That would be the usual 45 degrees from threshold base turn, to be adjusted if needed based on altitude.
For runway 22, for example, on a standard pattern at 1000ft you would turn base close to the water strip you see on the chart.
In my experience, I’ve never had fo fly a pattern below 1000ft, while they requested 500ft or other altitudes on departure based on the required separation from other departing traffic (they also request early turns or other stuff if needed).
All in all, with proper planning and accurate studying of the AIP Schiphol is not particularly difficult.
The most complex part is probably the RT (they are busy and expect you are current and fluent, and on departure you talk to 4 frequencies + ATIS before getting take off clearance), and I think the worst part is the bill you get to land there ;)
And I have never had an arrival above 500ft with ca 250 landings at EHAM in my log book so you can never be sure
Made the flight to EHAM today and had a fantastic time. Lost a bit of sweat and gained experience. Many thanks for all the earlier replies. Some questions may seem obvious to many of you but as this was my 2nd landing ever at a controlled field post PPL (and actually pretty much ever ever) I can use all the advice I can get and it really helped. I flew in at <1000ft and was asked to do a standard LH circuit for RWY 22. No instructions on where to turn so I did as suggested by NicoKM which seemed to be what was expected of me.
While obviously a very busy and complicated airport, I thought EHAM was/is also particularly tolerant of/accommodating to small fish. To prepare, I found the following useful:
- the VFR section in the AIP here. I made a one page summary of the instructions and expected frequencies for arrival, and a similar one pager for departure.
- The maps (ground movement, hot spots etc) from the same AIP
- discussion on this forum. As always, some areas of disagreement but overall very informative
- practice in a hobby simulator (X-plane). Specifically I rehearsed the part from VICTOR to the start of downwind and then on to landing, which gave me a really good feel of the speed of events happening in succession and the visual angles to expect. And a good feel of the runway which is indeed really long for grass field trainees.
Handling was done by Aviapartner. I did not need a slot (VFR obviously). Invoice was 312 euro for a PA28. While obviously not cheap the service offered was excellent. Will go again if I find a decent excuse.
Also, I saw this beauty following me to the runway and doing her run-up behind me on departure
Well done! Another thing that often happens when flying into large airports serving air carriers is that you’ll be asked to fly at max speed. I usually do this without being asked. You just fly full throttle and no flaps in the descent, then bleed it off over the ample runway length, ideally touching down near your desired turn off.
Seems no more private flights to AMS
I still wonder how come these activists don’t need handling for escort ??
I suspect this proposal will go nowhere but in a couple of years Schiphol will be able to say we tried our best but it did not work
This is what happens when you vote left-wing government’s in power. They take away your civil liberties, and try change things that shouldn’t be changed or without consultation.
Just look at the LTNs/ULEZ in the Labour ran London.
@pilotrobbie – check your facts. Our government is right of center and has been for the last 14 years.
Some good news from the courts:
Schiphol airport does not have to cut flight numbers from 500,000 to 460,000 later this year, as ordered by the government, judges in Amsterdam have ruled. KLM and a number of other airlines and aviation bodies had gone to court to have the move ruled illegal, arguing the government had broken European rules. The court agreed, saying that according to EU guidelines, a state can only reduce the number of aircraft movements at an airport after going through a careful process. ‘The state must identify various measures that can reduce noise pollution and consult all stakeholders,’ the court said. ‘A reduction in the number of aircraft movements is only allowed when it is clear that other noise mitigation measures do not work sufficiently well.’ The airlines say they are confident they can reduce noise levels and CO2 emissions ‘while maintaining a network of destinations for the millions of passengers and tonnes of cargo they carry annually to and from Schiphol’. Schiphol, which is 100% state owned, had said it will accept the new limit this year and the further cut to 440,000 flights in 2024, but that it cannot rule out an expansion after that. The case is not connected to the airport group’s own announcement on Tuesday that it is planning to end night flights in an effort to reduce noise nuisance for locals. Airlines have also criticised that move, saying it will lead to price rises for tickets and reduce holiday options.
I suspect this proposal will go nowhere but in a couple of years Schiphol will be able to say we tried our best but it did not work
Let’s hope it’s a dummy proposal
