A tower-induced go-round

No big deal, but at the end of a very long flight it was more work
than I needed.

As my flight instructor used to say, consider it a "character building
exercise".

--
jr

snipped a bunch of good stuff What type of aircraft were you flying?

'74 Piper Pathfinder -- PA28-235.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 16 Mar 2007 18:58:53 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote:

Today we experienced a new first, when the tower controller at
Jefferson City, Missouri decided to cut a Cessa 172 in front of me on
a short right base, *after* clearing me to land on Rwy 30.


Yeah, well he should have canceled your landing clearance, or at least
communicated with you. Or, if you couldn't accept a delay in your
clearance (and a medical emergency is as valid as a mechanical emergency),
you should have communicated with him.

He knew he had a student pilot so was giving him priority, I guess (can't
be sure without reading his mind).

Unless you ask him (and I'd do that on the ground), you can't really be
sure of all the nuances of the situation.

At many airports (in the US), giving multiple a/c clearances to land
without the runway being clear is not unusual. The controller is betting
he'll have the required clearance when you get there. Most of the time it
works out. Sometimes not shrug.

I get that frequently going into KASH, which has a lot of student activity.
Most of the time it works out with me doing slow flight and waiting for the
the a/c ahead to land; sometimes I request a 360 for spacing; and rarely
I'll get a go-around (usually from a controller who doesn't realize how
slowly I can fly my Mooney).
--ron

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

Today we experienced a new first, when the tower controller at
Jefferson City, Missouri decided to cut a Cessa 172 in front of me on
a short right base, *after* clearing me to land on Rwy 30.


What was your position at the time?



Incredulous, I slowed as much as possible, and watched as the 172 (who
was several hundred feet above us) struggled to lose enough altitude
to land safely. We were both bucking a 30 knot gusty headwind, which
-- although it allowed me to slow waaaay down -- did nothing but make
the poor, hapless Skyhawk keep flying, and flying, and flying....

Eventually he put it in a steep slip, and managed to touch down about
25% down the runway -- at which point he nearly stopped! Instead of
the tower telling the guy to land long and exit immediately -- the
runway is 6000 feet long -- the controller remained silent, as I
ground my way down final at minimum approach speed, way behind the
power curve, with a ground speed of maybe 50 knots.


He doesn't necessarily have to exit the runway before you land. If he's
3000 feet or more from the threshold when you cross it's fine, but that
won't happen if he touches down 1500 feet from it and then stops. How far
out were you when he touched down?



Having landed at OSH and SNF a few times, I knew I was spaced just
fine -- IF the 172 would only get off the danged runway.
Unfortunately, he was in no hurry to do so, and the controller
blithely told me to "go around" in his most bored "controller voice"
-- as if he does this all day long.


If you had adequate spacing behind the 172 the controller's decision to make
it number one does not sound too bad. The problem seems to be the 172's
unexpected stop. Was there additional traffic behind you?



Having just endured 20 minutes of fairly severe clear-air turbulence
during our descent from 7500 feet, I was *not* amused -- but bit my
tongue as I dutifully went around.

The guys in the FBO were all talking about it when we walked in.
Apparently the 172 pilot was a student (in which case he did a damned
good job getting that thing down), and the controller was...well, no
one would say what the controller was. However, I'm pretty sure we
know why he's been assigned to the deadest control tower in the
Midwest.


It may very well have been poor technique on the controller's part, hard to
say from just your description. If it was you better just get used to it.
The FAA determination to accelerate controller retirements and the reduced
pay scale for new hires will cause control towers to be staffed by less
capable people in the near future.

"TheSmokingGnu" wrote in message
...

You should have told the controller to, excuse my limited French, le
pousser où le soleil ne brille pas.

Then you should have quoted him the right-of way rules (planes below have
right over those above, planes on approach have right over those in the
pattern), and told him that you were taking your CLEARANCE and using the
RUNWAY.


Actually it is planes on final that have the right of way, but that's
irrelevant here as it was a controlled field.

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 16:58:26 -0500, "Peter Dohm"
wrote:


At many airports (in the US), giving multiple a/c clearances to land
without the runway being clear is not unusual. The controller is betting
he'll have the required clearance when you get there. Most of the time it
works out. Sometimes not shrug.

The controllers at one of the local Class D airports in southeast Florida
have a reputation for being rather cautious--and not doing that. (That's a
deliberate understatement, although there some extenuating
circumstances--including a high volume of IFR traffic.)

I strongly suspect that many (perhaps most) pilots pilots usng that airport
would be much happier with a quicker flow of traffic and more frequent
go-arounds.



It's places like BOS and other big city airports where the practice is
common.

I've been in situations where I've not been given a landing clearance until
the runway was clear.

I've also been in a situation where I was flying a Cessna 150 cleared to
land 15 hold short of Rwy 5 -- This was just after clearances to land had
been issued to a KC-135 for RWY 5; and a C-130 for Rwy 33!! (The C-130 was
practicing downwind landings).

--ron

At many airports (in the US), giving multiple a/c clearances to land
without the runway being clear is not unusual. The controller is betting
he'll have the required clearance when you get there. Most of the time it
works out. Sometimes not shrug.

The controllers at one of the local Class D airports in southeast Florida
have a reputation for being rather cautious--and not doing that. (That's a
deliberate understatement, although there some extenuating
circumstances--including a high volume of IFR traffic.)

I strongly suspect that many (perhaps most) pilots pilots usng that airport
would be much happier with a quicker flow of traffic and more frequent
go-arounds.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in news:1174096733.803538.270650
@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

Clearly the controller either made a mistake or is a dolt.

Either way, a few good S-Turns would have saved you some gas and turbulence.

Today we experienced a new first, when the tower controller at
Jefferson City, Missouri decided to cut a Cessa 172 in front of me on
a short right base, *after* clearing me to land on Rwy 30.

What was your position at the time?

Hard to say (I wasn't looking at my GPS). I'd say a mile out, maybe
two?

He doesn't necessarily have to exit the runway before you land. If he's
3000 feet or more from the threshold when you cross it's fine, but that
won't happen if he touches down 1500 feet from it and then stops. How far
out were you when he touched down?

Probably 1/2 mile.

If you had adequate spacing behind the 172 the controller's decision to make
it number one does not sound too bad. The problem seems to be the 172's
unexpected stop. Was there additional traffic behind you?

There was a 182 that had just called in, so he was 5+ miles out. I
agree the 172 stopping was the basic problem, but the controller
should have instructed him to land long or keep rolling. He did
neither.

It may very well have been poor technique on the controller's part, hard to
say from just your description. If it was you better just get used to it.
The FAA determination to accelerate controller retirements and the reduced
pay scale for new hires will cause control towers to be staffed by less
capable people in the near future.

I doubt it, but we'll see.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

Yeah, I thought about doing a 360, but it was so danged gusty that
turning at low altitude was very uncomfortable. (More for the family
than for me, of course.)



Aeronautical Information Manual
Official Guide to Basic Flight Information and ATC Procedures

Chapter 4. Air Traffic Control

Section 3. Airport Operations

4-3-5. Unexpected Maneuvers in the Airport Traffic Pattern

There have been several incidents in the vicinity of controlled airports
that were caused primarily by aircraft executing unexpected maneuvers. ATC
service is based upon observed or known traffic and airport conditions.
Controllers establish the sequence of arriving and departing aircraft by
requiring them to adjust flight as necessary to achieve proper spacing.
These adjustments can only be based on observed traffic, accurate pilot
reports, and anticipated aircraft maneuvers. Pilots are expected to
cooperate so as to preclude disrupting traffic flows or creating conflicting
patterns. The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for
and is the final authority as to the operation of the aircraft. On occasion
it may be necessary for pilots to maneuver their aircraft to maintain
spacing with the traffic they have been sequenced to follow. The controller
can anticipate minor maneuvering such as shallow "S" turns. The controller
cannot, however, anticipate a major maneuver such as a 360 degree turn. If a
pilot makes a 360 degree turn after obtaining a landing sequence, the result
is usually a gap in the landing interval and, more importantly, it causes a
chain reaction which may result in a conflict with following traffic and an
interruption of the sequence established by the tower or approach
controller. Should a pilot decide to make maneuvering turns to maintain
spacing behind a preceding aircraft, the pilot should always advise the
controller if at all possible. Except when requested by the controller or in
emergency situations, a 360 degree turn should never be executed in the
traffic pattern or when receiving radar service without first advising the
controller.