How often do you have to go around?

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 12:22:45 -0400, Ron Natalie
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
In simulation, the simulated ATC seems to be very inefficient at
spacing aircraft, because practically every fifth aircraft on landing
is told to go around. In fact, if you are told to follow someone in
for a landing, you can take for granted that he won't clear the runway
in time and you'll be told to go around. It's tiresome and
frustrating after spending a lot of effort to line things up nicely.

It's rare. I can't recall ever being told to go around at Dulles and
I can recall only once having a Gulfstream sent around because I was
on the runway. It's more common at airports with a lot of instructional

That's about my average as well for a bit over 1300 hours.

Once, many years ago an small turboprop had to go around at Lansing
as I hadn't cleared the runway. A couple years ago at MBS I was
told to "keep it in close" and then the guy ahead of me landed on the
numbers with a mile taxi to the first turnoff. I did a go around, was
still cleared, landed long, made the turn off and a DC-9 was able to
land behind me. Had I landed on the numbers the DC-9 would have had to
have gone around.

activity. People don't clear the runway or mess up the spacing, or
don't take off promptly when cleared, etc...


I suspect the flight games throw in a few more unexpected incidents,
malfunctions, etc... to make the games more interesting.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Newps wrote:


Emily wrote:



Then it's required that you give way in some other fashion.


How, when tower expects me to stay on final?



Tower will fix the problem and right of way rules are of no concern.
Just because I made you first doesn't mean you will necessarily stay
first. If that plan doesn't work you may be the one to go around if
that is the most efficient way to do things.

Well, I wasn't really speaking of right of way, more of being second
behind a much slower aircraft. And you resequencing me is fine, but
keep in mind that 1) the PIC is responsible for the safety of the
flight, 2) pilot is responsible for see and avoid in VMC, and 3) in the
interests of staying alive, I don't always trust ATC to keep me out of
the back of someone else.

Tower controllers often make mistakes, see and avoid is
always applicable. Right of way rules tell who and how to
avoid.

Self-preservation makes me get out of everybody's way.


"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
|
|
| Emily wrote:
| Newps wrote:
|
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| anywhere
|
| § 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water
operations.
| (a) Inapplicability. This section does not apply to
the operation of
| an aircraft on water.
|
|
|
| Right of way rules do not apply at tower controlled
fields.
|
|
| Cite?
|
| The tower and the approach control, if so equipped, make
the sequence.
| They both change the sequence for arrivals and departures
solely at
| their discretion as the operation warrants. Controllers
are not taught
| right of way rules. Why would they? By definition those
rules are for
| when there is no control.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

It also doesn't make the plane unable to execute the instruction.
Ergo, you should have gone around.

Instructions are flexible in simulation. If I followed all
instructions slavishly, I'd occasionally be stuck for eternity on the
ramp because the simulator doesn't give me the option of asking to
taxi and take off.

That is a completely different scenario than you presented. Sometimes the
sim presents you with a situation where you are supposed to show proper
decision-making, and in the example I responed to, you did just about
everything wrong. That's your prerogative, of course, but IMO such
discussions are more appropriate in a sim group where the attitude and
behavior aren't dangerous and everyone can have a chuckle.

Neil

Let's see...
I've been told to turn to a heading that would put me in a
level 4-5 T
In all fairness I doubt their radar at the time actually
showed the weather.

I was on final approach and below 200 feet [ still a student
pilot ] when the controller realized that he had another
airplane on short final on an intersecting runway. He told
me to make a right 360 for traffic. I said "Unable, will
go-around and turn before I get to the intersection and
reenter downwind."

I was at 4000 feet in solid IMC approaching the VOR enroute
to the OM for an ILS. Heard the controller issue a
clearance to the OM at 4000 to a plane that had just missed
the ILS [another trainer ]. I reported the VOR and was
told to hold at the OM at 4000. The other airplane was
still below 3000 feet and we were at that moment about 4
miles apart.
I advised that I was turning left at 4000 and would
intercept the DME arc, "let me know when the traffic is
above 4000"

On a strict traffic count the airport had qualified for
radar for years, but the airline traffic was low, only a few
commuters a day, so it was all position reporting.


"Morgans" wrote in message
...
|
| "Wade Hasbrouck" wrote
|
| However, as PIC you have the authority to decline an ATC
request if you think
| it would be unsafe or would not feel comfortable doing
it, as it is the PIC
| that is flying the aircraft, not ATC
|
| Although, if you say unable, you had better have a
reasonable reason for saying
| unable.
|
| The ATC can have you fly back out to the podunk VOR for
resequencing, or make
| you wait while 15 planes take off before you get your turn
to takeoff, or
| anything else he so desires, if he wants to show his
authority, if you get my
| drift. g
|
| That type of subject could start a whole new thread!
|
| How many of you have been given unreasonable ( in your
opinion) orders by ATC?
| --
| Jim in NC
|

With an operating tower, your traffic pattern can be
whatever you and the tower can agree on at the moment.
Right traffic, left traffic, straight in, are all OK if
approved. You can ask for a take-off on 1R and do a left
turn and get the option on 17R, next time around, teardrop
and land on 31 and then do an cross over at mid-field to a
left downwind full stop on 19L because it a closer taxi.
I've this type of creative traffic pattern at Wichita, Tulsa
Int'l and also fit into arriving airplane traffic while
doing multiengine training doing steep turns and close
traffic to avoid the final approach to the active runways.
Ask and you shall receive. But see and avoid and right of
way still applies.



"Emily" wrote in message
news | Newps wrote:
| snip
| Right of way rules do not apply at tower controlled
fields.
|
|
| Cite?
|
| The tower and the approach control, if so equipped, make
the sequence.
| They both change the sequence for arrivals and
departures solely at
| their discretion as the operation warrants. Controllers
are not taught
| right of way rules. Why would they? By definition
those rules are for
| when there is no control.
|
| I was just wondering. That's something I didn't get from
the regulation.

Right.



"Emily" wrote in message
. ..
| Newps wrote:
|
|
| Emily wrote:
|
|
|
| Then it's required that you give way in some other
fashion.
|
|
| How, when tower expects me to stay on final?
|
|
|
| Tower will fix the problem and right of way rules are of
no concern.
| Just because I made you first doesn't mean you will
necessarily stay
| first. If that plan doesn't work you may be the one to
go around if
| that is the most efficient way to do things.
|
| Well, I wasn't really speaking of right of way, more of
being second
| behind a much slower aircraft. And you resequencing me is
fine, but
| keep in mind that 1) the PIC is responsible for the safety
of the
| flight, 2) pilot is responsible for see and avoid in VMC,
and 3) in the
| interests of staying alive, I don't always trust ATC to
keep me out of
| the back of someone else.

That wasn't at OAK by any chance with MKF?



"Margy Natalie" wrote in message
...
|A Lieberma wrote:
| Ron Natalie wrote in
| :
|
|
| You should plan better so you aren't running down the (I
believe it
| is a 182). I don't know what kind of approaches you
are making
| in the game, but you should hang further back in faster
aircraft.
| If you passed underneath me in real life, I'd have the
FAA on
| short final I'd have the FAA on your ass.
|
|
| Dang Ron,
|
| Didn't you know that the lower plane has the right of
way in REAL life and
| you should give way to a plane passing under you on
final
|
| *tongue in cheek*.
|
| Allen
| My 1st, supervised, student solo a twin cut me off on
short final by
| passing below me. I, stupid student, thought I had done
something
| wrong, until on the ground when my instructor starting
using language
| I'd never heard him use before.
|
| Margy

In article ,
Roy Smith wrote:

Everybody wins. I don't get sent around and controller has "proof" on the
recording that he didn't break any rules.

PAO plays a similar game with pilots they know (ones that call
the tower controllers by name). Several times while a plane has
been slow getting to the end taxiway, they've cleared the plane holding in
position for high speed taxi, with take-off clearance happening on
the roll. Usually there is a plane on short final as well, so
everybody wins.

What PAO really needs is another taxi way between the middle of
the runway, and the end. The two taxiways near the middle are
right next to each other, and easy to miss if the landing is a
little long. Taxiing the 1000ft down to the end adds alot of time
on the runway.

Airport diagram pdf: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0610/09216AD.PDF

On the subject of go arounds, I had to go around today since a bird
decided to do a downwind take off just as I was on short final.
I had to break off the approach to avoid a collision.

There was also a flock of birds on downwind at one point. 'traffic
on downwind, a flock of birds, type unknown, possibly seagulls'
was the call from the tower.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

Matt Barrow writes:

His dedication is to MSFS, not flying.

In general, an interest in simulation of something also indicates an
interest in the thing simulated.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.