nutters in the circuit!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overhead joins can be dangerous where two aircraft are joining at a similar time.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: south wales
Age: 46
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh! how I hate flying into airfields with a lot of trainning going on, just how big can the CCT be? the other day I had to fly about 4 miles to follow someone in a C152 with no traffic ahead of him, full flap at 1000ft and dragging it in at 65kt. No doubt the airline pilot wannbe instructor was congratulating his student on a fine "stablized approach"!
on another note - I put some more solo time in the book today. second time up on my todd, 35 mins & 4 circuits - and no other traffic to get in the way. bliss!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
extend the climbout to 600 / 700 ft before turning crosswind
However, later in your career you might encounter aircraft with abysmal climb performance and you might need to initiate your turn well below 500' in order to keep a reasonably tight circuit. Or, if you're lucky, you might be flying aerobatic hotships who are capable of climbing all the way to circuit height well before the end of the runway. In which case you need to fly upwind at circuit height a little before you turn crosswind, otherwise you'll cut everybody off who's doing a normal downwind.
Just something to keep in mind. Turning crosswind should be done at a certain position, maybe a mile or so beyond the runway end, not necessarily at a certain altitude.
Oh, and about not turning below 500': I was lined up in front of a 737. I got my takeoff clearance with "immediate right turn towards XXX". Literally as soon as my wheels left the ground the 737 got its takeoff clearance. My turn to XXX was completed before I got to 50'....
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turning crosswind should be done at a certain position, maybe a mile or so beyond the runway end,
It would be a funny old world if we were all the same.....but it's a funny old world anyway.
A mile or so beyond? WTF? That's not a circuit, it's a short cross country!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
In general it's good practice to climb straight ahead to at least 500 feet before turning.
Shy Torque,
You guessed quite right that my experience of of dead-side joins is zero. Actually the procedure was unknown to me, never mentioned in my training, and I only came to have an idea of it - probably inexact - through perusing these pages.
Actually I am one of those who should - according to some - subscribe with "inexperienced beginner pilot".
So I can consider the differences theoretically, even so my doubts remain:
-) the overhead join is done ABOVE circuit altitude, allowing a wider field of sight than the deadside join, which I understand to be done AT circuit altitude
-) overhead joins are done from a 360° "origin", spreading the risk of collision over a wider area. The deadside join can only be done from a 180° field limited by the extended runway axis. Whether this is a pro or con can be discussed.
Also, I fail to see the relevance of the blind spot under one's plane. It does exist, for sure, but why should it be any more dangerous at some phases of flight than at others?
Thank you for discussing patiently - I am learning again!
You guessed quite right that my experience of of dead-side joins is zero. Actually the procedure was unknown to me, never mentioned in my training, and I only came to have an idea of it - probably inexact - through perusing these pages.
Actually I am one of those who should - according to some - subscribe with "inexperienced beginner pilot".
So I can consider the differences theoretically, even so my doubts remain:
-) the overhead join is done ABOVE circuit altitude, allowing a wider field of sight than the deadside join, which I understand to be done AT circuit altitude
-) overhead joins are done from a 360° "origin", spreading the risk of collision over a wider area. The deadside join can only be done from a 180° field limited by the extended runway axis. Whether this is a pro or con can be discussed.
Also, I fail to see the relevance of the blind spot under one's plane. It does exist, for sure, but why should it be any more dangerous at some phases of flight than at others?
Thank you for discussing patiently - I am learning again!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 32°55'22"S 151°46'56"E
Age: 39
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Jan,
Overhead joins are ideal for unfamiliar fields, particularly those without a/g radio. It gives you chance to work out whats going on, who is where and just get a good situational awareness. At a familiar field, where you know what it is going on and can see the traffic easily I don't see the problem with joining directly into the circuit.
Overhead joins are ideal for unfamiliar fields, particularly those without a/g radio. It gives you chance to work out whats going on, who is where and just get a good situational awareness. At a familiar field, where you know what it is going on and can see the traffic easily I don't see the problem with joining directly into the circuit.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: around
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, 'deadside' joins let you see the signals square just fine. But if you're doing one, you already know the runway in use. So why do you need a signals square? In fact, apart from non-radio ac, does anyone, honestly, still use those useless things? The only ones I've seen have been rusted solid and beyond repair, let alone fit for use for an aviation purpose.
They have one massive advantage -- generally you join lower than cct height on the deadside (500' vice 800'/1000'), meaning other traffic in the cct is skylined and much more visible, as opposed to trying to pick out traffic on downwind somewhere near the Le Touquet circuit when you're wallowing around in the overhead of Stapleford wondering where the other chap joining at 1000' above the cct (pretty sure that's the CAA 'standard') from the opposite direction is...
And as for the collision risk at 'Initials' (about 2nm on the extended deadside for a light single-type cct) -- that's avoided by having SA on other people joining and sorting your spacing out there, before you get back and cause carnage in the cct itself.
Admittedly this is only any good if you trust people to fly ccts at anything approaching a reasonable size, which might be why they've not caught on amongst a lot of the retired Navigators in the Belgrano...
They have one massive advantage -- generally you join lower than cct height on the deadside (500' vice 800'/1000'), meaning other traffic in the cct is skylined and much more visible, as opposed to trying to pick out traffic on downwind somewhere near the Le Touquet circuit when you're wallowing around in the overhead of Stapleford wondering where the other chap joining at 1000' above the cct (pretty sure that's the CAA 'standard') from the opposite direction is...
And as for the collision risk at 'Initials' (about 2nm on the extended deadside for a light single-type cct) -- that's avoided by having SA on other people joining and sorting your spacing out there, before you get back and cause carnage in the cct itself.
Admittedly this is only any good if you trust people to fly ccts at anything approaching a reasonable size, which might be why they've not caught on amongst a lot of the retired Navigators in the Belgrano...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why do you need a signals square? In fact, apart from non-radio ac, does anyone, honestly, still use those useless things? The only ones I've seen have been rusted solid and beyond repair, let alone fit for use for an aviation purpose.
There is a lot of non-radio traffic however, but I think they tend to fly to places where the signals square is not an issue.
SA is Situational Awareness. It can be quite important; last week I flew to Sardinia (LIEE) and we were told we were #2. I asked, more than once, "where is #1" and we had 3 pairs of eyes looking out. The ATCO could not speak English (beyond "cleared for the ILS" etc) so ignored the question. Then we were cleared to land, so we did. It turned out we were #1; #2 was an Easyjet which landed right behind us
I guess the 737 had us on his TCAS... essential for places like that.
So why do you need a signals square? In fact, apart from non-radio ac, does anyone, honestly, still use those useless things?
But I do not consider them useless. How can a pilot with no radio available, either not installed or not operational or not replied to, know what runway to use? Or do you prefer the French habit of picking one's own preferred runway? Even in my very limited experience I have seen that provoke some frightening situations, even with all planes doing full radio.
DEADSIDE???? What is this obsession with overhead joins and deadside descents? A lot of the complaints we get from the local NIMBYs arise from aircraft in perfect VFR conditions with all the navaids known to man, arriving in the overhead and descending on a deadside we don't have. Straight down the village High St.
If, when an OHJ is not a requirement, getting to circuit height and joining X-wind, downwind or base is too much to handle, some further training perhaps?
If, when an OHJ is not a requirement, getting to circuit height and joining X-wind, downwind or base is too much to handle, some further training perhaps?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting! I've rather got the impression that was, shall we say strongly discouraged in this country - had never (well, almost never) done an OHJ until I moved back here. Special consideration for non-radio aside (really, how many of us are flying non radio?) I'd expect to have a good idea of wind direction (and thus runway), at any point, and a pretty good idea of runways in use etc., long before I get to the airfield.
As for the NIMBY's, I'm slightly puzzled as to why an aircraft making an approach should bother them - departing I understand, but noise footprint should be minimal on descent/approach, surely?
As for the NIMBY's, I'm slightly puzzled as to why an aircraft making an approach should bother them - departing I understand, but noise footprint should be minimal on descent/approach, surely?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: now in Zomerset
Age: 62
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Overhead joins can be dangerous where two aircraft are joining at a similar time.
Exactly, but they are used at the very time when the circuit is busy and (if ATC) when ATC is unable to cope. Then they just send everybody into the overhead. It is a dangerous place to be.
Overhead joins can be dangerous where two aircraft are joining at a similar time.
Exactly, but they are used at the very time when the circuit is busy and (if ATC) when ATC is unable to cope. Then they just send everybody into the overhead. It is a dangerous place to be.
It can be stressful, but so can joining at any point in the circuit.
As for the NIMBY's, I'm slightly puzzled as to why an aircraft making an approach should bother them - departing I understand, but noise footprint should be minimal on descent/approach, surely?
It's not the descent. It's the re-application of power over the village on reaching circuit height that's the problem.
It's not the descent. It's the re-application of power over the village on reaching circuit height that's the problem.
What kind of ground track are these people flying that makes them need to apply power whilst still deadside?