Shoreham Incident.
taught it myself afterwards and disliked it always.....)
Never mind the system being used, I have witnessed some pretty appalling instances of a/c joining the circuit.
Some visitors seem to have little comprehension of the status of A/G asking "Am I clear for...etc" and then seem unable to fly an OHJ which is surely part of the PPL syllabus.
Before we start debating the merits of different types of join we should take steps to ensure that all know how to join the circuit whatever system is in use.
No comment on this tragic incident as we don't know the facts as yet.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,580
Received 437 Likes
on
230 Posts
You should not be flying such a large angle of bank in the OHJ. Maybe 5 degrees max.
E.g. EGNF, runway 24/06 is 553 metres, runway 36/18 is 382 metres.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
I don't think there is a requirement to fly the circle of an OHJ fully between the two ends of the runway
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,580
Received 437 Likes
on
230 Posts
Probably sensible to keep it within any ATZ though.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe that's why so many people fly the cross country circuits we all hate so much 
Non-OHJ related, Shoreham procedure (departing 20) is to climb straight ahead to 600ft minimum, then make a slight (20ish degree) right turn for noise abatement. You're then heading straight on to pretty much the coast (i.e. clear of the circuit), and turning onto your outbound track.
To me, in anything I've flown, 'normal' procedure is a Vy climb to (usually) circuit height, but 500agl at least (there's nothing aerobatic about it, simply a matter of spending minimum time in that awkward zone where options are minimal). At somewhere with a longer runway I'd flatten off at 500 to avoid the crosswind. What I was alluding to earlier 'being unsure of' is the 500ft turn (maxred et al). If remaining in the circuit, at (say) shoreham, I'd be turning somewhere between the tower and the numbers. That's definitely not going to be popular - so it seems the 500ft and turn concept is rather flawed. Certainly at shoreham the circuit would be more geographically defined.
What this whole thing does really highlight (for me at least) is the vastly differing expectations of aircraft performance in terms of both climb, and manoevuring (e.g. it would never occur to me to make a 5degree banked turn in any circumstance).
The other thought is - at (e.g) shoreham, operating under a controlled environment, with conflicting traffic crosswind, would you not expect a conditional takeoff clearance - e.g. "clear takeoff, not above XXX" Not attempting to lay any blame or critique, however, if being positively controlled it would seem logical to explicitly ensure the separation?
Non-OHJ related, Shoreham procedure (departing 20) is to climb straight ahead to 600ft minimum, then make a slight (20ish degree) right turn for noise abatement. You're then heading straight on to pretty much the coast (i.e. clear of the circuit), and turning onto your outbound track.
To me, in anything I've flown, 'normal' procedure is a Vy climb to (usually) circuit height, but 500agl at least (there's nothing aerobatic about it, simply a matter of spending minimum time in that awkward zone where options are minimal). At somewhere with a longer runway I'd flatten off at 500 to avoid the crosswind. What I was alluding to earlier 'being unsure of' is the 500ft turn (maxred et al). If remaining in the circuit, at (say) shoreham, I'd be turning somewhere between the tower and the numbers. That's definitely not going to be popular - so it seems the 500ft and turn concept is rather flawed. Certainly at shoreham the circuit would be more geographically defined.
What this whole thing does really highlight (for me at least) is the vastly differing expectations of aircraft performance in terms of both climb, and manoevuring (e.g. it would never occur to me to make a 5degree banked turn in any circumstance).
The other thought is - at (e.g) shoreham, operating under a controlled environment, with conflicting traffic crosswind, would you not expect a conditional takeoff clearance - e.g. "clear takeoff, not above XXX" Not attempting to lay any blame or critique, however, if being positively controlled it would seem logical to explicitly ensure the separation?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I was taught, and I am not saying it is right, wrong nor indifferent, (in todays arena), and this was at an airfield with one runway, 840 mts long, that on take off after crossing the numbers in a normal climb to 500' min, commence turn on outward leg to downwind, and by the time you are ready to join downwind you will be approaching circuit height of 1000'.
Traffic joining crosswind, across the numbers, having descended deadside, at 1000', in all my experinece, has been well overhead departing traffic, and would be in front of you if you were joing circuit. If you were not you are well clear and underneath joining traffic, to continue on your desired heading away from the airfield.
This has always been so basic, and my understanding that this is the way it is taught, and is in all CAA publications, that I cannot get to grips with why so many people appear to be at odds with it. It seems so standard.
Now getting back to this tragic incident, the start of this discussion, was that, IF, and we do not know yet, the croswwind aircraft was in the 'correct position', and was hit by a departing aircraft (FACTS NOT KNOWN), then the question was why, or how, could a departing aeroplane be at same level as a crosswind join??????? Obviously this is not a desirable position to be in.
Traffic joining crosswind, across the numbers, having descended deadside, at 1000', in all my experinece, has been well overhead departing traffic, and would be in front of you if you were joing circuit. If you were not you are well clear and underneath joining traffic, to continue on your desired heading away from the airfield.
This has always been so basic, and my understanding that this is the way it is taught, and is in all CAA publications, that I cannot get to grips with why so many people appear to be at odds with it. It seems so standard.
Now getting back to this tragic incident, the start of this discussion, was that, IF, and we do not know yet, the croswwind aircraft was in the 'correct position', and was hit by a departing aircraft (FACTS NOT KNOWN), then the question was why, or how, could a departing aeroplane be at same level as a crosswind join??????? Obviously this is not a desirable position to be in.
Standard Overhead Join Best flown at circuit speed, with standard medium turns (30 degrees) to give good lookout in all directions.
Not in a Visual Circuit
Joining traffic should be aware of traffic on and departing from the runway they are about to cross, high performance departing aircraft have a responsibility to ensure they do not impinge on the circuit pattern without an especially good lookout.
would you not expect a conditional takeoff clearance
Joining traffic should be aware of traffic on and departing from the runway they are about to cross, high performance departing aircraft have a responsibility to ensure they do not impinge on the circuit pattern without an especially good lookout.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'normal' procedure is a Vy climb to (usually) circuit height
- poor engine cooling during Vx (or Vy) flight
- in any high-perf plane, a conflict with arriving crosswind traffic
- a conflict with any traffic arriving on downwind etc joins
- an extended period of poor forward visibility
- a poor stall margin if there is turbulence, wind shear, etc in the departure area (slow flight is usually a bad idea)
After takeoff, one needs to climb at Vx until obstacle clearance is assured (let's skip the "Switzerland" case
) and then trim forward ASAP to a higher airspeed for good engine cooling and good forward visibility. The engine controls are not touched until cruise level is reached (again, ignoring stuff like higher altitude climbs e.g. above 5000ft). This procedure will generally mean that you are well separated from arriving crosswind traffic, and you have a reasonable chance of spotting crosswind traffic which is grossly incorrectly positioned (which is very common).
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting - completely different philosophies. I *never* climb at Vx unless there is definitely an obstacle clearance problem - that's very rare. Vy (IMHO) offers plenty of margin for control, and engine cooling is (rarely) an issue over the first few thousand feet, and I'd not consider that 'slow flight' (e.g. the typical PA28, Vs -50, Vy -79). Notwithstanding avoiding the crosswind leg, I regard getting to 1000-1500 ASAP after leaving the ground as something of a priority, but I do normally bring the prop and MP back from takeoff to 25/25 passing 500. I'm also a believer in lowering the nose periodically in the climb to clear the view.
Maxred - I don't think we're in disagreement, definitely not 'at odds' but when you say things like 'so basic' I feel compelled to point out that I think you're oversimplifying I understand that works by the numbers for the 'average' pa28 (say), Presumably in your aforementioned yak that can be at 2000 by the numbers somewhere with a longish runway you're modifying the approach substantially different to avoid turning at 500ft half way down the runway - if you get my point? 'Turn not below 500ft at point x' would make sense to me, but I never did get 'turn at 500ft.' - it doesn't define anything useful, it's merely co-incidental that in certain cases 500ft roughly co-incides with where you want to be making the turn. Tad pedantic perhaps
Maxred - I don't think we're in disagreement, definitely not 'at odds' but when you say things like 'so basic' I feel compelled to point out that I think you're oversimplifying
I understand that works by the numbers for the 'average' pa28 (say), Presumably in your aforementioned yak that can be at 2000 by the numbers somewhere with a longish runway you're modifying the approach substantially different to avoid turning at 500ft half way down the runway - if you get my point? 'Turn not below 500ft at point x' would make sense to me, but I never did get 'turn at 500ft.' - it doesn't define anything useful, it's merely co-incidental that in certain cases 500ft roughly co-incides with where you want to be making the turn. Tad pedantic perhaps
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i would fly it at a speed that keeps the separation constant, at shoreham, a typical training airfield, most aircraft are quite happy between 90-100 knots cruise, cruise descent deadside and cruise speed downwind, and slow down on base, also depends on whats in front of you, vary speed and track to fit in.
ps , smarthawke, whats the best glide speed of an RV-6.
ps , smarthawke, whats the best glide speed of an RV-6.
Last edited by memories of px; 7th Jul 2011 at 11:43.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ready to Depart
Age: 45
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point to Note PPRuNers:
All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise, at the controls of the GA aircraft.
Coventry, St Athan, Benson, Isle of Wight, Shoreham... any I've missed?
All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise, at the controls of the GA aircraft.
Coventry, St Athan, Benson, Isle of Wight, Shoreham... any I've missed?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise, at the controls of the GA aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540, a Vx climb and then trim forward - novel. 
I think you need a word with your old instructor. In RAF parlance Select, Hold, Trim - in civilian speak, Attitude, Power, Trim.
I think you need a word with your old instructor. In RAF parlance Select, Hold, Trim - in civilian speak, Attitude, Power, Trim.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Shoreham By Sea
Age: 57
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shoreham Incident
This should set you thinking some more......
BLACK X marks where the DA's prop was found
RED X - Prop blade lands in beach green playpark
GREEN X - Part of wing or possibly tail? you tell me. Lands in car park.
Blue X - RV crash site.
The mail suggested that 'bits rained down on a school playground' It didn't. It was a playpark.
bits | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
shoreham | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
BLACK X marks where the DA's prop was found
RED X - Prop blade lands in beach green playpark
GREEN X - Part of wing or possibly tail? you tell me. Lands in car park.
Blue X - RV crash site.
The mail suggested that 'bits rained down on a school playground' It didn't. It was a playpark.
bits | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
shoreham | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark - I actually think we are very much in agreement. By - so basic - I meant the lovely basic art of see and be seen, and fly your aeroplane in the manner that will fit the pattern at that given time. Whether it is alter your rate of climb due to crosswind hazards, slow down your approach to the downwind because there is a gyrocopter, a microlight, and a heliocopter all manouvering. The basic premise must still exist however of the 'plan'. And that is taught in PPL syllabus, or should be.
Also the old art of positioning calls - descend deadside, join crosswind, downwind, left base, finals and so on. I still amazes me that I have to ask a lot of the time where are you?
Also the old art of positioning calls - descend deadside, join crosswind, downwind, left base, finals and so on. I still amazes me that I have to ask a lot of the time where are you?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise
Having now thought about that, are you alluding that these 'professionals', may have had a reliance on ''control'' rather than self position and call????
Having now thought about that, are you alluding that these 'professionals', may have had a reliance on ''control'' rather than self position and call????