![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 16:35:53 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote: "Luke Skywalker" wrote Just "right" off the bat that strikes me as a suggestion with some merit... again just my first thought after reading it...a landing at a sat field would be required with some record taken of who did what (including N numbers) and if one lands at OSH without that briefing and your N number isnt on the paper (or try to land and this part might be difficult to enforce but once on the deck it should be easier) then there are some serious FAA FSDO problems. An out landing is not necessary for those who have the NOTAM, and have read (and understand) it. The idea of requiring that the NOTAM be on board is what needs to be enacted, and enforced. It's not the possession of the NOTAM, nor reading it that counts. It's the flying in the last few miles that matters. So how about a panel of judges evaluating everyone's approach and landing perfomance and assessing appropriate fines? Just kidding... Just kidding... ![]() I am amazed at some of the suggestions here (this and other threads). Do we really expect ATC to turn away someone for not knowing the procedure? Pilot: Oshkosh tower, experimental 5678X ... uhhh ... approaching the airport ... uhhh ... from the west. Landing. ATC: Experimental 5678X, what is the third word in the second paragraph on page 5 of the NOTAM? Pilot: Huh? ATC: Experimental 5678X, fly heading 270 for 30 minutes, then resume own navigation. Pilot: But ... but I want to land at OSH. ATC: Unable. This is a *show* we're talking about. *EAA* show. They want everybody there. Including (or especially?) a guy who built his own plane in the barn and avoids airspace where talking to ATC is required. He probably doesn't even know that the NOTAM exists and for him compliance with FAR 91.103 means squinting at the sky. Having *most* pilots follow the NOTAM keeps things failry orderly and helps ATC accomodate (within limits) the others. Seems to be working quite well. 12,000 aircraft landed and took off in just few days without a major accident. - Tom |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
US military moves to cut helicopter accident rates | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | October 5th 05 03:19 AM |
Bonehead move today | Viperdoc | Piloting | 31 | August 16th 05 07:27 AM |
Policy on Syria Moves Toward Regime Change (for Israel) | Truthseeker | Naval Aviation | 0 | June 10th 05 10:07 PM |
ATC Privatization moves forward! | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 8 | November 26th 03 01:21 AM |
U.S. Air Force Moves Ahead With Studies On Air-Breathing Engines | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 29th 03 03:31 AM |