A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old January 7th 06, 01:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

A Lieberman wrote:
: On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:55:37 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

: I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
: before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
: made it even more comical.

: I got this on my Beech Sundowner at GLH which is a commercial airport.
: Tower got a chuckle when I replied "fixed and welded."
: Maybe he thought I was a Sierra, who knows :-)

I was a passenger in my friend's Swift - tailwheel retract. We were landing
at Bridgport, perhaps - I can't remember. On short final tower called out
"Swift go around! Swift go around go around!". We did a go-around. On
downwind we asked "why did you have us go around?" Tower said "your nosegear
was not down!" We were laughing pretty hard, and eventually my friend
managed to say "Tower, the little wheel of this airplane is on the *back*".
--
Aaron C.
  #62  
Old January 7th 06, 01:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

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

"Douglas Paterson" wrote in message
...
[snip]
I queried tower on the phone after
landing, they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it
essentially
means "hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane,
we don't mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not
exist in the civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own
rules--they mirror both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle
differences (as there are between FAA and ICAO).

[snip]
So someone within the USAF thought USAF tower controllers should inform
flight crews that landing was at their own risk when the weather was below
approach minimums? What does that mean, exactly? Does someone else
assume the risk when weather is above approach minimums?

That phraseology doesn't exist in the civilian world, but it's not because
the USAF "flies under its own rules." All controllers in the US are
required to provide services in accordance with FAA Order 7110.65, it
doesn't matter if they wear a uniform.


HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
(my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is going
to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).

I spoke imprecisely when I said the USAF flies under its own rules--yes, it
flies in compliance with FAA (and ICAO and host-nation, where applicable)
rules. There are some pretty broad exceptions granted to the military *by
the FARs*, though, and that's the point I was trying to make....

Air Force Instruction 11-202 Volume 3
[http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfi...i11-202v3.pdf]
is the "General Flight Rules" for USAF pilots--chapter 1 of that pub does a
pretty decent job of explaining that inter-relation if you want the details.
Similar relationships exist as well, for example, for the control of
aircraft (though I'm not familiar enough with that side of things to give
you a citation).

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)



  #63  
Old January 7th 06, 01:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Douglas Paterson wrote:

I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
made it even more comical.


This one I can answer a bit more directly, since it came about during my
tenure in the Air Force. USAF got tired of "too many" gear-up landing (how
many was that? dunno; 1 is "too many" in my book), so they implemented a
policy that eventually worked its way into the rule books. I'll cite the
pilot side of things; I'm reasonably certain that the (USAF) tower
controllers' books have more or less the same guidance for their side of the
radio. I have no idea what, if any, reduction in gear-up landings is
attributed to this rule.

From AFI 11-202 v3
[http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfi...i11-202v3.pdf],
para 5.9.6:

5.9.6. Landing Gear Reporting Procedures. Pilots operating retractable gear
aircraft must report "gear down" to the ATC agency or runway supervisory
unit after extending the landing gear. This report shall be made during any
approach to an airport prior to crossing the runway threshold.

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)



  #64  
Old January 7th 06, 02:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

Douglas Paterson wrote:

HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
(my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is going
to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).


Every landing is at the pilot's risk. The controller has much less at
stake. :-)


Matt
  #65  
Old January 7th 06, 02:17 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

Douglas Paterson wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Douglas Paterson wrote:

I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
made it even more comical.



This one I can answer a bit more directly, since it came about during my
tenure in the Air Force. USAF got tired of "too many" gear-up landing (how
many was that? dunno; 1 is "too many" in my book), so they implemented a
policy that eventually worked its way into the rule books. I'll cite the
pilot side of things; I'm reasonably certain that the (USAF) tower
controllers' books have more or less the same guidance for their side of the
radio. I have no idea what, if any, reduction in gear-up landings is
attributed to this rule.

From AFI 11-202 v3
[http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfi...i11-202v3.pdf],
para 5.9.6:

5.9.6. Landing Gear Reporting Procedures. Pilots operating retractable gear
aircraft must report "gear down" to the ATC agency or runway supervisory
unit after extending the landing gear. This report shall be made during any
approach to an airport prior to crossing the runway threshold.


So if I had called the controller on downwind and reported "gear down
and welded", I wouldn't have gotten that reminder when I was cleared to
land? :-)

Matt
  #66  
Old January 7th 06, 06:26 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

So if I had called the controller on downwind and reported "gear down and
welded", I wouldn't have gotten that reminder when I was cleared to land?
:-)


In theory? No. In practice? Almost certainly. It pretty much becomes a
part of the controllers' automatic phraseology: "call sign, cleared to
land rwy XX, check gear down." That happens to me more often than not even
after reporting the gear down; indeed, I made it a habit to call at the FAF
(which, by another USAF rule, is the latest point by which the gear must be
down), "call sign, final approach fix, gear down"--which was typically
followed immediately by tower with, "roger, call sign, cleared to land rwy
XX, check gear down".... *sigh*....

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)



  #67  
Old January 9th 06, 06:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

Matt Whiting wrote:

I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
made it even more comical.


I've heard "...check gear down, no landing light observed" on short final at
RDU, a non-military airport. My landing light was inop and anyway is not related
to the gear position. Nevertheless I thanked the controller for his concern.

Dave
  #68  
Old January 11th 06, 09:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
made it even more comical.


Controllers at military fields are required to issue a wheels down check,
there's no exemption for fixed-gear aircraft. I belonged to a USAF Aero
Club almost thirty years ago. A tower controller at one of our safety
meetings attempted to explain why this was necessary even for our club
aircraft, which were all fixed-gear. I don't recall his explanation, but I
do remember thinking at the time it was completely absurd. Links to the
requirements below:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp2/atc0201.html#2-1-12

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp2/atc0201.html#2-1-24


  #69  
Old January 11th 06, 09:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Does 7110.65 prohibit saying "check gear down?"


Nope. It actually requires some controllers to say it, although the book
phraseology is "check wheels down".


  #70  
Old January 11th 06, 09:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...


"Douglas Paterson" wrote in message
...

HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
(my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is
going to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).


How does the controller know when the weather is below minimums for any
particular operation? If the controller is going to be hung to dry in the
event of a mishap if he doesn't state "at your own risk", then to cover his
ass he'd have to state it whenever the weather drops below the highest user
minima, which may still be above what's required for the arriving aircraft.
Seems to me it'd be better to just state the latest weather information.
I'd expect the pilot is going to ask for it anyway when told "at your own
risk."


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RUMSFELD GAVE INSTRUCTIONS FOR TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB MORRIS434 Military Aviation 1 July 2nd 04 11:41 PM
RUMSFELD GAVE INSTRUCTIONS FOR TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB MORRIS434 Naval Aviation 0 July 2nd 04 02:23 PM
Polikarpov PO-2 antique bipe-building plans and instructions FS Nenad Miklusev Aviation Marketplace 0 May 2nd 04 09:30 AM
Polikarpov PO-2 antique bipe-building plans and instructions FS Nenad Miklusev Home Built 0 May 2nd 04 09:29 AM
My Favorite Wartime Person: Bill Detz Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 July 13th 03 05:19 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.