FNG

As he said - unnecessary verbiage ;)

You're behind them - therefore you're not a worry to them - it's them that are a worry to you ;)

In addition how do you know there were two - there might have been only one and the the other was departing downwind low level. Or there might have been three and you couldn't see the third (or the first, or the second). There can sometimes be a fine line between a 'helpful' call and misinformation.

EVO

I'm intrigued. Is an over head call standard practice at 'HR or is the normal call 'deadside descending'. Reason I ask is if you call in the overhead just after someone else then you've no real idea who's going to be descending first. However, if you hear 'deadside descending' before you then that's an indication in itself that you're going to be no.2 to that traffic.

I have a feeling we could cause new PPLs (who are used to a tower) to worry more than necessary about going to non radio or a/g airfields.

I think a very quick call giving your position and your number in traffic (if you know it ) is important, but you could be in a mix of non radio aircraft so just slot in the pattern and keep a good look out.

I have been to a few fly-ins where it was safer when the A/G just gave up and the drivers sorted it out.

CM, if I understood paulo correctly, he was worried about someone flying up his wazzoo. At least a call may let the traffic ahead know that you are not going to cut in.

If the circuits being flown properly then no-one would have any need to 'cut-in', nor would they be in a position to do so. I think you're trying to justify a solution to a problem which doesn't actually exist - sorry.

I agree in principle, CM, but in reality you sometimes find yourself, as Paulo did, visual with an aircraft whose intentions are unclear, especially if people have differing views as to what "downwind" means (I know that they shouldn't, but they do). I agree that our primary job is to look out and to manouevre as nececessary to remain safe, but the radio, used in moderation, can help. As pointed out above, pilots can sometimes effectively "manage" a busy non ATC circuit through good airmanship and calls.

Sorry, I was imprecise with my wording - he did call overhead, descending deadside. You're quite right that this tells us that he should be ahead of us in the circuit (as he turned out to be); had he just called overhead we would probably have called immediately to clarify where he was and what he was doing.

We knew there was other traffic joining overhead, Goodwood Info told us when we told them our intentions. However, we couldn't spot it and were only a mile or so away from starting our descent when his deadside call came (he was arriving from the south, we were arriving from the north - the live side), so a sloppily-flown descent by the other pilot could have put us quite close on crosswind. In this case everything worked according to plan, but I don't like having to trust the other pilot to do the right thing if I haven't managed to spot him. So we called once we were descending to make sure that he really was ahead... he was.

AG cannot tell you or any other aircraft in circuit what to do, it can only give you information.

If I feel that another pilot would benefit (ie, I will benefit by not hitting someone I simply cannot see) then I would pass my intentions to traffic.

In theory, all circuit traffic will be listening anyway. The reality of often a different matter.

Reality may be - When the radio is not manned so calls dry up as there is no op to reply. Other traffic still will benefit from "traffic" calls. Another common reality is non radio traffic. This comes back to the lookout. Because you haven't heard him call, does that mean he isn't there... even though you haven't seen him yet?

I've met Paulo and he's a very nice bloke as well as being an accomplished pilot. Its a good question and deserves good answers.

TonyR
A/G is about providing information like wind & QFE etc. It's not the job of Air / Ground Radio to sort anything out traffic wise. Too many pilots (and one or two Air / Ground operators to boot) seem to be confused about the various roles of A/G, FISO and ATC.

Yes I do know the difference, but at a busy fly-in by the time A/G give every pilot the wind etc, a lot of wasted radio time could have been used better by pilots.

I would not expect FISO or ATC to just "give up"

Of course the other reason for not being able to spot someone decending on the dead side is because he is actually decending on the live side.

Buts that's a different can, full of different worms.

I would just make a position report, and I would do it at any field. Once did it after departing a towered field, another aircraft was reporting 10 miles to the south descending through 5000, and I was 10 miles to the south at 4500. As the tower blokey didn't seem to give a toss, I called up "XXXXX 10 miles to the south 4500"

I tell you what, these new fangled contraptions like "GPS" and "Radio" don't half make it dangerous flying around the british isles.:D

For clarification; yes, it may have sounded harsher than it was meant but then again I really mean it. It was most certainly not meant in a derogatory way.

I do not suggest that Paulo should sit and let the other guy fly into him. The fact that Paulo has seen the other guy is enough that the two don't hit each other.

By making a call on the radio you may put the other guy's back up for a number of reasons.

Rocking the wings is a tradition (apparently a dying one) which has a number of uses. Aircraft can be very difficult to see especially with no relative movement (ie on collision course) so the rocking wings, differing light and shadow or glint makes it more visible.

It also helps maintain the camaraderie amongst pilots.

I'm with Chilli, too.

Just to add that people's position reports often reflect more where they think they are than where they actually are.

Thats a silly arguement ;)

Calls to "Traffic" are not OK in the UK. They are not listed in any document and should NOT be made.

All calls should be addressed to the ground station; if there is nobody there, "XXX RADIO" will suffice. Alternatively, "transmitting blind" may be used however, simply stating your callsign, the airfield name, your circuit position and intention will advise interested parties what you are doing.

It's not a silly argument. The call implies that the other guy hasn't seen you, isn't following procedures or doesn't know what he's doing. You're questioning his airmanship.
It also suggests that you are uncertain, nervous, inexperienced or reliant on radio and ATC.

Bear in mind that this is the impression that others who may be listening but not watching the situation may get. 'The other guy' then gets greeted on the ground with an 'oh, you're the guy who tried to cut up/didn't see/doesn't comply....' type of comment.

The irritation(distraction) of the above scenario, whether the former or latter case, doesn't belong in the cockpit either CRM-wise.

Being asked if you have traffic in sight is a normal part of circuit ops. I don't find it insulting (but maybe others do).

Being asked by ATC maybe but not by other traffic.

ATC is asking on behalf of the other traffic.

I don't buy that. If that is the case then why didn't they ask the guy behind you? How come they don't ask every-one all the time?

They ask because it is their job to ensure a flow of traffic and by asking if X has Y in sight they think they're doing a good job. Problem arises when they ask Z if he can see Y and Z says yes when really he's looking at X. Two aircraft now following X. Recipe for disaster!

When in the open FIR, we may be passed traffic info if talking to someone for FIS or RIS. Naturally, in that event it is still our job to look out for the reported traffic, and all other traffic. It's the same in the circuit: being given info may be helpful, so long as we don't assume "That's OK then: there's only that bloke over [THUMP]..."