Balliol wrote:
Doing circuits at 200/300’ is just showboating IMHO with no training value. If any of my FIs did it they would be out of the door on landing.
The French have a blanket 500ft rule, unlike the UK, so presumably you are covered under the landing/taking off exemption. I indeed did low level circuits in the UK at 500ft AGL. However in France I distinctly remember being told off when I passed above 400ft having been told to do a “circuit en bas niveau”… Always done them here with a 300ft AGL. It was explained that you ensure there is no possibility on inadvertendly entering cloud and that you fly as close to the aerodrome as possible and the exercise is to make you aware of how things look different and happen much more quickly at such a low level.
Quite frankly, if I did screw up and launch towards lower than estimated cloud, the rules would be the last of my worries. Similarly on the two occasions I decided I would be better off on the ground than in the air, I wasnt too worried about doing a standard overhead join and the NOTAM warning given by FIS about Aerobatics overhead the aerodrome…
Regards, SD..
Arrêté du 3 mars 2006 relatif aux règles de l’air et aux services de la circulation aérienne points 3.1.2 and 4.6 say other than for takeoff or landing 150m (500ft). Exceptions for gliders using ridges, hang gliders and balloons if no risk to people or property. Decreases to 50m (150ft) if instructing forced landing in the countryside.
There are also listed the various heights over different size agglomerations, which must be for noise abatement and being able to glide away if the engine fails. Interestingly, a lot of routes in TMAs are well below these minima.
When learning to fly I was told low height circuits are practised at 500ft, and 300ft if with an instructor. This is sometimes listed on the VAC, e.g. Brest: Low height circuit: 300 ft AAL MNM as part of training flight with instructor, with ATC clearance and only on RWY 07L/25R. My instructor did say when doing ~300ft circuits to vary left hand and right hand to not annoy the neighbours.
The low height circuit is if you take off and find the cloudbase is lower than expected, or have mechanical problems which mean poor rate of climb. The plane is left in takeoff configuration and the circuit is oval and preferably left hand to keep visual with the runway. Having had to do one once, I’m very glad it was part of the BB/PPL 
Another possibility is flying VFR along a valley below airfield level, where the cloudbase is not much higher than the airfield.
If landing on unprepared surfaces e.g. field, glacier, emergency, it’s good practice to do a close downwind or pass as low as 50 or 100ft to inspect the surface for holes, boulders etc. This also works for moving birds or sheep at e.g. Avranches. I would call this part of landing.
Balliol wrote:
Ok, say there is a runway with some hangars and an apron / club buildings etc to the side of it. You are all saying it would be ok to fly a downwind leg over all that at less than 500ft?
What do you do when the Circling minimas are lower than 500ft (and cloud base is higher than minima but lower than cloud base)
Edit: For CAT A operations, the MDH can be as low as 400 ft (Part NCO: AMC1 NCO.OP.111)
@Moe have you any examples of circling minima below 500’ AGL please?
Benbecula VOR DME 06 CAT A
Hello
As IBRA says the low level circuit (“circuit basse hauteur “ en francais) serves to shorten to the maximum climbing for quick return to the runway because VFR conditions looks not possible or encountering some problem immediately after take off (e.g. passenger, engine). It could be also when you see bad weather at the destination airport (but what about diverting in this case ?)
In France, when you are doing low level circuit (and close enough to see the runway) for training, a FI must be on board (but it seem to be a doubt if it is only during PPL formation) ; generally we stop execute the circuit at 300’ AGL, wich is the altitude mandatory during the PPL exam…but if it is possible to do lower (e.g. with a PIPER CUB), however, fo instance, at LFPU lower than 200’ AGL with the BONANZA became a quick flight !).
Balliol here is the table I was talking about, directly from EASA:
That’s interesting and good learning for me thank you. I’m guessing the logic is that it could go that low because it is surveyed area – in practice most OCHs would drive it to 500’ or above. I wonder what criteria is used to derive the VM(C) figure that is published on the AIP material.
Edit looks like a 300ft obstacle clearance for Cat A (from 90m ICAO?)
Arrêté du 3 mars 2006 relatif aux règles de l’air et aux services de la circulation aérienne …..
There are also listed the various heights over different size agglomerations, which must be for noise abatement and being able to glide away if the engine fails. Interestingly, a lot of routes in TMAs are well below these minima.
This law is no longer in force and has been replaced by SERA. (cf. Arrêté du 11 décembre 2014 Relatif à la mise en œuvre du règlement d’exécution (UE) N°923/2012), Article 4: “Sont abrogés : 1° L’arrêté du 3 mars 2006 relatif aux règles de l’air et aux services de la circulation aérienne ; ….”
I think ultimately it all boils down to “necessary for landing”, and I bet that would be only decided by lawyers and judges, in case of insurance and / or particularly reckless behaviour.
I highly doubt that the circling approach above procedure minimas but below VFR minimum height minimas (500ft, open assembly, etc) could be a problem to any pilot.
I could even see the argument to be made that as soon as you descent from your cruise, you are approaching to land. That might be stretching things a bit, but what about starting your descent from the overhead? What about the base leg? What about a spiral descent?
I’m sure we can find a couple of airfields (not necessarily in the UK) where normal practice would make you breach a 500 ft rule in certain phases of the circuit (funnily enough, I’ve never hear of a minimum lateral distance).
Fields in are with lots of terrain will likely fall into that category, especially if they are in the bottom of the valley (so you have to do the circuit at low—ish altitudes over the higher surrounding terrain) . I think for instance at la Mole LFTZ you pass fairly close to some mountains, and I’d imagine 500 ft is not guaranteed (vertically).
