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.

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

Jay,

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

I haven't intentionally cut names, but have perhaps done it without
thought.

Doesn't your reader show the thread in a "tree" format? That usually
makes it easy to follow who is answering whom.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

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

I haven't intentionally cut names, but have perhaps done it without
thought.

Doesn't your reader show the thread in a "tree" format? That usually
makes it easy to follow who is answering whom.

No it doesn't. Don't assume people want to see all the previously read messages
when opening a group.

--
Bob Noel
(gave up looking for a particular sig the lawyer will hate)

Doesn't your reader show the thread in a "tree" format? That usually
makes it easy to follow who is answering whom.

No it doesn't. Don't assume people want to see all the previously read messages
when opening a group.

Sorry, Bob -- I had no idea.

I would find reading Usenet without the "tree" view to be VERY
confusing. I participate in many threads, and sometimes my
participation is spread over many different parts of my day (or week),
and I often must re-read a few posts to get back up to speed on what's
going on in the thread.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I asked Jay if he intentionally clipped names and he said he didn't.

He asked,

Doesn't your reader show the thread in a "tree" format? That usually
makes it easy to follow who is answering whom.

Yes, it does (Outlook Express), but I had my View set to Hide Read Messages
so I don't see the full tree. I'll leave it on Show All Messages and see if
I like it.

Thanks,

Jon

On 29 Mar 2007 17:23:02 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in .com:


Doesn't your reader show the thread in a "tree" format? That usually
makes it easy to follow who is answering whom.

If you include the Message-ID of the article to which you are
following up in the attribution, it makes it easy for everyone to
find.

If you include the Message-ID of the article to which you are
following up in the attribution, it makes it easy for everyone to
find.

How does one use the message ID (other than on google)?

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 03:25:34 GMT, Jose
wrote in :

If you include the Message-ID of the article to which you are
following up in the attribution, it makes it easy for everyone to
find.

How does one use the message ID (other than on google)?


With my newsreader client, Forte Agent, you just right-click on the
message-id and select Launch, and it jumps to that message.