![]() |
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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2XtN15qOA Two weeks ago I was with a friend who had COM failure and that was my first experience with light guns. Because of this, I thought it would behoove me to brush up on my experiences in a plane. I posted my experiences in the Flight Aware forums. The COM failure can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83618#83618 and my light gun questions can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83893#83893 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 13, 9:03*am, Sam Spade wrote:
wrote: Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2XtN15qOA Two weeks ago I was with a friend who had COM failure and that was my first experience with light guns. Because of this, I thought it would behoove me to brush up on my experiences in a plane. I posted my experiences in the Flight Aware forums. *The COM failure can be found athttp://discussions.flightaware.com/viewtopic.php?p=83618#83618 and my light gun questions can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83893#83893 What's this have to do with IFR Flying? In this case, NORDO situations. Still need to be cleared to land even if 7600 :-) after breaking out of the clag. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BeechSundowner wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:03 am, Sam Spade wrote: wrote: Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2XtN15qOA Two weeks ago I was with a friend who had COM failure and that was my first experience with light guns. Because of this, I thought it would behoove me to brush up on my experiences in a plane. I posted my experiences in the Flight Aware forums. The COM failure can be found athttp://discussions.flightaware.com/viewtopic.php?p=83618#83618 and my light gun questions can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83893#83893 What's this have to do with IFR Flying? In this case, NORDO situations. Still need to be cleared to land even if 7600 :-) after breaking out of the clag. What if it's 200 and 1/2? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 14, 8:54*am, Sam Spade wrote:
BeechSundowner wrote: On Jul 13, 9:03 am, Sam Spade wrote: wrote: Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2XtN15qOA Two weeks ago I was with a friend who had COM failure and that was my first experience with light guns. Because of this, I thought it would behoove me to brush up on my experiences in a plane. I posted my experiences in the Flight Aware forums. *The COM failure can be found athttp://discussions.flightaware.com/viewtopic.php?p=83618#83618 and my light gun questions can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83893#83893 What's this have to do with IFR Flying? In this case, NORDO situations. *Still need to be cleared to land even if 7600 :-) after breaking out of the clag. What if it's 200 and 1/2? Should have thought about an alternate long before then however it could happen on lift off.....declare an emergency. Need a clearance to land without an emergency. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BeechSundowner wrote:
On Jul 14, 8:54 am, Sam Spade wrote: BeechSundowner wrote: On Jul 13, 9:03 am, Sam Spade wrote: wrote: Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2XtN15qOA Two weeks ago I was with a friend who had COM failure and that was my first experience with light guns. Because of this, I thought it would behoove me to brush up on my experiences in a plane. I posted my experiences in the Flight Aware forums. The COM failure can be found athttp://discussions.flightaware.com/viewtopic.php?p=83618#83618 and my light gun questions can be found at http://discussions.flightaware.com/v...?p=83893#83893 What's this have to do with IFR Flying? In this case, NORDO situations. Still need to be cleared to land even if 7600 :-) after breaking out of the clag. What if it's 200 and 1/2? Should have thought about an alternate long before then however it could happen on lift off.....declare an emergency. Need a clearance to land without an emergency. So, you are saying I need a clearance to land when NORDO and proceeding under the provisions of 91.185? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 16, 3:41*am, Sam Spade wrote:
So, you are saying I need a clearance to land when NORDO and proceeding under the provisions of 91.185? Correct. I am sure you know clearance for an approach is NOT a clearance to land. I don't see anything in the above that says I am allowed to land (hence the light signals). No light signals, no clearance to land. I better be squawking 7700 if I plan to land without a LANDING clearance. The above pertains to enroute and approach clearances. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BeechSundowner wrote:
On Jul 16, 3:41 am, Sam Spade wrote: So, you are saying I need a clearance to land when NORDO and proceeding under the provisions of 91.185? Correct. I am sure you know clearance for an approach is NOT a clearance to land. I don't see anything in the above that says I am allowed to land (hence the light signals). No light signals, no clearance to land. I better be squawking 7700 if I plan to land without a LANDING clearance. The above pertains to enroute and approach clearances. I beg to differ with you. When operating under 91.185 you don't have an approach clearance any more than you have a landing clearance. If your destination airport has an operating control tower and conditions are IMC you don't need a landing clearance any more than you need an approach clearance. If, however, the Class D area is VMC to the extent that it is safe to enter the VFR traffic pattern that would be the prudent thing to do. Under IMC, so long as you can comply with 91.185 you're expected to sqawk 7600, not 7700. And, perhaps the transponder isn't working either. If it is, and you have sufficient time, listening on VOR voice might find ATC soliciting ident replies to new clearances. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 16, 3:36*pm, Sam Spade wrote:
BeechSundowner wrote: On Jul 16, 3:41 am, Sam Spade wrote: So, you are saying I need a clearance to land when NORDO and proceeding under the provisions of 91.185? Correct. *I am sure you know clearance for an approach is NOT a clearance to land. *I don't see anything in the above that says I am allowed to land (hence the light signals). No light signals, no clearance to land. *I better be squawking 7700 if I plan to land without a LANDING clearance. *The above pertains to enroute and approach clearances. I beg to differ with you. *When operating under 91.185 you don't have an approach clearance any more than you have a landing clearance. * Lets go this route. The system has built in a communication way for getting a clearance to land via light gun? What makes you think that 91.185 would trump the clearance to land procedures? I realize this is more theoretical talk as in the real world, ATC will move traffic to get us in safely and it's a matter of "semantics" but in the theory world, what you gave as reference pertains to enroute operations (center and approaches), not tower operations (landing) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 16, 3:46*pm, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Jul 16, 3:36*pm, Sam Spade wrote: BeechSundowner wrote: On Jul 16, 3:41 am, Sam Spade wrote: So, you are saying I need a clearance to land when NORDO and proceeding under the provisions of 91.185? Correct. *I am sure you know clearance for an approach is NOT a clearance to land. *I don't see anything in the above that says I am allowed to land (hence the light signals). No light signals, no clearance to land. *I better be squawking 7700 if I plan to land without a LANDING clearance. *The above pertains to enroute and approach clearances. I beg to differ with you. *When operating under 91.185 you don't have an approach clearance any more than you have a landing clearance. * Lets go this route. *The system has built in a communication way for getting a clearance to land via light gun? What makes you think that 91.185 would trump the clearance to land procedures? I realize this is more theoretical talk as in the real world, ATC will move traffic to get us in safely and it's a matter of "semantics" but in the theory world, what you gave as reference pertains to enroute operations (center and approaches), not tower operations (landing) I hit send too fast! Landing is a VFR operation, not a IFR operation. You would be visual from DH to wheels down so I really don't think 91.185 applies. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Light gun work with ATC COMS - Video | [email protected] | Piloting | 5 | July 15th 09 03:20 AM |
Pop up IFR clearance with ATC COMS - Video | [email protected] | Piloting | 0 | November 15th 08 05:05 PM |
Pop up IFR clearance with ATC COMS - Video | A Lieberma[_2_] | Owning | 0 | November 15th 08 05:04 PM |
Pop up IFR clearance with ATC COMS - Video | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | November 15th 08 05:04 PM |