Radio protocol regarding full stops on full stop only nights

In a previous article, Jay Somerset said:
The proper request would have been for a "stop & go".

Why do you, like the controller, assume that he wanted to go again? He
asked for a full stop, perhaps that's what he wanted?

When I'm doing night currency, I'll fly to a nearby (just outside the
inner ring of the class C) uncontrolled field. The runway is pretty
short, so I'll do a full stop and taxi back each time. No worry about
rules against touch-and-go, and no worries about landing long and not
noticing the end of the runway approaching fast in the dark.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"I'm fairly sure Linux exists principally because writing an operating system
probably seems like a good way to pass the bignum months of darkness in
Finland" - Rodger Donaldson

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jay Somerset" wrote in message
...

The proper request would have been for a "stop & go".


What airport prohibits touch and goes but allows stop and goes?

There is always the stop and taxi back option, not as convenient but ok for
currency.

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:40:41 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
et::


"Jay Somerset" wrote in message
.. .

The proper request would have been for a "stop & go".


What airport prohibits touch and goes but allows stop and goes?


What is the reasoning behind full-stop landings for night currency?
If one performs stop-and-goes (presumably adequate to meet the FAR
requirement), there is no more night taxi experience gained than with
touch-and-goes. Is it a safety issue? I must be overlooking
something.

... The controller may have had a brain fart ...

I keep hearing this term "brain fart." Is this a product of butt
heads?

Good question. It is a truly stupid phrase which has unfortunately seemed
to have really caught on lately.

Hi Ben

just curious to hear what other people have
done/would do in the same situation.

From Canada.
I would have contacted tower - not ground.
My downwind call would have stated left or right - i.e. downwind left -
it's a safety thing. You could be flying against upwind, thinking that
downwind is right when it is left, or vica versa - so it is a
situational awareness thing for you and the tower (In Canada it is SOP)

I would have called full stop, as you did.
I would have phoned tower once on the ground and asked them to explain
their response.
You couldn't, and didn't call touch & go.
But you could call stop and go,
or full stop,
or simulated go-around,
or low and over.

HTH

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE


In article .com,
"Ben Hallert" wrote:

Hi guys,

I was doing closed traffic at an unnamed airport with a 'No touch &
goes at night' rule. On downwind, I made the following call (because I
am aware of the rule) "XXX ground, Cherokee 1234 Sierra on downwind,
request full stop."

The tower responds back "Touch and goes are prohibited at night!
Cherokee 1234 Sierra, cleared for full stop ONLY!"

I had my instructor with me, and he said my call was fine. Was the
tower being jerky? Or was there a better call I could have made? I
knew about the rule, that's why I explicitly asked for full stop, but
the tower acted like I had just soiled myself in public.

I'm not too worried, just curious to hear what other people have
done/would do in the same situation. Also, if there's a technically
better call I can make, I'm all ears.

Thanks! Actually, I did say 'tower', not 'ground', that was a mistype.
And I already bought Say Again, Please and am reading it.

Ben Hallert wrote:
Thanks! Actually, I did say 'tower', not 'ground', that was a mistype.
And I already bought Say Again, Please and am reading it.

I would add to what the other responders have said that *in general* it is a bad
idea IMO to try to impute emotion or motivation based on an ATC transmission.
Don't worry about the controller's feelings. Just interpret the instruction
literally, request clarification if necessary, and exercise your pilot authority
accordingly.

Dave

I would add to what the other responders have said that *in general* it is
a bad idea IMO to try to impute emotion or motivation based on an ATC
transmission. Don't worry about the controller's feelings. Just interpret
the instruction literally, request clarification if necessary, and
exercise your pilot authority accordingly.

And remember, they are just government employees. Their level of competence
and flexibility never did recover from the strike.


Karl

"kage" wrote in message
...

And remember, they are just government employees. Their level of
competence and flexibility never did recover from the strike.


Actually, the best controllers never went on strike, it's just that
standards have declined markedly since then.

"kage" wrote in message
...
And remember, they are just government employees. Their level of
competence and flexibility never did recover from the strike.

Having spent time in both government and private sector jobs, I can attest
that there are large numbers of incompetent people employed in both sectors.
Government employees are no more likely to be incompetent than
non-government employees.

Furthermore, having spent a fair amount of time dealing with ATC, I can
attest that there are numerous controllers who are both competent and
flexible, to a high degree.

Pete