351Windsor wrote:
I reckon some instructors just get worn down and give in …
Many instructors are paid by the flying minute (airtime only – me included), so what do they care where that minute is spent? The longer it lasts, the higher the pay!
Birds don’t fly squares.
They don’t fly oval circuits either…
what_next wrote:
Too much! This is why we flew to Memmingen (EDJA) for the circuits. The advantage is, that we can do the cross-country part of the night instructions in one go with the circuits.
Memmingen is also not very cheap at night. I can’t remember but 2 years ago when i did my night refresher we went there and the landing fees for about 10 landings were quite heavy, if I remember right they outdid the cost of the flight.
It only takes one… where I instructed, there was one instructor who consistently flew very
wide circuits – whenever that one was up, circuit times went from 5 minutes to 8. Contrary to popular belief most instructors prefer more corcuits per sortie so students make better progress, we hated her.
Nothing would change it – ATC talking to her, a chat betwen colleagues, banter, i think everything short of threatening physical violence was tried.
With only two aircraft in the circuit, and ATC complicit, I could overtake her every few circuits by putting in a glide approach from abeam the threshold while she was trundeling towards Gatwick, but that does not work except when with students where this is sensible, which limits it to certain training stages
Shame,really, since from what I hear she was an ofherwise perfectly good instructor.
351Windsor wrote:
The only time I have nearly died in a circuit was at a ATC field.
I wonder if this situation is affected by the FTO/school being a large user of the airport services, in which case nobody can tell them what to do… not even ATC. Especially not ATC, because ATC don’t police circuit patterns.
The diametrically opposing comments on FI incentives are interesting. Where I trained, they got as little as £10/day retainer and got paid for flying time – IIRC £20/hr. (They did get paid for solo student airborne time however, so if you had say 3 airborne you got £60/hr while sitting in the office). So there you have a clear incentive to prolong the training. Obviously a honourable FI will not be influenced by that, but…
Still interesting are views for/against big (and rectangular) circuits. They must be easier to fly (because you have more time to think and prepare, and because you can eyeball the final approach view for longer) so that method will result in more people getting a PPL – even if they take longer to get it.
Where I am based I often have a situation where I am on late downwind (probably about 1nm away from the runway – not particularly tight) and ATC report another plane also on late downwind, so I know where to look but still can’t see him. Eventually I spot a tiny speck, maybe 2 miles away at 3 o’clock. If he has a transponder turned on, he might show up on TCAS too but at that distance I would not assume he is in the circuit. The correct procedure there is for me to do a sharp right turn to 3 o’clock and fly a few miles to get behind that traffic!
I do wonder whether some weird factor is behind this, because where I am based they bill brakes-off to brakes-on, which results on lots of people getting filled up at the pumps and then sitting there with the engine running for ages, sorting out all their bits and pieces, with nobody else being able to use the pump, with ATC being unable to tell them to hurry up (often the person is not on the radio at that point, too) – all to delay the brakes-off moment till the last possible minute.
Personally I much prefer an oval circuit but one cannot do it if there is other traffic in the circuit.
Here is a plot of some random GPS tracks – are those approaches too tight?
I could not find any track where I was flying circuits.
The strange ones which pass into the ATZ and come out again were probably at high altitude.
Is there a general requirement for a circuit to be fully contained within the ATZ? I did hear that from one FTO instructor. One could fly a circuit which is about 3x the distance of the ones shown above and it would still be within the ATZ. But such a circuit would take 3x longer to fly.
there was one instructor who consistently flew very wide circuits – whenever that one was up, circuit times went from 5 minutes to 8
My former homefield was also plagued with this phenomenon. I found a good remedy, though: “xxx radio, the OO-yyy on downwind, becoming number one, the plane before us has left the circuit”. Not really good for the club atmosphere but it did work. If at least the field has published an exact definition of how to fly the circuit.
(ISTR I learned this trick on some forum, pp_roon perhaps, certainly before this forum came to exist)
In EDXE we have abandoned a prescribed traffic pattern dur to noise issues (and old FIs debating about the “correct” pattern that had everyone put off… ). We just specify the pattern altitude (1000ft MSL) and the use of the southern pattern for powered aircraft and the northern pattern for gliders. With new students (for about the first ca. 20-30 landings / pattern) I fly the bigger pattern (resulting in around 5-6 minute patterns in a C172) to give them time to sort themselves out. Often you find “elderly” students thinking about when to deploy flaps or when to pull carb heat and alike. They think about it for a couple of seconds before they do something and I don’t want to disturb their learning by commanding action. Usually they get better pretty fast and we transfer to flying the shorter circuit (resulting in 4-5 minute patterns in a C172). These circuits are a “quasi-standard” at EDXE with the Gellendorf, a “suburb” south of the airfield on the north or south of the pattern. I have figured that many pilots tend to fly the longer pattern when coming home (if they don’t just go direct in). Also, pilots of faster or more complex aircraft tend to use the wider pattern, and foreign pilots (although the approach is easier from the smaller pattern, since you have a better view of the field. Rheine can be “gone” in the downwind, especially when people are too low or too far away:
View from downwind of the smaller pattern.
We do mix all types of patterns and approaches and if everyone takes care it even works with 5-7 planes in the pattern, although that is somewhat rare here. If the faster ones fly a larger pattern and the slower ones fly a tighter pattern, all can fly for their pace. We usually all have a radio and if unsure about the exact position of another plane, just ask them.
The biggest danger is a “Flugleiter” who thinks he can control the traffic. That never works. Best flying is when he shut’s his mouth and occasionally gives info for new arriving planes and a wind check once in a while.
EDIT: Our instructors are payed by block time and the aircraft is payed by flight time. We figured this would be the most fair model for all involved.
Not really good for the club atmosphere
That would be an understatement at many places (“most” over here). One would make big enemies very fast. If this issue was easy to solve then I think people would solve it. It isn’t easy to solve because clearly some parties benefit from it.
Our instructors are payed by block time and the aircraft is payed by flight time. We figured this would be the most fair model for all involved.
That’s very good. Not usual here though.
Part of it is to do with instructors trying to teach a “stabilised approach”.
I am not an instructor so not qualified to make criticism on teaching methods, although when we see C152s taking a longer downwind leg and turning base further out than I would do in a CJ2 it makes me wonder what’s going on…
