Don't know the cruise speed of a Eurostar, but I have slowed down an Archer II and a stage of flap to stay a proper distance behind a slower aircraft. I'm sure (and know) you can do it in a 172.

Ah, I see.

I don't think Mac meant that he wasn't able to do that, PA, just that he didn't want to.


MJ:ok:

OKee doke...

Well I think this is where we start talking about being cut up in the circuit again

The less flying you do, the less fuel you buy. If you don't fly at all you won't have to buy any fuel at all.

LevelAttitude, poor choice of words on my part - I didn't mean to imply that said a/c would need to rejoin the circuit. That's how I teach it also.

Nobody could argue with that, Mac.;)


MJ:ok:

Maybe I am missing something.. The landmarks are the turning point that is taught at the airfield for the circuit - aside from if someone is in a faster aircraft etc like an arrow.

There was no aircraft in front - they were the lead aircraft. 4 in the circuit including myself behind the lead aircraft and 2 behind.

The traffic pattern at home airfield is a pattern which is otherwise flown according to landmarks, headings, visual references etc - I turned base at the spot (as taught by the instructor) and so did the aircraft behind me which also had an Instructor on board.

Aircraft on the previous 2 approaches also turned in the same spot and flew what I would deem as a standard circuit..

Said aircraft that I was following was outside of the ATZ by extending their circuit. There is no 2 ways about it.

So according to the rule .. are you saying I should put myself also out of the ATZ ?? and what constitutes the traffic pattern - because IMHO this would mean that if you are "following an aircraft" and said aircraft is flying a non standard circuit - you would also be flying a non standard circuit..and the aircraft behind will be doing the same and if there is an aircraft behind they will also do the same due to the domino effect.

So for that "1 hour" - the lead aircraft will be putting all other aircraft out of the ATZ..

What would you do in that situation??

I apologise if I am nit picking or have confused the situation and I am far from the thousands of hours on SEP - but as my instructor once said - Air Law is one thing and the practical is another- people will do a free for all and you have to keep your wits about you.

If I have missed something then I welcome the education :ok:

Scoobster

Only picking up on the aspect of "landmarks" when flying a circuit.

Not heard the point that when away from base those "landmarks" are gone. All that's left is the age old runway threshold at 45 degs rule (Not the start of the runway always, due to displaced thresholds) Landmarks for circuits at night may well work due to street lighting and other lights at your home airfield etc, but again, anyone relying on landmarks for circuits when landing away, is not doing it right IMHO.

Yes, Scoob. That's how it's supposed to work.

Have a word with the 'big circuit' pilot on the ground later to find out what was the reason for the long downwind.

Having said that, it could also be said that, if the aircraft in front extends the downwind far enough, then it has left the 'circuit ' and has lost the right of way that being in the circuit would normally provide.

Where you draw the line is hard to say, and would depend a lot on how big you think a 'normal' circuit should be, and that will depend on what you are used to. I would suggest that any extension significantly outside the size of an ATZ, without any obvious reason could be a candidate for this line of thought.


MJ:ok:

Agreed when away from home.

I'm just wondering about following or conforming to the traffic pattern if lead aircraft at 'base' airfield is out of the ATZ.

Would one still be expected to conform just because they are setting the traffic pattern and would affect all other aircraft being outside also?

I do not advocate cutting up any aircraft and just trying to work out a how air law would fit into the scenario above

Ah okay.. Thanks MJ

In the US, the final rule of law is "see and avoid". Being behind the other plane you have the benefit of "see" and if you take action that fails to "avoid" a potential conflict, it would be on you.
Is the wording similar in the UK?
This is fun hearing other terms like "cut up". here it would be "cut off".
This is what I pictured when I first saw cut up.
Sliced Seminole

Your point about keeping the other aircraft in front of you to more easilly keep it in sight is a good one, Sky. When we 'cut up' or 'cut off' another aircraft, we often loose sight of it, and thus create another potential hazard.

I think that, although there are many procedural differences in the details of joining and flying the circuit pattern between the US and UK, the basic 'see and avoid' principle still holds good either side of the Atlantic.


MJ:ok:

The other problem with the outsized pattern pertains to my usual ride, a light twin.
104 knots is a good safe speed for all legs and turns, until short final. A big pattern of 100 KT downwind planes like 172's does not seem a problem, till we get to that long final leg.
Now the planes slow to 65 KTs or less, and I cannot negotiate a safe landing at all. With the big pattern, they get two planes on the final many times, dragging it in at a perfectly appropriate speed. It is just the time involved that is unworkable.
So we look at it with the tighter pattern. I blend in on a 200 yard wider downwind, in a good spot. I fly a slightly larger downwind leg, keeping well ahead of the plane behind by virtue of more speed. I am well in sight of following traffic. Now my downwind was longer, base leg a little longer, and when I get on final the leading plane is just touching down. I can now slow to 90 KT, and it works fine. Nobody has to do anything to their work to get me in.
When the thing gets big and slow, I have to beg a slot from one of my fellow aviators to arrive. Not usually a problem, but not necessary IMO.

Scoobster, Go Around from Base Leg - usually means you can fly the "normal" circuit next time round.

To the point on see and avoid... it also plays well to those not flying huge circuits.

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2013093.pdf

That report was astounding to me and reinforces the need to carefully study the laws and common practices of another country before flying there. That sort of thing is simply not done in the US, outside of restricted airspace or on designated Military Training Routes (MTRs). A 210KT Hercules @250 AGL would be something to behold :)
I had one opposite direction on an IFR flight with minimum separation once. We were in and out of the crud, and here he is at about half mile, and closing speed of 420 knots or so.

Thanks all for the observations and debate, very interesting. I only recently qualified and hence wanted to check my understanding. If things had progressed I would have applied power and gone around whilst also making a call on the radio to announce my intention.

Cheers,
Dan

Ps - it was at Barton, and it was busy (4 or 5 in the circuit I think from memory)

PA28181 and I are thinking the same thing.

IF you are new to flying, you will say something like: I turned base over granny's farm house.

That' s the problem. We use crutches like turn base over the power lines, when we should use the constants like the 45degree etc.

to the original poster: take some more lessons with instructors that might be out of your normal envelope (respected instructors).

I've always found it hard to fathom that flight instructors in england can do so without being commercial pilots.

Seen one which seemed much lower than that ... I was in a car at the time, not an aircraft, it gave the impression of just clearing the treetops, and the noise was something else entirely ...

(Yes I know that untrained ground observers rarely get within an order of magnitude when they estimate heights of aircraft. But it was still quite impressive.)

That rule being that from downwind to base the runway should be at a 45 degree angle as you look over your shoulder.

This is the same rule that you are referring to.. correct?

You might phrase it slightly more better than I have though :\

Scoobster

If you leave the ATZ depending on track, at Fairoaks, White Waltham, & Denham, you may get a phone call from EGLL:rolleyes:

Isn't it interesting though that for something we all do, all the time, every time we fly, there are so many opinions from so many with so much experience, some of which is contradictory !

Guess it goes to show that rules are all well and good but what matters is commonsense, good radio use, airmanship and courtesy. And if everyone makes it on the ground safely then that's a job well done.

150 driver, flying is not commonsense.

We have rules that have been around longer than you and I have been around

Why not follow them? I realize you have to actually read them, understand them and maybe even ask others to help you understand them. And be sure you ask someone who actually knows something like an FAA inspector here in the USA or whatever you call them in your country.

Commonsense? Hardly. It is well thought out rules that keep things safe, the only problem seems to be when they are not obeyed or understood.

When I was instructing, I would teach people on how to judge distance (without the use of DME, VOR, or GPS etc). Just having someone say: turn base over the power lines might work for one airfield, but what do you do if you don't have power lines at the next aerodrome?

Very true. Although courtesy (not to mention self preservation) means aircraft joining a circuit pattern tend to give way to those already in it I can, which surprised me, find no Rule that actually states that Circuit Traffic has any specific right of way.


All Quotes from CAP393
Since a pilot certainly wants to do this when concentrating on landing it is no surprise that:
A single pattern allows for an orderly single flow of Aircraft on to a final approach (0 to 4 nm from Threshold so ATZ, or not, is irrelevent) ie no multiple Base Legs, a variety of distances out from the threshold, which could be interesting, if not chaotic. However, due to 13, all aircraft are still required to give way to aircraft already on Final - no matter how they got there.

The above means that an aircraft joining a L/H Circuit Crosswind would be required to give way to existing Downwind Traffic.
But what about an aircraft that has Gone Around and is now flying along the runway at circuit height? The Rules state they are the ones who must now give way to an aircraft joining from the Deadside.
What about a R/H Circuit?

Pilots flying a Straight In approach to an airfield with a busy circuit pattern may not be popular but that does not mean they do not have right of way.

Challenging and fun certainly but, even though you only do this at your "home" airfield, may I suggest this (a steep gliding turn on the Dead Side, close to the runway) is not good airmanship.

I wasn't suggesting that you chuck the rules away and just use commonsense.

FWIW I have read the read the rules and like to think I follow them. But when you're in a situation where someone else isn't following the rules as you understand them (bearing in mind that there are what appear to be experienced aviators on here who are expressing differing opinions !) then commonsense/self preservation/good airmanship (call it what you will) must play a part in getting you down safely.

Pihutze, what a discussion and they are all there - the rule-rules-all, the cowboys, the few common-sensers and even some pilots ;-). Folks, I read all the discussion and summarize for me: it all depends.

One question to the UK flyers. Do you have published VFR traffic patterns and what is their legal status? I remember the very annoying discussion in Germany, you know that country with the hard-headed citizens, on traffic patterns and in the end the lawyers had to clear that traffic patterns are just guidelines, nothing else (there even is a published expert opinion, can't find it now).

I would treat a "log final" call at an uncontrolled airfield the same as "ILS established" on a controlled airport, where this is just an information and if time permits the controller will clear to land you well before the established machine is in final. Once the "long final" guy enters final, it has to fiddle emself into the traffic at the pattern, that easy?

Depends where you think the 'final approach to land' starts. If someone calls 'Final at 15 miles' does that mean that you can't turn 'base' in front of them?

My view is that, for traffic joining 'straight in', 'final approach to land' starts once you are inside a point on 'final' where you might reasonably expect the 'base leg' traffic to be, or inside the actual position of base leg traffic, whichever is the closer.

I realise that others may interpret the rules to suit themselves.


MJ:ok:

That is a long version of what I meant. If you have a published traffic pattern, I would assume someone "on the published final line on the chart" to have right of way and somebody on 15nm "long final" definitely not. Isn't there a setting in the UK with something like 8nm long final, 4nm final, less 4nm short final?

I just want to make sure I understand the situation as described by the OP.

There are only two planes in the sky near some airport. Just two planes. And they can't work out something on the radio to the satisfaction of both pilots?


I haven't heard anyone say something like: I offered to cross final and do a right 270 turn and rejoin final behind the plane calling on final.

Or: Plane on final offering to do a 360 turn to allow base traffic to go ahead.

And did both planes have recognition, landing, or other intense lights on over and above strobe and beacon?

I can think of at least one unlicensed uncontrolled airfield in the UK where an orbit on final will bring forth shouts of derision on the radio about what a dangerous manouvre this is ( possible traffic behind) and where a wrong directional turn on final into the dead side against the traffic direction would bring a similar result ( notwithstanding that your suggestion may otherwise be completely sensible.)

An orbit on final :eek:

Please broadcast any intention to do that so I can leave the FIR!!!

My version of 'Bing' didn't translate that...

As for Long Finals....

At Hawarden, a Baluga on a 10 mile final has precedence even over a PPL student pilot doing his first ever Solo Circuit (Me.)....

It's something to remember, as I had not done 'Orbits' before.

That wasn't very clever of somebody. (Not you).

Your story brings to mind a similar situation (G-BABB at Southend in 2006) which ended with a 16 y.o. student fatality.


As an aside, I've received an ATC instruction to orbit on final before now.

:eek:


Of all the things I see in uncontrolled circuits, I think orbiting on base and final are the most dangerous!

I hope you respectfully told them where to shove that instruction.

I remember that 'accident', Dave. It was tragic.:sad:

MJ:ok:

Perhaps a question for ATC to answer, how do they differentiate (indeed, should they ?) a first student solo from a second or more student solo ?

When I was training, flying solo and giving a 'Student G-ABCD' call sign I was more than once given instructions to orbit (although not on final !) and extend downwind due to heavy commercial traffic. Fortunately by the stage this started happening I was close to test, no dramas but would they have known that ?

I suppose the ATC view would be that whilst not ideal, the solo student was up to dealing with whatever emergencies or instructions were given otherwise the Instructor wouldn't allow the student to go solo.

Lest it be taken out context, the question is posed out of idle curiosity, not to have a pop at anyone.

You say "shove"; I said "going around".


In my head, though, I said... :}

Usually, the Instructor will give ATC a 'heads up' that this student is a potential First Solo when booking out, or tell them on the radio just before you go.

Nobody should be sent solo unless they are prepared for anything that could reasonably be expected to happen to them.


MJ:ok:

Orbiting on Final or base under ATC instructions not particularly unusual in my experience. Maybe I'm unlucky.
Certainly it's extremely common on downwind.

I think an orbit called for below pattern altitude is a very risky maneuver indeed. If a controller can't figure things out before that point he needs a little remedial training.