank you. The key point I was trying to make is that routing through the overhead at 2,000 QFE at an airfield where OHJs are used (and within not a full ATC environment) puts such traffic in conflict with the standard OHJ starting at 2,000 QFE.
NS: absolutely true, of course; but I didn't imply not talking to the Info service. In the particular case I had in mind the passing traffic called 'routing via the overhead at 2,000ft' and was advised by the FISO of QFE and also traffic joining overhead. We all used 'see and avoid', so not a problem; however, if I had been the passing traffic I would probably have climbed 200 feet or so and advised ... but then I rarely use overhead routings in any case, whether beacon or ATZ - I try to avoid un-necessary conflict!
Slip
