Overhead Joins
 

Hi,

Low hour ppl here with a question, ideally I'd like an instructor or ATC to answer as I have flown with several long hour ppls and have gotten different answers when discussing.

When approaching for an overhead join should you always position yourself initially as per http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_gad...oin_poster.pdf (90 degrees to the runway and turn runway heading deadside)

or is it acceptable to join deadside (eg if you are tracking 180 degrees and deadside/runway heading is 180) and then go into the cct (descend deadside, crosswind and into downwind)

The debate started when I turned left of an airfield (at about 10 miles out) so I could position myself for the initial approach for the overhead join. The pilot I was with told me that if I was already lined up on the deadside leg just go straight on and call overhead when abeam the runway deadside... (His view was why make it more difficult if you are already on the runway heading)

Thoughts...

My interpretation.
 

Do as it says: 'join overhead' 2000' qfe, determine circuit direction (windsock or signals square), if circuit is left-hand (default) make your turns to left vice- versa right-hand, descend on dead-side to circuit height, cross the end of the runway (cross-wind ie other end to threshold) at circuit height, downwind, base-leg, finals.
It doesn't matter which direction you join from you're going to ascertain circuit direct etc whilst over-head. This is the theoretical standard over-head join, however a lot of airfields have their own instructions depending on local restrictions in which case you need to consult the AIP or Pooleys etc..

I agree with jxk.
Starting your join from 2000ft overhead means that you'll be flying a similar path to all other aircraft who might also be joining. So assuming you don't bump into anybody in the overhead, you shouldn't be conflicting with anyone through the rest of your join.
If the standard proceedure at an airfield is to join overhead, and you decide to join on the deadside, chances are you wont be descending in the same profile as people joining overhead (because you'll have started at a different point). So in this scenario there is every possibility that someone joining from overhead could descend into you when you are deadside (if you were sufficiently low not to be seen).

I can see the point of an overhead join at an unmanned field or one without radio but I don't buy it for a manned field. If you ask for joining and traffic info and there isn't any of the latter why annoy the neighbours by spending longer in the circuit if you can join on final, base or downwind without upsetting any other traffic?

I’m not normally a fan of overhead joins, but there have been a couple of occasions recently (Henham Park & Project Propeller at Old Warden) where it has been useful in sorting out arriving traffic of radically differing airspeeds.

The usual caveat of checking Pooleys / VFR Guide / AIP and PPR applies. This will get you the information and probably the reason for any specific procedure. In the case of Headcorn you will be advised in no uncertain terms NOT to join over head…

Safe Flying,
Richard W.

Rabbs,

Its always worth getting an early radio call into your destination, that will give you all the info you need to plan your approach. I fly out of Donny and by doing this I usually get a straight in which reduces the workload vastly.

J.

it is published at most airfields i fly into, for a standard overhead join. I dont like it personally when people decide to do their own thing and 'just slot in behind' and come streaking accross the pattern at circuit height, makes things dangerous when people dont follow procedures i think.

Unless on test i wouldnt worry about specific direction to join into deadside.

Some airfields do ask you to join overhead for particular reasons. At those fields, you won't be popular is you don't.

Similarly, there are other airfields, especially those with parachuting, who don't wan't overhead joins under any circumstances.

All airfields have their little quirks, NIMBYs obstructions etc, so i you are not sure, phone them and ask before you launch - all part of preflight preparation

I think overhead joins are fab (second only to the RIAB), especially where non radio traffic is involved or if you are sorting out an approach to a scary new field.

But one thing I must add. When is the CAA going to come up with a readable version of the OH join pattern. The coloured fields add loads of 'colour' but you can't read the words without a magnifying glass and (Rabbs you are right to ask) the poster does not make it clear but you CAN make an OH join from ANY direction - thats the idea.

Technically...
 

This was discussed on here in some detail a while back. If you approach the airfield deadside, and descend before reaching the airfield then what you are doing is technically a cross wind join. In practice I've found there's nothing wrong with that, and at airfields that require an overhead join they seem happy with the cross wind join when approaching deadside. This is the way I tend to fly it.

If you absolutely have to perform an overhead join, and you are arriving from deadside then you should overfly the airfield, at circuit join height (usually 2000ft QFE) and do a 180 when you get to the live side, to go back to the deadside where you perform your descent to circuit height.

However, in the world of flying this is all open to interpretation and one man's "normal aviation practice" can be another's "I've never seen airmanship like it". As long as you stay safe that's the important thing.

The original purpose of the overhead join was to allow either non-radio aircraft, or aircraft arriving at a non radio airfield, to overfly the airfield at a safe height, to observe the signal square, determine the runway in use and circuit direction, and then descend into the circuit pattern. To do this you must arrive in the overhead at 2000 ft; descending on the Deadside as you approach is as stated, a crosswind join.

Whilst I find most pilots understand the pattern, the choice of speeds and power settings leaves something to be desired; many glide down at glide speed (best suited for range!) often leaving the ATZ; only to rejoin on an unannounced crosswind leg. A few weeks ago I joined overhead at an airfield where I heard two other aircraft report Deadside Descending ahead of me; I was crossing the centreline and could see no other aircraft, I called, descended and was well established Downwind before the other two aircraft appeared on a crosswind leg about a mile behind me. Nobody watching would have had a clue what they were doing.

Why?
 

Why does this simple over-head join procedure seem so difficult? I suppose in this modern over controlled environment pilots need to be told what to do from t/o to landing.

Surely a deadside approach is a cross wind join. An overhead join is what it says on the tin.

When joining crosswind if you are crossing the end of the take off runway try and position your self so you can at least see it.

Just in case a Pitts takes off and decides to go vertical.;)

ps when turning Final call "final" not "finals". Stops ATC asking if you joined "downwinds"

which dates back to WW1 :)

The OHJ is dangerous because - ignoring for the moment the 'people' who insist on the OHJ even when there is no known traffic, just to wind up visiting pilots (a certain airfield in the Luton area being one well known example) - it gets invoked when there are too many planes inbound at the same time, which is precisely when you do NOT want to be heading for the same spot at the same altitude!

The OHJ is also used at ATC airfields when the ATCO cannot handle the incoming traffic so he just sends everybody into the overhead and people then have to take care of themselves. And one finds some people cheating. For example the other day I arrived in the overhead, only to hear a certain other plane which was way behind me call "overhead". He got what he wanted (the clearance to descend deadside) ahead of me as a result. I wasn't bothered (never would have thought of that trick myself, but then I am not paying a club hire rate) but it shows the system is far from foolproof; the first person to call 'overhead' is likely to get a descent clearance regardless of where he actually is.

Actually I can't remember the last time I did an OHJ :D Pretty much everyone I've come across recently seems to join by whatever is easiest for them - me included - and unless an airfield *specifically requests* an OHJ I'd rather joing on a base / downwind etc....

I agree the "deadside" or "crosswind" join, which is half an OHJ is useful if approaching from the deadside and I'd always do this, but wouldn't fanny about doing a proper OHJ which would require crossing the airfield twice and tons of messing around in the most dangerous bit of airspace. I'd do an OHJ if there is no person on the radio or the airfield is closed though unless someone else was on frequency to tell me the weather / prefered runway etc.......

The US system of joining the downwind leg at 45 degrees has much to commend it.

Particularly if, in non- towered fields everyone is self - announcing on Unicom.

But of course the Brits could only come up with safetycom which lacks many of the brilliant features of Unicom and is half-baked enough to have many peeps refuse to use it.

Overhead joins give me the willies especially when people announce that they're overhead when they patently aren't.

Cusco.

G-VFWE at Keevil
 

Can quite remember when this was BUT the procedure was OHJ and non radio - some hundreds of aircraft all landed safely. Of course there were a few (idiots) who couldn't understand this procedure and just cut up the circuit.

I'm with Cusco and IO540 on this one.
The overhead join is for the twirly tash brigade flying slow non-radio aircraft using their monocled mark one eyeballs.

Too many aircraft in the same place at the same time can easily result and the US system of joining downwind on the 45 wins hands down as it is NOT open to misinterpretation and also allows for safe overtaking so people have less incentive to lie about their position (as IO experienced).

Aircraft are now too quick for this, having to lose 2000ft in the confines of the circuit can be difficult for those of us who fly aircraft with half decent aerodynamic qualities. The added dimension of having to descend deadside during the OHJ makes it less easy to see and you less visible to others - much easier if everyone arrives at the same height.

The OHJ is hazardous and should be scrapped.

SB

Ah....excellent. We haven't had a good OHJ punch-up for simply ages.

I'd counter with the proposal that any pilot who calls for the banning of the OHJ is clearly a habitual IFR-fondling agoraphobic, prone to panic attacks when required to look outside the aircraft, and who should be repeatedly smacked in the goolies with a Pooley's until they see the light of day (or faint from the inevitable panic attack).

I wish the CAA would publish diagrams of what do do is you are NOT approaching from the live side.

Too much confusion is about - like what was said earlier - people come up with different answers.

If they had a simple diagram showing a plane approaching from the dead side - flying over head - doing a 180 - and then continuing the join "as normal" (or as per the safetysense leaflet), if would save a lot of confusion.

In fact - I've yet to come accross a diagram which does not show just the safetysense scenario. Anyone know where to get one? I'm not the best MS Paint artist - would prefer a decent looking one to use!

I'll take the second punch then! Apart from the twirly tash bit, I kinda fit that group. However, I think the OHJ is daft and is the time I feel most exposed to a midair. I hate arriving overhead to hear two or three others doing the same (where are they?) I tend to ask for a downwind, crosswind or straight in approach and usually get it .... much safer. OK, I have a radio (handheld but good range) and accept that without any contact the OHJ has merit. But few fly these days without any radio, and those that do, tend to fly non radio into private strips or airfields where non radio is common. G-VFWE works well because by and large, the pilots are very experienced and have good situational awareness, so the odd non radio a/c can easily fit themselves in.

SS

Have always been taught the standard overhead join, works fine for me, keep a good look out and all is OK. Also helps if everyone sticks to the same join procedure, much simpler... instead of all sorts of folks joining from everywhere, downwind, base, long final, and from !!!! knows where else. :rolleyes: Of course at a larger controlled airfield circuits per se may not exist and you may be instructed to join downwind or base, which on the other hand is fine under the instruction of ATC, if the controllers are trying to slot you in between 757s and Scarebuses for example.

I would think the best course of action when visiting an aerodrome is to check the arrival procedures first before leaving... I know that some airfields like Fife have odd circuit patterns/procedures due to noise abatement etc.

No big deal if you check the procedures before leaving and then follow it. Mountain, molehill etc.

"any pilot who calls for the banning of the OHJ is clearly a habitual IFR-fondling agoraphobic, prone to panic attacks when required to look outside the aircraft"


What is clear from the responses here is that everyone has a different interpretation of what constitutes a correct OHJ - and in their own minds everyone is right of course! Positional ambiguity when joining overhead at closing speeds of 250+ kts can lead to hairy moments even for the most steely eyed sky gods among us.

E-hardon (or what ever your monicker is), a healthy degree of agoraphobia has kept me alive for 2000+ flying hrs. Agoraphobia in pilots is a healthy trait, unlike bravado which can be fatal.

SB

I'm not disputing the face that it's a simple procedure. But people only get shown diagrams in all of the books which show how to do the join if approaching live side. And this, I believe it where the confusion starts.

.

That would be "assess".

Why do you need to do all that? If coming from the deadside, and I know it is runway 25, then I fly over the 07 numbers at circuit height, turn onto downwind and fly the circuit. Easy peasy. Why fly overhead, turn, fly over head again, turn, fly overhead again, when there is no need.

We often talk about midair's in class G airspace and everyone has come to the conclusion that they are thankfully very rare. However when they DO occur, stats show that *most* of them happen within two miles of an airfield.....so buggered if I'm going to hang around above one for too long ;)

I flew into Bembridge the other day, and one chap joined straight in, one on downwind and I joined on base. No problem whatsoever, we all slotted in nicely....

Why is fearing a Marketplace a good thing in Pilots?

Transair would go under!....












I'll get my coat...

Personally I have no problem doing an OHJ non radio and whatever fits in an R/t situation, I am not though a fan of of the 45 downwind join - to me this gets even more people aiming for the same place than the OHJ, with less room to manoeuvre and cutting up others already in the circuit!:mad:

Agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment, foxmoth!

In any event, the 45 degree downwind join breaches the spirit, if not the actual letter, of Rule 12 of the Rules of the Air Regulations ... that all turns made within the vicinity of the aerodrome should be to the left (or right, if that is the indicated circuit direction) unless otherwise authorised by an ATCU.

The US 45 deg joins work well, but so does a UK DW join, but only if you happen to be approaching the field from the live side. The question was about airmanship/safety when coming in from another direction. In that case, even the US system can require some extensive manouevering, loss of height, potential conflicts with other joining traffic etc.

I agree that the CAA advice could be modernised: many aerodromes have ATIS and/or active ATC chatter to reveal circuit direction, so there is no need to arrive o/h for that reason alone.

I also believe the OHJ is a throwback to the days when you could easily lose 1000ft in the length of the runway. My, not exactly state of the art, Emeraude has to be slipped to do that, taking my attention away from the big picture, hence I join with the call "Decending dead side for a crosswind join" or "Passing aunty Mary's at 1000ft, will join left base/downwind XX" etc. A/G field by the way. ATC fields, do as yr told.
Edit:- Obviously if it's an unmanned non radio strip, then fly overhead to have a look, still dangerous though if someone else is doing the same.

The dangers of the O/H Join
 

Let me be arguementative :-) I will describe a scenerio I was on the down wind leg for landing at 1000 agl under a 1400-1500 cloud base.
A student pilot tried to join overhead effectively at circuit height cutting right across the downwind leg in the process.

No overhead join should be allowed without at Least a cloudbase of 2500 feet but how many airfields call for such a join when it is impossible and dangerous to do so.

Then lets look at two scenarios an aircraft joining long finals and giving dme distances on his approach. He is visual left and right of his track.

Now put him overhead. To get to the same point he flies overhead turns 90 degrees onto deadside, descends and turns to the left, he then makes another 90 degree crosswind turn, followed by another 90 degree turn onto downwind another 90 degree onto base another 90 degree onto final.

That is a total of six 90 degree turns to get onto final. Any turn adds danger not just from the physics but add high and low wing aircraft and you have the added danger of blind turns and collision potential.

Everyone homing into the same spot over an airfield also adds danger.
Aircraft of different speeds also adds danger.

For me the overhead join is outmoded and fraught with risk especially with todays aircraft equipt with GPS where the ability to give distances on non dme airfields exists.
It is also often used when the cloudbase does not allow it what do you do then?

Okay years ago when aircraft where non radio and you had to join overhead to check the windsock and signal square ok but to use it as the be end and end all of joining today?

Apart from all that what about the comfort of your passengers being thrown into needless blind turns.

The O/H is one form of join or should be but one which should only ever be used in good weather and vis.

Nothing changes fast in aviation. It was good enough for our grandfathers its good enough for us?

Pace

Either you are flying it wrong or the airfield you fly from has a runway too short for the Emeraude!

I think both the for & against brigade have valid points with regards to joining overhead. One thing you can be sure of though is that whenever or however you rejoin the circuit or approach an airfield to land, you're definitely going to be keeping a very very good look out and listening intently to the radio to try and get a feel for where everyone is.

The main problem in my opinion seems to be those pilots whom say they are somewhere they're not e.g... "Golf bla bla bla is overhead the numbers 2000ft" when the reality is they are still a good 1/2 mile from the airfield.

I personally like the OHJ, not because it more / less safer than others, I just f*cking enjoy it! :ok: It's good fun and all passengers I flown it with have thoroughly enjoyed it!

Supersport.

Supersport

The other problem is pilots idea of a circuit. You have those who consider down wind on a circuit more fitting of a 747 those who consider downwind with the runway literally vertically below, those whos idea of finals is six miles out.

If you place a racecourse pattern around the airfield the most obvious is to join it at whatever position you arrive. The height of that pattern then adjusts with a good clearance to the cloudbase but aiming to be 1000 feet or whatever and as you said communication and a good eye is all important.

Pace

My 2 cents worth:

In the early days of aviation, there was one spot where all traffic converged. That spot was the aiming point on the runway.

So we created the circuit with a direct downwind join. All of a sudden we now have a different spot where all traffic converges. Roughly mid-downwind.

So we created a new procedure so that you can see the circuit traffic before joining it, by flying overhead. Now all traffic converges overhead.

And when the Mk 1 eyeball didn't work due to speed or cloud, and we started flying on instruments, we moved that spot somewhere else and called it the IAF.

So let's face it. Whatever procedure you follow, there will always be a spot somewhere in space where the traffic converges.

Personally I prefer the direct downwind join under a 90 degree angle like what's prescribed in the Netherlands, or under a 45 degree angle like what's done in the US. The advantage is that at that point in space traffic is at the same altitude (at least in theory), that there's only a few places where traffic can come from and there's only one direction it'll be flying to.

With the OHJ, traffic can come from 360 degrees around you and might at that spot actually be turning head-on towards you. Plus, the CAA OHJ requires two distinct altitudes (circuit plus OHJ altitude) each offering sufficient clearance from terrain and from each other.

Quote:
I also believe the OHJ is a throwback to the days when you could easily lose 1000ft in the length of the runway. My, not exactly state of the art, Emeraude has to be slipped to do that,


Either you are flying it wrong or the airfield you fly from has a runway too short for the Emeraude!


600 metres grass. 60 knots. = 18 seconds end to end. 1000ft in 18 seconds. Forgive me if I am wrong but that equates to a decent rate of 3000ft per min or thereabouts, Angle of decent about 30deg.
I suppose we could muck about with acceleration rates etc but it doesn't look very comfortable / safe to me. I'll give it a practical next time.
What exactly am I doing wrong? because I can get it on the ground & stopped in about 400 metres.

At an aerodrome that has ATIS and ATC you're not going to arrive in the o/h unless instructed to do so.

Just out of interest - from the AAIB stats how many collisions have happened in the overhead or ATZ of an active airfield in the last 25 years?

Are we not getting a bit wound up over something that concentrates the mind, but actually isn't that much of a problem. And given the way fewer hours are being flown, this risk is reducing.........right :ok: