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 |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 03:45:23 GMT, Jose
wrote: That is what's happening. The pilots of all those air carrier jets streaming through the airspace you want to use are getting what they want. Traffic flows are dictated by air carrier needs because they're the biggest users. Some time back, in a different thread (about angelflight) you stated that angelflight did not get any priority, and continued to say that aircraft are handled on a first-come first-served basis. Your statement above seems to contradict that (otherwise I could just be scooted in front of the next jet that's not there yet). Well, how often is an air carrier flying low enough to be in approach airspace for an airport they're not landing at? Gets back to "they have to deal with arrivals, not throughflights". |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions? Could be. The rest of us look at charts :-) |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Roy Smith wrote:
someone else wrote N1234: ZXX Center, If you'd like to offer me an amended clearance or holding instructions, I'd be happy to consider them, N1234, over. What possible good comes from this? He's asked you what you would like to do, within the constraints of what he's already told you he's unable to give you. How could the controller possibly know what makes sense for you to do at that point? Are you the PIC, or are you just along for the ride? Roy's excellent suggestions snipped. As usual, an excellent answer, Roy. Dave |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Natalie wrote:
Roy Smith wrote: In article , john smith wrote: Oops! I guess I got my code squawks backwards. Should have typed 7700 for one-minute, then 7600 for the remainder of the flight. If you want to squawk "Lost Comm", just set 7600 and leave it there. The "7700 for one minute, then 7600" procedure predates me, but I understand that a long time ago (like 15 or 20 years), that was how it was done. No longer the case. ...and I suppose I should stop flying triangular patterns as well. Never could remember if it was clockwise for no receiver or the ohter way.. Heh heh. |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Roy Smith wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions? Could be. The rest of us look at charts :-) Whew. This has been some discussion. If only Roy, Steven, Richard, Jose, Warren were all inside the same room talking this out, it would make some fascinating listening. As it is, man, I'm tired of reading. :-) DGB |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:
"Richard Kaplan" wrote Again... "Intentions" are obvious. ATC should offer specific options. Again. The options are obvious, or they should be to any experienced pilot. Tell ATC which of the obvious options you'd like. ATC is there to help you, try working with them instead of against them. It's my understanding that the usual procedure in a case such as this is for the controller to issue a reroute based on the pilot's destintation, present location, and traffic and weather conditions. Giving the pilot a "say intentions" sounds a lot like "you're on your own buddy!". That doesn't sound at all helpful. Something I haven't seen discussed is how long the pilot has to give ATC some suggestions in this case. While contemplating alternative plans and awaiting a revised clearance, the pilot is to continue on his existing clearance. What happens if that takes him into the control area that doesn't want him? |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Jose wrote:
I'm not sure where this is going, but how about: "What clearance can you give me which will get me around to the east of Potomac's airspace?" Good enough. ...Or maybe he'll say, "Unfortunately, I can't get you anywhere near there. The best I can do in that direction is blah, blah. Can you do that?" Well, he's at this point offering something. He could have been offering something from the start, since he knows where I am and where I'm heading. A more helpful original call would have been: "Potomac can't take you right now. I can take you around twenty miles to the East if you like, or to the northwest direct XXX. Which would you prefer?" You seem to be expecting that he's going to say, "Bzzzt, wrong answer, try again". It doesn't work like that. No, it doesn't usually work like that. However, "you can't do that, what are you going to do about it?" sure makes it seem like the controller is playing that game. "Say intentions" should not be something pilots fear hearing. It's not. But "we've revoked your clearance. Say intentions." is. Jose Exactly. They tear up my clearance constantly and issue new ones. The best I can think of is that since the entire plan basically got canceled, they were letting the OP rethink it all. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Howard Nelson" wrote: "Howard Nelson" wrote in message news "Hamish Reid" wrote in message ... In article et, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Howard Nelson" wrote in message m... This thread just gets more interesting. I can just imagine a tape where the following was said: "JAL xxx heavy, Bay Approach refusing to accept you. Say intentions" To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay Approach? Erm, 1999? :-) Hamish Got me. 19xx-1999 Bay Approach, 1999-2003 Nor Cal approach (and maybe a couple of others), 2004- present Sierra Approach, 2006-? Western Approach, followed by USA approach to be handled by a synthesized voice sounding like Steven saying "USA approach refusing to handle you. What are your intentions?". My bad The sequence was Bay to Sierra to NorCal. I can't wait to see what the next consolidation is. Luckily I haven't said Bay Approach (or TCA) in years probably because the correct answer is printed on my charts. Just don't call them "Oakland" like I do every now and then... I'm betting on "Left Coast Approach" by 2020 :-). Hamish |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Changing squawk code seems like a bad idea (as well as totally
unnecessary). You are already radar identified, changing squawk code would just "un identify" you. Seems bad. As far as declaring an emergency goes, I would only do that if there was no other route that would not endanger me. Perhaps if TS were closing around me that would be an emergency. Being irritated that you must turn back and go back to the airport you took off from doesn't sound like a reason to roll fire trucks. -Robert, CFI |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Steve do they still use PDR, PDAR, and PARs?.
Al "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... Shouldn't that be taken into consideration by ATC prior to issuance of the clearance? They probably did. Remember, they initially issued a different route which was declined due to weather. Perhaps they then issued the route through the TRACON hoping they could sell it to approach. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Flap handle activated Climb/Cruise switching | Andy Smielkiewicz | Soaring | 5 | March 14th 05 04:54 AM |
You Want Control? You Can't Handle Control! -- Was 140 dead | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 0 | March 2nd 04 08:48 PM |
G103 Acro airbrake handle | Andy Durbin | Soaring | 12 | January 18th 04 11:51 PM |
How do you handle your EFB in the cockpit? | greg | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | November 17th 03 03:47 AM |
Need door handle for 1959 Cessna 175 | Paul Millner | Owning | 0 | July 4th 03 07:36 PM |