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

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"

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.

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"

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.

"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.

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"

Jay,

Do you intentionally clip the name of the person you're replying to, or is
it my reader that's doing it?

Jon

Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

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.

So... let's see. If under option #1 you landed behind the student, you had
enough room to guarantee a full stop before running him down? Since your
option #2 would have been to scare the bejeezus out of the student by
landing "over him", I presume the student wasn't near the far end of the
runway, so some numbers just don't seem right, here. If you needed to be
told to "go around" in that scenario, perhaps the controller knows you
personally? ;-)

Neil

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

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


What do you base that on?



The controller told ME to go around, remember?


I recall your original post said the controller issued the go around, and I
recall in a later post you said you went around because the controller
misjudged the spacing.



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.


Well, then it was a damned good thing you were at a towered field with an
alert controller! The 172 may have decided to continue down the runway
after a brief stop. He's out of your view beneath your nose, you land on
top of him. Had it happened at an uncontrolled field, or if the controller
hadn't been paying attention, you and your family and the occupants of the
172 could all be dead now. That controller may very well have saved your
life, and all you can do is complain about him having the audacity to insert
another airplane in to the available space in front of you. You should be
ashamed!



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.


If your story is accurate, the controller had proper spacing and was paying
close attention to the situation. The go around was issued after the 172
unexpectedly stopped on the runway, something the controller had no control
over. It was an action of the pilot that forced the go around, not
misjudged spacing by the controller. The controller did his job without
error and possibly saved your life. Instead of bitching about it you should
be thanking him.