GA1377 - Tall trees on approach at Popham
Initial Report
There are some extremely tall trees in the vicinity of Popham that force aircraft to make unusual approaches. Pilots have to pass through the gaps in these trees to make an approach to runway 03, which is extremely dangerous and looks like an accident waiting to happen.
comments
Airfield comment
It will not surprise you perhaps to learn that the trees on the approach to Runway 03 have been sighted as an obstruction many times. In fact, the trees are the property of Blackwood Forest and the estate was cultivated some years ago leaving the four or five trees standing. We don’t hold any correspondence relating to how these were managed but there is a general understanding here that they are in fact a safety feature left in place for the benefit of third parties travelling along the A303 both East and West. Without these trees, pilots approaching at less than a 5º approach angle would likely pass over the A303 ‘extremely low’, even low enough to impact high-sided vehicles or at the very least cause major distractions to motorists travelling at 70mph.
A further factor affecting the approach to runway 03 is the 3º down slope, which causes pilots to perceive a short runway on finals encouraging a low approach and early touchdown, despite there being 900 metres available. The displaced threshold is 200metres from the Airfield boundary from the A303 and 350 metres from the trees, providing pilots with options for a controlled approach. Under no circumstances would we recommend that pilots pass through the gaps in the trees on the approach to runway 03; it would never be safe or necessary to do this.
Like many unlicenced airfields in the UK, approaches to Popham runways 03, 08 and 26 have unusual approaches, (ie not straight in on finals). Popham had 18,700 movements last year, our flying schools (x3) fly all runways and accommodate these non-standard approaches without issue. It is very common that visitors to Popham for the first time fail to read the information published in flight guides, make incorrect approaches and apologise afterwards. Pilot experience also plays an important part in perceptions of risk. Our Website ‘Pilot Information’ (https://www.popham-airfield.co.uk/airfield-information-2024) can be downloaded about all runways and more recently you can fly the circuit on videos created especially for first time visitors here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjiDBVbHjF6h0FNHis5ZXDtQerNtZcvPf
We would argue that good preparation for coming to Popham would allay any concerns about the approach to runway 03 in a suitable aircraft with a well-informed experienced pilot. The commander of an aircraft is responsible for the safety of that aircraft. Flying conditions can render approach and landing challenging for some and if that is the case a diversion is always the best decision. We hope this resume is helpful? The trees are likely to remain for reasons that we hope are clear.
This image is a screenshot from the Popham RW03 video showing tree.
CHIRP Comment
This is a really interesting example of differing perspectives and how it is only by someone asking questions that the bigger picture emerges. Hence why reporting and adopting a questioning culture is so important. It’s very possible that this reporter wasn’t the only pilot operating into Popham who had concerns about the trees on this approach. Equally, the airfield probably felt that they had gone to very reasonable lengths to provide all necessary safety details for pilots and assumed that the details of and rationale for their unusual approaches were well known and understood. The raising of this report to CHIRP has left everyone better informed and allowed us the opportunity to promote the key messages and safety resources for Popham. A great example of just culture in action.
Considering more broadly, how aware are you of these sort of details for the airfields you fly into? Also, at your own airfield, do you keep track of trees and other obstacles on approach and departure? The trouble with trees and other vegetation is that they grow! Therefore, whilst trees that presented minimal hazard a few years ago may gradually become more problematic. Relatively small, incremental change is unlikely to be obvious to those who operate and fly regularly from an airfield. This can lead to complacency, with an assumption that it’s always been ok before so must still be now. Where there is capacity, adopt a questioning culture, don’t just assume that something is safe, but instead question and test the status quo. Just as this reporter has done.
For any approach path with obstacles to negotiate, it’s important to be careful about approach angle; equally, technique on final approach is critical. Pilots should always be prepared to go-around if they are not happy with the approach. It’s invariably better to reassess and have another go, rather than ‘cut it fine’. Pilots could also consider a steeper than normal approach at airfields where there are obstacles on the extended centreline. Recognising that non-licensed airfields do not have to comply with any specific requirements in respect to obstacles on the approach, pilots should also check all available information before visiting an airfield (such as Pooley’s, airfield websites or equivalent) so that they are aware of any likely warnings or issues and could modify their approach technique and approach angle if required. A simple 1:60 or similar calculation if unsure might be worthwhile when considering obstacles at airfields.
Dirty Dozen Human Factors
The following ‘Dirty Dozen’ Human Factors elements were a key part of the CHIRP discussions about this report and are intended to provide food for thought when considering aspects that might be pertinent in similar circumstances.
Knowledge – acquiring a full set of information before operating from an airfield.
Communication – assuming that because information is available, it’s been read/watched and understood.
Complacency – assumption that because it’s been safe before it must still be now.
Deviation – adapting procedures against inaccurate assumptions.