Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Germany rules on traffic patterns -- non binding!

There has been a long debate in Germany about traffic patterns and whether they are binding for pilots and what the required precision has to be. The background is airport neighbors complaining about noise, claiming that aircraft do not adhere to the published traffic pattern.

This issue escalated at the airfield Bonn Hangelar and the local government had issued a decree requiring all pilots to adhere to the traffic pattern within an arbitrarily defined corridor of 150m. In order to enforce this, a laser distance measuring device was purchased and used to determine aircraft’s position and altitude. Several pilots were fined for not adhering to the traffic pattern. Most of them went to court against the government, pointed to specific reasons why they could not maintain the pattern (weather, traffic, attention, etc.) and won.

Still, the local government insisted on its 150m corridor. AOPA and others escalated the issue to the state government, pointing out that it is impossible for a VFR pilot to fly with the required precision and also raising several safety concerns, mostly because the 150m corridor requires so much attention that adequate collision avoidance was no longer possible.

The state government hired an expert, Prof. Janser of the University of Aachen to determine whether such a 150m corridor is feasible and and sensible. His 75 page expertise came to a very clear conclusion: it is impossible, requiring higher precision flying than the IR exam, there is no legal foundation and it is a major safety issue. The expertise is very well done, showing exactly how popular GA aircraft operate in a pattern.

The state government then took action and ordered the local government to rescind their decree which happened last week. It has therefore finally been established that the track of a traffic pattern is non binding. The altitude is binding and the direction / position relative to the airfield but not the actual track. This expertise can now be considered the official position and applies to all airfields in Germany.

An important win for the GA community. Balancing GA and noise abatement is a difficult job and clarity is important.

An important win for the GA community.

I’m not so sure about that. The “noise sensitive community” does not give up easily either. They will now work towards imposing restrictions on the opening hours, night flying bans and similar. In the end, what’s better: An airfield with a traffic pattern that needs to flown precisely (a 150m visual circuit is not rocket science and does not require IFR flying skills, whatever this professor wrote in his report) and is open from sunrise to sunset, or an airfield with a “sloppy” traffic pattern that is open from sunrise+30 to 11AM and then again from 2PM to sunset-30 (and there are airfields with this kind of restriction!)?

Last Edited by what_next at 10 Feb 10:19
EDDS - Stuttgart

Well, they will try all that ANYWAY! So the win is a sign, at least.
At our airport (EDML) we have CONSTANT noise complaints by phone. And in the summer it sometimes develops to really hysterical dimensions – for example when that same woman calls 25 times in one afternoon and wants “those gliders” away from her house, “because they make a noise”.
There will NEVER be a solution for those people they accept – other than close the airport. So I think that this court ruling is a good step in the other direction.

Last Edited by Flyer59 at 10 Feb 11:37

Well, they will try all that ANYWAY!

But from what I know, at Bonn Hangelar they have been quiet since the strict pattern was imposed (apart from complaining about those who few outside the pattern). Now, that the pattern is not strict any longer they will become more active again, trying different things.

EDDS - Stuttgart

I’m not so sure about that. The “noise sensitive community” does not give up easily either

Agree with that, but its important that a pilot can deviate from a 150m corridor for purposes of safety (avoiding aircraft doing something stupid, dodging a cloud etc). Where I fly from there are about 5 noise sensitive areas around our circuit. It is therefore not a race-track circuit, it is some other shape. It is the reason why PPR is “mandatory”. The idea being that any new pilot can be given a briefing before (s)he arrives and not have 5 phone calls trail in one after another just after someone lands. It has to be done, to mitigate further restrictions or complaints to the airfield.

Its also where airmanship comes in because safety factors ignored, if a pilot knows the direction and strength of the wind from a windsock or weather report, then they should adjust the heading accordingly so the track is within 150m – and that shouldnt be impossible to achieve really.

I would say that it’s possible to fly that precise in the pattern of your homebase, but it’s really pretty hard to achive at some place you visit the first time. Sometimes you find the pattern easily, but at some fields it’s hard and everybody misses it the first time …

This 150m corridor is a bit like the UK situation where a burglar can sue the homeowner if he injures himself on something in your house – e.g. falls into your empty swimming pool and breaks a leg.

The fault is with the justice system which allows such actions (which are so obviously impossible to comply with or in the case of the burglar so obviously contrary to public policy) to proceed, and the fact that some lawyer is sufficiently cynical to have a go at it while keeping a straight face while banking the cheque from a client who obviously has loads of money and nothing to do in his/her life other than to cultivate bees under his/her bonnet and to harrass people.

You can’t do anything about lawyers taking on the job but the justice system needs fixing.

The only way to fly a circuit with the ground track within 150m is with an autopilot following a GPS track, and the top grade of roll steering implementing fly-by waypoints with precise wind correction based on the wind aloft from an airdata computer and the GPS. 150m is about 0.1nm which is about the level of accuracy required at the FAF when flying an ILS or a GPS/LNAV approach, but on those you always have a straight portion before you reach the FAF.

Even if you really wanted to do this, for a laugh, and had the right avionics, there is no chance of being within 150m in the circuit, with the 90 degree turns, and flying slowly, possibly in a strong wind. I went up on Friday and the wind at 1000ft AGL was about 40-50kt so the performance of any system at say 90kt would be, shall we say, entertaining…

Technically possible but I am not aware that anybody has the systems which actually work that way i.e. fly a 90 degree track intercept within 0.1nm with a wind of 50% of your TAS, and do this for all four corners.

Last Edited by Peter at 10 Feb 12:56
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The only way you’d know if you were within 150mtr is by fully zooming in on a moving map GPS which has the circuit overlaid. (Even then, I’m not sure you could achieve it the whole way around the circuit).

But if everyone does that, it’s not going to take any more than a sunny Saturday before planes start to crash and rain down on those below. Keeping to that track while keeping a good lookout is impossible.

EIWT Weston, Ireland

a moving map GPS which has the circuit overlaid

which is becoming quite popular among German microlighters, apparently. Search “www.ulforum.de”" for “Platzrundenmodul” for some illustrative examples.

Even before the Hangelar judgement (thanks for info, by the way!) I could never see the need for such contraptions. Indeed it brings more danger than safety, as dublinpilot pointed out. Especially in the circuit, one must be looking out, NOT peeking at some gizmo screen.

EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

>which is becoming quite popular among German microlighters,

Indeed. We introduced georeferenced maps into PocketFMS & EasyVFR too because of demand from German pilots.

EIWT Weston, Ireland
15 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top