If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
wrote in
: "Pilots who wish to conduct instrument approaches should be particularly alert for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the flow of traffic. Position reports on the CTAF should include distance and direction from the airport, as well as the pilot's intentions upon completion of the approach." From section 7 of:http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...AdvisoryCircul ar... Well. I think it boils down to this: a pilot should not depend on other pilots going beyond what is required of them to be in the air. A student pilot does not need to know anything about IFR operations to be in the air. Can you count on him knowing what IFR announcements on the radio mean? No. A private pilot does not need to know anything about IFR operations to be in the air. Can't count on him either. I appreciate that it's a good idea to learn about IFR, and I am. However, in my spare time studies of this I haven't read yet about approach procedures or the radio announcements that describe it. I wouldn't advise anyone with an IFR rating counting on me understanding such communications. The FAA doesn't advise that either. But I do and I'm smarter than the FAA. After the revolution I am going to sit all vfr pilots down and tell them everything they need to know about instrument flight regarding miing it up with IFR traffic. Ti will take twenty minutes, incuding commercials. Bertie |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 15, 5:28*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:5fdc8536-11f5-4348-993f- : Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site, landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the tower ATC phrase book? Why would he tell me that landing was own risk if he wasn't going to clear me to land? BTW: It always struck me as odd that a Mooney and a 747 have the same vis requirements on an ILS. A 1/2 mile is probably like 2 seconds in a 747 but an 1/8 mile is like 10 seconds in a Mooney. No, usually it's classified by category. On some runways the vis requirement is the smae, but on some it would be higher for a C or D airplane. It's mostly down to the OCL. Bertie I understand that. On a standard ILS if a cat C is 1/2 mile vis I believe a cat A should be 1/8 mile vis. The vis requirements should be based on how many seconds the pilot can see down the runway. I can't think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with regard to precision approaches. -robert -Robert |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 15, 5:36*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:0b1f9eb2-37b7-4f0c-b4c0- : On Jan 15, 12:55*pm, kontiki wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is no requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute charts for cross country airports. Of course there "is no requirement...". No one said anything about VFR pilots purchasing approach plates and teaching them IFR (perish the mere thought!). Re-read my post. Where I trained (and where I now teach) there are constantly people practicing instrument approaches and we hear calls like "...N1234a is procedure turn inbound ILS23.." or "N1234a is YUPPY inbound ILS 32..." Most students want to know what that means. In any case it behooves an instructor to explain.. once explained the student will no longer be ignorant and will ultimately be a safer pilot when he's out soloing. So do you disagree that the IFR pilot was wrong to use language that other pilots may not understand? The IFR pilot would certainly be foolish if he relied on all VFR pilots knowing the IFR waypoints and approach fixes at each airport. NOT WHAT HE SAID! Sorry for shouting. Seemed appropriate for some reason. That's why I posted that. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. I'm saying IFR pilots should use proper phrasing and he's coming back with VFR pilots should know IFR waypoints. Its not clear if he believes his suggestion is a "nice extra" or if he believes it really soves the problem at hand. -robert |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
: On Jan 15, 5:28*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: "Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:5fdc8536-11f5-4348-993f- : Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site, landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the tower ATC phrase book? Why would he tell me that landing was own risk if he wasn't going to clear me to land? BTW: It always struck me as odd that a Mooney and a 747 have the same vis requirements on an ILS. A 1/2 mile is probably like 2 seconds in a 747 but an 1/8 mile is like 10 seconds in a Mooney. No, usually it's classified by category. On some runways the vis requirement is the smae, but on some it would be higher for a C or D airplane. It's mostly down to the OCL. Bertie I understand that. On a standard ILS if a cat C is 1/2 mile vis I believe a cat A should be 1/8 mile vis. The vis requirements should be based on how many seconds the pilot can see down the runway. Nope, it's how reasonable it might be to expect to see he runway and munuever the airplane to a landing form the MAP or DH. You're nto going to be able to do that safely with 1/8 from 200' or thereabouts. 1/8 mile is pretty ****ing small! That's Cat 3a minima. I can't think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with regard to precision approaches. Hand flown, you would have a lot of airplanes crashed into the approach lights. An excepetional pilot would be able to do it most of the time, though. most of the time. And I've done a LOT of instruments in singles and light twins. 1/4 is reasonablem but 1/8. no. Bertie |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
: On Jan 15, 5:36*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: "Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:0b1f9eb2-37b7-4f0c-b4c0- : On Jan 15, 12:55*pm, kontiki wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is n o requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute charts for cross country airports. Of course there "is no requirement...". No one said anything about VFR pilots purchasing approach plates and teaching them IFR (perish the mere thought!). Re-read my post. Where I trained (and where I now teach ) there are constantly people practicing instrument approaches and we hear calls like "...N1234a is procedure turn inbound ILS23.." or "N1234a is YUPPY inbound ILS 32..." Most students want to know what that means. In any case it behooves an instructor to explain.. once explained the student will no longer be ignorant and will ultimately be a safer pilot when he's out soloing. So do you disagree that the IFR pilot was wrong to use language that other pilots may not understand? The IFR pilot would certainly be foolish if he relied on all VFR pilots knowing the IFR waypoints and approach fixes at each airport. NOT WHAT HE SAID! Sorry for shouting. Seemed appropriate for some reason. That's why I posted that. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. I'm saying IFR pilots should use proper phrasing and he's coming back with VFR pilots should know IFR waypoints. Its not clear if he believes his suggestion is a "nice extra" or if he believes it really soves the problem at hand. What I understoood him to say was that a vfr pilot should ahve a broad view of the structure of insturment flight. e.g, where the outer marker is in relation to the end of the runway. Where the center fix is. What altitudes the approaching airplane is likely to be at on an ILS. Waht a SID and STAR is. If they fly out of a busy airfiled, particulalry if tehy were to do special VFR, it would behoove them to know roughly what's going on. Hel, If I were operating IMC in a strange place, I'd have no idea where the other guy was if he called some strange waypoint, nor would I look it up. But I'd have a vague idea, at least, what he was up to wheras a VFR pilot would have next to none. It's an important part of "keeping the big picture" and expanding one's comfort zone. And regular Bunyip readers will know me as a Luddite who never turns the radio on unless he's forced! Bertie |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 15, 5:54*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Nope, it's how reasonable it might be to expect to see he runway and munuever the airplane to a landing *form the MAP or DH. You're nto going to be able to do that safely with 1/8 from 200' or thereabouts. 1/8 mile is pretty ****ing small! That's Cat 3a minima. I can't think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with regard to precision approaches. Hand flown, you would have a lot of airplanes crashed into the approach lights. An excepetional pilot would be able to do it most of the time, though. most of the time. And I've done a LOT of instruments in singles and light twins. 1/4 is reasonablem but 1/8. no. Maybe this is different to me because I live in a fog valley. Today I shoot 6 approaches. Weather was reported as 001OVC and 1/8SM. This is pretty common weather here. I easily could have landed from any of the approaches. Flying over the rabbit I clearly could see far enough of the runway to land. Now, if a car pulled in front of me that would be a different story but I don't think the FAA can protect against that anyway. So, to me landing 1/8SM 001OVC is not unreasonably hard but I could see it could be a handful going 150 knots in a 747. -Robert |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 15, 6:01*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote : On Jan 15, 5:36*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: "Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:0b1f9eb2-37b7-4f0c-b4c0- : On Jan 15, 12:55*pm, kontiki wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is n o requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute charts for cross country airports. Of course there "is no requirement...". No one said anything about VFR pilots purchasing approach plates and teaching them IFR (perish the mere thought!). Re-read my post. Where I trained (and where I now teach ) there are constantly people practicing instrument approaches and we hear calls like "...N1234a is procedure turn inbound ILS23.." or "N1234a is YUPPY inbound ILS 32..." Most students want to know what that means. In any case it behooves an instructor to explain.. once explained the student will no longer be ignorant and will ultimately be a safer pilot when he's out soloing. So do you disagree that the IFR pilot was wrong to use language that other pilots may not understand? The IFR pilot would certainly be foolish if he relied on all VFR pilots knowing the IFR waypoints and approach fixes at each airport. NOT WHAT HE SAID! Sorry for shouting. Seemed appropriate for some reason. That's why I posted that. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. I'm saying IFR pilots should use proper phrasing and he's coming back with VFR pilots should know IFR waypoints. Its not clear if he believes his suggestion is a "nice extra" or if he believes it really soves the problem at hand. What I understoood him to say was that a vfr pilot should ahve a broad view of the structure of insturment flight. e.g, where the outer marker is in relation to the end of the runway. Where the center fix is. What altitudes the approaching airplane is likely to be at on an ILS. Waht a SID and STAR is. If they fly out of a busy airfiled, particulalry if tehy were to do special VFR, it would behoove them to know roughly what's going on. Hel, If I were operating IMC in a strange place, I'd have no idea where the other guy was if he called some strange waypoint, nor would I look it up. But I'd have a vague idea, at least, what he was up to wheras a VFR pilot would have next to none. It's an important part of "keeping the big picture" and expanding one's comfort zone. And regular Bunyip readers will know me as a Luddite who never turns the radio on unless he's forced! But would you expect a student pilot on a cross country to know what it means if a IFR pilot calls up with "Cessna 1234 4 files from FOOBAR"??? -Robert |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 50 | November 30th 07 05:25 AM |
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale | >pk | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 06 07:48 AM |
"Airplane Drivers" and "Self Centered Idiots" | Skylune | Piloting | 28 | October 16th 06 05:40 AM |
Desktop Wallpaper - "The "Hanoi Taxi"". | T. & D. Gregor, Sr. | Simulators | 0 | December 31st 05 06:59 PM |