Video

A great review with all the important info there. Many thanks

Would have very much liked to watch the whole approach!

You are exactly right. If you look at any Navy NATOPS manual it shows the oval flight pattern.

In My training days, I liked the idea of a more continuous down wind-base - final turn. But levelling off briefly to check the pattern for traffic for untowered airports makes a hell of a lot of sense. High wing vs long wing situations potentially arise if you don't level off for a few seconds to look around the pattern Called it the (american) football pattern. Looks a bit oblong and unsmooth on radar

I love breakdowns like this. Simplicity, science, knowledge. Thank you!

After getting my private pilot and then flying by instruments, I have come to prefer the "standard rate turn" especially if I have a passenger with me, easier on them and much safer, so this fits perfectly with that approach.

I've been doing the curved right base to final in my Robin for years, and now adopt this on all base to final approaches. It is much safer and that to my mind is all that matters.

What? Daring to suggest a better method, rather than just continuing all the 'nagging' about doing the Traditional Circuit "better?" That's too radical, I'm afraid. Sadly, it's unlikely that 'the powers that be' who set the standards will ever manage to make changes. YES, I'm being facetious. I like your thinking. Thanks for posting. 👍

This thread is a good discussion and a nice video explanation. I do both approaches. For very short (and I mean very) short finals I do the rounded approach, for all others I do the squared approach because I have a low wing and want to be able to keep track of traffic. I really do not think the squared approach is more dangerous than the rounded approach, provided that you know and respect the aero dynamics. Dangerous situations arise when pilots are not aware of these, no matter rounded or squared approach. A squared approach looks squared on paper, but you do no turn on a dime with a 30 degree turn. Thus I use at most 30 degree coordinated bank angle. This increases stall speed by a approx 7% - I always keep the airspeed minimum 30% higher than the stall speed at the current flap setting. I use the height loss in turns as a normal descent. If I misjudge the height loss I add power, I do NEVER pull back on the stick (remember pitch change = speed change, throttle change = height change). If I overshoot and cannot make a coordinated turn by a large margin it is a go around. The overshoot situation is the setup for a skid turn to align up with the runway, with brings you in close danger for an unrecoverable spin. Most importantly and even though I have been flying for 23 years I still twice a year train landings. Typically 12-15 landings in 2 hours. High approaches, low approaches, long/short, with flaps, without flaps, rounded approaches, squared approaches, forward slips. Totally MANDATORY is correct airspeed at all times, correct descent, no bank angle > 30 degrees, always coordinated, never pull back on stick, never overshoot (go around), spot landings -0 meters/+25 meters. The result is that a non spot landing are rare. I do this because I am a firm believer of always doing the same landing is the most dangerous you can do. Different runways, sloped or not, obstacles, traffic you are not used to, weather conditions etc. dictates that you can not always perform the same kind of landing. And when you are trying to do a "landing pattern" you are not familiar with you introduces a stress factor which for some pilots result in unintended bad decision making during landing.

Great video. I’ve been doing this since 1979 when I was taught this by an old tailwheel CFI on a grass strip.

Hello Steven, with the GoPro Labs Firmware you have more control over ISO and shutter settings (and even more). Do you think that those settings could make a ND filter obsolete?

My instructor tells me to wait till 45 deg abeam of the runway then make the turn, is this the same principle in the turn at 1:54 ?

I've been flying my approaches this way since the early 1990's, when I had the opportunity to go up with an old Vietnam era pilot who demonstrated and explained it to me. I demonstrated and explained it as well in a video on my channel a few months back.

I disagree with everyone mentioning traffic being an issue. I have a picture of traffic in my head ten miles out and increase my awareness of what traffic is in the area the closer I get and on each leg. Once you turn base, the runway is yours. If untowered and someone is doing a straight in, that should be part of your scan before turning base. If someone doesn't have comms, they shouldn't be flying. I suppose that happens and it's legal, but those people are retarded. Best you can do is work around them. Obviously towered they aren't putting two planes on the same leg. At this point, not having ADS-B out is just retarded. Who cares what the regs say, they're written in blood. Just get it.

idiotic trianing habits and standard procedures...the net is full with accident repirts about deaths on approach...🤷‍♀️and the inly answer from authorities os higher costs and reducing the number of GA flights by making it less and less affordable instead of reasonable ideas.. like gun laws, no thinking but restrcitions...as one told me lately: soon everything is illegal...in the name of safety.

Steven: I am a rather new pilot with 120 hours. I completely agree with your statement. It takes a little distraction to not turn base to final when you have to then overshooting. Even though it happens to me many times, still sometimes difficult to figure out a reference when to turn, I turn and always make sure that I am coordinated (ball centered) but if I overshoot, I do not get crazy, I keep making the turn coordinated and then correct to the other side when needed. I guess that a gentle turn like 15d like you will use later in IFR training is better. Even carrier fighters use it. No wonder. Thank you for sharing that. And like last comment, great video, short, to the point. Good job man.😃

Clarity aloft vs Bose A30 vs Bose proflight Vs SEHT 50-60 would be a great video :D !

Totally agree.....The AOPA Safety Foundation funds a research project at the University of North Dakota.......the study looked at "racetrack" type of pattern......and the conclusion ws it was safer.....so why is no one pushing for change?

Well done ... I think the 1 reason so many students are taught the box circuit is that it gives you time to get cleaned up ..airspeed ..flaps ... rate of decent ..attitude . ... visualisation of the landing point. As you get more experienced you can get better at doing this closer in. We are talking 500 hours of flight time here for a commercial pilot. If you don't fly often enough you won't get the "Hands and wrists" to fly this. No 2 is a busy airport circuit for separation.( as mentioned below). However I completely agree with you. I have a Cessna 180 that can use 300meters to take off ...but I always go full-length and 20 deg flap so if I have an engine failure close in I can do the impossible turn back and a curved finals means you can make the angle tighter without landing short if you have an engine failure.

Also, the increase in stall speed with bank angle applies when MAINTAINING ALTITUDE, which given a fixed airspeed, necessitates an increased angle of attack (more back stick/yoke). If you're able to accept altitude loss in the turn and not increase angle of attack, you can mitigate stall speed increase with bank angle.

I have been using phonak for almost 10 years with several different aircraft. Piston, turbo props, light, mid size business jets, regional jet and Airbus. It has been working very well with all of them. I give 4.9 star but the only downside is durability. Wires are easy to get tore. I had to get new parts several times but they discontinued the product and no longer able to update parts. 😢 I will keep using it as long as I can and will try nanocomm next.

Really interesting video. Just to add my 2 pence to the age old question/debate. I learned to fly in the 80s when in the RAF and my old WW2 instructor used to call the square circuit, the bomber circuit and the curved approach the fighter approach, being a former Hurricane pilot and 707 pilot he thankfully taught me both. I also had many a flight in modern fast jet fighters and saw the same curved approach. The history I was told goes back to WW1 and WW2 bombers needing more space and a more “procedural” circuit where fighters needed the curved approach to see over the long nose, it took less time making them less vulnerable to attack. Jump forward to modern airliners and a 1000 foot square circuit makes sense as it allows time and can be more procedural and for the airline trainee route has become “standard”. I teach and examine the square “standard” circuit but am a big advocate of a 800 foot circuit and curved approach if taught properly. Many aren’t taught properly; and I’ve seen pilots loosing a dangerous amount of speed on the downwind to base turn by closing the throttle too much, and over banking at the same time while delaying the descent, along with the loss of lookout under the up wing on base to final turn in low wing aircraft. There’s a reason it’s called the dead side. It is more intuitive than procedural. The square circuit is an easier method to teach and learn as power is only removed for the descent on base after the turn, a descent is then started and trimmed stable with or without flaps before the turn to final (less to do and their is time to do it). My opinion is for students, novice, less intuitive pilots and those destined for a modern passanger bomber the square approach provides a better (safer) option. Sorry for the long answer but it’s an age old question.

Where can we get the Robin Lanyard ?

Love your videos, please keep them coming!

what a nice video. organized, easy to watch. Thanks!

Exactly!

Steven this is a fantastic overview of the farm strip and I very much hope you continue with similar videos of places you visit. Local places to visit / eat etc are always welcome. Thanks and keep up the good work.

Many thanks for this video. Would you be able to find the link to the LC-C35 adapter please?

A concise and well-explained video. I can't disagree with anything you have said here. I often find myself wincing when flying with another pilot who appears to favour this sharp base-to-final turn followed by a longer final. I prefer the method you outline here- mainly out of laziness and preferring to cut the corner - straightening up to the final approach course only within the last NM or so. The safety argument for doing so is compelling as well. I should add that I'm based at a radar-controlled class D airfield, so checking for traffic on final is less of a concern when at home. I see the argument for checking the final is clear before turning on,....

Great review…we just need to get you a DC ONE-X to try….much more “apples to apples” with the Bose…

Very nicely explained. Video not too long so as to keep viewers interested. Thanks 😊

May I ask which camera you took the telemetry from and if you have a link to the program you used please? Thank you 😊

Forbidden because the Nuclear power plant… with the Airbus A320/A220 it’s more difficult, on Flight Simulator I’ve tried many times, but I can’t avoid the restricted flight zone… I can land it, but it needs to be precised

Oh and just to note, the noise abatement over a farm on the approach to 22.

Steven, An excellently produced video. I've been in there a couple of times this year myself, and agree with what you said. A hidden gem. I'd be intersted to know how you get the flight instruments to display so nicely in your video.

I have maaaaany flight hours in model airplanes, I have had sporty flights in LSA and I have also flown in military Sea Harrier simulator. In all of the above, proficient and I have always flown and landed the way it is explained in this video. It is intuitive, smooth and safer. Then, I started getting my LSA flight license and I also started doing these damn squared circuits. There are several reasons: - In all the theory and internet, you find squared circuits. - The instructor (even though he flies sporty too) kind of did the same to highlight the legs when teaching the lessons. - Although not always, I developed a tendency to do those to show I was “in control” and I was never corrected by him. However, the moment I am told “do what you want with the plane”, I am back flying the way I have always been, whether it is practicing dead-stick landings, mid-field emergency landings, sporty flying around or just on my own. It is overwhelming to see how easy you get influenced by bad habits that are not even yours originally. Thanks for the video and rising our awareness!

Absolutely, it’s the right thing to do. Trying to make these military perfect square turns is ridiculous. Better a continuous gentle turn from downwind to final, just like you say.

I started out flying GA then was fortunate enough to fly fighters for the USAF. Since then I have always done the continuous turn to final. The only thing I do different is at 90 degrees through the turn I quick roll out to check for traffic on the staight in approach. Cessna is not as critical but when flying Piper, Mooney, or light twin (low wing a/c) this is a critical safety check.

great video! thank you for this!

The base to final turn is supposed to be a descending turn, so the increases in stall speed are only really relevant in level flight, or climbs. Increased g-loading is required to increase the stall speed: if you don't apply back-pressure, you won't stall (in general).The risk comes when a pilot allows themselves to be too low on base, then overshoots and tries to overbank without losing height. At that point, it's best to go around and try again. I like the constant turn method, but I suppose the benefit of the rectangular pattern is a slightly longer final approach leg for configuring and assessing stability. There's more than one way to skin a cat :)

This is a superbly comprehensive description of the dangers. 😊

So simple - it seems! Great explanation. ❤ thank you!

Interesting. I passed my check ride in 2000 but have only recently returned to flying and completed my flight review. The first time I (recently) flew the pattern, I did square off on crosswind. However, my downwind to base to final was instinctively rounded. Which is what I continue to fly.

Well thats how i do it all the time.

this explains why my rc landings are so rough. Thank you!

THANK YOU!!! I've been jabbed by my wife ( a better technical pilot) for doing this for years. I feel vindicated!

I strongly prefer the squared approach because I can not see the runway while making one large turn. In a Cessna 150, the wing blocks my view.

Really helpful. Thank you, esp. for the excellent visuals.

On sites like FlightAware, my patterns look more like paper clips than rectangles...

I still have a distinct base, but not much of one. I often start my base to final turn 5 seconds after finishing my downwind to base turn. It is mostly a chance to calibrate the exact positioning of the turn so I line up with final properly.