UNUSUAL HOLDING POINT?
Guest
Posts: n/a
UNUSUAL HOLDING POINT?
I recently flew from a an airfield that has ATC and Non Precision Approaches, and a full tower service. Upon rejoining I was offered the option of either a standard overhead join, or a base join to a LH 21. I elected to do a base join. I was instructed to maintain 1600'; I called the tower in adequate time for the join, and requested a further descent to join base, but was not cleared. As the circuit was not overly busy, I slowed down, and expected to be slotted in to the system. As I was now into the base leg at 1600 feet, (with a circuit height of 1100') I offered to go round, and descend dead side and rejoin down-wind. I was instructed to hold at my current position, which was effectively at the bottom of the downwind leg, at the intersection of the base leg. I accept that I was 500' higher than circuit traffic should have been, but I wonder if this is a safe place in which to conduct a hold? Are there any ATCOs out there who can shed light/offer opinions. I accept that if I felt there was a real risk, then I would have departed the circuit, and rejoined later from the overhead. I'm not trying to rattle cages, just seeking opinions.
Tailwinds
Tailwinds
Guest
Posts: n/a
Where was this? (Don't be shy - just helps with the answer!)
Could be due to Noise abatement etc. I think that the solution (and there were plenty!) was OK, and it warms me to know you can all see each other, which is more likely if you are above the cct traffic.
Also, there may have been an instrument approach due. Therefore, to have you going dead side and then crosswind blocks the climb out lane in the event of a go-around.
Either way, I don't know the full workings of the tower involved, but the controller (if not too busy) might have told you what was going on.
Finally, if anything like this happens then when you have landed call the tower. Though not all will be happy in explaining themselves, I for one would apologise when necessary, or take time to explain why we do seemingly silly things to you VFR chaps!
Does this help?!?!?
Could be due to Noise abatement etc. I think that the solution (and there were plenty!) was OK, and it warms me to know you can all see each other, which is more likely if you are above the cct traffic.
Also, there may have been an instrument approach due. Therefore, to have you going dead side and then crosswind blocks the climb out lane in the event of a go-around.
Either way, I don't know the full workings of the tower involved, but the controller (if not too busy) might have told you what was going on.
Finally, if anything like this happens then when you have landed call the tower. Though not all will be happy in explaining themselves, I for one would apologise when necessary, or take time to explain why we do seemingly silly things to you VFR chaps!
Does this help?!?!?
Guest
Posts: n/a
I recall at one time Shoreham in Sussex had a 1600 ft instruction for part of the curcuit but this was some time ago in busy periods never bothered me as i had plenty of time to adjust accordingly, have you asked why you were told to fly in an unexpected curcuit?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sounds OK to me, presumably the outcome was that you orbited once or twice until there was a good gap to allow you to descent onto a normal final. The ATCO should have known all other traffic in the ATZ and would have felt an orbit to provide you with a better service than full deadside join & circuit (and you would have been on the ground and out of their (h)air quicker).
It is important to ask these questions to gain a greater understanding of how it all works. Most ATS staff will be happy to explain to you, or chat to local pilots and flying instructors. Forums like this are also super places to become enlightened...
It is important to ask these questions to gain a greater understanding of how it all works. Most ATS staff will be happy to explain to you, or chat to local pilots and flying instructors. Forums like this are also super places to become enlightened...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes, to answer Bright-Ling, it was Shoreham, and to address the points raised, Shoreham does have two NDB-DME approaches 21/03, and I accept that should IFR traffic be making an approach, then an orbit would be appropriate. However, this was done in VMC, with very little traffic in the pattern. | also agree that noise abatement could be an issue, although I dont think the sheep would have cared either way! I accept that there may be many reasons for an unexpected hold, but as I said before, I thought that the intersection between Downwind and Base was an odd place to initiate a hold. I will actually visit the tower when I am next there, and get chapter and verse. Thanks for your answers
Tailwinds.
Tailwinds.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh well, take some biscuits and they will tell all!!!!!
Orbiting at the end of the downwind leg is a fairly standar place to be instructed to hold. Mid point is often more likely, as it is normally the closest place to the field, but I have only ever used that went vis is poor.
Good luck anyway!!!
Orbiting at the end of the downwind leg is a fairly standar place to be instructed to hold. Mid point is often more likely, as it is normally the closest place to the field, but I have only ever used that went vis is poor.
Good luck anyway!!!
