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

A tower-induced go-round



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 24th 07, 02:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default A tower-induced go-round


"TheSmokingGnu" wrote in message
...

French Valley (F70), we were using 18 that day for winds. The "standard"
crosswind takes you away from the sizable (and expensive, and influential)
housing developments some wonderful person decided needed to be direct off
the end of a GA airport.


The A/FD says:

"All departures.noise sensitive areas to N and S, best rate of climb to TPA
before departing the pattern. Calm wind.use Rwy 18."

Nothing there about crosswind being the "standard" departure.



Besides of which, everyone else was departing crosswind, and maintaining a
civil and orderly line of traffic is almost always preferable to flying
off the handle and doing your own thing, especially if you aren't going to
tell anyone first.


So he leaves the area in a different direction than everyone else. Why is
that a problem?


  #2  
Old March 24th 07, 05:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
TheSmokingGnu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 166
Default A tower-induced go-round

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Nothing there about crosswind being the "standard" departure.


Note the use of quotation marks to denote the fact that it is not an
established, official procedure, but an agreed-upon and accepted modus
of operation while at the airport.

So he leaves the area in a different direction than everyone else. Why is
that a problem?


It's a problem when he tries to leave by going through me. It's a
problem when he doesn't announce his departure vector. It's a problem
when he doesn't respond or acknowledge position reports. It's a problem
when he disrupts the nominally formed traffic pattern. It's a problem
when he flies directly opposite the approach and likely descent vectors
(following the Paradise VOR) of other aircraft. It's a REAL problem when
he does it at 140 knots.

Did you not actually read my responses? It seems likely, after the way
you treated Jay.

TheSmokingGnu
  #3  
Old March 24th 07, 10:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,573
Default A tower-induced go-round

So he leaves the area in a different direction than everyone else. Why is
that a problem?


It's a problem when he tries to leave by going through me. It's a
problem when he doesn't announce his departure vector. It's a problem
when he doesn't respond or acknowledge position reports. It's a problem
when he disrupts the nominally formed traffic pattern. It's a problem
when he flies directly opposite the approach and likely descent vectors
(following the Paradise VOR) of other aircraft. It's a REAL problem when
he does it at 140 knots.


These are probably the same guys who come blasting into a full pattern
on a long straight-in approach, expecting everyone else to move aside
because they're "charter captains".

I know most of the charter pilots in our area, and they are invariably
good about announcing their intentions (some even apologize for
barging in) -- but there are always those select few SOBs who have
just been handed off from approach and simply can't be bothered with
such mundane duties as making position reports on Unicom. They are
truly menaces of the air, in my humble opinion.

Did you not actually read my responses? It seems likely, after the way
you treated Jay.


You *do* realize that you're wasting your time arguing with Steven,
right? Understanding and properly reacting to subtle or nuanced
prose is simply not in his nature.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

  #4  
Old March 25th 07, 03:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,953
Default A tower-induced go-round

On 24 Mar 2007 15:00:43 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in .com:

Understanding and properly reacting to subtle or nuanced
prose is simply not in his nature.


The issue of reacting to implied, as opposed to stated, prose is that
the reader has no positive way of knowing if his own subjective
inference is that intended by the author.

While it such may be marginally useful in affairs of the heart, they
have little place in aviation, IMO.



  #5  
Old March 25th 07, 04:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,573
Default A tower-induced go-round

The issue of reacting to implied, as opposed to stated, prose is that
the reader has no positive way of knowing if his own subjective
inference is that intended by the author.

While it such may be marginally useful in affairs of the heart, they
have little place in aviation, IMO.


I have dealt with folks like Steven my whole life; the world is full
of them. You are very much like Steven, but -- on occasion -- seem to
have breakthroughs into understanding. I guess that makes you a
savant?

:-)

As but one example of the phenomenon that plagues guys like Steven, he
did not understand that my phrase about "having flown into Oshkosh, I
knew we had plenty of room" meant that we had damned little spacing
between us, in the normal world of controlled airspace. Any Oshkosh-
experienced pilot would have immediately understood that subtle
remark, and pilots with any knowledge of Oshkosh arrival procedures
might have picked up on it as well.

Without understanding this nuanced prose, Steven launched into a
diatribe about how "You said you had plenty of room." It's simply
not in him to understand this sort of thing, because he's neither
experienced enough as a pilot, nor is he capable of anything but
linear thought. Colored prose and creative writing are anathema to
guys like Steven, because it "clouds the issue" for them. If it's not
in black and white, it's wrong.

That's why guys like him are so good at quoting chapter and verse of
the rules. The codification becomes an end in itself, lending
structure and meaning to their lives, without which nothing makes
sense.

This trait probably makes him a good controller, by the way.

In the end, though, I believe this is why Steven continually butts
heads with many of us here. Pilots tend to be non-linear thinkers.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

  #6  
Old March 25th 07, 05:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,892
Default A tower-induced go-round

Jay Honeck wrote:
The issue of reacting to implied, as opposed to stated, prose is that
the reader has no positive way of knowing if his own subjective
inference is that intended by the author.

While it such may be marginally useful in affairs of the heart, they
have little place in aviation, IMO.


I have dealt with folks like Steven my whole life; the world is full
of them. You are very much like Steven, but -- on occasion -- seem to
have breakthroughs into understanding. I guess that makes you a
savant?


:-)


As but one example of the phenomenon that plagues guys like Steven, he
did not understand that my phrase about "having flown into Oshkosh, I
knew we had plenty of room" meant that we had damned little spacing
between us, in the normal world of controlled airspace. Any Oshkosh-
experienced pilot would have immediately understood that subtle
remark, and pilots with any knowledge of Oshkosh arrival procedures
might have picked up on it as well.


Without understanding this nuanced prose, Steven launched into a
diatribe about how "You said you had plenty of room." It's simply
not in him to understand this sort of thing, because he's neither
experienced enough as a pilot, nor is he capable of anything but
linear thought. Colored prose and creative writing are anathema to
guys like Steven, because it "clouds the issue" for them. If it's not
in black and white, it's wrong.


That's why guys like him are so good at quoting chapter and verse of
the rules. The codification becomes an end in itself, lending
structure and meaning to their lives, without which nothing makes
sense.


This trait probably makes him a good controller, by the way.


In the end, though, I believe this is why Steven continually butts
heads with many of us here. Pilots tend to be non-linear thinkers.


The guy reminds me of a cartoon I saw once.

Picture two guys in a sailboat about 6 feet long and an aircraft carrier
is bearing down on them full steam.

One guy says to the other, "Don't worry, we have the right of way."

For the boating impaired, change the sailboat to sailplane and the
aircraft carrier to 747.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
  #7  
Old March 28th 07, 09:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default A tower-induced go-round


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

As but one example of the phenomenon that plagues guys like Steven, he
did not understand that my phrase about "having flown into Oshkosh, I
knew we had plenty of room" meant that we had damned little spacing
between us, in the normal world of controlled airspace. Any Oshkosh-
experienced pilot would have immediately understood that subtle
remark, and pilots with any knowledge of Oshkosh arrival procedures
might have picked up on it as well.

Without understanding this nuanced prose, Steven launched into a
diatribe about how "You said you had plenty of room." It's simply
not in him to understand this sort of thing, because he's neither
experienced enough as a pilot, nor is he capable of anything but
linear thought. Colored prose and creative writing are anathema to
guys like Steven, because it "clouds the issue" for them. If it's not
in black and white, it's wrong.

That's why guys like him are so good at quoting chapter and verse of
the rules. The codification becomes an end in itself, lending
structure and meaning to their lives, without which nothing makes
sense.

This trait probably makes him a good controller, by the way.

In the end, though, I believe this is why Steven continually butts
heads with many of us here. Pilots tend to be non-linear thinkers.



Ahh, so it's all a misunderstanding, caused by my inability to understand
nuanced prose, a result of my linear thinking.

What a load of crap.

Jay, you said you had plenty of room when you said you were 1/2 mile out
when the 172 touched down 1500 feet from the threshold. Minimum separation
in the "normal world of controlled airspace" is 3000 feet, Oshkosh has
nothing to do with it. If you're uncomfortable with minimum separation just
tell the controller you'd like more room. I'm sure he'll happily
accommodate you, but you'll probably have to wait for the more experienced
pilots to land first.


  #8  
Old March 29th 07, 05:20 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,573
Default A tower-induced go-round

If you're uncomfortable with minimum separation just
tell the controller you'd like more room. I'm sure he'll happily
accommodate you, but you'll probably have to wait for the more experienced
pilots to land first.


You know, for a linear thinker, you can't seem to keep on the track
with your train of thought.

The controller told ME to go around, remember? I would have landed
behind the student pilot ahead of me -- or over him, if need be -- if
the controller hadn't given the order to go around.

Obviously by sending me around the controller was admitting his
failure to maintain what he judged to be proper spacing between us.

This situation had nothing to do with my comfort, and everything to do
with a Class D'oh! controller who was looking through the wrong end of
his binoculars.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

  #9  
Old March 26th 07, 02:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jon Woellhaf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 221
Default A tower-induced go-round

Jay Honeck wrote [about operations at uncontrolled fields]
These are probably the same guys who come blasting into a full pattern
on a long straight-in approach, expecting everyone else to move aside
because they're "charter captains".


Does this happen often at Class-D airports?


  #10  
Old March 28th 07, 02:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,573
Default A tower-induced go-round

These are probably the same guys who come blasting into a full pattern
on a long straight-in approach, expecting everyone else to move aside
because they're "charter captains".


Does this happen often at Class-D airports?


Worse. At Class D they report that they're on a 3-mile final, when
they're still 10 miles out...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


 




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
Round Engines john smith Piloting 20 February 15th 07 03:31 AM
induced airflow buttman Piloting 3 February 19th 06 04:36 AM
Round Engines Voxpopuli Naval Aviation 16 May 31st 05 06:48 PM
Source of Induced Drag Ken Kochanski Soaring 2 January 10th 04 12:18 AM
Predicting ground effects on induced power Marc Shorten Soaring 0 October 28th 03 11:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:27 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.