"David Cartwright" wrote in message
...

Frankly, if a controller tells me I'm to land with a tailwind, he can get
stuffed. Aside from the "hey, that fence is rushing at me quite quickly"
factor, you also have the issue of the extra strain it's putting on the
tyres/landing gear because the ground speed is so much higher.


So would you go somewhere else or land without a clearance?



I've been a passenger in a light aircraft where the controller has
insisted on the PIC using a particular (shortish) runway with a tailwind,
though. Fortunately, the PIC was (a) a 14,000-hour veteran and (b) a
stroppy, but polite old git. The discussion was an interesting one to
hear, but the one-sentence summary goes something like: "You don't have a
clue what you're saying, you don't have the performance documents or POH
for this aircraft to hand, and you're not responsible for the safety of
this aircraft; I am, though, so I'm going to do a visual approach to RWXX
instead, and you can lump it. When we're safely on the ground, if you want
to come and argue with me, that's fine". To the controller's credit, we
sat and had a coffee with him later and both sides explained their point
of view in a grown-up manner, and the controller went away with the
understanding that if we'd landed with the tailwind, we stood a good
chance of being in the hedge at the other end.


Did he land without a clearance?