Controller screwed up?

It's called anticipated separation. By the time the MD80 gets on the
runway you're long gone.




Paul Tomblin wrote:
I was coming in to land on RWY 4 at ROC. There was a North West MD80 at
the hold short line. Almost as soon as my mains touched down, before I'd
slowed down, the tower controller cleared the North West flight to take
off. I came back with "977 is still on the runway on runway 4", with a
rather urgent tone of voice because I didn't want to become the next
Tenerife. The controller, instead of cancelling the take off clearance
for the North West flight like I expected, came back with my taxi
instructions.

I'm hoping the North West flight saw me or heard me, but it seems to me
that it was wrong for the controller to rely on that. I'm going to file
a NASA form, but is there anything else I should do?

In a previous article, Newps said:
It's called anticipated separation. By the time the MD80 gets on the
runway you're long gone.

Are there at least some restrictions on when this can be used? I'm hoping
that it can only be done in good VFR conditions when the tower can see
both aircraft?


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
"Fly the airplane, then work the problem"
-- Rick Grant (quoting RCAF pilot training)

Are there at least some restrictions on when this can be used? I'm hoping
that it can only be done in good VFR conditions when the tower can see
both aircraft?

No restrictions but common sense come in to play there.

How does the controller know you won't have a problem and not get off the
runway ?
I'm not sure what the regulations technically say about it but it doesn't
sound right logically.
A better policy would be to give position & hold until the other plane is
actually in the process of turning off, then when some clear action toward
the turnoff is commenced, anticipate it as cleared and give a takeoff
clearance.




"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
It's called anticipated separation. By the time the MD80 gets on the
runway you're long gone.




Paul Tomblin wrote:
I was coming in to land on RWY 4 at ROC. There was a North West MD80 at
the hold short line. Almost as soon as my mains touched down, before I'd
slowed down, the tower controller cleared the North West flight to take
off. I came back with "977 is still on the runway on runway 4", with a
rather urgent tone of voice because I didn't want to become the next
Tenerife. The controller, instead of cancelling the take off clearance
for the North West flight like I expected, came back with my taxi
instructions.

I'm hoping the North West flight saw me or heard me, but it seems to me
that it was wrong for the controller to rely on that. I'm going to file
a NASA form, but is there anything else I should do?

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:02:50 +0900, "donzaemon" wrote
in :

I'm not sure what the regulations technically say

Then perhaps you might consider looking up the appropriate
regulation/order instead of admitting your ignorance publicly in an a
worldwide forum.

On Sep 11, 9:48 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:02:50 +0900, "donzaemon" wrote
in :

I'm not sure what the regulations technically say

Then perhaps you might consider looking up the appropriate
regulation/order instead of admitting your ignorance publicly in an a
worldwide forum.

What's wrong with admitting ignorance publicly in a worldwide forum?
Isn't that one purpose of Usenet? I admit my ignorance and get the
answers I am looking for?
No shame in that.

Ricky

"Ricky" wrote in message
ps.com...

On Sep 11, 9:48 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:02:50 +0900, "donzaemon" wrote
in :

I'm not sure what the regulations technically say

Then perhaps you might consider looking up the appropriate
regulation/order instead of admitting your ignorance publicly in an a
worldwide forum.


What's wrong with admitting ignorance publicly in a worldwide forum?
Isn't that one purpose of Usenet? I admit my ignorance and get the
answers I am looking for?
No shame in that.


Yeah, Larry. Lighten up a bit. Besides, I think he had a good point.

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 12:30:43 -0500, "Maxwell"
wrote in :

I think he had a good point.

That's because you haven't read the FAA order pertinent to the
controller's issuing the takeoff clearance. Do a little research
before you publish your opinion.

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:41:34 -0700, Ricky
wrote in om:

On Sep 11, 9:48 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:02:50 +0900, "donzaemon" wrote
in :

I'm not sure what the regulations technically say

Then perhaps you might consider looking up the appropriate
regulation/order instead of admitting your ignorance publicly in an a
worldwide forum.

What's wrong with admitting ignorance publicly in a worldwide forum?
Isn't that one purpose of Usenet? I admit my ignorance and get the
answers I am looking for?
No shame in that.

Ricky

When you admit you don't know what you are talking about, and freely
offer you opinion based on that lack of knowledge (as donzaemon did)
it benefits no one.

Those who drafted the charter for this newsgroup mandated that
articles posted here contain INFORMATION, not uninformed opinion.

Failure to invest the requisite effort to research a topic before
posting an article just decreases the signal-to-noise ratio in the
newsgroup.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

Those who drafted the charter for this newsgroup mandated that
articles posted here contain INFORMATION, not uninformed opinion.


Oh God forbid Larry. Do you mean to tell me someone actually posted an
uninformed opinion around here????


Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!! !!