Run and Breaks
 

Maybe this has been done before, probably after the N Weald collision but I couldn`t find it.

Sitting at a hold waiting behind a super meticulous low hour student departure, a couple of Yak-52s rejoin via R+Bs effectively doing 2 approaches apiece - used rather a lot of tacho time.

Not the end of the world but is there really that much energy to dissipate after an aeros session?. Can`t you just rejoin like anything else; overhead, downwind, base?.

Not knocking the 52 brigade they look like fun.

GH

I would hope that the north weald crash would make the yak 52 pilots very carefull about CCT entry via the R+B it is not some thing to do when you have the rest of the pilots expecting standard CCT,s to be flown.
Most light aircraft pilots have no idea how the R+B works and so do not know where best look to avoid such trafic this cuts down the "efective lookout effort" in the CCT and leaves the pilot flying the R+B with the sole set of 100% efective eyes and in practical terms 100% responsability to avoid ALL other trafic.

I have strong views on this subject as a mate of mine was killed in the above crash and would have hoped that the practice of R+B CCT entry would have stopped when other aircraft are in the CCT.

Not every Yak 52 pilot flys run & breaks (I don't because there is no need) however, some would argue that there is a need when in formation. That, of course, is up to them - the BIG proviso being that this type of circuit join is not a civilian procedure.

Pilots flying R & B joins should realise that they may be doing something that is totally unfamiliar with others. Furthermore, on busy day it may simply not be possible to fly such a join.

Not all Yak 52 pilots are ton-up hooligans - lots of other pilots make all sorts of strange attempts at circuit joins and patterns.

Fly safe

There was a longish thread on this last year, just after the AAIB report on the Yak vs Cessna tragedy, under the title "Gloomy News from North Weald". You might still be able to find that although I don't know how far back the archives go.

EDIT: The previous thread is at http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...&f=53&t=000197

The R&B procedure is described in the AAIB report.

I enjoy watching and listening to high powered aircraft performing run and breaks, but, if you are not in a hurry to get on the ground because people are shooting at you and/or because you need to re-fuel and re-arm in a hurry, and/or if you are not in a heavy jet with lots of energy and inertia and a slow spooling engine, surely the manoeuvre is done purely for fun and effect?

Some would say that the run and break has no place outside the military or air display environments. I wouldn't go as far as that. OK, you shouldn't expect to have to look out for Hunters at initial when you are lobbing into Denham or some such place, but maybe PPLs should be briefed on the procedure and the airfield details for places such as North Weald and Duxford should indicate that this sort of thing goes on there. Duxford's website does indeed do this.

[ 18 July 2001: Message edited by: FNG ]

Ok, so please brief us PPLs who don't know what you're talking about..... :confused:

[Edited because I just noticed FNG's comment that this is described on Duxford's site. I'm of to this site now to read up on it...]

[Edited again because I can't find Duxford's site - any chance of a URL? I found notes to pilots on the Imperial War Museum site, but nothing about R+B]


[ 18 July 2001: Message edited by: FlyingForFun ]

[ 18 July 2001: Message edited by: FlyingForFun ]

Is this the same as a Buzz and Break?

Kermie

At North Weald, run and breaks are no longer permitted on certain days (eg Saturdays when the market is in operation on the eastern side of the main runway).

Run and breaks are not always done "purely for fun and effect". For example, with a formation of aircraft - and there is a lot of formation flying done in Yaks as well as other civilian aircraft - a run and break to join is quite simply the safest way of taking the formation and getting all of the formation aircraft on the ground quickly.

The alternative is to break the formation up away from the airfield and then have multiple aircraft joining - a much longer process with those aircraft then creating a very busy sky - eg 7 individual aircraft joining in rapid succession.

Naturally, when bringing a formation into the circuit, the leader must be cognisant of all the other circuit traffic, (no difference from any circuit joining there), and it is usually to the benefit of all other traffic for the formation to enter the circuit as a single identifiable unit and then to get on the ground and out of everyone's way as soon as possible. I think one would usually find that aircraft performing a run and break will where possible fly a tight brief circuit to land rather than a "cross-country" circuit perhaps forcing other faster traffic to fly a non-optimal circuit at low power etc etc - itself a practice which has its dangers but which you can find at any given airport on any given day).

Obviously, one needs to time a circuit entry differently when leading a formation as opposed to being a single aircraft - if the circuit is crowded, you won't find large formations wandering in and breaking to land regardless of other traffic - common sense really.

There is a strong case, certainly in my opinion, for run and break procedures to be flown at airfields that will permit it. I agree though that it would be helpful for airfields that permit the procedure to write it up for the enefit of those many other pilots for whom the procedure is otherwise a mystery.

Southern Cross, nice reply. I fly JPs at North Weald, and the run + break join is a very good way of joining the circuit to land in many different ways, which I will briefly try to explain...

1 A jet weights considerably more than a light piston, so takes longer to slow down.
2 If a jet slows down to its' circuit speed and joins the circuit in a conventional way, the downwind leg will be flown at 90% power setting, which is very loud from 1000' away and lasts a long time as the a/c is only doing 115Kt.
3 Because the jet is doing 115Kt, it has to avoid light a/c who may well be doing 65/70 Kt downwind, which may well cause a go-around and even more noise!

A run and break will only use about 25% of the downwind leg and the engine will probably (depending on wind and the speed joined at) be at idle until a spool-up on a descending base to approx 70%.

I will only defend the r+b manuouvre at civillian airfields only by the following:

Anyone flying a high performance ex-military jet such as a JP, in civillian airspace, should have sufficient spare capacity to know where all the circuit traffic is presently, and to acquire them visually before entering the circuit. If they do not have all the other traffic visually, they should be prepared to pull-up out of the pattern and fit in with the traffic accordingly. It is wholly down to the r+b traffic to navigate his way around the visual circuit safely. In my view, this protects the average civilian pilot from ever having to know what a r+B is (better if they do - of course).

As a jet operator at North Weald, I would welcome comments on the subject.

NH

Noisy Hoolie, I don't disagree with what you say about operating jets, and I can see Southern Cross's point about recovering formations (certainly if there are as many as 7 aircraft). Isn't the point of the thread, however, to question the use of run and breaks by rorty piston singles operating on their own, in circumstances where a run and break is not mandated by the considerations applicable to jets, formations, and piston warbirds engaged in warfare?

NB as I hope should be clear from my post above and on the previous thread I'm definitely not trying to stop people running and breaking at places like NW, Dux and similar (Kemble?), and would encourage fellow PPLs to acquaint themselves with the procedure, on the basis that you should expect to adjust your flying to the environment in which you are operating,just as you would when setting off from a farmstrip base to land at a big commercial airport. It's surprising how many GA flyers seem to expect every airfield to be just like the one they learned at, whether it was Liverpool or Little-Sleepy-on-the-Wold.

Part of me says "yaaaaay, r&b, do another one, wheeeeeee", the other part says, "yes but...."
Better shut up now before this posting becomes any more schizo.

Noisy Hooligan.....
I regularly fly airliners into busy international airports, and rarely find it necessary to perform run and breaks to achieve my goal, despite having several single pistons circuit training at the same time.
It is purely a one-upmanship practice, that has already claimed three lives......why bother.
High performance types.....behave! J.P's are not what you would like to think they are. One or two friends operate turbo props into the regional airports, mixing with allsorts of traffic, experiencing no problems at all......other than you lot playing your war games.
Rant over.

Hmmm, apples and acorns a little bit.

Whilst flying a jet airliner into an international airport you also eat up loads of extra track milage - if NH can do a run & break without conflicting with other traffic then I think the technique is valid for noise and efficiency reasons.

The other problem with 'Weald is that there is no dead side and no overhead joins. Also the STN zone is at 1500' overhead the field therefore everyone is forced into a narrow slot of airspace.

At least if NH is doing a R&B join I know where he is. I'd rather he did that than blaze around the circuit overtaking folks.

Incidentally, the accident was not caused by a run and break.

I'm a 52 driver who has never done a run and break. But I know why 52s sometimes do..... It's because they *can* ;~))

SSD

[ 20 July 2001: Message edited by: Shaggy Sheep Driver ]

M14P, you might know where NH is, but I don't :(

A few people have said that when doing a R+B, you must take on 100% of lookout responsibility because other people won't be looking for you. Sounds sensible to me, but one pair of eyes is never perfect, and in the airspace around an airfield I'd be happier if I knew where to look for people.

Of course, if someone could tell me what a R+B actually is, I might be able to make some more informed comments :D


FFF
-----------

Exactly - if the procedure was published along with all of the funny radio calls it would be far more useful.

By denying overhead joins and dead sides then the only thing left is just to arrive from all points of the compass. As well as being poor for the spatial awareness of other aviators this also has the downside of denying the pilot a look at the windsock and lie of the land as well as other good reference features useful for operating at airports such as fuel facilites, taxiways etc.

There is a published procedure at NW which is to join downwind, but the problem is that most people ignore it and join straight in or on a right or left base according to which direction they've come from. I know, I used to myself but have tried to be good recently. I wonder if the NW procedure could be revised. During Aerofair the temporary ATC had us joining in the overhead at 1400 and descending into the circuit. This worked OK despite the zillions of aircraft which were joining, and not just because of the (excellent but overworked) ATCOs: most people kept a good lookout and maintained safe spacing. At White Waltham, with Heathrow airspace above the field, an overhead join at 1300 QFE with a deadside descent to 800 feet works just fine. There is, however, more vertical separation from the CAS available at WW, whereas at NW you are pretty close to Stansted's air if in the overhead above the circuit, so it may be that the present system is the best that can be devised.

PS: The R&B procedure is described in the AAIB report on the midair. I take the point that the manouevre performed during that incident was not a standard run and break.

[ 20 July 2001: Message edited by: FNG ]

Several above have asked, and I'm asking too.

What is a run and break...is this what Ive seen Tornado's at Leauchars do, ie. scream down the runway then pull hard into mid-downwind to curve slowly around onto final?

Skydriller et al

The R&B is almost as described by yourself.

I am happy to be corrected by any current mil pilots - but in precis, this is what I recall;


A/C inbound generally calls INITIAL (IP) normally 1nm from the field.

prior to this he has "generally" broadcast intentions to run and break.


the aircraft flies on the dead side but parallel to r/way ( mil flying rarely below 500') and pulls a high G turn (without altitude gain) bleeds off speed rapidly and allows flaps and u/c to be activated and in short puts the aircraft at the start of the Spitfire Curved Approach or constant aspect turn late-ish downwind.

I fly a Pitts Special and have never needed to R&B. However if given the "option", prevalent in the States or have been invited to do so, have always R&B'd because it is a blast!!

Stik

[ 20 July 2001: Message edited by: stiknruda ]

So here I am based at NCL, flying according to the approach guidance and being a quiet chap. I get on the ground and then see a group of Harriers/Hawks etc whoever is visiting for a cheap lunch, proceed to rip the place to pieces and make a huge noise - what's that all about then ? Don't even get me started about the R & B's that the Prima Donna's do at Trumpton either !

Hi,

I've just started on a Yak-52 and though I can't comment on formation circuits, whats the need for a R&B in a Yak-52/50, even in a restricted airspace area?

Not saying it isn't a 'fun' way to join the cct, but is it really necessary?

Feedback/comments?

:D

As a formation it saves a lot of hassle and delay getting down (as described above)

For fast jets it's the only tactical way to land i.e. shortest possible time flying slow in a circuit, hence the need for fast jets to practice it (although when they do it at civvy fields it's possibly just coz it looks punchy :) ).

Thers is no need for civvy aircraft to do it (unless they're in formation) but it's bloody good fun and it is another type of approach, can't do any harm to have another trick up your sleeve can it?

FNG

One consideration with the published procedure at North Weald (requiring you to join downwind as you correctly point out) is that if you are re-joining from the east (ie where one can get a decent amount of vertical airspace to play with :D ), is that in order to join downwind for 02 or 20 (bearing in mind that downwind is always on the western side of the runway), you need to either scoot around to the north or the south, (both of which take you close to another airport or CTZ and possibly in a contra-direction to the prevailing circuit), or somewhere in between (perhaps in the very limited overhead).

All the while avoiding the gliders if active (always east of the field as well ie between you and your published downwind join and up to 2000' hence inhibiting the possibility of an overhead transit at 1500' to the downwind area), the para-descenders if active etc.

The ceiling is 1500' due to Stansted and the circuit height at North Weald is "not below 800' ", which means you get people circuiting from 800' upwards, sometimes to as high as 1500'.

So, despite the published downwind join, and bearing in mind that it is an Air/ground service, a join directly onto base leg from the east ie left base for 20 or right base for 02 will, providing that you are aware of and fit in around all other circuit traffic, keep you from needing to transit close to other zones, possibly against the circuit direction, or through other circuit traffic if it is perhaps not at the level one might expect. One still has to be particularly vigilant for the gliders however -they can sometimes be more difficult to spot even when you know they are there.

Run in and breaks are generally performed by fast jets returning to the circuit, and they represent the quickest and most fuel and time efficient way of transitting back for a landing.
They also represent the easiest way to bring a formation into the circuit. This allows one aircraft at a time to peel off into the downwind. Straight in approaches take a great deal longer, and use more fuel with formation handling a lot more sloppy at low speeds (ie under 200 kts.)

The run and break allows a circuit join to be performed with the minimum of hassle, whilst saving time and fuel. A downwind join, for example, may cause other problems with the speed differnces in aircraft. A fast jet maybe downwind with no less than 160 kts, a C152 with 65kts(?) Problem self explanatory.

Of course due to its nature, the manoeuvre can only be performed if the circuit traffic allows it. The lead aircraft is responsible for positioning and if a run and break is attempted to a full circuit then that is a bad call and questionable airmanship.

Stiknruda's explanation is pretty accurate although initials is normally at 3-5 nm and heights vary according to aircraft type and local SOPs.

Aside from all this they're awesome fun and basically the only way to return from a trip, if you don't mess anyone else up in the process!!
Regards :cool: :cool: :cool:

Fast Errevt, I too fly ariliners in and out of Europe (and possibly the worlds) busiest airport, and I too have never done a run and break in Boeing, but then again, I have never seen a Spitfire do a radar vectored ILS down to CAT 3 minima either!
Different aircraft are operated in different ways, if you cannot cope with the concept of the run and break, then just rest assured, old chap, that the people who do carry out the manouevre are watching out for people like you who can't. As for war games, what are they? I just like practicing jet aerobatics and operating the aircraft as accurately and professionally as I can...

If anyone is genuinely interested as to what a run and break manouevre is, mail me and I will send you an explaination and diagram.

Until then.....WWWWwwwwwoooooosssshhhhhh!!!!!!
It may be not as fast as a Tornado, but who flies around at 250 feet to notice?

NH

Thought you were restricted to 500' in civ registered things!!!

Regards :cool:

Although R&B's are clearly dangerous if the circuit is busy with people who don't know what they are and aren't expecting them, I think there is actually a noise abatement benefit to them.

If I've got it right (and I've watched a fair few), fast noisy a/c belt into the drome and then kill the power and lose the energy with their high 'g' turn and hardly need to use the throttle again again until late final - this (as mentioned) saves fuel and time and it follows that the neighbours will have less a/c noise.

Also, I thought that the high 'g' turn was executed as a climbing turn? ie over the threshold numbers at 500' (often lower), climb and turn into late downwind at 1000'(ish).

The last two R&B's I watched were at Rochester. A swordfish, which pulled up into a fantastic climbing turn that had everybody on the ground gasping at the beauty of it, and a formation of a B13 and a Harvard. Watching the formation revealed why R&B's are favoured by military and formation pilots - I imagine that the following a/c was always quite confident about his leader's intentions and timings 'cos he could see him so well.

Steve R(1)

Southern Cross, thanks for your sensible comments on joining at North Weald. Regrettably I don't fly to or from there as much as I used to, as my flying activities have shifted to the west of London, but I must try to get in next time there's a bash on at the Squadron.

1: the name is Fast Erect (Mr.)
2:what is an 'Ariliner'?
3:I am a current DA holder
4:if you are so professional, why have you not noticed that your JP wonderplane has got airbrakes, therefore making R&B's utterly pointless?

1 :Don't care who you are.
2 :Don't care what you fly, although if you have a DA on anything other than a an Ariliner, then I am suprised you do not see the merits of R+Bs.
3 :Don't care.
4:Point 3. The R+B also gives excellent practice for PFLs as it is 2/3 of a forced landing.

THE END.

Moderators please close the thread, I am bored of reading drivell.

The run and break was originally designed during hostilities to prevent aircraft being shot down by enemy aircraft. An aircraft on long straight finals in the landing configuration prevents an easy target to a following fighter!

The manoeuvre gives very little time for an enemy pilot to draw a bead as it gives a constantly changing flightpath and a speed reduction from the deadside to the end of the downwind leg and beyond, depending on aircraft type.

We were taught them at BFTS on JPs, using 45 to 60 degrees AoB and airbrakes out until rolling out on the d/w leg. The problem is judging when and where to begin "breaking" to fit into a busy circuit so as not to cut anyone else up.

ShyT

Can even be done in a B747, as some at Kemble may have noticed!! :)

Noisy Hooligan...
got to give it to you straight, big boy, I also think you are talking complete ball-cocks.
When a R&B becomes 2/3 of a forced landing, i will show my bare arse in Woolies window for a fortnight.
Stick to talking about Ariliners, if thats what turns you on.

:eek:

I just tried a R & B in my A330 Ariliner, bugger me I got 2/3 way round the circuit and my engine failed. I was really glad of the practise I had received earlier as I executed a perfect landing anyway. Thanks NH for the valuable advice, it saved a very embarrasing crash :D.

Arrse - kan't spall

[ 05 August 2001: Message edited by: javelin ]

Shy Tourque is quite correct. It was designed as a way to avoid being shot down in the circuit.

You have to admit it works, how many harvards and jet provost have been shot down at North Weald in the last 50 years. Just a pity that others who try to do a standard join (Note the phraseology here, STANDARD join) have to put up with these pratts playing war.

Oh, if the argument starts to go against you, don't worry, just ask the moderators to close down this thread as you are bored with it.

Come come come. There can be NO justification for such a maneuver.

Gentlemen!

A run-in-and-break is designed to allow a very standard arrival pattern to a runway. You run in from an 'initial' point, which is a nominal distance out from the 'in-use' threshold, and fly along the 'in-use' runway, on the runway heading and slightly offset on the deadside. At an appropriate point as you pass along the runway you 'break' into the circuit to fit in with other circuit traffic. In the military, the speed is irrelevant as it works at all speeds, the amount of G used during the break bleeds this off if necessary. Climbing, descending or staying level in the break is irrelevant. In military fast jets the reason it is done is because we fly in formations and it is the quickest and tidyest way of getting a formation to the airfield and on the ground in good weather.

The nice thing about the procedure (note I call it a procedure, cos that's what it is) is that is is very standard. When you call 'initials' anyone in the local area can look and see you in the appropriate place and they know that you are going to fly from your current location, directly along the runway, on runway heading, and out of their way, until you 'break'. The advantage it has for the joinee is that you can see all traffic in the circuit as they are all offset to one side of you as you run in to the airfield. I would say that this is not the case with the current collection of accepted airfield joins used around the world.

PS. How can you say that the overhead join is the 'standard join' when it is rarely practised if it is actually allowed at all at some airfields.

I have held a pilots licence from the mid eighties and until this thread came about I had no idea what a run-and-break was. If I heard someone call “Initial” I would have no idea where to look. Most Pilots who haven’t read this thread are in the same position.

At least three people are dead because of this procedure. If the military use it then fine, leave it with the military as we do with other procedures like shooting down “bogies”, strafing enemy targets, and mid-air re-fuelling.

I can see that at some airfields (Kemble, Duxford) there is a case for allowing this to carry on with some of the faster traffic, BUT it should be promulgated in the flight guides and the circuit should be closed while the Big Boys play war. This of course would mean the Airfield would be permanently closed to non-radio traffic.

Hi there New Bloke, haven't seen you round here for a while. Whatever the position on a run and break executed according to the standard drill, it's worth noting that when the midair occurred at North Weald the Yak had not flown a standard run and break. The Cessna pilot was probably familiar with a standard R&B as he flew from North Weald regularly.

Hi FNG,

I am just finishing my fallow period during which I just LURK.
:D

Regarding the R & B at North Weald, two points.

A couple of years ago I used to fly from North Weald fairly regularly and I still didn't know what a R & B was.

The other point, I hadn't heard that the R & B that caused the accident was Non-standard. In what way was this Non-standard and do we know why a Non-Standard proceedure flown?

I still maintain that it should not be used. If we say that this procedure has to be used at civil G A Airfields, then it should be included in the PPL syllabus and taught to all pilots. We would need to put another 2 – 3 hours on the PPL (Including NPL). I’m sure we will be thanked for that.

Have a look at the sky, B I G isn’t it. And yet even in the open FIR there are mid-Air collisions. Now think about the sky around an Airport, especially North Weald with Stapleford to the south and Stansted to the North (and above – if you see what I mean). When I go there I want everyone to see me (see various threads about landing lights in the vicinity of Airfields) and I want to see everyone else. To give me half a chance to be able to see everyone else, I need to know where to look for them.

----edit-------

Having just re-read the whole thread two more points.

The guys doing the R & B won't know where to look either, is initial 1 mile, 2 miles, 3 miles? Take your pick.

Noisy H. You started off asking for comments, then seemed to get bored with comments not to your liking

---end of edit--------

[ 06 August 2001: Message edited by: New Bloke ]

New Bloke, did you have a look at the accident report? (I posted the link further up the thread). Others have commented on the facts recorded in the report (1) that the Yak pilot deviated from the usual R&B pattern to fly over his house and (2) that the Cessna was in a quite wide downwind position. NB before friends of the deceased on either side flick the safety catches off their flame throwers, I am merely reporting what others have said and expressing no conclusions of my own.

PS: Surely a bit pessimistic to suggest 2-3 hrs needed to inform PPLs about R&Bs? It doesn't take that long to learn a standard overhead join, and most of us can self- brief for a non-standard join by reading the Pooleys, AFE Guide or whatever or ringing the airfield before we set off. Is it that much different to learning how to mix it with heavy traffic at a regional airport?

PPS: having said that it is surprising what useful info the published guides do not include. The guides might point out where R&Bs occur and maybe add a diagram. Any editors of airfield guides reading this?

[ 06 August 2001: Message edited by: FNG ]

New Bloke,

I don't mean any offence by this but if you used to fly at North Weald and didn't know what a Run and Break was and heard people call initials but didn't know what that meant - Did you not ask someone what it was all about?

BTW I agree with your point about a run and break being an unusual practice (I wouldn't say non-standard) so if airfields permit R&B's maybe they should include the details of the procedure in the TAP. And as I said earlier where is the harm in learning an extra procedure which gives you an alternative choice of an approach, you can never stop learning in this game.

No Offence taken Gash, No I never heard anyone call "Initial". If I had of done I would most probably have landed and asked someone, my point here is that by then it may have been too late.