square or oval?

[Russ]

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

 

 

[facthunter]

I believe square is the standard for the type of aircraft we operate. The long nosed situation is as you are about to flare so you have a problem whichever way you do it. You can't see much out of the rear seat of a DH 82 but it didn't cause much problem. A bit worse at night with a single flare path but that doesn't happen any more Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

I believe square is the standard for the type of aircraft we operate. The long nosed situation is as you are about to flare so you have a problem whichever way you do it. You can't see much out of the rear seat of a DH 82 but it didn't cause much problem. A bit worse at night with a single flare path but that doesn't happen any more Nev

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

In

 

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

In respect to ppl and rec, yes. Although I have had quite a number of pilots turn inside me on final and even short final i couldn't tell you how many were military if any.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

In

 

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

In respect to ppl and rec, yes. Although I have had quite a number of pilots turn inside me on final and even short final i couldn't tell you how many were military if any.

 

 

[Russ]

Nothing does "circuits" like a gyro. And.......doesn't that pee some folks off. ( finals.......what finals )..just slide her in over the windsock. ( making sure, all's clear )

 

 

[Russ]

Nothing does "circuits" like a gyro. And.......doesn't that pee some folks off. ( finals.......what finals )..just slide her in over the windsock. ( making sure, all's clear )

 

 

[Guernsey]

An oval circuit would be a better option if you had to do an emergency landing on a football oval....those corner posts on a soccer oval could

 

be a problem. .

 

Alan.

 

 

[Guernsey]

An oval circuit would be a better option if you had to do an emergency landing on a football oval....those corner posts on a soccer oval could

 

be a problem. .

 

Alan.

 

 

[Yenn]

We fly rectangular circuits, because that is what is prescribed. By all means fly an oval if you can't see the threshold from a straight approach. but there wouldn't be many planes that hide the threshold on long finals. I find it easier to judge the correct approach angle from a straight in approach, but we were tought to fly a base leg so that is what most of us do. There is the advantage to rectangular patterns that you know roughly where to look for other traffic, although some of the GA I have seen seem to be so far out that I wonder if they are at the same airstrip.

 

 

[Yenn]

We fly rectangular circuits, because that is what is prescribed. By all means fly an oval if you can't see the threshold from a straight approach. but there wouldn't be many planes that hide the threshold on long finals. I find it easier to judge the correct approach angle from a straight in approach, but we were tought to fly a base leg so that is what most of us do. There is the advantage to rectangular patterns that you know roughly where to look for other traffic, although some of the GA I have seen seem to be so far out that I wonder if they are at the same airstrip.

 

 

[frank marriott]

If a person is unable to fly neatly the 4 legs of a prescribed circuit pattern then it is too early in their training to be granted a certificate or licence.

 

 

[frank marriott]

If a person is unable to fly neatly the 4 legs of a prescribed circuit pattern then it is too early in their training to be granted a certificate or licence.

 

 

[dazza 38]

We fly rectangular circuits, because that is what is prescribed. By all means fly an oval if you can't see the threshold from a straight approach. but there wouldn't be many planes that hide the threshold on long finals. I find it easier to judge the correct approach angle from a straight in approach, but we were tought to fly a base leg so that is what most of us do. There is the advantage to rectangular patterns that you know roughly where to look for other traffic, although some of the GA I have seen seem to be so far out that I wonder if they are at the same airstrip.

I have seen pilots both GA and RAA do circuits that huge that I think they leave the airfields post code.

 

 

[dazza 38]

We fly rectangular circuits, because that is what is prescribed. By all means fly an oval if you can't see the threshold from a straight approach. but there wouldn't be many planes that hide the threshold on long finals. I find it easier to judge the correct approach angle from a straight in approach, but we were tought to fly a base leg so that is what most of us do. There is the advantage to rectangular patterns that you know roughly where to look for other traffic, although some of the GA I have seen seem to be so far out that I wonder if they are at the same airstrip.

I have seen pilots both GA and RAA do circuits that huge that I think they leave the airfields post code.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I have seen pilots both GA and RAA do circuits that huge that I think they leave the airfields post code.

And that always worries me when I do a downwind join, my downwind would be no further out than about 300 metres but I have seen traffic well over 1 nm wide of the runway. I am a bit guilty now of calling joining downwind early while still coming in close just incase I visually miss a widey. I like to have a good view of the runway on downwind, how can anyone on a wiiiiiiiide downwind see someone sitting on the keys?

 

 

[SDQDI]

I have seen pilots both GA and RAA do circuits that huge that I think they leave the airfields post code.

And that always worries me when I do a downwind join, my downwind would be no further out than about 300 metres but I have seen traffic well over 1 nm wide of the runway. I am a bit guilty now of calling joining downwind early while still coming in close just incase I visually miss a widey. I like to have a good view of the runway on downwind, how can anyone on a wiiiiiiiide downwind see someone sitting on the keys?

 

 

[dazza 38]

And that always worries me when I do a downwind join, my downwind would be no further out than about 300 metres but I have seen traffic well over 1 nm wide of the runway. I am a bit guilty now of calling joining downwind early while still coming in close just incase I visually miss a widey. I like to have a good view of the runway on downwind, how can anyone on a wiiiiiiiide downwind see someone sitting on the keys?

When I follow these pilots doing huge circuits the first thing I say is " where the fark are they going ".

 

 

[dazza 38]

And that always worries me when I do a downwind join, my downwind would be no further out than about 300 metres but I have seen traffic well over 1 nm wide of the runway. I am a bit guilty now of calling joining downwind early while still coming in close just incase I visually miss a widey. I like to have a good view of the runway on downwind, how can anyone on a wiiiiiiiide downwind see someone sitting on the keys?

When I follow these pilots doing huge circuits the first thing I say is " where the fark are they going ".

 

 

[Ada Elle]

I would have sworn that CASA recommended a circuit size, but I can't find it. However:

 

- if your aircraft climbs at 500fpm at 70knots (I'm looking at you, J160) your circuits are going to be 1.1nm wide if you turn "so as to be circuit height when turning downwind)

 

- if you then do a 45 degree base turn, then your final approach angle is about 4.5 degrees

 

- an engine failure on final might not be much fun then (in a J160)

 

I'm kinda confused about what to do here.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

I would have sworn that CASA recommended a circuit size, but I can't find it. However:

 

- if your aircraft climbs at 500fpm at 70knots (I'm looking at you, J160) your circuits are going to be 1.1nm wide if you turn "so as to be circuit height when turning downwind)

 

- if you then do a 45 degree base turn, then your final approach angle is about 4.5 degrees

 

- an engine failure on final might not be much fun then (in a J160)

 

I'm kinda confused about what to do here.

 

 

[SDQDI]

If you turned downwind once at circuit height two up in the j3 we would have been out of the CTAF.

 

 

[SDQDI]

If you turned downwind once at circuit height two up in the j3 we would have been out of the CTAF.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

I would have sworn that CASA recommended a circuit size, but I can't find it. However:- if your aircraft climbs at 500fpm at 70knots (I'm looking at you, J160) your circuits are going to be 1.1nm wide if you turn "so as to be circuit height when turning downwind)

 

- if you then do a 45 degree base turn, then your final approach angle is about 4.5 degrees

 

- an engine failure on final might not be much fun then (in a J160)

 

I'm kinda confused about what to do here.

If you join downwind at standard circuit height of 1000ft, keeping parallel and at Approx 45 deg. to runway then reduce power just prior to the 90deg turn onto base, another 90deg turn onto final Establishing a stabilised approach and all going well you should pull off a landing.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

I would have sworn that CASA recommended a circuit size, but I can't find it. However:- if your aircraft climbs at 500fpm at 70knots (I'm looking at you, J160) your circuits are going to be 1.1nm wide if you turn "so as to be circuit height when turning downwind)

 

- if you then do a 45 degree base turn, then your final approach angle is about 4.5 degrees

 

- an engine failure on final might not be much fun then (in a J160)

 

I'm kinda confused about what to do here.

If you join downwind at standard circuit height of 1000ft, keeping parallel and at Approx 45 deg. to runway then reduce power just prior to the 90deg turn onto base, another 90deg turn onto final Establishing a stabilised approach and all going well you should pull off a landing.