Run and break when will they learn ?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recently observed:
XXX radio this is YYY formation (2 aircraft) inbound request run and break.
YYY formation, XXX radio this is only a radio service, I can not clear you to do anything the circuit is very active on runway.....
YYY fromation rodger will position for a run and break on runway....
Some moments later;
YYY formation bearking off the run and break due to aircraft on final we'll orbit on downwind for spacing.
Circuit continues to be busy and several attempts to make a run and break are broken off and formation continues to orbit just outside downwind.
Some minutes later;
ZZZ aircraft (one of the formation) "bingo fuel, bingo fuel, bingo fuel".
The two aircraft having already loaded the frequency unnecessarly, confirm that number 2 is low on fuel through more blocking of the frequency.
With little or no chance of making their run and break, the aircraft announce that they are breaking clear of the curcuit.
This is followed by the aircraft low on fuel cutting in on final approach on front of two aicraft in the pilot's haste to get their aircraft safely on the ground.
My points are;
1. There was no need to make a run and break
2. The circuit was too busy and if as many argue, it is ok provided the circuit traffic can be visually avoided, why was the run and break broken off so many times?
3. The only reason why the aircraft ended low on fuel was the wasted time spent holding for a run and break
4. Putting the aircraft in this situation could be endangerment.
5. Using military phraseology in a civil environment does nothing for helping pilots to understand what is going on. If the pilot simply said that they were short of fuel then they would have been afforded priority on final by the circuit traffic and would not have to cut up the circuit in a rush back to the ground.
6. When operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome, aircraft shall conform to the pattern or avoid it..........orbiting downwind and busting onto final is not conforming to the pattern.
If run and breaks are to be a new part of the circuit pattern then it is about time that the CAA issued some guidance for those pilots who may find themselves confronted with one.
Regards,
DFC
XXX radio this is YYY formation (2 aircraft) inbound request run and break.
YYY formation, XXX radio this is only a radio service, I can not clear you to do anything the circuit is very active on runway.....
YYY fromation rodger will position for a run and break on runway....
Some moments later;
YYY formation bearking off the run and break due to aircraft on final we'll orbit on downwind for spacing.
Circuit continues to be busy and several attempts to make a run and break are broken off and formation continues to orbit just outside downwind.
Some minutes later;
ZZZ aircraft (one of the formation) "bingo fuel, bingo fuel, bingo fuel".
The two aircraft having already loaded the frequency unnecessarly, confirm that number 2 is low on fuel through more blocking of the frequency.
With little or no chance of making their run and break, the aircraft announce that they are breaking clear of the curcuit.
This is followed by the aircraft low on fuel cutting in on final approach on front of two aicraft in the pilot's haste to get their aircraft safely on the ground.
My points are;
1. There was no need to make a run and break
2. The circuit was too busy and if as many argue, it is ok provided the circuit traffic can be visually avoided, why was the run and break broken off so many times?
3. The only reason why the aircraft ended low on fuel was the wasted time spent holding for a run and break
4. Putting the aircraft in this situation could be endangerment.
5. Using military phraseology in a civil environment does nothing for helping pilots to understand what is going on. If the pilot simply said that they were short of fuel then they would have been afforded priority on final by the circuit traffic and would not have to cut up the circuit in a rush back to the ground.
6. When operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome, aircraft shall conform to the pattern or avoid it..........orbiting downwind and busting onto final is not conforming to the pattern.
If run and breaks are to be a new part of the circuit pattern then it is about time that the CAA issued some guidance for those pilots who may find themselves confronted with one.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have only seen a run and break performed once. That was at Bournemouth, which is in controlled airspace, and the manuover was flown by a Vampire and no other traffic was anywhere near the curcuit. Seemed a very sensible way to get the speed off and positioned correctly on downwind considering the way the aircraft approached the field. However, I do not see why this manuover is needed apart from the enjoyment factor. A bit of forward planning would remove the need.
So here we have one group saying it's a good practice and the other group saying it's dangerous. I know that I would feel very uncomfortable being in the circuit if somebody called their intention to do a run and break so I must fall into the latter group. Is airmanship something that only low houred pilots need in order to avoid more experienced pilots that insist on doing these manuovers? I consider my safety to be more important than your fun.
D
So here we have one group saying it's a good practice and the other group saying it's dangerous. I know that I would feel very uncomfortable being in the circuit if somebody called their intention to do a run and break so I must fall into the latter group. Is airmanship something that only low houred pilots need in order to avoid more experienced pilots that insist on doing these manuovers? I consider my safety to be more important than your fun.
D
DFC:
That horror story sounds like a mixture of the inexcusable with the inept but unfortunately people do dumb and inept things in all aspects of life - it's not unique to this topic. During many journeys on the roads you are likely to notice someone doing something dumb or inept - but rarely it's ourselves! Strange that!
The call of "Bingo" is interesting as this is usually a pre-briefed "informational" fuel level rather than minimum fuel. There are a variety of formation R/T calls but none of them affect people outside the formation. If in doubt or urgency the sensible action, as always, is to use plain language.
That horror story sounds like a mixture of the inexcusable with the inept but unfortunately people do dumb and inept things in all aspects of life - it's not unique to this topic. During many journeys on the roads you are likely to notice someone doing something dumb or inept - but rarely it's ourselves! Strange that!
The call of "Bingo" is interesting as this is usually a pre-briefed "informational" fuel level rather than minimum fuel. There are a variety of formation R/T calls but none of them affect people outside the formation. If in doubt or urgency the sensible action, as always, is to use plain language.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot help but agree. The run and break is the preferred method of people who seem to affect flying suits and aircraft have little purpose other than image.
That these wannbes can suggest it is a safe way of joining a circuit suggests some basic fault in their logic.
It is not a standard practice. Even the military do not use it routinely at civil fields. Doing it at airfields with air/ground and non-radio traffic might mean that there is no one to actually refuse them permission but it is still appalling 'airmanship'.
Keep it for displays and when you're trying to impress the military at their airfields (fat chance in a JP or Yak!!!).
That these wannbes can suggest it is a safe way of joining a circuit suggests some basic fault in their logic.
It is not a standard practice. Even the military do not use it routinely at civil fields. Doing it at airfields with air/ground and non-radio traffic might mean that there is no one to actually refuse them permission but it is still appalling 'airmanship'.
Keep it for displays and when you're trying to impress the military at their airfields (fat chance in a JP or Yak!!!).
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: don't know, I'll ask
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dufwer, I think you are totally right, but you have clearly not recognised the important operational necessity for run and breaks in the civil set up. I fly a reasonably high performance aeros machine and have to admit that a bit of airborne hooliganism is great fun, but as I do not want to end up dead it is in safe places at appropriate altitudes for whatever the hoolganism of the day is. I have also flown in formations, not quite the Mallory Big Wing league but formations none the less, and the only point of an R&B is because it is fun. It therfore has to be done only when nobody is around. This negates the point however for the flying egomaniac where the only pointis to let other people see them; the airborne equivelant of the Vauxhall Nova with added noise, it's the look at me factor, and as such has no place in safe aviation practice.
R&B even by the proficient exponents of the art, only encourge the less able to have a go, which is a bad thing. If it is possible for Concorde to slow down from Mach whatever to a sensible approcah speed, there is no reason whatsoever why even a large formation cannot disperse at a pre-planned rate and arrive individually at a sensible speed for an approach apropriate to the environment in which they intend to land. If as pilots they have so little control or situational awareness that this is not possible they should not be flying formations and should get some sensible training.
Too many A/G airfields are turning into the playground of mindless egotistical pilots who have either little regard for others or not enough skill and training to fit in with standard circuit practice. These people should be grounded until they learn some manners.
So there!
Another thing, is there any link bewteen pilots skill and the numbr of badges on their flying gear: in my experience there is an inverse link between them. Beware the flying suit full of badges.
R&B even by the proficient exponents of the art, only encourge the less able to have a go, which is a bad thing. If it is possible for Concorde to slow down from Mach whatever to a sensible approcah speed, there is no reason whatsoever why even a large formation cannot disperse at a pre-planned rate and arrive individually at a sensible speed for an approach apropriate to the environment in which they intend to land. If as pilots they have so little control or situational awareness that this is not possible they should not be flying formations and should get some sensible training.
Too many A/G airfields are turning into the playground of mindless egotistical pilots who have either little regard for others or not enough skill and training to fit in with standard circuit practice. These people should be grounded until they learn some manners.
So there!
Another thing, is there any link bewteen pilots skill and the numbr of badges on their flying gear: in my experience there is an inverse link between them. Beware the flying suit full of badges.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ont, Canada
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ChrisN,
Thanks, I didn't notice the diagram link before.
This confirms in my mind that the main reason for the accident was the two aircraft were flying "opposite" patterns.
At controlled fields, there will often be left/right base leg aircraft controlled by ATC. When I have been in that situation, the controller will repeatedly call traffic, and confirm that the pilots have each other in sight.
At an uncontrolled field, pilots really need to know what the circuit procedures are, and follow them.
If I were to lose sight of conflicting traffic, and couldn't resolve it quickly via RT, I would be leave the circuit, climbing above circuit height, then re-enter when I could determine where everyone was.
Most mid-airs do occur in VMC in the circuit, and pilots need to very aware of what is going on at all times.
Mike
Thanks, I didn't notice the diagram link before.
This confirms in my mind that the main reason for the accident was the two aircraft were flying "opposite" patterns.
At controlled fields, there will often be left/right base leg aircraft controlled by ATC. When I have been in that situation, the controller will repeatedly call traffic, and confirm that the pilots have each other in sight.
At an uncontrolled field, pilots really need to know what the circuit procedures are, and follow them.
If I were to lose sight of conflicting traffic, and couldn't resolve it quickly via RT, I would be leave the circuit, climbing above circuit height, then re-enter when I could determine where everyone was.
Most mid-airs do occur in VMC in the circuit, and pilots need to very aware of what is going on at all times.
Mike
