A tower-induced go-round

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

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? ;-)

What I thought I could or could not do is irrelevant. The controller
told me to go around, so I did -- end of story.

At an uncontrolled field, if the student had cut in front of me (as he
did when he was ordered to do so by the tower controller) I would have
executed a 360 degree turn for spacing, or landed short behind him. I
also would have got on the radio and asked him to land long and keep
it rolling.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

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? ;-)

What I thought I could or could not do is irrelevant. The controller
told me to go around, so I did -- end of story.

My point was that had I been on that approach, and saw the plane ahead of
me stop dead on the runway, I would have _told the controller_ that I was
going around, not figure out how to land with the other plane still on the
runway.

At an uncontrolled field, if the student had cut in front of me (as he
did when he was ordered to do so by the tower controller) I would have
executed a 360 degree turn for spacing, or landed short behind him. I
also would have got on the radio and asked him to land long and keep
it rolling.

Which the student may or may not have done while you've committed to
landing. I also would not want to be in the pattern with someone suddenly
pulling a 360 on final, either. IMO, the scenrios you're presenting do not
reflect the most courteous or safe options.

Neil

On 31 Mar 2007 06:48:38 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in om:

At an uncontrolled field, if the student had cut in front of me (as he
did when he was ordered to do so by the tower controller) I would have
executed a 360 degree turn for spacing,

Such a maneuver would place you in the blind to arriving traffic
during certain quadrants of the 360* turn. What do you have against
S-turns to increase spacing?

or landed short behind him.

I also would have got on the radio and asked him to land long and keep
it rolling.

Technically, that is not in accordance with the Self-announce FAA
policy for CTAF.

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

At an uncontrolled field, if the student had cut in front of me (as he
did when he was ordered to do so by the tower controller) I would have
executed a 360 degree turn for spacing, or landed short behind him. I
also would have got on the radio and asked him to land long and keep
it rolling.


Cut in front of you?

"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.

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.

Both of those statements are 100% true.

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.

What an incredible statement, from a guy who wasn't there. I'm
thankful you don't work for the NTSB.

The controller should have done one of the two following things:

1. He should not have revoked my previously issued landing clearance
and cut the 172 in ahead of me.

*or*

2. He should have ordered the 172 to land long, and keep it rolling.

Either choice would have worked out fine. He blew it, and did
neither. When he finally noticed the spacing issue, he ordered a go-
round.

In the end, it all worked out fine, and there was nothing unsafe about
it. But it was an unusual ATC lapse in judgement, which is why I
posted it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

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

Both of those statements are 100% true.


No they're not. You also said you were 1/2 mile out when the 172 touched
down 1500' from the threshold. If that's correct the controller judged the
spacing just fine.



What an incredible statement, from a guy who wasn't there. I'm
thankful you don't work for the NTSB.


No, I wasn't there. That's why I have to rely on your account. The problem
here is that your story does not support your conclusion. You have to
change one of them.



The controller should have done one of the two following things:

1. He should not have revoked my previously issued landing clearance
and cut the 172 in ahead of me.


According to your story there was adequate spacing to put the 172 ahead of
you, doing that does not revoke your previously issued landing clearance.



*or*

2. He should have ordered the 172 to land long, and keep it rolling.


Perhaps the controller isn't as comfortable telling pilots how to do their
jobs as you are telling controllers how to do theirs.

If your distances are accurate the 172 didn't need to land any longer than
he did. "Keep it rolling" is part of a normal landing, the pilot shouldn't
have to be told to do that.



Either choice would have worked out fine. He blew it, and did
neither. When he finally noticed the spacing issue, he ordered a go-
round.


Did the controller tell you that? Your story makes it sound like he ordered
the go around when he noticed the 172's unexpected stop on the runway.



In the end, it all worked out fine, and there was nothing unsafe about
it. But it was an unusual ATC lapse in judgement, which is why I
posted it.


If you're going to stick with your conclusion, that the controller misjudged
the spacing, you're going to have to put your plane closer to the threshold
when the 172 touches down.