interesting moment yesterday on final

Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:

"Jose" wrote in message


So such a report is useful to =you=, an IFR pilot who is also a
controller and happens to know where RIKKI is.


An accurate position and intention report is useful to any pilot that
knows where RIKKI is. It doesn't matter if they're operating IFR or
VFR and it doesn't matter how they earn their living.

You've both argued this one to death, and both keep overlooking the
obvious. Pilots *and* controllers use colloquial jargon to communicate
position.

An example; a few years ago, I was flying into Don Scott (OSU) from the
North East. I contacted the tower, and was told to "report when I was over
the river". Well, it seemed reasonable to me that the controller was
referring to the river that was visible directly ahead of me. However,
there are *two* rivers near OSU, and the controller was actually referring
to the other river, which was not visible from my position. It could have
gotten quite ugly, as my flight path would have put me off the departure
end of the active runway at pattern altitude.

In this instance, RIKKI is jargon to anyone unfamiliar with the IFR
approach plates for that airport -- something that is typical for VFR
pilots. So, while that call might tell the controller where the aircraft
is, it would seem prudent for the controller to then translate that into
something meaningful for VFR traffic in the vicinity.

Neil

Larry Dighera wrote:


Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

The root of the problem is the 'hobby' mentality of some airman. To
be an aviation dilettante invites disaster.


So Larry you are saying that you know not only the names but locations as
well of every IFR fix, intersection, ect... for every airport that you have
ever flown into VFR?

Recently, Neil Gould posted:

In this instance, RIKKI is jargon to anyone unfamiliar with the IFR
approach plates for that airport -- something that is typical for VFR

Please excuse the typo. The above should read "atypical for VFR"

Neil

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:30:07 -0500, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
:

In this instance, RIKKI is jargon to anyone unfamiliar with the IFR
approach plates for that airport -- something that is typical for VFR
pilots.

Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

You must have real fun planning a long VFR XC. How many weeks does it take
you?

The root of the problem is the 'hobby' mentality of some airman. To
be an aviation dilettante invites disaster.

As I see it, an airman doesn't think they need to communicate
meaningfully, and choose instead to use colloquial jargon, THEY are the
the ones inviting disaster.

Neil

Recently, Neil Gould posted:

Recently, Neil Gould posted:

In this instance, RIKKI is jargon to anyone unfamiliar with the IFR
approach plates for that airport -- something that is typical for VFR

Please excuse the typo. The above should read "atypical for VFR"

Yikes. Never mind! Revert to previous...

Neil

Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

You mean to say that a newly minted VFR pilot is supposed to study all
the approach plates at all the airports he might be flying past or need
to fly into? How many newly minted VFR pilots even know how to read an
approach plate?

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:37:36 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:


Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

The root of the problem is the 'hobby' mentality of some airman. To
be an aviation dilettante invites disaster.


So Larry you are saying that you know not only the names but locations as
well of every IFR fix, intersection, ect... for every airport that you have
ever flown into VFR?


Don't be silly.

I'm saying, that regulations require an airman to have all available
information that may affect his planned flight. But you knew that,
right?

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote:

Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

The root of the problem is the 'hobby' mentality of some airman. To
be an aviation dilettante invites disaster.


So Larry you are saying that you know not only the names but locations as
well of every IFR fix, intersection, ect... for every airport that you have
ever flown into VFR?

Before the internet, didn't "all available
information" pretty much mean a current
sectional and Airport F/D and a weather/
notam briefing for a VFR flight?

Now that we have the internet, I could spend
10 hours researching a 2 hour flight for
"all available information"

On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:33:33 -0400, Jose
wrote in :

Personally, I would classify approach plates or low-level en route
charts as being within the broad category of "all available
information" with which an airman is required to familiarize himself
during preflight planning.

You mean to say that a newly minted VFR pilot is supposed to study all
the approach plates at all the airports he might be flying past or need
to fly into?

No. I find that the regulations require familiarity with all
available information relevant to the flight. I would suppose that an
FAA inspector would also.

How many newly minted VFR pilots even know how to read an
approach plate?

Jose

Only those who value their lives? :-)

Honestly, if I were headed to an un-towered airport, before I'd fault
an IFR arrival for reporting RIKKI, I'd question my preflight planning
thoroughness.

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 17:30:13 -0500, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
:

I guess you
think that quarter million pilots are "aviation dilettantes", and that if
they don't understand of your communications, it is not your problem?

No. I think that if regulations are not followed, a PD has occurred.