This work concerns the combined oscillatory flow and current in a circular, smooth pipe. The study comprises wall shear stress measurements, and laser-Doppler-anemometer velocity and turbulence measurements. Three kinds of pipes were used, with diameters D=19 cm, 9 cm, and 1.1 cm, enabling the influence of the parameter R/δ to be studied in the investigation (R/δ ranging from about 3 to 53), where R is the radius of the pipe, and δ is the Stokes layer thickness. The ranges of the two other parameters of the combined flow processes, namely the current Reynolds number, Rec, and the oscillatory-flow boundary-layer (i.e. the wave–boundary layer) Reynolds number, Rew, are: Rec=0−1.6×105, and Rew=0−7×106. The transition to turbulence in the combined flow case occurs at a current Reynolds number larger than the conventional value, ca. 2×103, depending on Rew, and R/δ. A turbulent current can be laminarized by superimposing an oscillatory flow. The overall average value of the wall shear stress (the mean wall shear stress) may retain its steady-current value, it may decrease, or it may increase, depending on the flow regime. The increase (which can be as much as a factor of 4) occurs when the combined flow is in the wave-dominated regime, while the oscillatory-flow component of the flow is in the turbulent regime. The component of the wall shear stress oscillating around the mean wall shear stress can also increase with respect to its oscillatory-flow-alone value. For this to occur, the originally laminar oscillatory boundary layer needs to become a fully developed turbulent boundary layer, when a turbulent current is superimposed. This increase can be as much as O(3–4). The velocity profiles across the cross-section of the pipe change near the wall when an oscillatory flow is superimposed on a current, in agreement with the results of the wall shear stress measurements. The period-averaged turbulence profiles across the cross-section of the pipe behave differently for different flow regimes. When the two components of the flow are equally significant, the turbulence profile appears to be different from those corresponding to the fundamental cases; the level of turbulence increases (only slightly) with respect to those experienced in the fundamental cases.