A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A tower-induced go-round



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #19  
Old March 23rd 07, 02:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default A tower-induced go-round


wrote in message
ups.com...

Hell, Thats an easy answer. Even a caveman or a pilot can answer that.
G


Well, as you didn't answer it, I'll have to assume you are neither.



Read this real slow thickhead...


No need. I can read it quickly, no matter how slowly you wrote it.



A competent tower controller that just stuck a slower and higher
landing trafffic in front of another aircraft that he/she ALREADY
cleared to land should have stated to the preceding plane " exit the
runway without delay, landing traffic on a 1/2 mile final" while the
preceding plane was still on the rollout.


There was no need for that.



He/she should not have
waited for the guy/girl to make a complete stop on the runway.


The pilot should not have made a complete stop on the runway regardless.



If you
just go back and reread this whole thread it should become crystal
clear to a sane and competent controller that Jay was given a go
around because of the tower controller was asleep at the switch.


How could the controller give Jay a go around while he was asleep at the
switch?

To those of us that have read this whole thread and also have some knowledge
of ATC procedures it is crystal clear that Jay had plenty of room behind the
preceding 172, and that an alert controller issued a go around to Jay when
he observed the 172 had stopped on the runway. Good for him.



There
are those of us who make a living in the private sector and have to
prove ourselves every day to stay employed.


Just like the controllers at JEF.



Then there is the
government workers who BS their way though life and the system to make
it to retirement, milking the system the whole time.... Jay and I and
alot of others work for the private sector and are surviving in the
black. Your employer is the US government who is 9+ trillion in the
red. It is either your move or checkmate on our part...


You can only hope to perform your job as well as I perform mine.



In closing I still admit that Steven. P. Mc Nicoll knows his regs
probably better then most other aviation people ,, But he forgot his
common sense at the office..


Those with common sense don't hold controllers responsible for a pilot's
mistake.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Round Engines john smith Piloting 20 February 15th 07 03:31 AM
induced airflow buttman Piloting 3 February 19th 06 04:36 AM
Round Engines Voxpopuli Naval Aviation 16 May 31st 05 06:48 PM
Source of Induced Drag Ken Kochanski Soaring 2 January 10th 04 12:18 AM
Predicting ground effects on induced power Marc Shorten Soaring 0 October 28th 03 11:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.