Position and Hold at uncontrolled field

this guy was not a new pilot, he was flying a C-210 and he wasnt having trouble,
he was just "chatting" to Nellis approach, and really really dragging out each
word slowly.
As the person following him, in class B, I was not suppose to deviate from my
course or altitude - I tried slowing down a little to give me more time, but the
guy just kept talking.
I never said anything to him, As soon as I had the opportunity I fired off
"arrow 891 request turn on course"

the nellis AFB guys are kinda relaxed, I guess the speed of our planes put them
to sleep.



C J Campbell wrote:

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
LOL...a couple of months ago nellis approach almost let me fly into a
mountain
because some guy from utah here for xmas shopping, flying out, I was right
behind
him, was doing that on the radio, ummm hhmmm mmmmummm and so on, I almost
told him
to spit it out and shut up but he wouldnt stop talking!
finally as I am nearing the mountain getting ready to make the decision to
deviate
from my course ATC had me on, he shut up and let me ask to make my turn.

I hate it when people just dont spit out what they have to say .


Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp and
laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is having
trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more while
you all argue over it.

One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.

Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on improving
your own radio habits and decision making.

Sorry, apple valley california.
Just outside the Los Angeles basin.
Nice airport, nice restaurant, no tower and alot of local yahoo's use it.
las month when I was flying to LA there was even a UAV out there. I heard ATC
calling him out at 10,000 over apple valley.

Jay Honeck wrote:

it can be a big deal, the first and only time I flew into apple valley,
those
country boys out there were landing 2 and 3 planes at a time. It was a
mess.
half of them wasnt even talking, I think they figured that since the other
guy wasnt off the runway yet they did not need to make call since no one
could take off.

Are you talking about Apple Valley in Illinois, near Galena?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

some guys took speaking lessons from JFK

I have always thought of JFK as the first American president to speak
with an accent


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Bob Gardner wrote:
Is there a nice way for you to point out that 123.3 is designated for flight
school use?

If, IF... the ground station is licensed for that frequency.
Please note that ground stations are licensed for a specific
location and frequency. Really... our license on the wall
(posted per the FCC rules) licenses us for 123.3. The nearby
flight school uses the frequency for chit-chat... when they
SHOULD be using 122.9, 122.75 or 122.85.

Please note that 123.45 is NOT an air to air frequency. :-)
It is attached to the baggage handlers at KORD.


Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 197 Young Eagles!

"C J Campbell" writes:

Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
a hard time learning to use the radios.

Fair enough. But I'm thinking of pilots who should be able to do
better, but who simply have never given a thought to how their radio
hogging is messing up others.

One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.

Sure, students need to practice using the radio, but please take them
to a quiet field and frequency to do so. To let them flounder on the
air at a busy field is simply dangerous.

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
news:6wM_b.396854$na.764749@attbi_s04...

What, you wouldn't? Why should I wait for someone to clear the runway
if there is enough room for me to land behind him?


The same reason you take more fuel than the bare minimum, that you clear
obstacles by more than the bare minimum, and start your takeoff roll with
more than the bare minimum of required runway remaining.

It's hard enough to ensure that you will not make any mistakes while
landing, but you don't have any idea what sort of mechanical problems might
occur, such as brake failure. Or, you might have to make a go around at the
last minute that puts the other aircraft right in your way. There's all
sorts of reasons the landing might not go exactly as you expect it to. Why
reduce or eliminate your safety margin when there's absolutely no good
reason to?

The day you attempt to land while someone is still on the runway, and you
find that you can't avoid running into them, you'll understand why you
should wait.

And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:%uV_b.395703$xy6.2263304@attbi_s02...
And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.

Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?


Folks that operate at controlled fields often land behind a previous landing
aircraft that is still on the runway.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Folks that operate at controlled fields often land behind a previous
landing
aircraft that is still on the runway.

Only if they are the type to do the same thing elsewhere. Just because a
tower controller tells you to do something, that doesn't mean you have to do
it, if you feel it's unsafe.

Beyond that, the tower controller uses very specific minima to decide
whether such a clearance can be given; for example, 3000' of separation is
required for a Category I aircraft landing behind a Category I or II
aircraft. At LOM, the runway is only 3700', so using the same criteria, the
other aircraft would have to be practically all the way at the other end of
the runway.

Pete

There is no requirement for the preceding aircraft to be off the runway
for the next one to land. If you are in a single engine plane then the
other plane has to be 3000 feet down the runway.



Peter Duniho wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
news:%uV_b.395703$xy6.2263304@attbi_s02...

And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.


Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?