Shoreham Incident.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A crosswind join should be flown overhead the upwind numbers, not a mile or two upwind of them.
That's the issue here.
That's the issue here.
Hence why the 45 degree join to mid downwind as used here in the US is a relatively safe method as everybody is already at circuit height prior to joining - so blind spots below or above is greatly reduced.
The way to reduce "blind spots" is to ensure proper lookout - wherever you are.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's ok joining on the 45 if know exactly where the airfield is. But, I find that if I'm trying to find a small airfield I haven't visited before it's easier from 2000ft agl rather than circuit height 1000ft. From the overhead it's easier to spot the wind-sock, signal square and observe traffic in the circuit and generally get myself orientated to the field. To use the 45 degree method you have to know the runway in use to plan your circuit which probably implies being given instructions by ATC. "Horses for courses".
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both the UK "standard rejoin" and the USA "45 degree rejoin" work. I use them both and am not sure which one I prefer.
However, unless pilots are disciplined to fly either given procedure correctly, these accidents will always happen despite all the "lookout" in the world.
However, unless pilots are disciplined to fly either given procedure correctly, these accidents will always happen despite all the "lookout" in the world.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 45 degree join in the US is different and to me safer,
It's ok joining on the 45 if know exactly where the airfield is. But, I find that if I'm trying to find a small airfield I haven't visited before it's easier from 2000ft agl rather than circuit height 1000ft. From the overhead it's easier to spot the wind-sock, signal square and observe traffic in the circuit and generally get myself orientated to the field.
Have asked this before but where is the statistical evidence that the US 45 deg join is "safer" than an OHJ?
We might all have some sort of subjective feelings about which is safer but until someone can show me stats on airproxes/collisions in the circuit for different types of join, I am yet to be convinced.
We might all have some sort of subjective feelings about which is safer but until someone can show me stats on airproxes/collisions in the circuit for different types of join, I am yet to be convinced.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that their is any statistical evidence in favor of either procedure.
Both are flawed if the procedure is not flown correctly.
In the UK over the numbers means - over the numbers
In the US intercept at 45 degrees means - intercept at 45 degrees.
Making up your own joining procedure in either country, in a busy circuit, with all the lookout in the world, will not stop this happening again.
Maybe, a N reg parachute will be mandatory next, along with Mode S and 8.33kz spacing.
Both are flawed if the procedure is not flown correctly.
In the UK over the numbers means - over the numbers
In the US intercept at 45 degrees means - intercept at 45 degrees.
Making up your own joining procedure in either country, in a busy circuit, with all the lookout in the world, will not stop this happening again.
Maybe, a N reg parachute will be mandatory next, along with Mode S and 8.33kz spacing.
Last edited by Jetblu; 17th Jul 2011 at 14:58. Reason: Add
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US there is nothing to stop you flying overhead the airfield at a safe height first then fly away turn and descend out of the way of the airfield before joining on the 45.
The key is to have the big picture in your mind. For two to collide like this at an ATC controlled field is nuts, especially because both pilots would no doubt have been listening to RT for some minutes before the event and should have been aware of the other.
The key is to have the big picture in your mind. For two to collide like this at an ATC controlled field is nuts, especially because both pilots would no doubt have been listening to RT for some minutes before the event and should have been aware of the other.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Englishal - you are right, both aircraft should have heard one another on RT, but, Shoreham does not have radar. They probably rely solely upon pilot information.
If for example, aircraft A calls up for departure, for a standard circuit and whilst accelerating in the roll hears aircraft B call up "letting down deadside for rejoin" Aircraft A for sure would be looking out for aircraft B.
Once aircraft A has reached 500ft he would then turn left still ascending onto crosswind still looking out to his left for aircraft B "joining" crosswind.
Why would aircraft A be looking directly behind in the climb on crosswind. One doesn't expect a prop chomping away at your *rse from behind.
When I call downwind and another aircraft calls finals, the picture that I am expecting is the other aircraft to be in front of me, having completed base leg and descending on the runway heading, but after this discussion I will now be looking everywhere for that traffic.
If for example, aircraft A calls up for departure, for a standard circuit and whilst accelerating in the roll hears aircraft B call up "letting down deadside for rejoin" Aircraft A for sure would be looking out for aircraft B.
Once aircraft A has reached 500ft he would then turn left still ascending onto crosswind still looking out to his left for aircraft B "joining" crosswind.
Why would aircraft A be looking directly behind in the climb on crosswind. One doesn't expect a prop chomping away at your *rse from behind.
When I call downwind and another aircraft calls finals, the picture that I am expecting is the other aircraft to be in front of me, having completed base leg and descending on the runway heading, but after this discussion I will now be looking everywhere for that traffic.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
both pilots would no doubt have been listening to RT for some minutes before the event and should have been aware of the other.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
both pilots would no doubt have been listening to RT for some minutes before the event and should have been aware of the other.
both pilots would no doubt have been listening to RT for some minutes before the event and should have been aware of the other.
Having done that very crosswind join so many times, once over the upwind numbers I'm busy looking at the downwind leg to merge with any traffic approaching from my right and would not have seriously imagined (until now) there would be a serious conflict with an a/c taking off below and to my left, especially if the take off clearance is for an immediate left turn out - which is unusual, but could well turn out to be the case here as it fits better with the evidence available and provides a scenario in which every party involved acted professionally and rationally.
I find Shoreham ATC superb at alerting and helping to deal with possible conflicts.
This thread has personally made me question a whole load of assumptions and issues about crosswind joins etc.. Many thanks.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spotthedog - your description of the crosswind join in para 2 is spot on
Had YOU been that DA40 on the day in question, you would have seen the other aircraft climbing crosswind (parallel with your track) in your 3 o clock position, range approx 1 mile/1.5 miles.
Have you seen the geographical photo's on previous pages ?
Had YOU been that DA40 on the day in question, you would have seen the other aircraft climbing crosswind (parallel with your track) in your 3 o clock position, range approx 1 mile/1.5 miles.
Have you seen the geographical photo's on previous pages ?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had YOU been that DA40 on the day in question, you would have seen the other aircraft climbing crosswind (parallel with your track) in your 3 o clock position, range approx 1 mile/1.5 miles.
Have you seen the geographical photo's on previous pages ?
Have you seen the geographical photo's on previous pages ?
a) the earlier observation in this thread that a prop can travel a significant distance when it detaches, and possibly other smaller pieces too.
b) Witness statements suggest the RV fell speedily from a low height (although we don't know what height yet do we - even 1100 feet might appear "low" to a muggle, as to "400 feet" - surely this isn't true but time till tell).
c) Witness statements suggest that the RV appeared to turn away from the houses (on the east and south of the A259) and a bridge (which surely must be the A259 bridge and not the A27 bridge as quoted in the Mail article).
So if I was the DA40 joining crosswind (over the numbers and then tracking over the recreation park towards the A259 bridge) the other a/c would probably have been coming at me from below and from the left as it had just taken off from R20 and, the presumption here, made an agreed early left turn, in order to reach the point of collision.
But suppose, as you suggest, the RV had continued on a more 'normal' R20 departure, it still would have to have turned sharpish left and departed the published circuit track at some point, in order to approach me from my 3 o clock. But yes I would have stood a better chance of seeing it ... and it me. But I have several problems with this scenario so it seems less likely to me - based on what we know.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brighton
Age: 73
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Early Left Turns EGKA
I will admit to sometimes not following the circuit pattern when departing 20 and going off to the east.
If im doing T&G,s my focus is on a cross wind climb out of 110deg until I reach circuit height of 1100ft
But if im going east I now realize that once IV crossed the coast I have forgotten the circuit pattern and followed the coastline which is 80deg as it feels safer to hug the land rather than the wet water.
Probably its due to my C152 not have such a great rate of climb as compared to other high performance planes that I have never reached 1100ft as I went under the Crosswind / Downwind area of the circuit.
However im going to make sure I keep to the pattern from now on
If im doing T&G,s my focus is on a cross wind climb out of 110deg until I reach circuit height of 1100ft
But if im going east I now realize that once IV crossed the coast I have forgotten the circuit pattern and followed the coastline which is 80deg as it feels safer to hug the land rather than the wet water.
Probably its due to my C152 not have such a great rate of climb as compared to other high performance planes that I have never reached 1100ft as I went under the Crosswind / Downwind area of the circuit.
However im going to make sure I keep to the pattern from now on
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The August edition of the Shoreham Airport News has, not surprisingly, run an article on the mid air collision last month. While much of the content has already been stated here I thought was the following excerpt may be of interest , "We do however know that the DA40 was joining crosswind and had just crossed the upwind numbers of the active runway(20). The Vans was, it is believed, on circuits."
Moderator
"We do however know that the DA40 was joining crosswind and had just crossed the upwind numbers of the active runway(20). The Vans was, it is believed, on circuits."
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500man
You can fly a tight oval circuit in any aircraft, but it is very bad practice to fly a circuit that is not the one published.
A number of years back a Cessna 150 flown by a mate ( with a young passenger) was hit by an aircraft doing a non standard circuit, all were killed.
Before anyone jumps on me this is a general comment as I am not in a position to comment on the Shoreham accident.
A number of years back a Cessna 150 flown by a mate ( with a young passenger) was hit by an aircraft doing a non standard circuit, all were killed.
Before anyone jumps on me this is a general comment as I am not in a position to comment on the Shoreham accident.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts