Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Ground station insisting on traffic pattern upon landing

No big deal, really, and luckily we don’t have ‘Flugleiter’ here. It’s either ATC or nothing.

Indeed….this has been the subject of a previous rant of mine….to me A/G radio actually degrades safety by virtue of providing a false sense of security to some pilots who then fail to properly assess the relative position of other aircraft….and worse feel as though they can’t or don’t need to transmit timely and useful position and intention calls….increasing airprox incidents….AFIS isn’t any better either in terms of safety in and around the circuit

Last Edited by AnthonyQ at 17 Sep 04:47
EGPD / OMDW / YPJT, United Kingdom

to me A/G radio actually degrades safety by virtue of providing a false sense of security

Couldn’t agree more !

Well, with that quote Jan, you proved yourself that what you said was wrong…

Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany

I once told an A/G that I intended to join “upwind” ie along the axis of the runway and turn crosswind…..he just said I’m not sure the other pilots will understand….which was a polite way of saying “please join overhead like everyone else”….which I appreciated and then did…so I get the point of the OP…the Flugleiter could have “suggested” in a polite way and no feathers would have been ruffled

EGPD / OMDW / YPJT, United Kingdom

@Philipp: how so? I stated:

one HAS to fly the circuit, at least from the beginning of downwind

the document says

Der Einflug erfolgt in der Regel in den Gegenanflug

But I must admit it is a far less general “rule of the air” than I believed. Also the document I cited is rather vague, as it grants an exception to its own rules just a couple of lines lower. But I have not seen the “LuftVO”, of which the cited document seems to be an interpretation.

I also think we agree that, if Rhino’s Flugleiter was upset, it was rather because of local regulations/traditions than for a violation of the general rules of the air.

Last Edited by at 17 Sep 06:34
EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

But I must admit it is a far less general “rule of the air” than I believed. Also the document I cited is rather vague, as it grants an exception to its own rules just a couple of lines lower.

Also, “in der Regel” would translate as “usually”. The sentence you refer to describes a common practice rather than a “rule” that must be followed as such. And indeed the next lines read: “Straight-in approaches […] are possible for economical and noise abatement reasons, if traffic permits”. (There was no airborne traffic at the time)

But I have not seen the “LuftVO”, of which the cited document seems to be an interpretation.

The cited parts of the LuftVO are really just common sense, though (the following is a very rough translation):

$ 22 – 1
1 – Read the NOTAMS for an aerodrome you’re flying in the vicinity of (landing at, taking off from, ..)
2 – Follow the instructions received from the “Flugleiter” (here: Luftaufsicht) and the aerodrome operator
3 – Watch the traffic to avoid collisions
4 – Integrate with the traffic flow or clearly keep away from it

I also think we agree that, if Rhino’s Flugleiter was upset, it was rather because of local regulations/traditions than for a violation of the general rules of the air.

Fair enough. But ruling out general rules of the air in this respect (which I think we have done now) and written local regulations that clearly state that at THIS aerodrome, a straight-in approach cannot be flown, we are dealing with local traditions. Well, next time when I’m there, I’ll know.

Essen-Mülheim (EDLE), Düsseldorf (EDDL), Paderborn (EDLP), Mönchengladbach (EDLN), Germany
There are many good reasons for an overhead join (and it is mandated in some countries)

Such as?
  • Less likelihood of conflict with other traffic already in the traffic circuit.
  • If there is much other circuit traffic, integration with that traffic is easier from the upwind side where there is usually no other traffic.
  • Checking the windsock, runway conditions etc.
Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 17 Sep 10:17
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Less likelihood of conflict with other traffic already in the traffic circuit.

Yes, but a very high likelihood of hitting somebody who is

  • joining overhead too, or
  • just flying at 2000ft AAL (like most UK PPLs have been taught to fly)

It gets better if the airfield has an IAP with a 2000ft platform

In the UK, the OHJ is used by “ATC” when they are overwhelmed with inbounds. By sending you to the overhead, they are not responsible for you. No competent ATCO will send traffic to the overhead otherwise.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Yes, but a very high likelihood of hitting somebody who is

joining overhead too, or

Sure. Anywhere you fly you can hit someone. What is the likelihood of someone doing an overhead join at the same time as you do, compared to the likelihood of someone else being in the circuit already when you join?


just flying at 2000ft AAL (like most UK PPLs have been taught to fly)

Do you mean that you want to descent through 2000 ft AAL rapidly to avoid a concentration of traffic at that level? Fine, then join at 1500 ft AAL! (That’s what I usually do anyway…)

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

What is the likelihood of someone doing an overhead join at the same time as you do, compared to the likelihood of someone else being in the circuit already when you join?

In the scenario where the OHJ is used where I fly VFR mostly (UK) the chances are fairly high because the OHJ is used when ATC cannot cope with the traffic.

I agree it is high too in the other joins, but in the OHJ it seems worse because you are going round and round, and say there are 5 others doing the same, you will see at most 1 or 2 of them. Yet they will all be at roughly your height, etc.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top