HWD,

A run and break is typically carried out this way:

A long, straight approach down final, sometimes from a few miles out, usually at high speed but can be at any altitude up to circuit height.

From the midpoint of the runway, the pilot will execute a 180 degree turn to put himself onto a midfield downwind to start a curved approach onto short final to land. Sometimes the pilot will come in low and pull up to circuit height during the turn but it can vary from that to a run AT circuit hieght and a horizontal turn onto downwind. This will sometimes be a shallow turn or a steep turn, climbing to circuit height, or horizontal at circuit height. It usually puts the pilot on a close-in downwind position at approximately midfield, so the curcuit flown is much tighter than your average circuit.

That's for a solo pilot. For a formation, the same applies but each aircraft will peel off with a set separation, usually with the first one peeling off over the approach numbers and then each subsequent aircraft on a 5 second delay. This ends up with a group of aircraft all in stream on downwind, now under their own navigation and setting themselves up for individual landings. Sometimes they'll fly extended downwinds to get the timing of the landings right.

So, having said all that, the places to look when you hear a call for a run and break are starting along the final approach out to a couple of miles, usually low (say 500 ft QFE). The run in will often be fast. Then look along the runway for aircraft executing their turns up (or across) to a close-in downwind. Then look for curved final approaches sometimes starting the decent from abeam the numbers. Rarely will the pilots fly a standard square curcuit with a run and break, so their time from downwind to final will be pretty short.

If it's a formation, the leader will usually announce how many aircraft are in the formation when they approach. Try to remember how many to expect and count them off when you see them. That way you'll know if you'll know you've got them all in sight.

Most run and breaks I've seen have been executed with due regard for local traffic patterns and other traffic in the circuit, but I'm sure there are plenty of examples where that hasn't been the case.

A run and break will often be announced by a radio call something along the lines of "G-XXXX turning Initial for a Run and Break, runway 26, 30 seconds(or X miles) to run" or something close to that.

I hope that answers the question. If you want to see properly executed run and breaks, spend a couple of hours at Lakenheath's Spotters' Corner. The Eagle drivers know how to do it!


If you've got any other questions, ask and I'll try to answer them.
Cheers,
Pitts2112

Cheers Pitts,

Thanks for the very clear explanation. From your description, I have actually seen one in action. I was departing Blackbushe and had the pleasure of seening The Arrows landing at Odium in just that manner, with smoke on and all the trimmings. Each Hawk peeling off just as you have described.

That was possibly the first time I had an inkling that maybe I wouldn't be happy with just pottering around in a spammer. I was thinking the other day, as I was upsidedown in M14P's 2 seat plaything, wouldn't it be nice to learn to fly the whole envelope :ok:

HWD,

Funny you should mention that. I still remember the day I was convinced I wanted to do real aerobatics. I was 12 and my Dad took me to see the USAF Thunderbirds fly at the local airbase. I was totally blown away and decided on that day that I wanted to be a fighter pilot. Well, that didn't work out (bad eyes and the damn Ruskies gave up!), but I got myself a Pitts as soon as possible so I could at least get some good flying in.

Have loved every minute of it!

Pitts2112

Grammar point intervention!
 

Run and Breaks ?

Shureley - Runs and Break?

Loike 'Courts Marshall' which is what all you 'orrible little tyros will be on if you's not carefull!

Sir George Cayley

Pitts,
As I said to M14P on the way back to Popham after his aeros demonstration "You do realise you have just cost me alot of money." I couldn't even think about it yet, but looking beyond my current CPL related training, I have already spent my future earnings :D

"Pa", said Wylie, "When I grow up I want to be an aerobatic pilot!"

"Son, you can't do both", said Wylie senior.

Stik

Sorry about that HWD old chap!!! Still, at least you will not fritter them away on school fees, a house or other such silliness...

When are we going to do some more upsidedowniness then?

m

Hmmm, any available opportunity springs to mind :D

There seems to be a lot of concern about "run and breaks" whereas it is a perfectly valid, safe and efficient manouevre if flown sensibly, correctly and considerately. If someone chooses to do anything incorrectly it can be dangerous.

In a modified form (flying parallel with the runway, just below circuit height, just on the deadside and turning onto a crosswind join) it's far preferable to a straight-in approach to an uncontrolled field because you can see other traffic and sequence yourself onto downwind. Straight-in approaches always seem to bu&&er-up someone on base (that should have been given way to).

Why do some people feel so strongly against the manouevre? I can understand the issue with the call "initials" because it's simply not widely understood, so I use "short final to break" instead.
Someone's bound to refer to the accident again but, as has been said several times, that does not appear to have been caused by a VRIAB.

:confused: HFD

Do that at circuit height and it's a standard mil. join - which is definitely my favourite, but everyone needs to be singing from the same hymnsheet. From that position you can do an overhead join in 90% of cases* and still see everyone's position &c.

Tim

*the remaining 10% being those where CAS or activities such as para dropping get in the way!

By being slightly below circuit height you can see other traffic against the skyline rather than having to look for them against the ground.

The path flown is just the same as a high go-around so I don't understand why there would be any concern. We just need to use terminology which everyone understands.

HFD

flown JP3 and 5a for the last 10 years or so and never seen the need to RIAB. Only time I actually did the deed was when the circuit was clear and thus, would not confuse or endanger anyone. quote " a hooligan-- but a safe one " unquote. It's just showin' off, unless you have a formation to land

Standard approachs works fine, and as far as I am aware nobody was trying to shoot me down on long finals !! although those pesky Typhoons out of Warton sometimes have me in their sights.

I have flown a Nanchang CJ6 out of a busy controlled Canadian airport for many years. I started doing a R and B for two reasons.

1) It's a lot of fun

2) The CJ6 has a very draggy gear but a very low max operating speed. With a R and B you can reduce to low cruise power entering the circuit and use the the upward flight path to get to gear speed, the drag of the gear and flaps to keep the speed down on the curve back to the runway and then slowly bleed the power of on short final. This completely avoids the deadly (to radials) condition of low MP, high RPM and highish airspeeds.

After demonstrating to ATC I could accurately fly the aircraft and was not a jerk I found they were very accomodating and now they almost always give me clearance for the R and B with out me having to ask.:ok:

Hi guys,
I suppose I could do a run and break in my little aircraft too. The circuit would be low and tiny. Maybe I should pop in to NW one day and ask if I can do it - initial down 02, up and pirouette around the Squadron roof, and back down onto 02 grass. Whee!

madamB:cool:
'damned microlights - no discipline at all!'

Great thread.

Only learning for PPL, but never heard of R+B before reading this thread. Now I know what it is, and will be aware, if I ever hear 'initials', to look down to the 'finals' area of the RW to spot the incoming a/c. The safety value of this can't really be underestimated.

In the thread it was pointed out that the reason for RB's was to reduce the risk of planes being shot down in WW2. Very sensible, but was that not before fast jets came along?

I'm sure I remember one of those TV docs about WW2, where an ex Mustang pilot recalled how the ME262 (have I got the type right - 1st German jet fighter?) was a 'sitting duck' on long finals, so he popped quite a few.

Obviously the ME262 was too new, or experimental, to try RB's.

Whilst from this thread, I glean that there's a solid reason for fast jets (I include JP in that) to do RB for fuel save/noise abatement, I'm not convinced of similar reasons for powerful piston a/c. Maybe to get a formation down, certainly, but for a single a/c - why bother?

Just my little opinion, which, as a student pilot is mostly BS anyway :D , but to reiterate, a very worthwhile thread if I'm on base/finals at a small, unfamiliar field and hear 'xxxx initials 30 secs'.

PS TJFC - like your explanations of how stall speed is increased in 'G' turns. Although some have pointed out that your wording may not be this or that, it certainly got through to me that as you pull more G (increase wing loading) then your stall IAS will increase.

Is it a reasonable analogy that, if we lived on planet Zog, and Zog had 3g as normal gravity, then we would (assuming similar atmosphere) need lots more IAS to get off the ground? If so, you're precis on stalls helped me a lot

As a student pilot, I appreciate input in a well explained manner - thanks.



:)

Forget noise abatement, fuel conservation, formation landing etc.

I was taught that a run and break into the circuit is tactically the safest way to join. The airfield and immediate surrounds are the only area that you can be reasonably sure is clear of manpads (man portable air defence systems) and therefore the safest area to decelerate into and then further restrict your manoeuvrability with flap and gear.

Oh yes, and it was bloody good fun......:E

Q: Singletons - Why Bother?
 

A: Practice. A formation is the last place you want to be practicing a RIAB; that's doing it for real.

Surely, if you're on final and somebody in a fast and noisy machine calls initial and expects you to get out of their way in half a minute, they're not only selfish and dangerous, but illegal too?

Or have I misread my air law somewhere? Conforming to traffic pattern? Not overtake or cut in on final? etc.

MB:confused:

I really have tried not to become too involved in this thread but MB's latest post has catalysed me out of my cosy stupor!

Nowhere above does it state that a/c RIAB'ing have the right of way.

Nowhere above does it state that the "initial" call immediately precedes a/c forming up on final.

The call of "initial" happens about a mile out and is to let the formation a/c, who will only be concentrating on lead's aeroplane and not their position relative to the ground, know that the RIAB is about to happen.

Unlikely as it is, as lead generally tries pretty hard to arrive with minimal disruptance to other circuit traffic, if you are on final and hear "Initial" then you can expect the RIAB aircraft to land after you. If you are on a long, high draggy final you may see the faster formation aircraft zip by you BUT they will break and extend downwind to allow you to land first.

Even if a tyro PPL stude on a solo cross-country encountered a formation RIAB at a destination, without even knowing what was going on, should he conform to the circuit as taught he should neither be alarmed nor inconvenienced.

Stik

Dusty B...
You don't break as a formation...so it doesn't make much difference. Normally around 2 seconds gap inbetween a/c breaking. It's just as fun in a singleton though.

No one has also mentioned that RIAB's were also established as a way to check the condition of the RWY/airfield before commiting on a long finals to land!

Glad to have woken you up, Mr Stik:)

I would expect any tyro PPL, and not a few experienced ones, would be somewhat disconcerted to see a formation wizzing underneath him as he carries out his final approach.

'Fast' aircraft pilots have established a reputation in many quarters for acting as if they own the sky - but possibly nobody's dared tell them that for fear of the reaction.:ouch: Maybe they should ask themselves why.

happy landings
MB

MB,

I've got to support my formation buddy, Stik, on this one and am saddened to hear you tar all "fast aircraft" pilots with an undeserved brush. Your statement is the same as saying that all microlight pilots are selfish, uninformed, and dangerous cowboys; and we both know that's not true. I'd be interested to hear of personal experiences you've had with pilots conforming to this reputation.

You may have misinterpreted Stik's description as I don't know of any pilot who would be careless enough to bring in a formation under an aircraft on final or interfere with an aircraft on final in any way. Standard procedure if Lead does find a conflict is to stay at circuit height and complete a standard circuit orbit, with an extended downwind, to re-establish a run-in from the initial point.

My experience, as one who has participated in, and led, RIABs is that the pilots concerned are very aware of the active traffic and take great pains to sequence into the circuit to avoid disrupting others. This preparation starts on the ground at the departure point before anyone even gets into a machine, briefing local procedures and circumstances at the destination. Sure, you may get a racey-looking break, but it is usually well planned and done to take full account of other traffic.

Of course there are always exceptions, but as I go out of my way to be where these kinds of things are done, my experience has been as I've described and not as per the reputation you're talking about. I don't think most fast aircraft pilots need to ask themselves about this reputation.

Pitts2112

Generally formation and RIAB's are only carried out by experienced pilots so i would expect that the tyro student wouldnt have much to worry about because the formation is hardly going to go out of their way to harrass him in his 152

All this fuss and emotion over such a simple manoeuvre - why are some people so bothered or frightened by it?

The fact is that anyone joining a circuit (by whatever means) is required to give way to people already in the circuit and, as always to obey the rules of the air. Somebody already in the circuit has less to fear from a VRIAB than from some wally who chooses to fly a straight-in approach to a field without full ATC - and there seem to be an increasing number of those!

As I said earlier, one tangible concern seems to be about the call "initials" - and maybe that's valid; it's simple to cure so lets not use it! For years I've just called "final to break", and sometimes added "30 seconds" or whatever appears appropriate and, if there's an aircraft on final, I usually add that I've seen it.

HFD

OK, so what exactly is so hard for your average PPL to understand about a RIAB? A join via initials is a useful alternative to a standard overhead join, and although developed initially as a military technique, is surely not that hard for anyone with half a brain cell in the family to comprehend. A RIAB is just a development of that technique, employing a slightly tighter circuit. Surely a simple classroom brief on these methods would not overly add to the burden of a PPL course? Don't even get me started on the normal square PPL circuit, generally flown well outside the protection of the ATZ......

I suspect that could make all the difference. In fact why not mention any aircraft you've seen in the circuit. What's scary about flying a slow aircraft when there are fast ones in the vicinity is not knowing what they have in mind and whether you've been seen. With me doing 45kt and you doing 200kt or whatever, I've got no escape if you come at me.

If I don't know you, I don't know if you are sensible or a cowboy (I've met both in my time) and feel I've got to assume the worst. It makes me think of the close up view I once got of a barrel roll across my bows (not in circuit I hasten to add) by a fast aerobatic type. I'd seen the guy coming from my left and he looked as if he'd turned to go behind me, so I continued my lookout scan. Next thing I knew he'd appeared from below and to my left, showed me his belly two or three hundred feet ahead, and then went on his way.

I've never trusted aerobatic types since. As I implied above, if I know you've seen me and if you know the limitations and capabilities of my type, then I doubt I'd have a problem.

... and no, I didn't mean to tar all quck'n'heavy pilots with one brush, but as with yobs in the street, it's the badly behaved ones that get noticed.

MadamB
Let's be friends

MB, although I'm only an "untrustworthy" aerobatic type, please afford me the courtesy of quoting me fully and in context:

I did say zip by you, not underneath you. You in your 45 knot machine would be given a safe half mile lateral seperation and would be quite safe.

Funny - I don't treat all microlighters with the same brush, even those that land unannounced on my strip and walk up asking for tea!

No - the dogs get those!

Stik

Fournicator...

Thank you...someone else who has noticed the new PPL bomber circuit!

I think I've stimulated a debate to show different points of view, which is good, but we're drifting off the essence which isn't.

First, Stik, I'll apologise for misrepresenting you :ouch: - that was a misread on my part just before going to bed. I do not wish to tar all pilots of whatever ilk with one brush, as, I'm sure, neither do you.
Edit by MadamB: re-reading teh thread, I only need to apologise for the bit about saying "wizz underneath", had I written "wizz past" everything else would still apply. I was expecting to be beaten up for my comments and responded accordingly :eek: :ouch:

Other than that, the point I have been trying to make is that slower traffic is vulnerable (and feels vulnerable) to faster traffic, especially in uncontrolled airspace, and by that I include in circuit at fields without ATC.

Maybe what you need to do is to get the CAA to include RIAB terminology in CAP413 and add the procedure to its other documents such as the VFR guide and Safety Sense leaflets (and why not the ANO while we're at it).

Until then, may I humbly suggest that high-energy manouvres have no place within the circuit at an uncontrolled aerodrome, unless the pilot knows that there is no other traffic in the vicinity.

MadamB
... and I don't like the growing trend for 'cross-country' circuits either, so we can agree on that. Material for another thread, methinks.

MB - your apology accepted;)

Stik

Yaks and similar types are not fast aircraft. Some people who fly them simply like to think they are. However, these aircraft can be operated safely at quite slow speeds even when in formation. Speed is not an issue.

The simple thing about a run and break is that it is not a civil procedure, it is not published in any civil document and there are no civil R/T procedures for the reporting of such a manoeuvre.

That does not legally prevent one from doing a run and break. Just as it does not prevent a pilot from completing an aerobatic sortie over an airfield. Airmanship may say something different!

However, the law does provide protection to aircraft in the circuit at an airfield. Any aircraft on a run and break is clearly not conforming to the circuit and thus simply has to avoid the circuit traffic. The circuit traffic simply continues with the standard circuit and does not alter the circuit to accomodate the run and break aircraft because they will avoid the circuit.

If anything goes wrong when a run and break is in progress then the leader and wing flights are guaranteed to be responsible provided that the other aircraft have continued to fly the standard circuit.

There is no reason why a run and break can not be done on the dead side at or above circuit height and the aircraft stream over the upwind end of the runway and join downwind as everyone else does. There would be no unusual calls and no need for anyone else to hear or worry about something they do not understand.

There is no other way to look at the run and break at or below circuit height over the active runway other than as a show-off exercise. Something that proper formation training and aerobatic training tries to get pilots to avoid.........unless they have a display authorisation and then that even impresses that the pilots should not simply show-off!!

To sum it up - ignore run and breaks - as far as GA pilots need to be concerned they do not exist. Pilots completing a run and break will avoid the circuit and accept responsibility for anything that goes wrong. Thus the simple answer is - ignore run and breaks.

Regards,

DFC

I think that you have all missed one point that could cause confusion and discomfort for PPLs who are not familiar with RIABS (and why should they be familiar with a non standard practice?)

Students are taught that under the rules of the air, the lowest aircraft (at a non ATC field) has the right of way when landing.

So, taking the scenario given before, a PPL is on final and a fast moving aircraft flies underneath, making radio calls that are without meaning, then should s/he give way as the other aircraft now has the right of way.

Personally, I understand the RIAB, having flown out of North Weald for some years, but others have not/do not.

Your thoughts would be interesting.

A couple of points in answer to recent comments:
- The lower aircraft has right of way when it's approaching to land but not at other times. When inbound to break an aircraft is not approaching to land so does not have ROW; also, it most definitely should not be beneath other aircraft, although it may or may not be lower.
- The path taken is simply the same as a high go-around with an early turn to sequence into the downwind traffic and, if appropriate, a continuous turn onto finals.

There is nothing inherently dangerous in this and IMHO it is much safer and easier than flying a straight-in join/approach.

A final comment for MadameBreakneck - and without wanting to start a war about this - in my experience (as a SEPL, MEPL, microlight and gliding instructor) there are unfortunately rather more "cowboys" in the microlight area than at least the first two. By this I mean people who don't know the laws, break the laws or fly inconsiderately; from your contributions here I'm pretty sure you aren't one of them.

HFD

HFD

Totally understand what you are saying and agree with you, but my point was than a PPL who doesn't recognize the calls and sees something go by lower may well be confused about their intentions and therefore whether to give way.

That's my point, no more nor less.