As an aside once you are in the overhead you are in a more favourable position should the engine fail.

The early aviators were well aware of this given less reliable engines and would prefer to get overhead and then stay within gliding distance.

Scoobster,
From your own Post you were Downwind following another aircraft and instead of following them as you are required to do (conform to the pattern formed by other aircraft) you turned Base where you thought you should due to 'Landmarks' and effectively cut in front of them.

You do not know why they, in your opinion, extended their Downwind Leg - maybe they needed to increase the spacing between themselves and an aircraft in front of them?

They were aware of you and once you were established on Final they requested your intentions. This was perfectly reasonable (and we only have your opinion that this was said in an 'arsy' voice) - they probably wanted to know whether you intended to Land, in which case they would probably immediately have initiated a Go Around; or whether you intended a Touch & Go, in which case they could probably have continued with their Approach.

To the OP: You were on Base when someone said they intended joining for a Long Final - this means they were at least 4 miles out so (although you should obviously check) you should have had plenty of time to complete your Landing without interfering with them.

Emergencies excepted, I believe an aircraft on Final has priority over all other aircraft and that for Straight Ins this Rule trumps the need to conform to Circuit Traffic - not least because they are not intending to join the Circuit Pattern.

Good airmanship does dictate that at uncontrolled airfields good position reporting is required and it would be very poor to call "Final" at 4 miles.

A better option though would be to Go Around from Base Leg onto the Dead Side and join again. This also enables traffic behind to fly a "normal" pattern. Notwithstanding local noise rules any extending should be done upwind and not downwind.

Level Attitude, sorry beg to disagree with you here! An aircraft flying a straight in is not conforming with the pattern formed by other aircraft.

As is also keeping a good lookout - even now there are some airfields which are non radio as are some a/c. Exceptional I agree these days with Unicom (or whatever UK call it) but still possible.

Mind you, this is not pointed at anyone, but just a general observation. It seems the patterns are getting stretched to the point that an engine inoperative situation will leave a plane well short of the runway environment. Flying straight in is a fine way to end up in this position, unless you really have taken into account the winds, etc. Being on the PAPI or VASI 3 miles out will leave you in the dirt.
This is a bit more than embarrassing. If it gets so busy that the downwind keeps getting pushed out, maybe it is time to fly some circuits elsewhere, or go do air work. :ok:

if you had just said 'Go Around from Base' that would make sense but to then say go "onto the Dead Side and join again" is, in my opinion, really asking for trouble as you are leaving the circuit from a very unusual position and will likely conflict with other (eg Joining) traffic.

Yes it is.

Conforming with the pattern means flying over (roughly) the same track, at (roughly) the same height and in the same direction as other aircraft.
It does not mean the whole pattern has to be flown and it states nothing about priority or giving way.

An aircraft joining Straight In will fly the same last portion of the final approach track as all other aircraft so once they are 'Final' they have right of way to land.

I do agree this is confusing at uncontrolled airfields where different joins can be used but, unless anyone can reference where it says that Final traffic, in certain circumstances, must give way to circuit traffic then ' Them is the Rules'

Flying away from the airfield will also leave the aircraft well short of a runway environment. Should we not do that or do engines only fail when approaching the field? Why fixate on engine failures only in the circuit? Would high approaches and constant tightly flown low power glide circuits increase the likelihood of the very engine failure the consequences of which you are trying to avoid?

Searching for more of a middle ground, Mike. I see patterns fit for a bizjet at small airports for no good reason that I can think of. I do climb above pattern altitude when leaving the airport, not high enough to glide to another but still a better situation than 90 seconds from touchdown.

So please tell me how you Go Around from Base Leg then?

Extending downwind is a bad habit, if it is any further than the point appropriate to a flapless approach and often leads to absurdly huge circuits.

Going round from base leg means crossing to the deadside, then fitting into the circuit as required. Other traffic joining must give then way.

Straight in joins should only be flown if there is no other traffic - or on an instrument approach, of course. If there's any other traffic, then join on the deadside and fit in as necessary.

I was once duty pilot at Benson supervising solo students bouncing Bulldogs off the runway. Whereupon a plummy-voiced corgi-carrier in a 146 announced he was joining straight in, having dropped off the royal at some venue or other.

I directed ATC to tell him to join on the deadside as there were 3 others in. He queried this, so I told them to repeat it. But he did as instructed and fitted into the circuit without difficulty. Later in the bar he queried this with the CFI, who backed me up and advised him to read the Flying Order Book.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ga_srgw...osterJan09.pdf provides a good depiction of the standard overhead join.

I think it has long been accepted by most people as implicit in this statement that the onus is on traffic joining the circuit to make adjustments to their track and speed to 'fit in' with traffic already established in the circuit pattern, whatever size, or shape of circuit the established traffic is makiing, and that, once established in the circuit, each aircraft must follow the one ahead.

The problem is: When does the 'joining' aircraft become part of the 'established' circuit traffic?.

In my opinion, an aircraft joining the circuit straight in, from a 'long final' position is not part of the circuit pattern until it is inside whatever 'base leg' any already established aircraft is flying at that time.

This means that any such aircraft coming into conflict with any aircraft on the 'base leg' must, by definition, be still 'joining', and not yet 'part of' the established circuit traffic. It must therefore, make an adjustment to allow the aircraft established on 'base leg' to continue unhindered, and the only safe way to do this at this point, is to 'go around'.

As to the 'Always be witiin gliding distance of the runway whilst in the circuit' argument;

It must be appreciated, and accepted, that any form of 'powered approach' must, by definition, leave the aircraft, at some point, and for the remainder of the circuit, unable to make it to the runway in the case of an engine failure .

The only way to avoid this situation, whilst at the same time maintaining the order of traffic in the circuit, would be for everyone to make glide approaches from the 'downwind' position, in the style of WW2 Tiger Moth practice.

I would suggest that, considering the wide range of aircraft we have in circuit patterns today, and the general unwillingness amongst many people to conform with the conventions we already have, this would be impossible to achieve.


MJ:ok:

Thank God for someone else who doesn't believe that the mantra of always within gliding distance of the field is always appropriate.

Dead side, live side, overhead join, good grief! Every airfield in the UK must be so pleased to have its own unique arrangement! Far be it from Brits to follow the KISS principle......like they do in the US of A. Where they call unicom, prefaced by the NAME of the airfield to avoid misunderstanding. And left turn circuits are de riguer, unless otherwise specified in the literature....

So in the US, you call on the universal frequency, eg. " Enstone traffic, Echo Romeo joining downwind for Two Five. " And you then slot in downwind. Simples.

As the UK likes to be different in every way, I am more than ever reluctant to welcome power traffic to a gliding site, where THERE IS NO DEAD SIDE, FOLKS....gliders can come from any direction as necessity requires. and furthermore, THERE IS NO OVERHEAD JOIN! ! As we have seen some power planes attempt, despite the winch which has just launched a glider up to 1,400 feet and is still connected with a braided steel cable which might just possibly get in the way of an overhead join.......

And yet, on a gliding site, if the thermals all quit at once, as does sometimes happen, you can have eight or ten gliders landing at the SAME TIME and they mostly manage to avoid each other.

In which case ATC would be in-situ to integrate the VFR with the IFR on the IAP.

Totally agree. In my humble opinion any pilot conducting a straight-in approach to an uncontrolled busy circuit is overly optimistic, or arrogant, or mad, or a combination of all three. In my humble time watching aeroplanes going round and round I have witnessed such behaviour on many occasions. Frequently it turned out that the PIC was a very experienced and highly qualified aviator who should otherwise be setting an example.

I recently flew with an out of practice pilot at his request. We did 11 circuits in 33 minutes. Flying a 1.2 mile final would have put us into a neighbouring ATZ. Normal Base to Final turn is around 800mtrs out. A mile out is a Long Final call.


I've flown this approach countless times, and it's been perfectly adequate for anything from fixed wing microlights to light twins.


We don't allow overhead joins as there's a noise sensitive area on the dead side. So no dead side descents, and our circuit height is 800ft.


Complaints from visitors that they've been 'Cut up' on a two mile final are usually met with :rolleyes:.

Why thank God? Trying to remain within gliding distance of the field sounds completely sensible to me. Very rarely does one share the circuit with a modern passenger jet and so quite why - for example - a circuit containing the usual mix of PA28 and 172's needs to be a size suitable for a Boeing B52 is beyond me.

A call of 'Long Final' indicartes that you are on the centreline, and between 4 and 8 miles out.

If you are behind another aircraft downwind, and you then turn final in front of it, you have 'cut them up', regardless of where you, or they are based.




MJ:ok:

One airfield I can think of has published two separate, non-integrated circuits, one for 'GA', and one for microlights. They meet on short final. That is simply engineering 'cutting-up' and proximity.

. A call of 'Long Final' indicartes that you are on the centreline, and between 4 and 8 miles out.


Try it on 06 at Bagby then, and see what Topcliffe has to say.
Or 24 and make friends at Sutton Bank.

Why would you indicate that you were between 4 and 8 miles away from Bagby, or any other airfield, when you were, in fact only 1 mile away?


MJ:ok:

I am curious as to how many aircraft could safely operate in a "standard" circuit pattern and stay within the 2 or 2.5 nm radius of an ATZ of a typical GA field?

Assuming only one aircraft occupies the runway at any time, as that would probably dictate the spacing required in the circuit.

What do people think?

So is a "longfinal" call the point at which the aircraft is established on 'final' and, therefore, has the right of way, or is that not until a proper "final" call is made. It is something that has always niggled my mind.

The earlier quoted 4 mile final leaves between 3.45 and 4 mins at most GA approach speeds which will really screw up somebody half way along a reasonably tight base leg. At 2 of the airfields I fly from, there isn't a deadside due to glider flying so a go around would involve a pretty tight turn to fly down the runway. High workload, tight bank angle climbing from approach speed - only a matter of time!

"Long Final" according to CAP 413 is between 8 and 4 miles, as has been said.

GA pilots calling "Long Finals" correctly should be (a) complimented for correctly applying the detail of CAP413, and then (b) shot.

"GA pilots calling "Long Finals" correctly should be (a) complimented for correctly applying the detail of CAP413, and then (b) shot." :ok:

The calls are just position reports, and should not constitute a claim to 'right of way'

This is a grey area, as the rules regarding rights of way, and flight in the vicinity of an airfield are rather vague and conflicting in places. In my opinion, an aircfraft joining 'straight in' cannot claim to be even in the circuit pattern, let alone on 'final approach' for the purpose of 'right of way'. until it is inside any aircraft on base leg.

You are obviously not based at a large international airport like I am, together with many other private and training aircraft.

…because it's singular!

Agree with MJ.
… :ok:
(BTW MJ, tip the toast crumbs out of your keyboard…)

It's an interesting question, Bingo, and the answer would depend, very much, on what you consider to be a 'standard circuit'

If we consider a few commonly followed conventions we could suggest a standard cirtcuit to be, straight ahead to 500' agl, left turn 90 degrees, level at 1,000', limmediately left 90 degrees again, 90 left again at the end of the downwind leg when the threshold is about 45 degrees behind us, descending on base, to be wings level after the final turn at a miin. of 500'(1nm), final approach as required to land, making a go around decision at 200'agl, and vacating the runway, or performing a 'touch and go'

This would take aroud 6 mins per circuit to complete in a typical training aircraft like a C152, or PA38, and would be just about contained within a standard 2 mile radius ATZ.

Spacing in the cirtcuit would be determined by the need for aircraft on final to have a clear runway at 200'agl, so a min of 30 secs apart.

Assuming that all the aircraft were doing 'touch and goes', this would mean that our 'standard circuit', under ideal conditions, with perfect discipline and accurate flying, could accommodate a maximum of 12 identical aircraft.


MJ:ok:

:eek: Surely you don't mean these ', 'toast crumbs'? ;)


MJ:ok:

I wouldn't fancy flying in that circuit...

Not been to a PFA rally then -:)

MJ,
I would agree with your comment, and admit it would be the ideal situation. It is interesting that quite often having 4 training aircraft in a circuit can create the extended downwinds etc which seen so common.
I recall from an FI seminar some years ago, the speaker suggesting it should be taught that if you cannot turn base at the correct position then you should initiate a go around from downwind and re establish in the circuit. If I recall the speaker explained he taught go arounds from every part of the circuit and regarded a landing as a bonus!

With regard to calling long finals at 4 miles, I seem to remember that any flight more than 3 miles from an airfield was categorised as a cross country, so are we now calling final whilst still on the nav leg?

Interesting thread though.

Ah yes. I went to one of those once. :eek:

;)


MJ:ok:

By maintaining, or climbing back up to and then maintaining, circuit height; turning on to a final approach track at the appropriate point and flying along (but just to one side of) the Runway until it was appropriate to turn Crosswind.

Technically, by flying just to one particular side of the Runway, an aircraft could be said to be on the Dead Side of the Runway BUT it would never have left the circuit so would not need to rejoin and, at all times, would be conforming to the circuit pattern.

Many, that's why I wouldn't fancy it.,..
You are showing your age. It's LAA these days.;)

I don't think there is such a thing as a Standard join these days. Try joining overhead when there is parachuting going on and you might be in for a surprise. Try joining overhead where there is a MATZ above and Typhoons flying around and you might get a surprise.

At airfields like this I favour a base leg or straight in join. At airfields with a SOHJ when I am arriving from the dead side I'd join on crosswind over the upwind numbers.

At "home" I like to join overhead just for fun, and see how accurately and quickly I can crank it around, lose 1000' before crossing the numbers. Our circuit is quite tight due to noise abatement so I think final is typically 0.2 - 0.4 nm.

However if joining from a straight in or Base then I'd be prepared to give way to anyone in the circuit. I shudder to think of someone on base having to "go around" to someone on final as this doesn't really do anything to increase separation. Better would be to extend downwind if there is any ambiguity before turning base, or for the person on long final to adjust speed etc., or go around.

What annoys me more is incorrect position reports...Someone calls up "on final" when in actual fact they are 6 miles out. I had that at Bembridge one time, I was downwind for the westerly runway and someone called in final. I decided to extend downwind and I was half way to shoreham before they passed me !

I resemble that remark about my age... I claim that was a typo. Remember being at Wroughton with 5 inside of me downwind. That made for a crick in the neck looking around. I couldn't do it now because of my age, and my neck wont turn like an owl anymore. -:)

Thats fair enough but the issue in this thread wouldn't apply in this case given one assumes your large international airport has an air traffic control service rather than air/ground.

Not a criticism. just an observation. Two approaches here to the same airfield. The first aircraft turns final about a half mile out and takes about 30 seconds to the threshold. The second turns about a mile out and spends around a minute on final.


It's me dragging the 172 in to miss the un-matted (soft) first 200mtrs.:\
It's also me in the tower on the second clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41s12mQ7Jtk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMVKKI7vtsk

Not quite sure what you want us to observe from the two clips, Mac. :confused:


MJ:ok:

Just that there's no right way, but there's a quick way and a slower way.
If I'd been behind the Eurostar I might have slipped in ahead of him when I saw him Disappearing into the downwind distance. I have to pay for my fuel.