Ditto what IO540 said.

In fact the OHJ requires more faffing around in the circuit and more risk of collision (in this incident, an OHJ would have done nothing to avert the risk by all accounts). At least if you join on say base leg, you can get a picture in your mind of the traffic and there should be only two directions traffic will be approaching from, downwind or final (for someone on a straight in).

Approaching from the deadside then the crosswind join (as in over the numbers) is the most expident way to join. You can also modify your flight path to the left or right to fit in behind someone else in the circuit quite easily.

We fly extremely tight circuits where I am based due to noise abaitment.

Anyway, a sad day and a sad needless loss of life.

There is unfortunately an assumption that when the radio is unmanned anything goes. In fact, blind calls become even more important at every stage of the joining procedure. I often call downwind, late downwind, base and final. The problem with chatter between aircraft is that with the discipline out of the window people a liable to loose track of what others are doing. The easy way out is a blind call: "G-XXXX not visual with aircraft on base ... request position" or similar.

Also agreed. Obviously sensible use, for essential flight safety purposes, only.

Not idle chatter, which sometimes happens at an airfield near me.
I've even heard pilots order lunch from the circuit.

Many pundits on this thread proclaim why they don't wish to use a 'standard' join and proceed to explain their own home brewed variation.
Apparently they know better what's good for themselves and don't really care about everyone else !
e.g. I can't understand the advocation of joining on base, sounds highly hazardous.

If nothing else it demonstrates that if such (experienced ?) pilots do their own thing, circuits for others in their vicinity is made more hazardous.

The OHJ is a procedure whereby one has a good idea of where other a/c should be and whilst one may be- if non radio - unaware of unheard traffic, it does allow time for good look at what's happening below BEFORE the alternative suggestions of suddenly appearing on cross wind or some other self appointed random position.

If willy nilly one breaks the pattern - without asking ATC's permission (& so others on frequency can hear the exchange) then perhaps certain old bold pilots could do with some circuit retraining !

One of the fundamental points is to make sure you're in level flight at the circuit height before entering the live part of the circuit - applies whether it's an OHJ or "commercial" join.

To not do so is to risk descending on top of an a/c which is already established in the circuit.

Also, how do you lookout? Is this taught?

What I dislike about the OHJ in a low winged aircraft is that you're circling with your underbelly to traffic that may be arriving in the overhead from any direction. The combination of that blindspot with the natural inclination of new arrivals to be looking down to orientate themselves with the runway and trying to spot what's already in the pattern is not good.

I don't see why you should be circling overhead arriving traffic. Surely the point is that if you arrive in the overhead at 2000' and start to descend dead side then all other arriving traffic should be above you? The key is not to circle in the overhead other than to position yourself for a descent dead side.

Sure, two aircraft may arive in the overhead at the same time from different directions but then radio should avoid that being a problem and one wont be below you. Is there any difference between that and one aircraft joining crosswind and another downwind at the same time? The key in all these situations is to know what other aircraft are doing.

What I don't like about OHJ's is:

When flying overhead, you are essentially head to head with anyone completing the decent deadside and crossing the upwind numbers. Albeit at 1000' supposedly, but you know how some people fly, "nearly 1000'" or "nearly over the upwind numbers. At a shortish runway, say 700m, this puts you a maximum of 700m lateral separation if you cross overhead the downwind numbers.

However, some people descend pretty quick and tight to the runway, other people fly miles out and turn. This puts the opposing traffic in a blind spot (i.e. below your cowl), while you are turning and descending. Very dangerous if you don't have a big picture of what is going on. Especially as you are now all aiming for the same spot - the upwind numbers.

Next you cross over the upwind numbers and you have to look out for people above you opposite direction joining OH, people descending deadside either inside you (if they fly a tight circuit) or coming in close behind and people in the circuit coming from the right (in a LH circuit). Apparently you might also have to look out for people coming up from below too. Once in the circuit you have to contend with people joining on base and final, so your head really has to be moving around.

Now throw into that equation a Thruster microlight, an RV6, a TBM700 and a Cessna 152, all with vastly different performance.

If everyone joined on something like the US 45° join, then faster aeroplanes can overtake safely, of slower aeroplanes can adjust to pop in behind someone in the circuit. I joined on base the other day in front of a motor glider on downwind. By the time I had landed and taxied clear of the runway, he was turning final. If I had joined OH I'd have come in behind him, then had to fly a really wide circuit so I didn't ram him up the backside and I'd have probably ended up outside the ATZ. Joining base, I could see up downwind, and I could see final was clear....much more sensible if you ask me.

Also note that at many airfields, OHJs are prohibited due to parachuting, military airspace, shared ATZs etc....

The point is that you are in a turn at the same height as arriving traffic, until you are either given permission to descend to circuit height, or you have decided that it is safe to do so. While in that turn, in a low winged aircraft, you are blind to anything approaching from the outside of your turn.

You should not be flying such a large angle of bank in the OHJ. Maybe 5 degrees max.

But it is a bad system anyway, for reasons already posted, plus also the case of planes with different speeds.

I confess that I don't have much experience of being asked to hold in the overhead at an airfield with ATC; most times I use an overhead join I am at uncontrolled fields. ATC usually sequence arriving aircraft differently in my experience. I agree though that circling in the overhead with other aircraft arriving has potential for something nasty to happen.

Pilot DAR I have seen this for Biggin Hill:

EGKB AD 2.22 — FLIGHT PROCEDURES

1. Circuit Procedures

a. Aircraft taking off, 'going around' or making 'touch and go' landings are to remain at or below 500 ft QFE until the upwind end of the runway in use has been passed, when a left or right turn (as appropriate) should be initiated. Aircraft joining or re-joining the circuit for landing are to fly across the upwind end of the runway in use at 1000 ft QFE at 90° to the runway heading, a left or right turn (as appropriate) should be made onto the downwind leg.

Not if the other arriving aircraft are, when they get the field visual, manoeuvring so as to put the airfield on the left hand side of the aircraft (I assume left hand circuit here) and therefore orbiting the edge of the atz in the same direction as the a/c which are already overhead and, of course, maintaining a lookout.

Would be interesting to see the stats for midairs/air proxes in the overhead as opposed to in the circuit/at circuit height - I would suggest the latter figures would be much higher.

EGKB PROCEDURE. Thats what the majority of us have been stating since this discussion started. The join procedures are pretty standard, and at airfields where fast jet traffic fast SEP, can depart, shooting through the 1000' mark, then a procedure would appear to have been drawn up to stop them banging into crosswind traffic, going about their normal safe business of joining across the numbers at 1000' to get into the pattern:sad:

Well my experience of flying in the States is that it is pretty much every man for himself, with particular respect to the unicom airfields, HOWEVER, before I get fried, the standards of R/T, lookout, and general discipline, appear superior to the UK, and I am about to get fried by UK pilots for saying that, but, the thread here has touched on this.

and the rest of humanity have every right to take their place in whatever corner they find left void, I suppose?

ok then where are the statistics? Are OHJ pro rata any more safe than commercial joins or usa joins? We need stats otherwise it becomes subjective.

If someone can show me that there have been more midairs and/or air proxes on one system or the other then I might be convinced of a case for change.

Yes, however, it was qualified with r/t, discipline and lookout, and I made particular ref to Unicom, where is has to be that way.

Specifically I was referring to some fields where as you approach, calling position and ASSUMING, that the crcuit pattern is one way, when a Lear or similar can take off downwind, straight from his private hanger. It happened to me in Florida, and nr Chicago.

I have experience of Van Nuys where as you may be aware, everything is joining, and yet lookout, comms, positioning and ATC come together, generally nicely.

The UK system in general works, as long as everyone is on the same page, and forgive me, this debate has shown that it may not be the case.

"Now throw into that equation a Thruster microlight, an RV6, a TBM700 and a Cessna 152, all with vastly different performance.:

As a point of note as the phrase 'high performance' is frequently cropping up in the thread with reference to RVs. This is a general comment not connected directly with the incident. RVs can indeed climb and cruise at greater speeds than many certified machines.

But in the circuit they can sit quite happily at 'normal' circuit speeds. My 200hp RV-6 would cruise easily at 160+ KIAS. It's stall speeds were 47 KIAS full flap and 52 KIAS clean - pretty much the same as a C152 or Tomahawk.

The mail online article speaks of plummeting 400 ft.... If this is correct we've all been barking up the wrong tree.

As for now we've assumed the collision took place at around 1.000 ft.

I have no idea where they got their info from.

Ex-British Airways captain killed after mid-air collision with light aircraft causes him to lose control and crash | Mail Online

(and I've never been practically taught an overhead join during my PPL.....(!) taught it myself afterwards and disliked it always.....)

hardly the best way to learn it then - find a good flying instructor who knows and can teach it well!

Never mind the system being used, I have witnessed some pretty appalling instances of a/c joining the circuit.

Some visitors seem to have little comprehension of the status of A/G asking "Am I clear for...etc" and then seem unable to fly an OHJ which is surely part of the PPL syllabus.

Before we start debating the merits of different types of join we should take steps to ensure that all know how to join the circuit whatever system is in use.

No comment on this tragic incident as we don't know the facts as yet.

5 degrees max? How can you possibly make that work over short runways?

E.g. EGNF, runway 24/06 is 553 metres, runway 36/18 is 382 metres.

Ah, a slight drift back near topic for a moment....

I don't think there is a requirement to fly the circle of an OHJ fully between the two ends of the runway :)

Probably sensible to keep it within any ATZ though. :)

Yes, I should say so! :ok::D

Maybe that's why so many people fly the cross country circuits we all hate so much :}

Non-OHJ related, Shoreham procedure (departing 20) is to climb straight ahead to 600ft minimum, then make a slight (20ish degree) right turn for noise abatement. You're then heading straight on to pretty much the coast (i.e. clear of the circuit), and turning onto your outbound track.

To me, in anything I've flown, 'normal' procedure is a Vy climb to (usually) circuit height, but 500agl at least (there's nothing aerobatic about it, simply a matter of spending minimum time in that awkward zone where options are minimal). At somewhere with a longer runway I'd flatten off at 500 to avoid the crosswind. What I was alluding to earlier 'being unsure of' is the 500ft turn (maxred et al). If remaining in the circuit, at (say) shoreham, I'd be turning somewhere between the tower and the numbers. That's definitely not going to be popular - so it seems the 500ft and turn concept is rather flawed. Certainly at shoreham the circuit would be more geographically defined.

What this whole thing does really highlight (for me at least) is the vastly differing expectations of aircraft performance in terms of both climb, and manoevuring (e.g. it would never occur to me to make a 5degree banked turn in any circumstance).

The other thought is - at (e.g) shoreham, operating under a controlled environment, with conflicting traffic crosswind, would you not expect a conditional takeoff clearance - e.g. "clear takeoff, not above XXX" Not attempting to lay any blame or critique, however, if being positively controlled it would seem logical to explicitly ensure the separation?

The way I was taught, and I am not saying it is right, wrong nor indifferent, (in todays arena), and this was at an airfield with one runway, 840 mts long, that on take off after crossing the numbers in a normal climb to 500' min, commence turn on outward leg to downwind, and by the time you are ready to join downwind you will be approaching circuit height of 1000'.

Traffic joining crosswind, across the numbers, having descended deadside, at 1000', in all my experinece, has been well overhead departing traffic, and would be in front of you if you were joing circuit. If you were not you are well clear and underneath joining traffic, to continue on your desired heading away from the airfield.

This has always been so basic, and my understanding that this is the way it is taught, and is in all CAA publications, that I cannot get to grips with why so many people appear to be at odds with it. It seems so standard.

Now getting back to this tragic incident, the start of this discussion, was that, IF, and we do not know yet, the croswwind aircraft was in the 'correct position', and was hit by a departing aircraft (FACTS NOT KNOWN), then the question was why, or how, could a departing aeroplane be at same level as a crosswind join??????? Obviously this is not a desirable position to be in.

Standard Overhead Join Best flown at circuit speed, with standard medium turns (30 degrees) to give good lookout in all directions.Not in a Visual Circuit
Joining traffic should be aware of traffic on and departing from the runway they are about to cross, high performance departing aircraft have a responsibility to ensure they do not impinge on the circuit pattern without an especially good lookout.

That seems definitely wrong, for several reasons:

- poor engine cooling during Vx (or Vy) flight
- in any high-perf plane, a conflict with arriving crosswind traffic
- a conflict with any traffic arriving on downwind etc joins
- an extended period of poor forward visibility
- a poor stall margin if there is turbulence, wind shear, etc in the departure area (slow flight is usually a bad idea)

After takeoff, one needs to climb at Vx until obstacle clearance is assured (let's skip the "Switzerland" case :) ) and then trim forward ASAP to a higher airspeed for good engine cooling and good forward visibility. The engine controls are not touched until cruise level is reached (again, ignoring stuff like higher altitude climbs e.g. above 5000ft). This procedure will generally mean that you are well separated from arriving crosswind traffic, and you have a reasonable chance of spotting crosswind traffic which is grossly incorrectly positioned (which is very common).

Interesting - completely different philosophies. I *never* climb at Vx unless there is definitely an obstacle clearance problem - that's very rare. Vy (IMHO) offers plenty of margin for control, and engine cooling is (rarely) an issue over the first few thousand feet, and I'd not consider that 'slow flight' (e.g. the typical PA28, Vs -50, Vy -79). Notwithstanding avoiding the crosswind leg, I regard getting to 1000-1500 ASAP after leaving the ground as something of a priority, but I do normally bring the prop and MP back from takeoff to 25/25 passing 500. I'm also a believer in lowering the nose periodically in the climb to clear the view.

Maxred - I don't think we're in disagreement, definitely not 'at odds' but when you say things like 'so basic' I feel compelled to point out that I think you're oversimplifying :) I understand that works by the numbers for the 'average' pa28 (say), Presumably in your aforementioned yak that can be at 2000 by the numbers somewhere with a longish runway you're modifying the approach substantially different to avoid turning at 500ft half way down the runway - if you get my point? 'Turn not below 500ft at point x' would make sense to me, but I never did get 'turn at 500ft.' - it doesn't define anything useful, it's merely co-incidental that in certain cases 500ft roughly co-incides with where you want to be making the turn. Tad pedantic perhaps :)

Quote:

---

Standard overhead join Best flown at circuit speed

---

What speed would that be exactly?

Probably 130 in a B200, 100 in a Seneca, 90 in a commander, 80 in a 172, 70 in a Rallye, 50 in a microlight ;)

(just guessing, but there lies the problem)

i would fly it at a speed that keeps the separation constant, at shoreham, a typical training airfield, most aircraft are quite happy between 90-100 knots cruise, cruise descent deadside and cruise speed downwind, and slow down on base, also depends on whats in front of you, vary speed and track to fit in.
ps , smarthawke, whats the best glide speed of an RV-6.

Point to Note PPRuNers:

All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise, at the controls of the GA aircraft.:ouch:

Coventry, St Athan, Benson, Isle of Wight, Shoreham... any I've missed?

We would have to know what percentage of hours are flown by such pilots before we jump to the 'obvious' conclusion.

IO540, a Vx climb and then trim forward - novel. :p

I think you need a word with your old instructor. In RAF parlance Select, Hold, Trim - in civilian speak, Attitude, Power, Trim. :)

Shoreham Incident
 

This should set you thinking some more......

BLACK X marks where the DA's prop was found
RED X - Prop blade lands in beach green playpark
GREEN X - Part of wing or possibly tail? you tell me. Lands in car park.
Blue X - RV crash site.

The mail suggested that 'bits rained down on a school playground' It didn't. It was a playpark.

bits | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
shoreham | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Mark - I actually think we are very much in agreement. By - so basic - I meant the lovely basic art of see and be seen, and fly your aeroplane in the manner that will fit the pattern at that given time. Whether it is alter your rate of climb due to crosswind hazards, slow down your approach to the downwind because there is a gyrocopter, a microlight, and a heliocopter all manouvering. The basic premise must still exist however of the 'plan'. And that is taught in PPL syllabus, or should be.:hmm:

Also the old art of positioning calls - descend deadside, join crosswind, downwind, left base, finals and so on. I still amazes me that I have to ask a lot of the time where are you?:confused:

All fatal mid-airs in the UK in the last 3 years (at least) have had professional pilots, retired or otherwise

Having now thought about that, are you alluding that these 'professionals', may have had a reliance on ''control'' rather than self position and call????