After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
about who I'll fly with.

First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.

Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the aircraft
they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.

Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
indication that it is safe for flight.

If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone I
know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up restoration?"
Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.

If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat. Thanks,
but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane to
be comfortable.

What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?

KB

"Kyle Boatright" wrote:

> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.

Yep.

> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the aircraft
> they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.

Well, yeah: if you want me to take a ride in your Questair Venture, I might
demur.

> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.

Yep. Visible airframe corrosion? Rotted tires? Rusty water in the fuel
samples? Uh...no thanks.

> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone I
> know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
> will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up restoration?"
> Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.
>
> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat. Thanks,
> but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane to
> be comfortable.
>

I *do* know enough about him. Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is
on my "no go" list.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

Kyle Boatright > wrote:
> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.

> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.

> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the aircraft
> they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.

> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.

> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone I
> know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
> will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up restoration?"
> Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.

> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat. Thanks,
> but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane to
> be comfortable.

> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?

> KB

So far, only one with a guy who's nickname was "Crash".

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

> wrote:
>> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?
>
>> KB
>
> So far, only one with a guy who's nickname was "Crash".
>

Or "Zoom."


--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.
>
> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the aircraft
> they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.
>
> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.
>
> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone I
> know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
> will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up restoration?"
> Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.
>
> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat. Thanks,
> but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane to
> be comfortable.
>
> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?
>
> KB
>
>
I've never had a real problem with this really. Being an instructor at
heart any time I'm in the air or on the ground around pilots, the
situation with me is either an understood student/instructor
relationship up front as would be the case in a dual session, or if I'm
getting ready to fly with a pilot I've not met before for some reason,
I'll usually know from the way the preflight is handled whether or not
I want to fly with that pilot.
I can't envision a situation where I would have talked with a pilot
before a flight, or at best watched him/her preflight the airplane where
I would be in that aircraft as a passenger with a pilot I didn't trust.
Dudley Henriques

If you can fly it from the right seat I will go.
I would love to fly right seat with John.
The only way I wont go is if the weather is bad.
"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
. ..
> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.
>
> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the
> aircraft they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.
>
> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.
>
> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone
> I know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my
> question will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up
> restoration?" Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.
>
> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat.
> Thanks, but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his
> airplane to be comfortable.
>
> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?
>
> KB
>

Actually, if John Travolta asked you to fly with him, I think you'd have to
sit left seat. I'm pretty sure that, at present, he's only qualified to be
SIC in the 707.

Martha

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
. ..
> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.
>
> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the
aircraft
> they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.
>
> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.
>
> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone
I
> know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
> will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up
restoration?"
> Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.
>
> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat.
Thanks,
> but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane
to
> be comfortable.
>
> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?
>
> KB
>
>

"Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim" > wrote in message
...
> Actually, if John Travolta asked you to fly with him, I think you'd have to
> sit left seat. I'm pretty sure that, at present, he's only qualified to be
> SIC in the 707.

Correct, plus the fact that the 707 is a two "qualified" pilot plane.
--
Jim in NC

("Dan Luke" wrote)
> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.


Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)


Paul-Mont
http://www.scientology.org/en_US/religion/catechism/pg039.html
Interesting. So this is why John Travolta yells "clear" whenever he starts
the engines.

Morgans writes:

> Correct, plus the fact that the 707 is a two "qualified" pilot plane.

The flight engineer is not necessary?

"Montblack" wrote:

>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>
>
> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)


Hmmm....I see your point.

Glass houses, eh?

--
Dan

"Notice this rent in my garment; I am at a loss to explain its presence!
I am even more puzzled by the existence of the universe."

- Jack Vance: _The Eyes of the Overworld_

I had an experience earlier this year right after passing my checkride
that gave me pause...

After ferrying my bird over to a local field for Mx, The shop offered
to fly me back to my home field.

The kid who came in to take me was this young Vietnamese kid who does
odd-jobs for the shop... We walk out and jump right in to a waiting
aircraft on the ramp... not even an oil or gas check (I started taking
off the caps myself, but he told me no, he was in a hurry, and the
plane was pre-flighted earlier that morning...)

We get in to this earlier warrior and... Uggh, that's all I can say.
The plane has 12 grand worth of avionics (All Garmin, GNS430/MX20,
SL20 and New Xponder), but _everything_ else in the cockpit creaked
(and all the old radios were still in the plane, evidently inop). The
primer sounded like it was driving sand into the cylinders, The six-
pack instruments barely worked. The electrical switches flipped and
flopped any which way, long ago having lost any friction... Nothing in
that plane looked right, nothing in it sounded right...

Then we started up and went to Taxi out... The kid took several
minutes to request a basic VFR departure to the neighboring airport...
Then, when he did get it, he started taxing to the wrong runway.

Run up was equally scary... that poor engine had seen or heard better
days, one of the mags clearly had a dead plug.

At this point, I realized I should have declined the ride... but the
'too late' trap set in.

Three attempts at take-off clearance later (and after througoughly
confusing the controller asking for "VFR Class-C Transition TO
Oakland" and for clarification on "Hold short of Runway"), we were
rolling down the runway... and the door latch fails. "Don Worry bout"
he said.

At this point we had to juggle a few airspaces in quick succession to
make it back to my home field, so I told him I would take the radios
(I was kind of rude about this, but judging what I had just seen, I
figured it was a matter of safety). We arrive into OAK's pattern, and
the kid doesn't understand what "Overhead entry to right downwind for
27R means", proceeding to turn up-wind after crossing over the
field... At that point I just took the yoke and put that bucket-of-
bolts back on the ground.

After we shut-down, he asked me if I was taking Instrument Students...
When I told him my ppl was only a few weeks old, he seemed
astounded... "You so confident, I feel safe with you".

Never... Again...

Those little nagging voices are there to keep us pilots alive... I
should learn to listen to them more;)

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:54:22 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

> I'll usually know
> from the way the preflight is handled whether or not I want to fly with
> that pilot.

I wish I'd known that. But, from my own experience, I agree: a
problematic preflight is a good indicator of what's to follow.

But I was slow, and the fellow was a friend. The final straw was being a
minute or two from entering a pattern on a 45 to downwind having just
observed someone take off that had indicated he'd be staying in the
pattern. I suggested to my friend that we turn a bit so we'd fall in
behind that plane. My friend demurred, claiming that the [class D] tower
would prevent any collision.

More recently, there was a midair in that downwind with exactly that
scenario. Just to emphasize the point.

There were other symptoms too, looking back at it. The person was (and
probably is) a fine "stick", but just a little too "trusting" of his
environment.

- Andrew

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Montblack" wrote:
>
>>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>>
>>
>> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)
>
>
> Hmmm....I see your point.
>
> Glass houses, eh?
>

An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Montblack" wrote:
>>
>>>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>>>
>>>
>>> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)
>>
>>
>> Hmmm....I see your point.
>>
>> Glass houses, eh?
>>
>
> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.

You may have hit on the answer to the lack of folks interested in aviation.
We need to form a cult around it. If we can become classed as a church the
tax savings alone will be great. The only problem is finding the virgins
that will be required to cut off shirt-tails.

On Jul 11, 7:11 am, Andrew Gideon > wrote:
>
> The final straw was being a
> minute or two from entering a pattern on a 45 to downwind having just
> observed someone take off that had indicated he'd be staying in the
> pattern. I suggested to my friend that we turn a bit so we'd fall in
> behind that plane. My friend demurred, claiming that the [class D] tower
> would prevent any collision.

Isn't that what they're there for? I'm based out of a Class D field,
and if I were in that situation (2 minutes on the 45 with a plane on
the upwind, which I've been in more than a dozen times) I sure
wouldn't take it upon me to sequence myself. At the very least, I'd
ask the controller if he wants me in front, or behind the traffic.
Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
upwind, then have him follow me.

("Matt Barrow" wrote)
> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.


http://www.wacoairmuseum.org/
An aviation cult isn't wacko, ...it's Waco!


Paul-Mont

buttman wrote:
> On Jul 11, 7:11 am, Andrew Gideon > wrote:
>>
>> The final straw was being a
>> minute or two from entering a pattern on a 45 to downwind having just
>> observed someone take off that had indicated he'd be staying in the
>> pattern. I suggested to my friend that we turn a bit so we'd fall in
>> behind that plane. My friend demurred, claiming that the [class D]
>> tower would prevent any collision.
>
> Isn't that what they're there for? I'm based out of a Class D field,
> and if I were in that situation (2 minutes on the 45 with a plane on
> the upwind, which I've been in more than a dozen times) I sure
> wouldn't take it upon me to sequence myself. At the very least, I'd
> ask the controller if he wants me in front, or behind the traffic.
> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
> upwind, then have him follow me.

And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere else for a
moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots responsibility to see
and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew suggested.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Montblack" wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm....I see your point.
>>>
>>> Glass houses, eh?
>>>
>>
>> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.
>
> You may have hit on the answer to the lack of folks interested in
> aviation. We need to form a cult around it. If we can become classed as a
> church the tax savings alone will be great. The only problem is finding
> the virgins that will be required to cut off shirt-tails.

We need a High Priest -- I recommend Dudley Henriques (if his wife will let
him).

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Matt Barrow" wrote)
>> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.
>
>
> http://www.wacoairmuseum.org/
> An aviation cult isn't wacko, ...it's Waco!
>

You say tom-may-toe, I say tom-mah-toe.

(We're all sorta nuts or we wouldn't be here)

Matt B.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> buttman wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 7:11 am, Andrew Gideon > wrote:
>>>
>>> The final straw was being a
>>> minute or two from entering a pattern on a 45 to downwind having just
>>> observed someone take off that had indicated he'd be staying in the
>>> pattern. I suggested to my friend that we turn a bit so we'd fall in
>>> behind that plane. My friend demurred, claiming that the [class D]
>>> tower would prevent any collision.
>>
>> Isn't that what they're there for? I'm based out of a Class D field,
>> and if I were in that situation (2 minutes on the 45 with a plane on
>> the upwind, which I've been in more than a dozen times) I sure
>> wouldn't take it upon me to sequence myself. At the very least, I'd
>> ask the controller if he wants me in front, or behind the traffic.
>> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
>> upwind, then have him follow me.
>
> And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere else for
> a moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots responsibility to
> see and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew suggested.
Ditto! "...claiming that the [class D] tower would prevent any collision.",
is right up there with "Famous last Words".

On Jul 10, 8:28 pm, "Kyle Boatright" > wrote:
> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.
>
> Second, I won't fly with someone if I have a prejudice against the aircraft
> they fly. Homebuilt helicopters come to mind.
>
> Third, regardless of the other two checks and balances, the airplane must
> appear to be in good condition and have enough recent usage to give some
> indication that it is safe for flight.
>
> If I'm not sure about any of the issues, I'll either try to "qualify"
> someone or politely decline the offer of a ride. For instance, if someone I
> know offers a ride in his beautiful new Stearman restoration, my question
> will be... "So how many hours does it have since the ground up restoration?"
> Under 25 hours and I'll politely take a rain check.
>
> If John Travolta pulls up in his 707 and asks me to sit right seat. Thanks,
> but no. I'd love to go, but don't know enough about him or his airplane to
> be comfortable.
>
> What are your criteria and what, if any, flights have you bypassed?
>
> KB

With the criteria you listed, you would never get on a commercial
flight. <g>

buttman writes:

> Isn't that what they're there for?

Why is it called VFR, again?

In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>> Isn't that what they're there for? I'm based out of a Class D field,
>> and if I were in that situation (2 minutes on the 45 with a plane on
>> the upwind, which I've been in more than a dozen times) I sure
>> wouldn't take it upon me to sequence myself. At the very least, I'd
>> ask the controller if he wants me in front, or behind the traffic.
>> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
>> upwind, then have him follow me.
>
>And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere else for a
>moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots responsibility to see
>and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew suggested.

Class D controllers are not responsible for in-air separation, they're
responsible for runway separation. If you expect them to sort it out for
you, you're basically taunting Darwin.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
In 1665 Isaac Newton became discouraged when he fell up a flight of
stairs.

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>>> Isn't that what they're there for? I'm based out of a Class D field,
>>> and if I were in that situation (2 minutes on the 45 with a plane on
>>> the upwind, which I've been in more than a dozen times) I sure
>>> wouldn't take it upon me to sequence myself. At the very least, I'd
>>> ask the controller if he wants me in front, or behind the traffic.
>>> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
>>> upwind, then have him follow me.
>>
>> And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere
>> else for a moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots
>> responsibility to see and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew
>> suggested.
>
> Class D controllers are not responsible for in-air separation, they're
> responsible for runway separation. If you expect them to sort it out
> for you, you're basically taunting Darwin.

Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the first.

"EridanMan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I had an experience earlier this year right after passing my checkride
> that gave me pause...
>
[snip]
> After we shut-down, he asked me if I was taking Instrument Students...
> When I told him my ppl was only a few weeks old, he seemed
> astounded... "You so confident, I feel safe with you".
>
> Never... Again...
>
> Those little nagging voices are there to keep us pilots alive... I
> should learn to listen to them more;)

I shudder to think about how many "pilots" operate at his level of ability
on a regular basis. I recall another guy (also of Asian persuasion but
that's not a knock on Asian pilots) who could barely understand english that
created havoc in the local [Class D] airport's pattern. There were at least
eight planes in the pattern with a few opting to leave instead of dealing
with the danger this guy created by literally not knowing which way was
North.

Marco

Mxmanic

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:29:07 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> It is the pilots responsibility to
> see and avoid traffic.

Which is why, I admit selfishly, I'll pull behind rather than before. If
I'm behind, I can see the other plane. If I'm before the other plane,
there's this level of trust involved.

Of course, the pilot of the other plane has his own perspective:

After you.
No, after you.
No, please, after you.
...

<Laugh>

To Buttman: Asking isn't a bad idea (except see my selfish perspective
above). But relying upon class D to provide airborne separation is twice
wrong (regulatory and keep-own-butt-safe-atory).

- Andrew

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> Mxmanic

I'd fly with him. I just wouldn't land with him <g>

On Jul 11, 1:40 pm, Jim Stewart > wrote:
> Mxmanic

Nothing to fear there.

Austin

El Maximo wrote:
> "Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Mxmanic
>
> I'd fly with him. I just wouldn't land with him <g>

LOL

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:21:18 -0400, Marco Leon wrote:

> I shudder to think about how many "pilots" operate at his level of ability
> on a regular basis.

I just completed a flight review this week. The CFI made comments that
are still bugging me.

I consider myself a mediocre pilot. I'm decent, but I've not enough
experience to be really good or great.

Yet the CFI seemed to consider it praiseworthy because (for example) I
could slip (which I used during a simulated engine failure). Apparently,
a lot of people with whom he flies cannot. It's still on the PPL PTS,
isn't it?

Maybe he was just trying to make me feel comfortable or something (I hate
tests {8^), but...

- Andrew

On 2007-07-10 17:28:38 -0700, "Kyle Boatright" > said:

> After one spooky experience several years ago, I am very discriminating
> about who I'll fly with.
>
> First, I have to know a pilot well enough to form an opinion about his/her
> abilities as a pilot and about the owner's mechanical aptitude and
> ability/will to properly maintain the aircraft.

Heh. You would have had a hard time learning to fly if you thought that
way back then, eh?

As an instructor flying in a strange plane, I want to see logs, just
like a DPE would. The skill of the pilot I am flying with does not
matter so long as he is not suicidal. I am PIC. Always. Whether I like
it or not. I figure if I was asleep in the back of the plane and there
were an incident, some FAA type would insist I was PIC. So I make it
clear from the beginning.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-07-11 09:02:28 -0700, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:

> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Montblack" wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm....I see your point.
>>>
>>> Glass houses, eh?
>>>
>>
>> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.
>
> You may have hit on the answer to the lack of folks interested in aviation.
> We need to form a cult around it. If we can become classed as a church the
> tax savings alone will be great. The only problem is finding the virgins
> that will be required to cut off shirt-tails.

Rod Machado already has the secret rituals worked out. Don't know what
they are, exactly, except that they take place in dark hangars and
involve kneeboards....

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>>And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere else for
>>a
>>moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots responsibility to see
>>and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew suggested.
>
> Class D controllers are not responsible for in-air separation, they're
> responsible for runway separation. If you expect them to sort it out for
> you, you're basically taunting Darwin.

It's a fine line. I'm also based out of a Class D airport and there needs to
be at least some level of trust in the controller. They will yell at you for
re-sequencing yourself on your own. That being said, it is correct that you
are responsible for your separation and should take evasive action as needed
and answer questions later. The gray area is the perception of a collision
threat--yours may be different from the controller.

I'd do what buttman (dude, you gotta change your name. You make it hard for
people to agree with you. I feel reluctant to state that "I'm with
Buttman!") would do and keep going while keeping a close eye on the suspect
traffic and kindly querying the controller with "do you want me in the front
or behind that traffic?" And if they knew your newsgroup name, they would
know your preference...

Marco

In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
>> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>>>> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
>>>> upwind, then have him follow me.
>>>
>>> And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere
>>> else for a moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots
>>> responsibility to see and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew
>>> suggested.
>>
>> Class D controllers are not responsible for in-air separation, they're
>> responsible for runway separation. If you expect them to sort it out
>> for you, you're basically taunting Darwin.
>
>Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the first.

That's obvious from the level of '>' indentation.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
#define sizeof(x) ((int)rand()*1024)

("C J Campbell" wrote)
> Rod Machado already has the secret rituals worked out. Don't know what
> they are, exactly, except that they take place in dark hangars and involve
> kneeboards....


Oh great, here we go again.... Oh wait. I thought you said kneelers. <g>


Paul-Mont
(Former alter boy)

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>> Paul Tomblin wrote:
>>> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
>>> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>>>>> Most likely, the controller would make the upwind guy extend his
>>>>> upwind, then have him follow me.
>>>>
>>>> And what happens if the controllers attention is aimed somewhere
>>>> else for a moment or he just plan screws up? It is the pilots
>>>> responsibility to see and avoid traffic. I'd do exactly what Andrew
>>>> suggested.
>>>
>>> Class D controllers are not responsible for in-air separation,
>>> they're responsible for runway separation. If you expect them to
>>> sort it out for you, you're basically taunting Darwin.
>>
>> Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the first.
>
> That's obvious from the level of '>' indentation.


I know that and you know that, BUT...

In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
>> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>>> Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the first.
>> That's obvious from the level of '>' indentation.
>
>
>I know that and you know that, BUT...

Hey, if people can't figure out that, do you care what they have to say?


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
AFAICT, most national capitals have already reached bogon criticality,
passed it, seen it in the rear view memory and now look back on the
moment as a fond, if distant, memory. -- Robert Uhl

>>>> Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the first.
>>> That's obvious from the level of '>' indentation.
>>
>> I know that and you know that, BUT...
>
> Hey, if people can't figure out that, do you care what they have to say?

I certainly wouldn't want to fly with a pilot who can't...

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:05:35 -0400, Marco Leon wrote:

> They will yell at
> you for re-sequencing yourself on your own.

To what "sequencing" do you refer? At the class Ds with which I'm
familiar, "sequencing" is limited to "cleared to land", "#2 cleared to
land", etc. Sequencing doesn't typically start until that point.

Also, keep in mind (though I'm sure you know this) that sequencing is not
separation.

[...]
> while keeping a close eye on the
> suspect traffic and kindly querying the controller with "do you want me
> in the front or behind that traffic?"

Can't keep a close eye if you're in front (at least in my airplane) <grin>.

- Andrew

On Jul 12, 6:49 am, "El Maximo" > wrote:
> "Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
>
> .. .
>
> > Mxmanic
>
> I'd fly with him. I just wouldn't land with him <g>

That is a keeper.. :-)

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>> Paul Tomblin wrote:
>>> In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder"
>>> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>>>> Watch your trimming Paul. I wrote the second paragraph not the
>>>> first.
>>> That's obvious from the level of '>' indentation.
>>
>>
>> I know that and you know that, BUT...
>
> Hey, if people can't figure out that, do you care what they have to
> say?

OK you win.

In a previous article, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> said:
>Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> Hey, if people can't figure out that, do you care what they have to
>> say?
>
>OK you win.

This time...


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"If something's expensive to develop, and somebody's not going to get paid, it
won't get developed. So you decide: Do you want software to be written, or
not?" - Bill Gates doesn't foresee the FSF or Linux, 1980.

On Jul 11, 12:02 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> buttman writes:
> > Isn't that what they're there for?
>
> Why is it called VFR, again?

In your case is stands for Virtual Flight Retard.

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Montblack" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone belonging to a wacko religious cult is on my "no go" list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are we speaking aviation or the L.Ron Hubbard thing? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm....I see your point.
>>>>
>>>> Glass houses, eh?
>>>>
>>> An aviation cult isn't wacko, just....different.
>> You may have hit on the answer to the lack of folks interested in
>> aviation. We need to form a cult around it. If we can become classed as a
>> church the tax savings alone will be great. The only problem is finding
>> the virgins that will be required to cut off shirt-tails.
>
> We need a High Priest -- I recommend Dudley Henriques (if his wife will let
> him).
>
>
>
>
>
Nah...wouldn't work. My wife says that to make me a High Priest
somebody would have to rewrite every bible ever written.
Since she just went upstairs I will tell you that I am interested in a
possible position as "Keeper of the Virgins".
Dudley Henriques

("Dudley Henriques" wrote)
> Since she just went upstairs I will tell you that I am interested in a
> possible position as "Keeper of the Virgins".


But do you really want to hear, "Dudley, we need you. You are the one man
who will KEEP these young women VIRGINS."?


Paul-Mont :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC4ivU__lVU
There's a "Keeper of the Virgins" opening at this castle.

Montblack wrote:
> ("Dudley Henriques" wrote)
>> Since she just went upstairs I will tell you that I am interested in a
>> possible position as "Keeper of the Virgins".
>
>
> But do you really want to hear, "Dudley, we need you. You are the one man
> who will KEEP these young women VIRGINS."?
>
>
> Paul-Mont :-)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC4ivU__lVU
> There's a "Keeper of the Virgins" opening at this castle.
>
>
>
>
..........on second thought.........
D

On Jul 11, 5:03 pm, wrote:
> On Jul 11, 12:02 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>
> > buttman writes:
> > > Isn't that what they're there for?
>
> > Why is it called VFR, again?
>
> In your case is stands for Virtual Flight Retard.

Candidate for post-of-the-month ;)

"EridanMan" wrote ...
> After ferrying my bird over to a local field for Mx, The shop
> offered to fly me back to my home field.
>
> We get in to this earlier warrior and... Uggh, that's all I can say...
> ... Nothing in that plane looked right, nothing in it sounded right...
>
> Run up was equally scary... that poor engine had seen or heard
> better days, one of the mags clearly had a dead plug.

OK,... so how much do you know about this shop ?!?
I hope their "beater" doesn't reflect the quality of their work.

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Morgans writes:
>
>> Correct, plus the fact that the 707 is a two "qualified" pilot plane.
>
> The flight engineer is not necessary?

The flight engineer isn't a pilot, fjukktard


Just like you, except they generally know what they're talking about.


Bertie

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> buttman writes:
>
>> Isn't that what they're there for?
>
> Why is it called VFR, again?
>

What's it matter, fjukktard. you don't fly.


Bertie