The Deaf vs. The Colorblind

On 17 Aug 2006 09:49:04 -0700, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote in . com:


Larry Dighera wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:19:22 -0700, Sylvain wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

Please explain how a data link would be useful in controlling an
aircraft that has lost communication capability due to electrical
system failure.

the same way one would for *any* aircraft that has lost communication
capability as described in AIM 6-4-1 for instance?


Please explain how aircraft that has lost (data link and all radio)
communication capability due to electrical system failure will be able
to receive the green 'cleared to land' light gun signal upon arrival
if light guns are eliminated as suggested.

Aircraft wouldn't lose the datalink because it would have a backup
battery.

That wouldn't provide the same level of safety as a ground based
system.

But if it did they could use just one color light and three or
four Morse characters which everyone would be required to memorize.
Every pilot knows S, O, A, and N (even though AN ranges have went where
VOR should have years ago, but I digress) and most people know "V" from
Beethoven's FIFTH-da-da-da-dum.

I suppose that's reasonable. It's more complex, but if we are truly a
brotherhood of airmen, I suppose we can accommodate the physically
challenged in that small way.

In article . com,
"Bret Ludwig" wrote:

Aircraft wouldn't lose the datalink because it would have a backup
battery.

a backup battery doesn't mean much when the equipment itself dies.

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

Larry Dighera wrote:

one, nobody suggests eliminating the light guns,

Retiring the signal lights would be beneficial to the colorblind,
but devastating to the deaf.

fair enough. So someone did suggest it, bad idea nonetheless.

Perhaps you'd be good enough to point out the part of AIM 6-4-1 that
exempts a flight from receiving a clearance to land from ATC at
towered airports:

good, so you can cut and paste, we now just have to work a bit
on the reading comprehension part; now pay attention to the part
that says 'and land as soon as practicable' (for the VFR part);
do you understand what 'practicable' mean? if your first field
of choice is not 'practicable' -- for instance because it requires
a clearance that you now are unable to receive -- then pick another
one -- for instance one which is not controled, there are quite
a few to choose from. As for the flight in IFR is concerned, it
is also explained in excruciating details, try reading it again.

--Sylvain

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:34:31 -0700, Sylvain wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

one, nobody suggests eliminating the light guns,

Retiring the signal lights would be beneficial to the colorblind,
but devastating to the deaf.

fair enough. So someone did suggest it, bad idea nonetheless.

Perhaps you'd be good enough to point out the part of AIM 6-4-1 that
exempts a flight from receiving a clearance to land from ATC at
towered airports:

good, so you can cut and paste,

Am I to infer from that statement, that you don't appreciate the
effort I expended in researching the information and providing it as
reference material for this discussion? Personally, I prefer having
the words of the actual citation before me when making decisions based
on them, don't you?

we now just have to work a bit
on the reading comprehension part; now pay attention to the part
that says 'and land as soon as practicable' (for the VFR part);
do you understand what 'practicable' mean? [sic] if your first field
of choice is not 'practicable' -- for instance because it requires
a clearance that you now are unable to receive -- then pick another
one -- for instance one which is not controled, there are quite
a few to choose from. As for the flight in IFR is concerned, it
is also explained in excruciating details, try reading it again.


(Someone is going to have to enlighten you on the function of the
Shift key.)

So there is no such part, that exempts a flight from receiving a
clearance to land from ATC at towered airports contained in AIM
Section 6-4-1: Two-way Radio Communications Failure. Thank you.

To summarize, retiring FAA light gun equipment, would result in the
inability of a flight to land at a towered airport in the event of
lost communication as a result of total electrical system failure.

So when my headset plug makes intermittent contact while I'm on short
final at my destination (towered) airport, you suggest that I abort
the landing, and head for an uncontrolled field, rather than see the
green light from the tower and land?

Your smug attitude belies your shallow analysis of the issue.

Jose wrote:
I've noticed myself that the green (in airport beacons) is often not a
well saturated green, and the green (on wingtips) is often blue.
Perhaps secondary colors would work better for colorblind people while
not being hard to distinguish for normally sighted people.

When flying at night (at a distance) I often have to watch the beacon
for a bit to discern white from green. After a few cycles I can tell
the brighter white from the dimmer green. On a sunny day the red &
white lights on a VASI often are hard to tell apart until I'm within 1
mile. I have a red/green deficiency but can tell white from green from
red well enough to have passed the signal lamp test to get a SODA.

Larry Dighera wrote:

Am I to infer from that statement, that you don't appreciate the
effort I expended in researching the information and providing it as
reference material for this discussion?

something I did myself before posting to refresh my memory, google:
AIM site:faa.gov
total time: about 2 1/2 seconds, but I didn't want to clutter
a post by something that anyone could get easily. But thanks for
the effort.

So there is no such part, that exempts a flight from receiving a
clearance to land from ATC at towered airports contained in AIM
Section 6-4-1: Two-way Radio Communications Failure. Thank you.

you definitely have to work on this reading comprehension thing.
Seriously. May be English is not your native language. Ask
someone to explain it to you, hire an instructor, do something.

To summarize, retiring FAA light gun equipment, would result in the
inability of a flight to land at a towered airport in the event of
lost communication as a result of total electrical system failure.

Total electrical system failu either you are in VMC and then
this is not really a problem, although it might be, this is
your call after all, or you are in IMC in which case this
is an emergency and you do whatever it takes to complete the flight
safely (you may want to read 14 CFR 91.3 -- it is online too,
no need to post it here)

So when my headset plug makes intermittent contact while I'm on short
final at my destination (towered) airport, you suggest that I abort
the landing, and head for an uncontrolled field, rather than see the
green light from the tower and land?

If you have to ask, I suggest that you take remedial training.

--Sylvain

Your smug attitude belies your shallow analysis of the issue.

I had to think about this one for a minute, thought you were
being ironic, it was difficult to tell.

On 17 Aug 2006 09:49:04 -0700, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:


Larry Dighera wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:19:22 -0700, Sylvain wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

Please explain how a data link would be useful in controlling an
aircraft that has lost communication capability due to electrical
system failure.

the same way one would for *any* aircraft that has lost communication
capability as described in AIM 6-4-1 for instance?


Please explain how aircraft that has lost (data link and all radio)
communication capability due to electrical system failure will be able
to receive the green 'cleared to land' light gun signal upon arrival
if light guns are eliminated as suggested.

Aircraft wouldn't lose the datalink because it would have a backup
battery. But if it did they could use just one color light and three or
four Morse characters which everyone would be required to memorize.
Every pilot knows S, O, A, and N (even though AN ranges have went where
VOR should have years ago, but I digress) and most people know "V" from
Beethoven's FIFTH-da-da-da-dum.

I seem to recall being required to demonstrate the ability to identify
VOR stations by listening to the Morse coded identifier. This was
during my training for the private certificate. I astonished my CFI
by listening to the ID just once and then saying, "Ok, that's MZB (or
whatever)" without refering to the sectional chart where the morse is
given thusly -- --.. -... for MZB. He said, "How'd you do that?" I
explained I'd been a ham since I was a kid and could easily decode
those things in my head. So.....we're already supposed to be able
to do this so how come the tower guys can't talk to NORDO guys this
way?

Klein, NA7NA

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:38:43 -0600, Klein wrote in
:

so how come the tower guys can't talk to NORDO guys this
way?


No necessity?