A tower-induced go-round

"Jay Honeck" writes:

If you had adequate spacing behind the 172 the controller's
decision to make it number one does not sound too bad. The
problem seems to be the 172's unexpected stop. Was there
additional traffic behind you?

There was a 182 that had just called in, so he was 5+ miles out. I
agree the 172 stopping was the basic problem, but the controller
should have instructed him to land long or keep rolling. He did
neither.

But on the other hand, you should not space yourself in the circuit
with such a presumption. Even if the controller makes such an
instruction, there is no guarantee that a pilot will be able to carry
out out in a way convenient to you.

- FChE

But on the other hand, you should not space yourself in the circuit
with such a presumption. Even if the controller makes such an
instruction, there is no guarantee that a pilot will be able to carry
out out in a way convenient to you.

I presumed nothing, other than that I was cleared to land. When the
controller revoked that clearance (by inadvertently misjudging the
spacing between aircraft) I went around -- simple as that.

The only reason I posted this experience here was because it was a
"first" for Mary and me, in over 1700 hours of flying over 12 years.
It wasn't dangerous, or difficult -- but it *was* unusual.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

I presumed nothing, other than that I was cleared to land. When the
controller revoked that clearance (by inadvertently misjudging the
spacing between aircraft) I went around -- simple as that.


Previously you said the spacing was good and the controller initiated the go
around when the 172 unexpectedly stopped on the runway. Now you say the
spacing was poor and you chose to go around. Which is it?

I believe you were formerly in the newspaper business. Were you forced out
of that career by an inability to keep a story straight?