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 » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 15th 08, 07:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I
got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site,
landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a
landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the
tower ATC phrase book? Why would he tell me that landing was own risk
if he wasn't going to clear me to land?

BTW: It always struck me as odd that a Mooney and a 747 have the same
vis requirements on an ILS. A 1/2 mile is probably like 2 seconds in a
747 but an 1/8 mile is like 10 seconds in a Mooney. Of all my 6
approaches today I easily could have landed from any one of them. I
was able to follow the rabbit to the runway but technically if I can
only see 1/8 or so I can't land.

-Robert
  #2  
Old January 15th 08, 08:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 15, 12:45*pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I
got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site,
landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a
landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the
tower ATC phrase book?


I looked in my FAR/AIM 2007 Pilot/Controller glossary and found
nothing.

I could only hazaar guesses as an uninformed VFR only wimp. I'm
curious about the answer though!

ON a (barely) related aside regarding my ignorance of IFR terminology:
I checked out in a 172 on Sunday, and while doing some landings at a
non-towered local airport that had some published IFR approaches I'd
hear planes calling their positions using IFR terminology.

I had NO CLUE where the planes actually were in relation to the
airport. I didn't know if they were two minutes out or ten. A bit
disconcerting when you want to take the active and fly the pattern. If
wishes were horses this beggar would ask that IFR pilots report their
positions (during VFR conditions) in a way us poor VFR only morons
could understand.

Might be safer for all ... maybe might maybe ...

  #3  
Old January 15th 08, 08:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 15, 11:02*am, wrote:

I had NO CLUE where the planes actually were in relation to the
airport. I didn't know if they were two minutes out or ten. A bit
disconcerting when you want to take the active and fly the pattern. If
wishes were horses this beggar would ask that IFR pilots report their
positions (during VFR conditions) in a way us poor VFR only morons
could understand.


Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).

-Robert, CFII
  #4  
Old January 15th 08, 08:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
kontiki
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 479
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).

-Robert, CFII


Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.



  #5  
Old January 15th 08, 08:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 15, 11:15*am, kontiki wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).


-Robert, CFII


Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.


That would require students to purchase IFR charts for every airport
they visit. They would not only need approach charts but enroutes as
well. Its much simplier to just tell the IFR pilots that they need to
use VFR friendly phrasing. Instead of saying "I'm at FOOBAR" they
could just say "I'm 5 miles out on the the ILS straight in runway 12".
Its not very hard.

-Robert, CFII
  #6  
Old January 15th 08, 08:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"


Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.


That would require students to purchase IFR charts for every airport
they visit. They would not only need approach charts but enroutes as
well. Its much simplier to just tell the IFR pilots that they need to
use VFR friendly phrasing. Instead of saying "I'm at FOOBAR" they
could just say "I'm 5 miles out on the the ILS straight in runway 12".
Its not very hard.

-Robert, CFII


I can't see much sense in demanding that VFR pilots learn about IFR
and buy or download the approach plates so they can understand a radio
message from an IFR flight doing practice in VFR conditions (or when
conditions are VFR at the relevant airport).

Since there is no requirement to use the radio at class E fields,
though, then there's really nothing to be said if an IFR pilot just
doesn't want to be bothered.

This will probably never be such a big problem (ie, an accident or two
or three) that the FAA has to write a regulation on it. If they do
regulate, I'd bet money on the rule requiring IFR pilots to announce
position rather than the FAA requiring IFR knowledge from VFR pilots.
However annoying to the IFR pilot it might be.
  #7  
Old January 16th 08, 04:59 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Roger (K8RI)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 727
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:19:17 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

On Jan 15, 11:15*am, kontiki wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).


-Robert, CFII


Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.


That would require students to purchase IFR charts for every airport
they visit. They would not only need approach charts but enroutes as


And at that level they's still have no idea where we were. They are
happy to know where they are which is as it should be. There should be
no need to make the primary training more difficult with learning
additional terms and the equivalent of additional patterns. They have
plenty of items to deal with as it is.


well. Its much simplier to just tell the IFR pilots that they need to
use VFR friendly phrasing. Instead of saying "I'm at FOOBAR" they
could just say "I'm 5 miles out on the the ILS straight in runway 12".
Its not very hard.

If the conditions are VFR it's expected that we identify in plain
language. IOW If I'm at HARPY on the VOR-A into 3BS I'd identify as
Barstow traffic, Thirty Three Romeo, 5 West North West at 1100 on the
VOR-A. Even if the VFR pilot has no idea what the VOR-A is, they do
know what 5 WNW at 1100 means. It also tells them I'm coming into the
airport at about half the pattern altitude they are flying.

It doesn't bother me to see a 310 come screaming in at 500 AGL while
I'm flying the pattern at a 1000, but it certainly would unnerve a
student and probably any other pilot who is not used to seeing it as
well.

If the student and VFR pilots had to be familiar with all the
approaches at out little airport it would be a challenge and this is
just a little airport. We have runways 18/36 as well as 06/24. The
VOR approach is on the 317 radial out of MBS meaning the VOR approach
comes in from the WNW, aligns with nothing on the airport, and it
typically ends with a "circle-to-land" at 500 AGL. Then we have the
GPS approaches to both 06 and 24. They are straight in from about 7
miles out. IOW to VFR traffic they are straight in. Mix learning the
straight ins with the VOR and the circle to land and we'd have no low
time pilots in the pattern.

Normally it's not all that busy and you can fly any of the approaches
with the published missed, but on a busy day those on the VOR break
off before tangling with the down wind traffic for 06 even if they are
using 24 if for no other reason than to avoid rattling students.
The straight ins to 06 and 24 have to watch for base traffic and
*normally* announce often enough to know just where they are.
(There are always exceptions)

Me? When VFR knowing where I am, where they are, and what they are
flying lets me know if I can land or need to extend my down wind and
follow the traffic flying the approach. The student and low time
pilot doesn't normally have this capability nor should they be
expected to. So if I were on the GPS 06 I'd identify my position in
reference to the runway and watch for VFR traffic. If I see, or hear
some one on down wind, I'm going to be extra alert for the possibility
of breaking off and joining the pattern

Yes, I could declare being on final as by the time I'm half way to the
airport from the final approach fix I'm within the distance many fly
VFR patterns. Why they insist on using a pattern large enough a 737
could probably fly it I don't know. To me a VFR pattern has base
between a half to three quarters of a mile out and I'm flying high
performance. BTW we have a pilot who flys a 310 and his VFR patterns
are only *slightly* larger than mine. HOWEVER declaiming final does
two things. It is likely to confuse students who are used to, or are
learning to always do things the same and this would interrupt that.
Then there is always the guy who never progressed beyond that point
and is always going to fly the pattern the same no matter what you
say. With that one you see the conflict coming, break off and hope he
never flys into AirVenture.
So, IF I can fit I'll land straight in on the approach, but always
plan it so I can brake off and avoid conflicts.

When it gets exciting is when you discover some one flying those big
patterns just under the ceiling, or you do the step down to find a
windshield full of some one scud running.

BTW we have one pilot who flys such large patterns that on several
occasions pilots in the pattern have mistakenly assumed he was headed
elsewhere. One day he got all bent out of shape because an ultra light
landed ahead of him and he had to go around. I even though he was
headed for MBS.

Roger (K8RI)

-Robert, CFII

  #8  
Old February 3rd 08, 03:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jan 15, 11:15 am, kontiki wrote:

Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.


That would require students to purchase IFR charts for every airport
they visit.


I took "at that airport" to mean the home field, where most of the student
instruction takes place. But the purchase of IFR charts wouldn't be
required for any airport, they're available free online. Once the fixes are
identified the student can use a site such as AeroPlanner or SkyVector to
plot them on his VFR chart, which he should be purchasing anyway.



They would not only need approach charts but enroutes as well.


Why would they need enroute charts?



Its much simplier to just tell the IFR pilots that they need to
use VFR friendly phrasing. Instead of saying "I'm at FOOBAR" they
could just say "I'm 5 miles out on the the ILS straight in runway 12".
Its not very hard.


How is that VFR friendly phrasing? It uses IFR terminology.


  #9  
Old January 17th 08, 01:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,175
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

kontiki wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).

-Robert, CFII


Flight instructors should at least tell their students
about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.


Better to give CTAF fixes in some universally recognized form...
5 miles out straight in for 22 beats the hell out of NAILR even
if the guys in the pattern are instrument rated. If their flying
VFR at some non-familiar airport you think they've studied all the
approach charts for the airport to understand what fix you might
be reporting.
  #10  
Old January 15th 08, 08:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
B A R R Y[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 782
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Yea, we teach (or are suppose to teach) IFR pilots not to do that. Its
not very helpful for the intended purpose (to let everyone know where
you are).


I was taught, and it was reinforced by the DE, to use distance and
direction over waypoints.

If you think about it, it's not difficult to do, as the distance from
the named point to the airport is usually right on the plate. Also,
since most of us have at least a VFR GPS onboard, we have another
reference for distance out in between fixes.
 




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
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land" Robert M. Gary Piloting 168 February 5th 08 06:32 PM
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks" Mike[_7_] Naval Aviation 50 November 30th 07 06:25 AM
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale >pk Aviation Marketplace 0 October 16th 06 07:48 AM
"Airplane Drivers" and "Self Centered Idiots" Skylune Piloting 28 October 16th 06 05:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:24 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.