square or oval?

[diesel]

After reading through the forums all the old issues still dominate. I believe if sqare well rectangular circuits were changed to more oval ends as in military a lot of problems would go away. The glider and other pilots I taught never had a problem this way. The over ruddered turn onto finals with all the stall spin issues. Also a nice steady decent down to aiming point with reduced workload works well. If turns are left a little too late they get over cooked and turn to custard. Chas

 

 

[diesel]

After reading through the forums all the old issues still dominate. I believe if sqare well rectangular circuits were changed to more oval ends as in military a lot of problems would go away. The glider and other pilots I taught never had a problem this way. The over ruddered turn onto finals with all the stall spin issues. Also a nice steady decent down to aiming point with reduced workload works well. If turns are left a little too late they get over cooked and turn to custard. Chas

 

 

[dazza 38]

I fly an oval circuit more than the square circuit generally. It depends on if there are other aircraft in the circuit. But I fly during the week and not on weekends so I always have the circuit to myself at Boonah.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I fly an oval circuit more than the square circuit generally. It depends on if there are other aircraft in the circuit. But I fly during the week and not on weekends so I always have the circuit to myself at Boonah.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

I think it comes down to airmanship and how well you were taught. A rectangular pattern is how you fly in the circuit not some free form mishmash. Leave that to the gyros.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

I think it comes down to airmanship and how well you were taught. A rectangular pattern is how you fly in the circuit not some free form mishmash. Leave that to the gyros.

 

 

[pylon500]

When initially learning to fly gliders, I found I could judge a circular approach better than square, although my instructors kept trying to get me to go square.

 

Thirty years later, and I'm trying to teach my students how to do square circuits, but sometimes they just can't seem to judge their heights or glide angles, so I then have them try circular approaches.

 

They get a better idea, but by the time they go solo, they've usually got the idea of going square again.

 

I think the actual problem they have is like 'target fixation', where they loose their depth of field.

 

I try to cure this by breaking their vision, by making them check the windsock, or check their height against the local tree tops.

 

Get them to look around momentarily, and they get their 'three dimensional' view back, and can judge their height/distance better.

 

 

[pylon500]

When initially learning to fly gliders, I found I could judge a circular approach better than square, although my instructors kept trying to get me to go square.

 

Thirty years later, and I'm trying to teach my students how to do square circuits, but sometimes they just can't seem to judge their heights or glide angles, so I then have them try circular approaches.

 

They get a better idea, but by the time they go solo, they've usually got the idea of going square again.

 

I think the actual problem they have is like 'target fixation', where they loose their depth of field.

 

I try to cure this by breaking their vision, by making them check the windsock, or check their height against the local tree tops.

 

Get them to look around momentarily, and they get their 'three dimensional' view back, and can judge their height/distance better.

 

 

[jetboy]

I learnt in the 70s at a controlled airport and for some reason was only taught oval circuits despite having about 6 instructors at that club. CFI was ex-RNZAF and one of the juniors ex-RAAF maybe that had something to do with it. I first learnt there was a different way about 2 years on when competing in our national competitions at Invercargill

 

Happily I came in 2nd for that competition however I pretty much always fly the oval pattern I think its far safer for a number of reasons particularly our microlight circuits are usually tight and at 500' pattern here. I wouldnt feel safe doing sq ccts with the Jabiru. maybe CASA should mandate the oval pattern in this circumstance

 

 

[jetboy]

I learnt in the 70s at a controlled airport and for some reason was only taught oval circuits despite having about 6 instructors at that club. CFI was ex-RNZAF and one of the juniors ex-RAAF maybe that had something to do with it. I first learnt there was a different way about 2 years on when competing in our national competitions at Invercargill

 

Happily I came in 2nd for that competition however I pretty much always fly the oval pattern I think its far safer for a number of reasons particularly our microlight circuits are usually tight and at 500' pattern here. I wouldnt feel safe doing sq ccts with the Jabiru. maybe CASA should mandate the oval pattern in this circumstance

 

 

[facthunter]

Golly people. There must be more demanding things than being able to change from square to oval and vice versa. The oval circuit will be the most compact where a limiting bank angle applies, (if you want it to be). You adjust the 1/2 turn to arrive at the in the slot position from the downwind turn point, so you are judging it for a longer period. With the square circuit you can maintain a track till you decide to do your final turn so you are dividing the job up into smaller "bits". If you have a strong tailwind component on BASE or equivalent it still has the be well judged and allowed for. This is the area that must get into problems with if they are going to. Once you get a job in the industry you will find you rarely do a ""normal" circuit, but it's a good idea to relate where you are to where you would be in the normal circuit, as a reference for checks speeds and configuration of the aircraft. We tend to be creatures of habit, but some flexibility is required. Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Golly people. There must be more demanding things than being able to change from square to oval and vice versa. The oval circuit will be the most compact where a limiting bank angle applies, (if you want it to be). You adjust the 1/2 turn to arrive at the in the slot position from the downwind turn point, so you are judging it for a longer period. With the square circuit you can maintain a track till you decide to do your final turn so you are dividing the job up into smaller "bits". If you have a strong tailwind component on BASE or equivalent it still has the be well judged and allowed for. This is the area that must get into problems with if they are going to. Once you get a job in the industry you will find you rarely do a ""normal" circuit, but it's a good idea to relate where you are to where you would be in the normal circuit, as a reference for checks speeds and configuration of the aircraft. We tend to be creatures of habit, but some flexibility is required. Nev

 

 

[dazza 38]

I think it comes down to airmanship and how well you were taught. A rectangular pattern is how you fly in the circuit not some free form mishmash. Leave that to the gyros.

So you're saying that military pilots have bad airmanship because they fly oval circuits ?

 

 

[dazza 38]

I think it comes down to airmanship and how well you were taught. A rectangular pattern is how you fly in the circuit not some free form mishmash. Leave that to the gyros.

So you're saying that military pilots have bad airmanship because they fly oval circuits ?

 

 

[dazza 38]

When initially learning to fly gliders, I found I could judge a circular approach better than square, although my instructors kept trying to get me to go square.Thirty years later, and I'm trying to teach my students how to do square circuits, but sometimes they just can't seem to judge their heights or glide angles, so I then have them try circular approaches.

They get a better idea, but by the time they go solo, they've usually got the idea of going square again.

 

I think the actual problem they have is like 'target fixation', where they loose their depth of field.

 

I try to cure this by breaking their vision, by making them check the windsock, or check their height against the local tree tops.

 

Get them to look around momentarily, and they get their 'three dimensional' view back, and can judge their height/distance better.

Jeez i'm surprised Ada hasn't jumped on you for typing loose instead of lose in your post.

 

 

[dazza 38]

When initially learning to fly gliders, I found I could judge a circular approach better than square, although my instructors kept trying to get me to go square.Thirty years later, and I'm trying to teach my students how to do square circuits, but sometimes they just can't seem to judge their heights or glide angles, so I then have them try circular approaches.

They get a better idea, but by the time they go solo, they've usually got the idea of going square again.

 

I think the actual problem they have is like 'target fixation', where they loose their depth of field.

 

I try to cure this by breaking their vision, by making them check the windsock, or check their height against the local tree tops.

 

Get them to look around momentarily, and they get their 'three dimensional' view back, and can judge their height/distance better.

Jeez i'm surprised Ada hasn't jumped on you for typing loose instead of lose in your post.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

So fly rectangles normally.....but when the noise stops as practise or for real I fly so that the runway is not far away and never gets further unless I'm sure I want that, which is an oval......I guess rectangles have 4 know sides and corners for reporting purposes...an oval less so... But only a minor point IMHO.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

So fly rectangles normally.....but when the noise stops as practise or for real I fly so that the runway is not far away and never gets further unless I'm sure I want that, which is an oval......I guess rectangles have 4 know sides and corners for reporting purposes...an oval less so... But only a minor point IMHO.

 

 

[pylon500]

I guess if you look at it from a geometrical aspect, when doing a glide approach, you have a (reasonably) constant descent rate so from the downwind leg to touchdown needs to be a constant angle.

 

This would dictate flying a constant curve to stay on angle, which by comparison means a square circuit requires flying outside the glide angle at the corners, while flying inside the glide angle on the legs.

 

The proponents of circular circuits will tell you this, and point out that the aiming point is constantly changing it's angle when viewed around the square circuit.

 

To that end, many square circuit flyers (maybe not even realising that they do it) will be using ground reference points to pick up there circuit height/position.

 

Square circuit flyers are more likely to use power to correct falling short, while circling flyers are more likely to cram their circuit and sideslip or go 'round.

 

If you really want students to open their eyes and see where they are, throw in a few right hand circuits!

 

Obviously if you fly at a field that mandates left and right circuits due to restrictions, these students tend to pick up better (note I didn't say quicker) than than students that spend all their time turning left.

 

 

[pylon500]

I guess if you look at it from a geometrical aspect, when doing a glide approach, you have a (reasonably) constant descent rate so from the downwind leg to touchdown needs to be a constant angle.

 

This would dictate flying a constant curve to stay on angle, which by comparison means a square circuit requires flying outside the glide angle at the corners, while flying inside the glide angle on the legs.

 

The proponents of circular circuits will tell you this, and point out that the aiming point is constantly changing it's angle when viewed around the square circuit.

 

To that end, many square circuit flyers (maybe not even realising that they do it) will be using ground reference points to pick up there circuit height/position.

 

Square circuit flyers are more likely to use power to correct falling short, while circling flyers are more likely to cram their circuit and sideslip or go 'round.

 

If you really want students to open their eyes and see where they are, throw in a few right hand circuits!

 

Obviously if you fly at a field that mandates left and right circuits due to restrictions, these students tend to pick up better (note I didn't say quicker) than than students that spend all their time turning left.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Jeez i'm surprised Ada hasn't jumped on you for typing loose instead of lose in your post.

Pots and Kettles?

 

 

[rankamateur]

Jeez i'm surprised Ada hasn't jumped on you for typing loose instead of lose in your post.

Pots and Kettles?

 

 

[Soleair]

I expect to adopt an oval pattern in my MiniMax (when it is eventually finished) for the same reason Spitfire & carrier pilots used it: visibility over the low wing. Since the Max's wing is at cockpit level, it does blanket nearly all sight of the airfield when flying with wings level. A gentle bank from downwind to final means the runway can be kept in sight at all times. It's either that or a slipped final.

 

Bruce

 

 

[Soleair]

I expect to adopt an oval pattern in my MiniMax (when it is eventually finished) for the same reason Spitfire & carrier pilots used it: visibility over the low wing. Since the Max's wing is at cockpit level, it does blanket nearly all sight of the airfield when flying with wings level. A gentle bank from downwind to final means the runway can be kept in sight at all times. It's either that or a slipped final.

 

Bruce

 

 

[Russ]

oval........(square in me high wing, blanks vision, find i need to up the wing to take a peek)