Steven P, McNicoll just ****ed me off

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124291160.a4b773a96257a25b104a0209edc5c8ac@o nlynews...

Boy, I just checked my log book. I landed at Sarasota Florida on
runway 14 on March 10, 2000 on top of a black spot on the runway.

An honest-to-God FAA controller had cleared a plane for position and
hold and at the same time cleared another airplane to take off.


I'm familiar with this incident. The local controller believed the Skyhawk
was departing full length because strip marking indicated that's where he
was and there was a Skyhawk in that position. The Skyhawk pilot did not
properly identify his position as being at an intersection downfield.



They hit at the intersection where the first plane was in position and
hold. The plane that hit them was an instructor with a student pilot.

For the life of me, I can't see why it happened, but the plane that
was in position and hold never had a chance to see the plane that ran
into them.


Did you not read the report? Did the aircraft departing full length have a
chance to see the plane downfield? Why did the Skyhawk pilot not hear the
takeoff clearance issued to the full length departure?



So what is so honest-to-God bad about not lining up perfectly on the
runway instead of stopping a little bit crossways to watch what is
happening on the runway?


How far off the runway alignment would a Skyhawk at an intersection need to
be in order to have an unobstructed view?



And don't give me any excuses about one of the aircraft not obeying
ATC instructions. Neither plane did anything against ATC
instructions. Read the NTSB report. It was a human error on the part
of the controller.


Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but not by
the local controller.

So, what ****ed you off?

Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:
(much snipped collision on the runway)

Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but
not by the local controller.

Wait a second... if the tower and ground controllers are two different
people...where and when do ground controllers give position & hold or
clearances for departure?

Neil

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:
(much snipped collision on the runway)

Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but
not by the local controller.

Wait a second... if the tower and ground controllers are two different
people...where and when do ground controllers give position & hold or
clearances for departure?


The local controller issued a "taxi into position and hold" instruction to
an Skyhawk he believed to be at the end of the runway. He believed that
because the strip, which was prepared by the ground controller, was marked
to indicate a full length departure. The Skyhawk involved in the collision
called ready to go but did not indicate he was an intersection departure.
It so happened that there was a Skyhawk at the far end of the runway. It
was the Skyhawk at the full length position that the local controller
believed had called ready to go.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:53:32 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124291160.a4b773a96257a25b104a0209edc5c8ac@ onlynews...

Boy, I just checked my log book. I landed at Sarasota Florida on
runway 14 on March 10, 2000 on top of a black spot on the runway.

An honest-to-God FAA controller had cleared a plane for position and
hold and at the same time cleared another airplane to take off.



So, what ****ed you off?


Your know it all attitude.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124304865.3ffa3812a56509dda6ca3417c2357737@o nlynews...

Your know it all attitude.


I never claimed to know it all, but I do know a lot. I think you're reading
things in to my messages.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:04:38 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124304865.3ffa3812a56509dda6ca3417c2357737@ onlynews...

Your know it all attitude.


I never claimed to know it all, but I do know a lot.

So do a lot of us. I think that your condescending language on this
particular topic will not serve any purpose to improve flying safety.

I think you're reading
things in to my messages.


I think not.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message

.... I think that your condescending language on this
particular topic will not serve any purpose to improve flying safety.


In future, Steven, do not concern yourself with accuracy. However, be sure
your tone doesn't offend anyone. This is more important.

John Gaquin wrote:

Mike Weller wrote:

.... I think that your condescending language on this
particular topic will not serve any purpose to improve flying safety.


In future, Steven, do not concern yourself with accuracy. However, be
sure
your tone doesn't offend anyone. This is more important.

Interesting... Is it more important for a CFI to be accurate or have a
better 'tone'? I guess I prefer a more accurate CFI 'cause I stuck with my
Private CFI for my Instrument. Don't tell him that though.

Hilton

"Hilton" wrote in message
k.net...
In future, Steven, do not concern yourself with accuracy. However, be
sure your tone doesn't offend anyone. This is more important.

Interesting... Is it more important for a CFI to be accurate or have a
better 'tone'? I guess I prefer a more accurate CFI 'cause I stuck with
my
Private CFI for my Instrument.

It would be best to have both, however.

It's funny, I can relate both to the folks who get irritated with Steven
(though frankly, in this particular set of threads, it seems to me all he's
done is provide accurate information...I didn't see anything irritating
about that), as well as to Steven himself. We both get crap for our "method
of delivery", even when we are providing accurate information, while the
folks who go around cussing and throwing around personal insults are
apparently condoned (activities that Steven and I both practically never
engage in, nor do many of the other "factually correct" folks here).

Just one of the funny things about Usenet, I guess. It's okay to go ad
hominem and use foul language, but don't you dare get caught acting like you
actually might KNOW something.

Pete

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:04:38 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124304865.3ffa3812a56509dda6ca3417c2357737 @onlynews...

Your know it all attitude.


I never claimed to know it all, but I do know a lot.

So do a lot of us. I think that your condescending language on this
particular topic will not serve any purpose to improve flying safety.

And your infantile cry for attention by naming another poster in the subject
line will?

I think you're reading
things in to my messages.

I think not.

Well, you appear to be wrong. Nobody's defending you in this thread. You
are empirically certified as ignored and unloved. Now, OT, it's hard to see
planes on runways. I've missed one; and I'm not alone. Ask.

moo