FFF

I didn't notice an argument - just a discussion. Thought that's what the forum was for ;)

Likewise, in the time honoured fashion of good PPrune debates we work through the issues until either reaching completely common ground, or agreeing to disagree. In this case, mostly the former.

CM - I've not at any point said that I had a problem with any ATC service, as it happens I grew up with military ATC and came to civil flying slightly later in life. If Brize want me at 1704 ft that's fine by me, so long as they don't mind my explaining politely that I'd be better at 1635½ ft - they have their problems and if giving slightly restrictive clearances to me ease those (or give me a permission I wouldn't otherwise have got) that's just fine.

Incidedentally, you said that there are published criteria as to under what circumstances a RAS will, or won't, be granted. Where would I find those? - it would be worth knowing for en-route planning.


Weren't we talking about approaches and joins at some point?

G

The only place They're published is in each units MATS part II (the individual unit operating instructions). However, if you've got access to approach plates where the 25nm MSA (top right hand corner normally) is published then take the highest figure on there and you won't go far wrong.

I'm not familiar with the phrase "overhead join", but we have the same practice here in Canada for uncontrolled aerodromes (you can see an explanation and diagram here). At controlled aerodromes, we follow ATC instructions unless it is dangerous to do so, then we decline to accept the clearance (not a novel concept, I think?).

I have flown a bit in Oz, and as I recall they also use the "overhead join".


I was taught this technique for practice forced landings in Harvards, and it seems to be easier than flying a rectangular circuit. I don't agree with flying at the edge of a stall, though ... I'd suggest flying at best L/D speed would be much more appropriate. Also there shouldn't be any need for 45 degree banks ... 30 degrees is plenty.