No more "Left Downwind"?

Grumman-581 schrieb:

I hate it when I see these students pull out on the
numbers and just sit there... Don't know what they're doing... Are
they fiddling with maps or have they just forgotten where the throttle
is?

Maybe they are doing a last check of the runway alignement?

Stefan

In article ,
Grumman-581 wrote:

I hate it when I see these students pull out on the
numbers and just sit there... Don't know what they're doing... Are
they fiddling with maps or have they just forgotten where the throttle
is?

Possibly setting their DG after checking the mag compass and making
certain they are on the correct runway.

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 13:52:36 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
No, of course not. I'm not saying he did anything wrong. I was just using
this as a real-life example of why "the active" is a meaningless term at an
uncontrolled airport.

Awh, I'm just razzing ya' a bit... grin

I've had people announce that they were departing 27 when I was on
final to 09 even though I'm coming in behind someone else who just
landed on 09... When you have a crosswind runway, either one is
probably about the same given that the winds around here are usually
either directly out of the south or *sometimes* directly out of the
north... Hell, I flunked by first checkride for my PPL because I
crabbed into a nonexistant crosswind and landed with my nosewheel 3 ft
off the centerline (of the 100 ft wide runway)... In all my flying at
that airport, I had *never* encountered wind directly straight down
the runway and it just so happened that it was that way on my
checkride...

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 19:55:13 +0200, Stefan
wrote:
Maybe they are doing a last check of the runway alignement?

Well, it shouldn't take *that* long, but considering the fact that
there is a single runway at that airport and your choices are 09 and
27, I would hazard to guess that setting your gyro to your compass
while in the runup area is more than sufficient...

In article xrhKg.2053$8J2.265@fed1read11,
"BTIZ" wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...
left is standard.. right traffic is on the chart with annotations for the
airport along with the airport elevation, lighting, runway length and
frequency.. as in
JEAN (0L7)
2832 *L 46 122.9
RP 2R 20R
or
Sky Ranch (3L2)
2599 - 33 123.0
RP 12

Interesting. I have never seen it.

Does that mean you never go into an airport with a designated right had
traffic pattern?
Or does that mean that you never look at your charts?

Anyone who has overflown Ohio knows that, with the exception of
southeast Ohio, you are rarely outside gliding distance of a suitable or
established landing area.
Ohio has several hundred public use and private airfields spread across
the Cincinnati and Detriot Sections.

Out of couriosity, I grabbed a chart. Looking at the Cincinnati
Sectional I found four in the southern half of Ohio. One local, the
other three 70-90 nm away. Three I knew had RP's and the fourth is a
grass stip down beside the Ohio River across from Huntington WV.
- Greater Portsmouth/KPMH has a tall hill on the west side.
- Middletown Hook/KMWO has no obstructions, they just want the traffic
over the river instead of over the town.
- Newlon/I41 has a couple tall towers on the other side of the river.
- Columbus Southwest/04I is adjacent to Darby Dan/6I6

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 01:56:42 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:

On the other hand, if the FAA presenter was a true spokesman for
official policy, perhaps his admission, that the FAA considers the
congestion on the shared CFAF frequencies a safety concern, is
evidence that the FAA is powerless to petition the FCC for the
additional CTAF frequencies necessary to meet its federal mandate* to
insure safe skies.


On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 09:29:14 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote in :

Sorry, Larry, we've got seven of them now, with most of the new ones
sparsely used: (122.7, 122.72, 122.8, 122.97, 123.0, 123.05, and 123.07).

I thought I recalled there being additional CTAF frequencies created
after a channel separation decrease at some time in the past. Thanks
for the information.

It only takes six months and a public hearing of the airport users to
petition the FAA/FCC for a new frequency.

So how does one go about petitioning the FAA for a different CTAF
frequency? Is there a specific form for it, or is a letter signed by
the appropriate airport official or group of resident pilots
sufficient to get the hearing scheduled?

What prevents the FAA from proactively re-evaluating the CTAF
frequency assignments globally within the NAS to reduce frequency
congestion? Are they just lazy, or unaware of the issue, or what? It
seems to me like a comprehensive plan of CTAF frequency assignments to
spread them among all the seven channels would be preferable to a
patchwork policy. Surely someone looking at the big picture is going
to be able to devise a better system than a system of oiling the
squeaky wheels as they occur.

Grumman-581 wrote:

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 19:55:13 +0200, Stefan
wrote:
Maybe they are doing a last check of the runway alignement?

Well, it shouldn't take *that* long, but considering the fact that
there is a single runway at that airport and your choices are 09 and
27, I would hazard to guess that setting your gyro to your compass
while in the runup area is more than sufficient...

If it not overcast and you know about what time it is the sun position
will tell you as well (daylight hours)

Not very high tech of course.

Ron Lee

Why? That is where all the pilots (and hence all the fun is)...

Speaking of clogging up the frequency... I was 15 out from Nappanee
(C02) Indiana trying to announce my arrival when I hear someone on the
frequency describing to someone else, what they did the previous
weekend, in minute detail... I swear the frequency was taking up by this
guy for 5 minutes straight... When he finished his diatribe I barely had
the time to announce my plans...

That was the first time I have ever heard this kind of frequency robbing
inconsiderateness... I swear it was like listening to some ham radio
operator with a bad case of verbal diarrhea...

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ UMP

Emily wrote:
Cubdriver wrote:

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 02:02:12 GMT, Jose
wrote:

The real problem isn't "with you" or "left" or "looking", but rather
the windbags that take two minutes to say anything because they
haven't a clue.


"Jeff--is that you?"

"Yeah, it's me."

"How ya doing?"

"Okay, I guess."

(Heard on a holiday weekend.)


The above is why I avoid small uncontrolled airports on the weekends.

That was the first time I have ever heard this kind of frequency robbing
inconsiderateness... I swear it was like listening to some ham radio
operator with a bad case of verbal diarrhea...

We heard a lot of that on our flight into OSH this year.

The worst (thankfully, on an air-to-air frequency) was when a woman was
READING THE OSHKOSH NOTAM to another pilot, apparently flying with her
as a flight of two.

We were incredulous...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article ,
B A R R Y wrote:

"Jeff--is that you?"

"Yeah, it's me."

"How ya doing?"

"Okay, I guess."

(Heard on a holiday weekend.)

FWIW, I've only heard stuff like that on dead quiet frequencies. And
when I do? Who cares?

well, with the number of airports on one frequency in the northeast US, there
really isn't anything like dead quiet during VFR days.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate