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

With the wind?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 5th 06, 11:38 AM posted to rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?

"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...
The same thing
happens at any major airport, changing to the other runway is quite a
production.


Yeah, I was a passenger on a commercial flight into Schiphol (Amsterdam)
last year; the captain came onto the intercom to say: "We were second in
line to land, and they just changed runways on us". Took us the best part of
15-20 minutes to muck about and get down.

I have also seen airports where the apron and terminal are all the way on
one end of the runway. In these cases pilots sometimesprefer to take a
slight tailwind to land toward their destination, rather than have to
taxi back.


We used to see this a lot at Norwich (probably still do if they've reopened
04 - last time I flew there it was shut for maintenance). The main runway is
27/09, but we also have 04/22. The terminal is right at the starting end of
04 (in fact, there's a displaced threshold because the terminal building is
in the way). So the smaller commercial aircraft, particularly those heading
to Amsterdam, would often choose 04 if the wind was within limits, because
it was only a 60-second taxi and a quick right turn instead of a drive
around the airfield.

D.


  #32  
Old April 5th 06, 11:46 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?

On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 01:21:56 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

Maverick: "Requesting permission for flyby."


"Cleared for the option"


All right, all right! I hear this all the time (well, I hear it
sometimes) at PSM nearby.

What does "cleared for the option" mean? Is it any whim on the part of
the pilot in the pattern, like a touch&go?

In other words, is it a way of saying "your request is approved"?

(The problem, I suppose, is that with a handheld I didn't hear the
request.)



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com
  #34  
Old April 5th 06, 11:50 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 14:15:24 -0400, Peter Clark
wrote:

The local airport PSM has a single runway, with the SE end more or
less pointing toward the small city nearby. I believe the "calm"
status is defined as up to 7 knots (possibly 7 mph). So if the wind is
blowing 7 knots or less, you take off to the NW. Perhaps your airfield
has a like orientation and reason for taking off into the wind.


With 11,300' of runway at sea level you could have a 20 knot tailwind
and still not worry


Indeed, I could land on the crosswise taxiways at Pease.

(And of course I meant to say *with* the wind.)


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com
  #35  
Old April 5th 06, 02:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?

What does "cleared for the option" mean? Is it any whim on the part of
the pilot in the pattern, like a touch&go?


It means the pilot can land to a full stop, or touch and go, or do a low
approach to the runway ("peek and go?") without advising the controller
which option he will pick. Otherwise, if you are cleard for (say) a
touch and go, you are not cleared to do a full stop landing - you'd have
to tell him you want a full stop and he would have to clear you for that.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #36  
Old April 5th 06, 10:42 PM posted to rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?



David Cartwright wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
...

Baloney. If you get a chance go to any big airport on a day with light
winds. Most of these airports have preferred runways, landing in a
particular direction is preferred by the controllers for any number of
reasons. If the wind shifts to make that runway a tailwind, but it's only
5 knots or so, you will land with a tailwind or you will go somewhere
else. Same as my previous example about the crosswind.



Frankly, if a controller tells me I'm to land with a tailwind, he can get
stuffed.


That's fine. You land with the flow or you don't land. Your inability
to handle a 5 knot tailwind is not my problem.


Aside from the "hey, that fence is rushing at me quite quickly"
factor,


If a 5 knot tailwind does that to you, you are way too fast on final.


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.


Yep, 5 knots. A real tire buster.

  #37  
Old April 5th 06, 10:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?



Jose wrote:

What does "cleared for the option" mean? Is it any whim on the part of
the pilot in the pattern, like a touch&go?



It means the pilot can land to a full stop, or touch and go, or do a low
approach to the runway ("peek and go?") without advising the controller
which option he will pick.


As well as a stop and go.

  #38  
Old April 6th 06, 02:22 AM posted to rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?


"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?


  #39  
Old April 6th 06, 02:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?


"Cub Driver" usenet AT danford DOT net wrote in message
...

All right, all right! I hear this all the time (well, I hear it
sometimes) at PSM nearby.

What does "cleared for the option" mean? Is it any whim on the part of
the pilot in the pattern, like a touch&go?

In other words, is it a way of saying "your request is approved"?


CLEARED FOR THE OPTION- ATC authorization for an aircraft to make a
touch-and-go, low approach, missed approach, stop and go, or full stop
landing at the discretion of the pilot. It is normally used in training so
that an instructor can evaluate a student's performance under changing
situations.


  #40  
Old April 6th 06, 02:43 AM posted to rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default With the wind?

The PIC can always say UNABLE, a magic word to controllers.
The controller cannot turn the whole airport around at a
busy air carrier airport, there may be dozens of airplanes
in trail for a hundred miles. But the PIC can usually work
something out to get a more favorable runway within a
reasonable time. It helps if you can fly your approach at
higher speeds, nothing like getting a C172 at 62 knots on
final to really slow the airport down.
Don't accept a clearance you can't safely fly, and practice
some non-standard operations to find out how to fly fast and
slow down for the landing.

Most POHs show landing distances with a tailwind, but you
should understand that many pilots fly and land too fast and
waste a lot of runway and have other landing problems [wheel
barrow]. Tires have a speed limit, but that is usually not
a problem on light aircraft.

If you want to fly to a big, busy airport with noise
problems, learn to deal with it.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
message
nk.net...
|
| "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?
|
|


 




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
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! Eliot Coweye Home Built 237 February 13th 06 03:55 AM
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? tom pettit Home Built 35 September 29th 05 02:24 PM
Mini-500 Accident Analysis Dennis Fetters Rotorcraft 16 September 3rd 05 11:35 AM
Outfly the wind Doug Piloting 7 July 6th 05 03:18 PM
LX4000 wind calculation AttentionLEcureuil Soaring 2 June 23rd 04 04:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:20 PM.


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