Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student and
they did seem to slow things down a little.

I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
Student 1234A, ...."

From AVWeb

Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix so
air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience and
knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on July
19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and was
on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend Airport,
a controller ordered him to turn left and climb to pattern height so an
overtaking Piper Meridian could land. It's believed he did not reconfigure
the aircraft and apply enough power for the unorthodox go-around and the
Cessna he was flying stalled and crashed a short time later. The four-person
investigation team concluded pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for
which his training and experience had not prepared him" after being
"instructed to carry out an unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the AAIB
report said. Adding to the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to the
field after just eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing
visibility. His instructor was watching from the ground as the order to
deviate from the runway heading was complied with and he noted the nose-up
attitude of the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park.
Investigators determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was on
and the engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross was
the youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.

Hi,

In article >,
Gig 601XL Builder<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:
> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
> Student 1234A, ...."

I'm learning to fly at a military field, and they use the prefix 'Tyro'

i.e.

Bumfigle Tower, Tyro G-ANDY, ....

Andy

Gig 601XL Builder <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:
> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student and
> they did seem to slow things down a little.

> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
> Student 1234A, ...."

My instructor taught this format: "Foobar Center, Cessna 12345A, student
pilot".

They do at least talk a bit slower if nothing else, which is handy
at some new, busy place.

And since we are always learning, aren't we always "students"? :-)

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...

> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student
> and they did seem to slow things down a little.

Worked for me coming through PDX when the freq-changing knob broke on the
radio and I couldn't switch freqs to land at Troutdale. At first he was a
little surly but as soon as I told them I was a student pilot they contacted
TTD tower and calmly relayed instructions to enter the pattern and look for
the light signal.

They seemed a lot more helpful once they knew I had an excuse for being
clueless.

-c
Now I tell 'em I'm a student all the time. ;> Every good pilot is a
student, right?

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in
:

How about a big yellow bumper sticker above the tail # of the airplane?

"CAUTION: STUDENT PILOT"


Seriously, though...

When I did my initial flight training, I was always taught to announce
"student pilot" on my initial callup and on hand offs any time I was solo.
ie: "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna 1234A, for Taxi with Uniform. Student Pilot".
In hindsight, part of the idea of putting it at the end was to specifically
attract attention to it as not being part of the normal callup.




> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student
> and they did seem to slow things down a little.
>
> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
> Student 1234A, ...."
>
> From AVWeb
>
> Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
> student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix
> so air traffic controllers can take into account their limited
> experience and knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation
> of a crash on July 19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had
> logged 15 hours and was on his second solo flight. Just before he
> touched down at Southend Airport, a controller ordered him to turn left
> and climb to pattern height so an overtaking Piper Meridian could land.
> It's believed he did not reconfigure the aircraft and apply enough power
> for the unorthodox go-around and the Cessna he was flying stalled and
> crashed a short time later. The four-person investigation team concluded
> pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for which his training and
> experience had not prepared him" after being "instructed to carry out an
> unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the AAIB report said. Adding to
> the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to the field after just
> eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing visibility. His
> instructor was watching from the ground as the order to deviate from the
> runway heading was complied with and he noted the nose-up attitude of
> the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park. Investigators
> determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was on and the
> engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross was the
> youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student
and
> they did seem to slow things down a little.
>
> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
> Student 1234A, ...."
>
> From AVWeb
>
> Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
> student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix
so
> air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience and
> knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on
July
> 19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and
was
> on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend
Airport,
> a controller ordered him to turn left and climb to pattern height so an
> overtaking Piper Meridian could land. It's believed he did not reconfigure
> the aircraft and apply enough power for the unorthodox go-around and the
> Cessna he was flying stalled and crashed a short time later. The
four-person
> investigation team concluded pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for
> which his training and experience had not prepared him" after being
> "instructed to carry out an unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the
AAIB
> report said. Adding to the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to
the
> field after just eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing
> visibility. His instructor was watching from the ground as the order to
> deviate from the runway heading was complied with and he noted the nose-up
> attitude of the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park.
> Investigators determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was
on
> and the engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross was
> the youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.
>
>
In may very well be a good idea and, as several contributors have pointed
out, it is commonly done by both civil and military flight schools.

However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do with
the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably well
known. And, of course, it is phrased as though someone would like to see it
become a regulation.

(rant temporarily witheld)

>> The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on
> July
>> 19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and
> was
>> on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend
> Airport,

>>
> In may very well be a good idea and, as several contributors have pointed
> out, it is commonly done by both civil and military flight schools.
>
> However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do
> with
> the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably
> well
> known. And, of course, it is phrased as though someone would like to see
> it
> become a regulation.
>
> (rant temporarily witheld)
>
>

I agree. When I made student solos to unfamiliar controlled fields I used
'student' after my call. It wasn't required, but I felt better knowing that
the controller might think twice before handing me anything unusual.

At my home field, which is uncontrolled, a high percentage of the traffic is
student traffic and I don't think the extra chatter of 'Student' in all the
pattern calls would help much.

Hi,

In article >,
Peter > wrote:
> However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do with
> the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably well
> known.

I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student took
off, and when he landed.

I could be mis-remembering of course.

Andy

Andy Hawkins > wrote in
:

> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Peter > wrote:
>> However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do
>> with the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was
>> presumably well known.
>
> I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
> that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student
> took off, and when he landed.

I have to agree with Peter on this one.

A specific set of unique and random circumstances caused an unfortunate, but
unique and random accident. There is no call to start create regulations to
protect from this specific set of unique and random circumstances from ever
happening again.

The change of ATC personnel is yet another contributing but random
circumstance that is not likely to be repeated with any frequency demanding a
regulation.

"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
>> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student
> and
>> they did seem to slow things down a little.
>>
>> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
>> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
>> Student 1234A, ...."
>>
>> From AVWeb
>>
>> Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
>> student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix
> so
>> air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience
>> and
>> knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on
> July
>> 19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and
> was
>> on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend
> Airport,
>> a controller ordered him to turn left and climb to pattern height so an
>> overtaking Piper Meridian could land. It's believed he did not
>> reconfigure
>> the aircraft and apply enough power for the unorthodox go-around and the
>> Cessna he was flying stalled and crashed a short time later. The
> four-person
>> investigation team concluded pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for
>> which his training and experience had not prepared him" after being
>> "instructed to carry out an unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the
> AAIB
>> report said. Adding to the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to
> the
>> field after just eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing
>> visibility. His instructor was watching from the ground as the order to
>> deviate from the runway heading was complied with and he noted the
>> nose-up
>> attitude of the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park.
>> Investigators determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was
> on
>> and the engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross was
>> the youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.
>>
>>
> In may very well be a good idea and, as several contributors have pointed
> out, it is commonly done by both civil and military flight schools.
>
> However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do
> with
> the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably
> well
> known. And, of course, it is phrased as though someone would like to see
> it
> become a regulation.
>
> (rant temporarily witheld)
>
>

"Travis Marlatte" > wrote in message
et...
> "Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
>>> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student
>> and
>>> they did seem to slow things down a little.
>>>
>>> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
>>> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
>>> Student 1234A, ...."
>>>
>>> From AVWeb
>>>
>>> Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
>>> student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix
>> so
>>> air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience
>>> and
>>> knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on
>> July
>>> 19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and
>> was
>>> on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend
>> Airport,
>>> a controller ordered him to turn left and climb to pattern height so an
>>> overtaking Piper Meridian could land. It's believed he did not
>>> reconfigure
>>> the aircraft and apply enough power for the unorthodox go-around and the
>>> Cessna he was flying stalled and crashed a short time later. The
>> four-person
>>> investigation team concluded pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for
>>> which his training and experience had not prepared him" after being
>>> "instructed to carry out an unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the
>> AAIB
>>> report said. Adding to the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to
>> the
>>> field after just eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing
>>> visibility. His instructor was watching from the ground as the order to
>>> deviate from the runway heading was complied with and he noted the
>>> nose-up
>>> attitude of the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park.
>>> Investigators determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was
>> on
>>> and the engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross
>>> was
>>> the youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.
>>>
>>>
>> In may very well be a good idea and, as several contributors have pointed
>> out, it is commonly done by both civil and military flight schools.
>>
>> However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do
>> with
>> the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably
>> well
>> known. And, of course, it is phrased as though someone would like to see
>> it
>> become a regulation.
>>
>> (rant temporarily witheld)
>>
>>
>
>

Well, that wasn't a very useful post, was it?

What I meant to say was that "judgement" training should start early.
Starting out, I added "student pilot" to my call sign. Once I stopped doing
that, I can remember a time when I responded to an odd request with "Unable,
student pilot."

--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:23:16 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:

>Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
>airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student and
>they did seem to slow things down a little.
>
>I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
>controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
>Student 1234A, ...."
>
>From AVWeb
>
>Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
>student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix so
>air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience and
>knowledge. The recommendation came from the investigation of a crash on July
>19, 2006, that killed a 16-year-old student who had logged 15 hours and was
>on his second solo flight. Just before he touched down at Southend Airport,
>a controller ordered him to turn left and climb to pattern height so an
>overtaking Piper Meridian could land. It's believed he did not reconfigure
>the aircraft and apply enough power for the unorthodox go-around and the
>Cessna he was flying stalled and crashed a short time later. The four-person
>investigation team concluded pilot Sam Cross was put "in a situation for
>which his training and experience had not prepared him" after being
>"instructed to carry out an unfamiliar and nonstandard manoeuvre," the AAIB
>report said. Adding to the mix was the fact that Cross was returning to the
>field after just eight minutes in the air because haze was reducing
>visibility. His instructor was watching from the ground as the order to
>deviate from the runway heading was complied with and he noted the nose-up
>attitude of the Cessna before it stalled and spiralled into a park.
>Investigators determined the flaps were at 20 degrees, the carb heat was on
>and the engine was turning at 900 rpm at the time of the crash. Cross was
>the youngest pilot ever to be killed in a plane crash in Britain.
>

I hope that someone takes the air traffic controller and the ****** in
the meridian out and beats them senseless.
the kid had the right of way and neither had the right to do what they
did.
it is called a go around folks and every meridian can do one.
the pair of ******* just killed a pilot through combined negligence.
dont let them get away with it.

Stealth Pilot

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

> Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that
> student pilots on solo flights be identified by a radio call-sign prefix so
> air traffic controllers can take into account their limited experience and
> knowledge.

Will this also apply to inexperienced air traffic controllers?

Student pilots are advised to tell ATC that they are student pilots; I don't
see any reason why they must be "flagged." They are not trying to keep it a
secret.

"Stealth Pilot" > wrote in message
...

> I hope that someone takes the air traffic controller and the ****** in
> the meridian out and beats them senseless.

I looked at this thread very early in the morning (before my coffee) and
read:

"Investigators Say Student Pilots Should Be Flogged"

Maybe the controller should be flogged.

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
> that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student took
> off, and when he landed.
>
> I could be mis-remembering of course.
>
> Andy

My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff happens"
and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time an
accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will die;
but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

However, I did only scan the report on line, which never results in my best
performance; so I have now printed it. I have a rather long gap in my
schedule later today, and will read it in its entirety.

Peter

> What I meant to say was that "judgement" training should start early.
> Starting out, I added "student pilot" to my call sign. Once I stopped
doing
> that, I can remember a time when I responded to an odd request with
"Unable,
> student pilot."
>
> --
> -------------------------------
> Travis
> Lake N3094P
> PWK
>
>
I think that all instructors attempt to do that, with varying results; and I
agree that "unable" needs to be part of every pilot's vocabulary. It seems
to be the real-life version of a "pause button" and excessive use indicates
a need for additional training; but it can help in avoiding dangerous
conditions.

Peter

Stealth Pilot wrote:
>
>I hope that someone takes the air traffic controller and the ****** in
>the meridian out and beats them senseless.
>the kid had the right of way and neither had the right to do what they
>did.
>it is called a go around folks and every meridian can do one.
>the pair of ******* just killed a pilot through combined negligence.
>dont let them get away with it.

What exactly did the pilot of the Meridian do that has upset you so?

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Hi,

In article >,
Peter > wrote:
> My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff happens"
> and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time an
> accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
> find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will die;
> but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
> would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily going
to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for inexperienced
(not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
pilots.

'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
this inexperience without too much extra effort.

Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above is
the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
way as any to me.

I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated factors
in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
bad.

Andy

On Jul 17, 12:23 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:
> Not IMHO a bad idea really. When I was training and flew to controlled
> airspace for XC flights it was suggested that I mention I was a student and
> they did seem to slow things down a little.
>
> I can see how a uniform way of doing this might be helpful both in
> controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Example, "Bumfigle Tower, Cessna
> Student 1234A, ...."
>

I had a side thought that is somewhat similar; I was watching/
listening to a recording of a mayday flight in (I believe) Britain,
and the communications initiated from the pilot of the emergency craft
prefixed his callsign with Mayday (e.g. Mayday Company 1234 is turning
to heading 120 requesting runway 5R). I don't remember the exact
details, but it was a bird strike on takeoff (i think the vid is on
youtube).

Anyway, I bring it up because of a previous discussion regarding the
ATC handling of the American flight that ended up "accepting" a runway
assignment that was somewhat inappropriate for their situation. From
what I remember, some of the ATC transcripts involved an initial
landline comm between approach and tower, with approach requesting the
tailwind runway, but not telling tower that the pilot had declared an
emergency. If the AA pilot was prefixing his callsign with the
"mayday" tag, the first communcation between him and twr would have
alerted the tower controller that the runway request was not
"ordinary". (of course, IIRC, the initial controller told the pilot
to squawk 7700 as well which would be yet another reminder). It seems
(to me at least) that it could also help with the following:
New pilots on frequency would be immediately aware of the emergency
situation being handled on the frequency,
Controllers would be reminded of the priority of the flight's
handling,
On initial callup on a handoff by the emergency craft, the new
controller would be immediately reminded of the mayday sit.

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Peter > wrote:
>> My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff
>> happens"
>> and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time
>> an
>> accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
>> find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will
>> die;
>> but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
>> would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.
>
> While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily
> going
> to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for
> inexperienced
> (not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
> pilots.
>
> 'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
> this inexperience without too much extra effort.
>
> Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above
> is
> the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
> way as any to me.
>
> I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
> factors
> in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
> bad.
>

How about squawking "1201" for student pilots?

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote

> I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
> factors
> in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
> bad.

I hate to speak ill of the dead, but wow! How far away from ready are you
to solo, if all it takes is a distraction to keep you from advancing the
throttle from idle, when you are not trying to land?

It should be so automatic, that distractions should not be an issue. When
things were not happening (like climbing) it should not be hard to notice
that your engine was making no noise, right?

I am truly sorry this young man died. It sucks that things piled up on him,
and non standard procedures took place. Part of training has to be
expecting the unexpected, but above all, fly the plane. That did not
happen.

I think that he was not ready to solo. More drilling on unusual situations
needed to take place, without a doubt. The big thing that needed to be
taught is fly the plane. Always. Without fail. No matter what.
--
Jim in NC

The instructors around here make sure that "unable" is in the students
vocabulary. Controllers will occasionally offer Class B transition to a solo
student. If the student doesn't have a Class B endorsement, which most don't
have, it is up to the student to say "unable".



"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
>
>> What I meant to say was that "judgement" training should start early.
>> Starting out, I added "student pilot" to my call sign. Once I stopped
> doing
>> that, I can remember a time when I responded to an odd request with
> "Unable,
>> student pilot."
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------
>> Travis
>> Lake N3094P
>> PWK
>>
>>
> I think that all instructors attempt to do that, with varying results; and
> I
> agree that "unable" needs to be part of every pilot's vocabulary. It
> seems
> to be the real-life version of a "pause button" and excessive use
> indicates
> a need for additional training; but it can help in avoiding dangerous
> conditions.
>
> Peter
>
>

I trained at a Class D under Class B and I never used (nor felt the
need to use) the "S" word during my lessons or solo flights.

I work in sports TV and I'm certain that gave me a big leg up on
dealing with comms. When I'm at work, I wear a headset, I listen to
multiple faceless voices while scanning multiple screens, all the
while having to remain focused on specific tasks yet keep the big
picture in mind. Sure sounds like flying to me.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
www.pbase.com/flyingphotog

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Peter > wrote:
> > My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff
happens"
> > and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time
an
> > accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
> > find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will
die;
> > but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
> > would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.
>
> While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily
going
> to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for
inexperienced
> (not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
> pilots.
>
> 'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
> this inexperience without too much extra effort.
>
> Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above
is
> the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
> way as any to me.
>
> I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
factors
> in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
> bad.
>
> Andy

Well, I did use some of that idle time to read the entire report.

The proposal at the end of the report seemed to make the Student/Tyro call
sign a recommended standard for all student solo flights, which would
suddenly end when the private pilot certificate was issued. IMHO, that is
an egregious idea for at least two reasons: 1) it is just one more example
of the worse of the "Nanny State" and 2) it suddenly ends exactly when the
new pilot is first exposed to the distraction and responsibility of
passengers.

However, the call sign recommendation was my only criticism of the report,
which was remarkably thorough and complete--expecially for a single aircraft
accident with only the pilot aboard and no injuries on the ground.

Interestingly, it appears that the student pilot did absolutely nothing with
the exceptions of pulling back on the yoke and of turning--and too far and
to an incorrect heading. Apparently, according to the rather thorough
reconstruction, he flew the approach with approximately 20 degrees of flaps,
carb heat on and 1700 rpm. Although the tachometer froze showing 900 rpm,
the additional findings and commentary suggested that the power was never
changed from the approach to impact--in other words, in addition to not
removing carb heat and to not retracting the flaps, the student never
throttled up...

All in all, an unusual chain of events. As you said, a lot of small
isolated factors.

Peter

Jay Beckman writes:

> I work in sports TV and I'm certain that gave me a big leg up on
> dealing with comms. When I'm at work, I wear a headset, I listen to
> multiple faceless voices while scanning multiple screens, all the
> while having to remain focused on specific tasks yet keep the big
> picture in mind. Sure sounds like flying to me.

Listening to voices and conversing with them are two very different things.

Hi,

In article >,
Ken > wrote:
> How about squawking "1201" for student pilots?

That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.

Andy

Hi,

In article >,
Peter > wrote:
> The proposal at the end of the report seemed to make the Student/Tyro call
> sign a recommended standard for all student solo flights, which would
> suddenly end when the private pilot certificate was issued. IMHO, that is
> an egregious idea for at least two reasons: 1) it is just one more example
> of the worse of the "Nanny State" and 2) it suddenly ends exactly when the
> new pilot is first exposed to the distraction and responsibility of
> passengers.

The flying order for the club I'm flying at (at a military field) contains
the following:

To indicate their relative inexperience, solo students may use the prefix
'TYRO' on their first call on frequency. E.g. 'XYZ Ground G-ANDY
TYRO request taxi solo ABC departure.' Aircraft not using TYRO will be
assumed capable of accepting non standard instructions including turns below
500 ft to clear the departure lane after take off.

The key phrase there is 'to indicate their relative inexperience'. If the
report is recommending that this call sign prefix should stop the day
someone passes their checkride, then yes, that's perhaps not such a good
thing.

I would imagine it would be good to allow *any* pilot to use the prefix when
(for example) landing at a new airfield for the first time to indicate to
the controllers that they may perhaps not be completely au fait with
procedures at that field.

It's not gonna solve all problems like this, but surely anything that can
reduce them is good, no?

Andy

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Peter > wrote:
> > The proposal at the end of the report seemed to make the Student/Tyro
call
> > sign a recommended standard for all student solo flights, which would
> > suddenly end when the private pilot certificate was issued. IMHO, that
is
> > an egregious idea for at least two reasons: 1) it is just one more
example
> > of the worse of the "Nanny State" and 2) it suddenly ends exactly when
the
> > new pilot is first exposed to the distraction and responsibility of
> > passengers.
>
> The flying order for the club I'm flying at (at a military field) contains
> the following:
>
> To indicate their relative inexperience, solo students may use the prefix
> 'TYRO' on their first call on frequency. E.g. 'XYZ Ground G-ANDY
> TYRO request taxi solo ABC departure.' Aircraft not using TYRO will be
> assumed capable of accepting non standard instructions including turns
below
> 500 ft to clear the departure lane after take off.
>
> The key phrase there is 'to indicate their relative inexperience'. If the
> report is recommending that this call sign prefix should stop the day
> someone passes their checkride, then yes, that's perhaps not such a good
> thing.
>
> I would imagine it would be good to allow *any* pilot to use the prefix
when
> (for example) landing at a new airfield for the first time to indicate to
> the controllers that they may perhaps not be completely au fait with
> procedures at that field.
>
> It's not gonna solve all problems like this, but surely anything that can
> reduce them is good, no?
>
> Andy

My presumption, from reading their recommendation, was that the call sign
prefix (or suffix) would end with passing the checkride.

In short, we agree.

Peter

Andy Hawkins writes:

> That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
> around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.

What do you squawk instead?

Hi,

In article >,
> wrote:
> Andy Hawkins writes:
>
>> That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
>> around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.
>
> What do you squawk instead?

What the tower tells you to.

Andy

Hi,

In article >,
Peter > wrote:
> My presumption, from reading their recommendation, was that the call sign
> prefix (or suffix) would end with passing the checkride.
>
> In short, we agree.

If that is their recommendation, then yes, we agree that would be an odd
'forced' cut-off.

It'd be interesting to see if the CAA were to come after a qualified PPL
that used the Tyro (or whatever) prefix to indicate inexperience...

Andy

On Jul 19, 1:36 pm, Jay Beckman > wrote:
> I trained at a Class D under Class B and I never used (nor felt the
> need to use) the "S" word during my lessons or solo flights.
>
> I work in sports TV and I'm certain that gave me a big leg up on
> dealing with comms. When I'm at work, I wear a headset, I listen to
> multiple faceless voices while scanning multiple screens, all the
> while having to remain focused on specific tasks yet keep the big
> picture in mind. Sure sounds like flying to me.

Many years ago when I was a student pilot I was probably in the safest
period of my flying life.
I was on a familiar field and under the supervision of at least 2
instructors.
And a tower that could handle a pilot who could and once did say
'Negative" as they tried to clear me to land crosswind.
The term IS 'pilot in command'
On the various crosscountries I did toward my PPL I'd been briefed
upon the different airfields that I would be landing at and had to do
a weather check before the next leg...
And after gaining my PPL apart from checkrides and type ratings I was
more or less left to my own resources