No SID in clearance, fly it anyway?

In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:

Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.

Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar tower"?

The tower where I got the clearance that started this all was HPN (White
Plains, NY). It's got a scope in the tower cab and a rotating antenna
on the field, even though the tracon is in a remote location (somewhere
out in Long Island). From a hardware point of view, it's better
equipped than LaGuardia (which has no rotating antenna on the field),
even though HPN is Class D and LGA is Class B.

Roy Smith wrote:

In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:


Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.


Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar tower"?

A VFR tower is a tower with no radar at all in the cab or a DBRITE that
has not been certified for separation services. An example of a VFR
tower are all contract and non federal towers. Grand Forks, ND is VFR,
Van Nuys is VFR, etc. Almost all class D towers are VFR.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:

Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.

Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar tower"?


Well, you could ask the DOT Inspector General or the Federal Aviation
Administrator for an official definition of a VFR tower. Or then again,
scratch that- they clearly don't know either....maybe Serco or Midwest ATC
could give you an answer. :-)

Chip, ZTL

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:

Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.

Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar tower"?


Well, you could ask the DOT Inspector General or the Federal Aviation
Administrator for an official definition of a VFR tower. Or then again,
scratch that- they clearly don't know either....maybe Serco or Midwest ATC
could give you an answer. :-)

I thought the presentation of unicom as VFR tower during the debate was
classic.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:

Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.

Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar
tower"?


Well, you could ask the DOT Inspector General or the Federal Aviation
Administrator for an official definition of a VFR tower. Or then again,
scratch that- they clearly don't know either....maybe Serco or Midwest
ATC
could give you an answer. :-)

I thought the presentation of unicom as VFR tower during the debate was
classic.


Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation media
reports about the hearings and debates.

Chip, ZTL

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
k.net...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Snowbird) wrote:

Um...VFR tower guys (the subject of this subthread
is non-radar towers) don't give vectors.

Is there an official definition of a "VFR tower" or a "non-radar
tower"?


Well, you could ask the DOT Inspector General or the Federal Aviation
Administrator for an official definition of a VFR tower. Or then
again,
scratch that- they clearly don't know either....maybe Serco or Midwest
ATC
could give you an answer. :-)

I thought the presentation of unicom as VFR tower during the debate was
classic.


Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation media
reports about the hearings and debates.

It all left me with a warm fuzzy feeling, thinking these were going to put a
finger in the works.

"Chip Jones" wrote in message k.net...

Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation media
reports about the hearings and debates.

Or the slightly less popular beta towers.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
k.net...

Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation
media
reports about the hearings and debates.

Or the slightly less popular beta towers.


LOL. If only that damn union would get out of the way, we could outsource
for some 8-track capability.

Chip, ZTL

Hey, we're getting a new tower built here, I think it's a DVD.

Chip Jones wrote:

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Chip Jones" wrote in message

k.net...

Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation

media

reports about the hearings and debates.

Or the slightly less popular beta towers.



LOL. If only that damn union would get out of the way, we could outsource
for some 8-track capability.

Chip, ZTL

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
k.net...

Or "VHF" towers, or "VHS" towers...all of which came up in aviation
media
reports about the hearings and debates.

Or the slightly less popular beta towers.


LOL. If only that damn union would get out of the way, we could outsource
for some 8-track capability.

I favor privatization for just that reason, but these "experts" didn't even
bother to develop a model of the system they want to modify immediately.
Boeing spent a fortune developing a model to implement DCAC and take
advantage of manufacturing automation, but there was still a nose wheel
collapse on the the first DCAC 747-4xx.