Double FFS: height = altitude - elevation. It really isn't difficult, and makes absolutely no difference whether you use QNH and add elevation, or use QFE and don't: you're still at the same level relative to the runway you're going to land on. And it has nothing to do with the question.

I've just looked at an FAA airport directory incidentally; they list "TPA" traffic pattern altitude: and list two numbers the first is pattern altitude, the other is above airport elevation (in other words, circuit height!). QNH or QFE in effect, even if they don't use those terms over there. For example, it lists Palm Springs, which has a runway elevation of 477ft...

Just what I could do with here!

G

Good spot


However, back to circuit height....

G

Thanks for eddicating me, PatoWalker - a couple of centuries more and I'll begin to understand the subtleties of colloquial English. As long as I needn't master them to get a 6 on the ELP test...

AIRPLANE ROCKS!!:ok:

At the moment I am working on a project where I am establishing the circuit details (amongst other data) for all the airfields I can find.

It does seem that generally circuits operate at 1000 AAL. However, this is not a cut and dried rule by any stretch and a great deal of airfield managers (who dont have a Pooleys circuit page) heavily prefer to give circuit details by phone directly to the pilot when arranging PPR.

You could always fly a circuit and use a radar altimeter to find out how high you are...

A KRA10 costs about £15k to install.

Have you got round to asking Leeds what their handling charge is yet?

This seems to vary and I know people that have been charged anywhere from 0 - £75.

Apparently you can get a complimentary massage as well.

How would a massage at Leeds compare with a massage at Southend?

Are we comparing Essex girls with Loiners?

I guess the first will be provided by Sharon and the second by Lisa.

;)

I thought the only people doing complimentary massages these days were BA in Upper Class and the banks when it comes to massaging your overdraft - downwards with malice!

Yes I did.

For my 998kg MTOW aeroplane, £20 landing, £30 handling (£45 if you don't buy any fuel), and there was another £7 for something or other, but I forget what.

So, £57.

Still cheaper than going by train!

G

One reason for having a lower circuit height is the lateral size of the circuit is smaller. An example is RAF Newton close to Nottingham (Tollerton) airfield. Both the circuit heights were 800 ft (above respective aerodrome levels) because they were within about 3 miles of each other.

Yes, I know RAF Newton is now (very sadly) closed but the circuit height at Tollerton has remained at 800 ft.

Another reason is combined fixed wing/helicopter traffic. I don't know whether it's the same now but Oxford used to have a fixed wing circuit height of 1,200 feet with the helicopters having of 700 ft with opposite circuit directions - this meant you had 500 ft separation from helicopter traffic when overflying their live side at 1200 ft in a fixed wing a/c.

1,000 ft is the norm - any differences should be publishes in the AIP.

Thats actually not that bad. I think it used to be more than that.

I may venture up there myself, its been a while since I Played in the LBA xwinds.

Shirley they are talking about Shirley Crabtree? Look 'her' up. :)

When I last flew at Blackbushe (90s) it was 800ft agl for singles and 1200ft agl for twins by day and 1000ft agl for everything after dark.

And where is the document that states this - or are you just somebody else who *thinks* this is the case?

G

Genghis, I have to confess I don't know of any official document that says the "normal" circuit height is 1,000 ft - I guess that one reason for originally picking 1,000 ft is that when flying downwind at 1,000 ft the hundreds pointer on the altimeter is at the twelve o'clock position on the altimeter which makes it a bit easier for the inexperienced/student pilot to read and/or notice any deviations.

I suppose some ancient practices which have been established since the days when Pontius was a pilot aren't written down in referenced statute almost like the fact that (in the UK) we drive on the left hand side of the road - if you happen to find a reference please let me know!

I increasingly think that there isn't one, but if I find it I'll post it here.

Historically, I'm actually slightly more used to an 800ft circuit height anyhow! So I remain particularly uncertain of 1000ft.

If in doubt, I will ask ATC!

G

It's easiest at Denham; elevation 249 and circuit height 750, you work it out.

FWIW I have had a shufti at what used to be taught.

As stated in my own training manual Flight Briefing for Pilots Vol. I.(published 1961-9) written by the respected 'Birch & Bramson, circuit height is shown at 800 - 1000 ft.

Thus the "1000 ft unless otherwise stated" doesn't come from back then.
I agree it's often the case, but not the rule.

mikehallam