Clearwater FL mid air; one fatality

[Ron Lee]

CNN Headline News reported a mid air event between two aircraft at a
Clearwater FL airpark. One plane had a tail number of N6622S if I
read the upside down numbers correctly.

Ron Lee

[gatorcog]

Airplane down was a C-150, one fatality. The other was a Twin Comanche
which landed safely, but damaged. They apparantly collided on the downwind
leg. All we heard in the FBO was a call "entering downwind" and then
"**final **runway, we've had a midair, the other plane went down". The two
guys in the twin were pretty shaken up. Headings of the planes at time of
collision is sketchy at this point. I think they did see each other, though
obviously not soon enough.

A middle-aged couple who had been flying north of the area decided to call
it quits earlier than planned because, according to them, too many planes in
the sky, erratic pattern flying and lack of position calls. Last week a cop
showed up at the FBO with a tow bar that had fallen off of a plane and
landed in a neighborhood, and now this (the 150 crashed 10' from the monkey
bars on a playground; no one hurt on the ground that I know of).

I almost hit a bonanza last year on the downwind at CLW that didn't call his
position - an all too common problem.


"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
> CNN Headline News reported a mid air event between two aircraft at a
> Clearwater FL airpark. One plane had a tail number of N6622S if I
> read the upside down numbers correctly.
>
> Ron Lee

[Cockpit Colin]

Complacency / Poor Discipline / 'Cockiness' - I see a lot of it here too.

Oh how I wish more people would give more thought to the fact that these
machines can kill you in a moment if not treated with respect.

CC

[Robert Henry]

gatorcog" > wrote in message
ink.net...

>
> I almost hit a bonanza last year on the downwind at CLW that didn't call
his
> position - an all too common problem.
>

The 'all too common problem' here is relying upon someone else (i.e., the
other pilot, ATC, ad infinitum)... for safety, traffic avoidance, proper
maintenance, whatever.

According to your statement, an accident almost happened because someone
ELSE failed to do something. Excuse me for reacting, but that's not how the
system works!

Having done it myself, I submit that such thinking IS the most considerable
factor in the GA accident rate.


Using the NTSB report for the Caldwell, NJ midair from 11/2002 almost
totally verbatim, here's what your accident report might have said:

"The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s)
of this accident as follows:

The inadequate visual lookout of both pilots. Factors in the accident was
the [Bonanza pilot's] failure to provide a traffic advisory, ...."



"Loving _________, thought someone else would ...______ [make a position
report]."

We are PIC. Be the PIC and never let go for a second.

--

Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI

[gatorcog]

I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I call
all my positions and listen for others, too.
One has to look out for oneself. Combining visual and aural vigilance is
one way to do this. Unfortunately, there's an attitude out there among some
pilots, especially old timers, that "I don't have to talk to anybody, I've
been doing this for years, I know what I'm doing" etc. Sometimes it catches
up with you.

Thanks for your reaction

"Robert Henry" > wrote in message
news:hqzOb.3721$_H5.2989@lakeread06...
> gatorcog" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
> >
> > I almost hit a bonanza last year on the downwind at CLW that didn't call
> his
> > position - an all too common problem.
> >
>
> The 'all too common problem' here is relying upon someone else (i.e., the
> other pilot, ATC, ad infinitum)... for safety, traffic avoidance, proper
> maintenance, whatever.
>
> According to your statement, an accident almost happened because someone
> ELSE failed to do something. Excuse me for reacting, but that's not how
the
> system works!
>
> Having done it myself, I submit that such thinking IS the most
considerable
> factor in the GA accident rate.
>
>
> Using the NTSB report for the Caldwell, NJ midair from 11/2002 almost
> totally verbatim, here's what your accident report might have said:
>
> "The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s)
> of this accident as follows:
>
> The inadequate visual lookout of both pilots. Factors in the accident was
> the [Bonanza pilot's] failure to provide a traffic advisory, ...."
>
>
>
> "Loving _________, thought someone else would ...______ [make a position
> report]."
>
> We are PIC. Be the PIC and never let go for a second.
>
> --
>
> Bob
> PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

gatorcog wrote:
>
> I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I call
> all my positions and listen for others, too.

And if you called at the same time that he did, both of you are cussing that other
NORDO *******.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Robert Henry]

"gatorcog" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Unfortunately, there's an attitude out there among some
> pilots, especially old timers, that "I don't have to talk to anybody, I've
> been doing this for years, I know what I'm doing" etc. Sometimes it
catches
> up with you.
>
> Thanks for your reaction

Ok, but you completely missed it.

[Newps]

gatorcog wrote:
> I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I call
> all my positions and listen for others, too.

Don't call every position, it's unnecessary and annoying. For example
if you are alone in the pattern then one call per pattern, midfield
downwind, is all you need. If the pattern is really busy and you are
following the same guy then same deal, one call midfield. If somebody
is nearing the airport and will be joining the pattern then more calls
make sense. We have a college flight school that trains at an airport
11 SW of here and with three in the pattern you'd think it was O'Hare.
It is a constant nonstop barrage of totally useless traffic calls. Fer
Christ sakes they are making a call when they taxi from the ramp to the
runway.

[Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi]

you, sir, are an idiot, in addition to a troll.

and a quite unattractive troll at that.

the AIM states that you call every position in the pattern, be it in
crosswind, downwind, base or final. the aim is advisory, you say, and
not regulatory! oh ho, but explain that to an NTSB judge when you've
knocked another plane out of the sky and ended several people's lives
prematurely because you thought the advisory information was
unnecessary, and didn't contribute enough to safety to justify lifting
your green, sausagelike finger and depressing the extremely life limited
PTT switch, energizing the grossly inefficient, hence gasoline wasting
radio, which jeopardizes the lives of thousands of birds in your
vicinity simply through its frankensteinesque, extravagant use of
radiant energy.

in fact, you probably have to start your APU just to transmit.

in all seriousness, i certainly hope you don't come into contact with
student pilots or pilots that are still malleable in their attention to
detail or attitude towards doing every last useful thing to further
safety of flight for everyone; not just themselves.

you need only consider the situation where instrument traffic gets a
late handoff to an uncontrolled CTAF, and someone not making any calls
going onto base or final, and you have yourselves an error chain fit for
a midair. when both planes are low, slow, and focused on the runway.
need me to draw a picture?

in addition: this college you speak of? they are training people?
sadly, people do not spring forth fully formed from the foreheads of
others; only gods. this being said, radio skills do not spring forth
fully formed from the foreheads of CFIs either. students must learn by
experience. and this experience usually includes saying "uhhh, uhhh,
uhhhh cessna uhhhh, uhhhh" on the radio for some time. give them a
break. they're not at o'hare. they're not at your airport. they're at
their airport. they probably don't want some nordo freak coming in and
screwing up their pattern anyway.

note: read the AIM on proper radio speaking technique, not just when to
speak. you'll probably cut down your transmission lengths by half.

AND ANOTHER THING. stop asking for any traffic in the area to please
advise when you change to CTAF; change 10nm out, that way you can listen
for anyone in the pattern making PROPER calls on EVERY leg. of course,
if there was only one person in the pattern there, and they were making
one call on every downwind, and doing full-stop taxibacks, you probably
want to listen up 20nm up if you're not flying a piper cub.

%nfsd

Newps wrote:
>
>
> gatorcog wrote:
>
>> I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I
>> call
>> all my positions and listen for others, too.
>
>
> Don't call every position, it's unnecessary and annoying. For example
> if you are alone in the pattern then one call per pattern, midfield
> downwind, is all you need. If the pattern is really busy and you are
> following the same guy then same deal, one call midfield. If somebody
> is nearing the airport and will be joining the pattern then more calls
> make sense. We have a college flight school that trains at an airport
> 11 SW of here and with three in the pattern you'd think it was O'Hare.
> It is a constant nonstop barrage of totally useless traffic calls. Fer
> Christ sakes they are making a call when they taxi from the ramp to the
> runway.
>

[BTIZ]

I've flown a full traffic pattern entry and landed and not made a radio
call...

it's not because I did not want to.. it's because I could not get a word
in...

every ya who out there was talking up a storm.. to include the multiple
calls from the jump plane to the landing zone 4 miles away trying to wake up
the landing zone safety group plus his 30 second transmission announcing the
impending jump before he takes off.. and again about the time he's kicking
them out there door....

and the 4 aircraft in the pattern on different parallel runways.. and the
"overflight calls" from aircraft well above the traffic pattern going to
another airport, and the practice area calls over the dry lake 3 miles
away.. and the acro club calling the practice box hot... plus everyone was
blocking each others calls..

in the end.. it's still.. see and be seen..

oh yeah.. I hate those guys that call in to a CTAF freq.. asking "Unicom"..
for an airport advisory.. there is no Unicom.. but there are 4 planes in the
pattern.. on CTAF.. and the inbound doesn't even know the runway numbers or
layout.. or the guy that calls a left pattern to the right side runway,
crossing the left runway final approach course in the process.. and then
asking.. so which is the longer runway.. can't you tell by looking??

so much for preflight planning... they set up for a "standard left traffic
pattern" and then realize they are on the wrong side of the airport for the
runway they really want. Or the "short" 3500x60ft runway spooks them and
they go for the big one (4500x75) from the wrong side. I've seen a new
Cirrus use every foot of the 4500ft runway with a 5knt downwind landing.. so
he could save a circuit and land straight in, no one answered his call for
an "advisory" and he chose not to overfly and look at the wind sock. There
was no one on the radio when he called was his answer. There is NEVER anyone
on the radio if you are the only one in the pattern.

oh.. and watch out for those guys that go IFR.. "I Follow Railroads"... at
800ft AGL.. and right through the airport traffic pattern downwind for the
east side runway at cruise speed.. and never make a call..

At least the local State Police aircraft and Flight for Life emergency
helicopters make the call when they transition the airspace.. going down the
interstate on the "other side" of the airport in the west runways traffic
pattern. And they do alter their flight path if traffic reports in the
pattern.

BT

"Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi" > wrote in message
news:X7HOb.36420$Ar1.28533@fed1read04...
> you, sir, are an idiot, in addition to a troll.
>
> and a quite unattractive troll at that.
>
> the AIM states that you call every position in the pattern, be it in
> crosswind, downwind, base or final. the aim is advisory, you say, and
> not regulatory! oh ho, but explain that to an NTSB judge when you've
> knocked another plane out of the sky and ended several people's lives
> prematurely because you thought the advisory information was
> unnecessary, and didn't contribute enough to safety to justify lifting
> your green, sausagelike finger and depressing the extremely life limited
> PTT switch, energizing the grossly inefficient, hence gasoline wasting
> radio, which jeopardizes the lives of thousands of birds in your
> vicinity simply through its frankensteinesque, extravagant use of
> radiant energy.
>
> in fact, you probably have to start your APU just to transmit.
>
> in all seriousness, i certainly hope you don't come into contact with
> student pilots or pilots that are still malleable in their attention to
> detail or attitude towards doing every last useful thing to further
> safety of flight for everyone; not just themselves.
>
> you need only consider the situation where instrument traffic gets a
> late handoff to an uncontrolled CTAF, and someone not making any calls
> going onto base or final, and you have yourselves an error chain fit for
> a midair. when both planes are low, slow, and focused on the runway.
> need me to draw a picture?
>
> in addition: this college you speak of? they are training people?
> sadly, people do not spring forth fully formed from the foreheads of
> others; only gods. this being said, radio skills do not spring forth
> fully formed from the foreheads of CFIs either. students must learn by
> experience. and this experience usually includes saying "uhhh, uhhh,
> uhhhh cessna uhhhh, uhhhh" on the radio for some time. give them a
> break. they're not at o'hare. they're not at your airport. they're at
> their airport. they probably don't want some nordo freak coming in and
> screwing up their pattern anyway.
>
> note: read the AIM on proper radio speaking technique, not just when to
> speak. you'll probably cut down your transmission lengths by half.
>
> AND ANOTHER THING. stop asking for any traffic in the area to please
> advise when you change to CTAF; change 10nm out, that way you can listen
> for anyone in the pattern making PROPER calls on EVERY leg. of course,
> if there was only one person in the pattern there, and they were making
> one call on every downwind, and doing full-stop taxibacks, you probably
> want to listen up 20nm up if you're not flying a piper cub.
>
> %nfsd
>
> Newps wrote:
> >
> >
> > gatorcog wrote:
> >
> >> I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I
> >> call
> >> all my positions and listen for others, too.
> >
> >
> > Don't call every position, it's unnecessary and annoying. For example
> > if you are alone in the pattern then one call per pattern, midfield
> > downwind, is all you need. If the pattern is really busy and you are
> > following the same guy then same deal, one call midfield. If somebody
> > is nearing the airport and will be joining the pattern then more calls
> > make sense. We have a college flight school that trains at an airport
> > 11 SW of here and with three in the pattern you'd think it was O'Hare.
> > It is a constant nonstop barrage of totally useless traffic calls. Fer
> > Christ sakes they are making a call when they taxi from the ramp to the
> > runway.
> >

[Newps]

Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi wrote:
> you, sir, are an idiot, in addition to a troll.

Yep, that could be.


>
> and a quite unattractive troll at that.

No, actually I'm pretty good looking.


>
> the AIM states that you call every position in the pattern, be it in
> crosswind, downwind, base or final. the aim is advisory, you say, and
> not regulatory! oh ho, but explain that to an NTSB judge when you've
> knocked another plane out of the sky and ended several people's lives
> prematurely because you thought the advisory information was
> unnecessary, and didn't contribute enough to safety to justify lifting
> your green, sausagelike finger and depressing the extremely life limited
> PTT switch, energizing the grossly inefficient, hence gasoline wasting
> radio, which jeopardizes the lives of thousands of birds in your
> vicinity simply through its frankensteinesque, extravagant use of
> radiant energy.

Now, that's funny.


>
> in fact, you probably have to start your APU just to transmit.

Hmmmmm...APU. Might have to get one of those.


>
> in all seriousness, i certainly hope you don't come into contact with
> student pilots or pilots that are still malleable in their attention to
> detail or attitude towards doing every last useful thing to further
> safety of flight for everyone; not just themselves.

As a matter of fact I do, as a rep of the FAA no less. Every pilot
meeting we have with the college I speak of I reccomend that they talk
less and look more, just from a personal preference standpoint.


>
> you need only consider the situation where instrument traffic gets a
> late handoff to an uncontrolled CTAF,

And then what good is the 48 radio calls you just made if there's no one
there?


and someone not making any calls
> going onto base or final, and you have yourselves an error chain fit for
> a midair.

Are you looking outside? Ever?


when both planes are low, slow, and focused on the runway.
> need me to draw a picture?

Sounds like about all you would understand.


>
> note: read the AIM on proper radio speaking technique, not just when to
> speak. you'll probably cut down your transmission lengths by half.

Have you ever read this newsgroup? Ever?

>
> AND ANOTHER THING. stop asking for any traffic in the area to please
> advise when you change to CTAF;

Oh I see now, you think I drive a jet.


change 10nm out, that way you can listen
> for anyone in the pattern making PROPER calls on EVERY leg.

Radio calls are not necessary, on any leg.


of course,
> if there was only one person in the pattern there, and they were making
> one call on every downwind, and doing full-stop taxibacks, you probably
> want to listen up 20nm up if you're not flying a piper cub.

I fly a 182. At 10 miles out one call every midfield downwind would
allow me to hear 3 or 4 calls. That's plenty enough for me. How about you?

[Gerald Sylvester]

>> you, sir, are an idiot, in addition to a troll.
> Yep, that could be.

but you are not as good as that guy a few weeks ago. ;-)
He gave it to me and a few others quite good. He shut
up as quickly as he arrived. He was an ass but I gotta
give him credit for dishing it out with style. <grin>

ok, now seriously.

> As a matter of fact I do, as a rep of the FAA no less. Every pilot
> meeting we have with the college I speak of I reccomend that they talk
> less and look more, just from a personal preference standpoint.

I'm a low time pilot but I have to say it is somewhere in between
both of you. We're talking about uncontrolled airports. personally
they scare the hell out of me because while everyone is giving
position reports and can't get a word in and thinking about
what to say and when to say and just trying to fly the damn
airplane, there are those planes that do NOT even have radios
forget the pilots that have them and don't know how to use them.


Everyone has their comfort level. If an uncontrolled airport
is that busy, I'm outta there. I don't like it one bit. 3
people in the pattern is no big deal. 4 starts getting tight
since that 5th person might be on approach. 5 forget it. bye
bye. That is my comfort level. If you are at airports with
all trainers, it gets even more hairy since the students
workload is quite high already, they aren't flying very
tight patterns, they are 100 feet too high, 200 feet too high,
all over horizontally, make your reports. If there isn't
room to make one, land and get out or fly away to another
airport.



>> going onto base or final, and you have yourselves an error chain fit
>> for a midair.
> Are you looking outside? Ever?

correct, for the plane that doesn't have radios. Hopefully
the other pilots behind you are watching as well.

Also as they say, there is a reason why you have two ears (and
two eyes) and one mouth.

> I fly a 182. At 10 miles out one call every midfield downwind would
> allow me to hear 3 or 4 calls. That's plenty enough for me. How about
> you?

I'd recommend more than that. At least say you are on approach for the
pattern to give heads up for people and then announc you are on downwind
so people know you are there. From there, announce if there is space
on the frequency.


Now for my story, on my PPL checkride we did the emergency engine out in
2 parts. First, the initial part including checklist and setting up for
a landing. We descended from 4500 down to about 3000 feet by the time
we decided I did everything, now time to land the plane. The 2nd
part was to do a short approach which was at an uncontrolled airport.
Well I turned too early and was high on base. I lined up for final
and started my slip. Well as I am about 1/2 mile out a Cessna who
was in the pattern, landed, taxied back, decides to take the runway
without making a radio call. he didn't call and probably didn't look
as I was in a slip and probably very visable. Well I had to
go to the side of the runway, slipped some more was just about to add
power and go around when the DE said, ok land it long and we'll call
it ok. I did that. Nevertheless it got a touch hairy with idiot who
did not use his radio when he should have and didn't use his eyes either.

Gerald

[Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi]

Newps wrote:

>
>
> Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi wrote:

>> in all seriousness, i certainly hope you don't come into contact with
>> student pilots or pilots that are still malleable in their attention
>> to detail or attitude towards doing every last useful thing to further
>> safety of flight for everyone; not just themselves.
>
> As a matter of fact I do, as a rep of the FAA no less. Every pilot
> meeting we have with the college I speak of I reccomend that they talk
> less and look more, just from a personal preference standpoint.

so, as a representative of the FAA, you're foisting your personal
preferences on students and college CFIs instead of the recommended
procedure in the AIM? how interesting. you wouldn't want to back up
your claim of being an FAA employee with a certificate number? and i
don't think cleaning the toilets at your FSDO counts as being a
representative.

>> you need only consider the situation where instrument traffic gets a
>> late handoff to an uncontrolled CTAF,
>
> And then what good is the 48 radio calls you just made if there's no one
> there?

what good are the course corrections in the clouds if there's no
mountains there? or other planes? because you're going to get yelled
at, and you might even hit something. the more you do it, the better
the odds of both.

>> going onto base or final, and you have yourselves an error chain fit
>> for a midair.
>
> Are you looking outside? Ever?

oh, i'm sorry. you must not have heard. we have these things called
headsets now. they actually have the microphones *attached* to the
headset, so you don't have to bend down and pick it up, and talk into it
while contemplating your navel any more. try http://www.sportys.com

do you have to look down to find the PTT switch every time? or is there
some sort of physical limitation you possess that somehow closes your
eyes when you open your mouth? you must have alot of bruises from
running into things constantly.

>
> when both planes are low, slow, and focused on the runway.
>
>> need me to draw a picture?
>
> Sounds like about all you would understand.

yeah. pretty much. at least i know how to draw one. see extended.

>>
>> note: read the AIM on proper radio speaking technique, not just when
>> to speak. you'll probably cut down your transmission lengths by half.
>
> Have you ever read this newsgroup? Ever?

have you ever read the AIM? ever?

>> AND ANOTHER THING. stop asking for any traffic in the area to please
>> advise when you change to CTAF;
>
> Oh I see now, you think I drive a jet.

no, but it certainly sounds like you drive a plane.

> change 10nm out, that way you can listen
>
>> for anyone in the pattern making PROPER calls on EVERY leg.
>
>
> Radio calls are not necessary, on any leg.

nor is using a landing light if the aircraft is not for hire at night,
but we turn those on during the day for visibility don't we? why don't
you use the radio? just sounds like you're scared to use it. either
that or you have a thpeech impediment, and have a complexsh about it.

>> if there was only one person in the pattern there, and they were
>> making one call on every downwind, and doing full-stop taxibacks, you
>> probably want to listen up 20nm up if you're not flying a piper cub.
>
>
> I fly a 182. At 10 miles out one call every midfield downwind would
> allow me to hear 3 or 4 calls. That's plenty enough for me. How about
> you?

i've flown everything from a citabria to a PC12. and being an FAA
employee *snort*, you'll realize that you don't get handoffs based on
groundspeed. you get them based on distance and in some cases, altitude.

the simple facts related to this are laid out thusly:

one call per circuit results in approximately 6-10 calls per hour, given
a suitable landing runway and a pattern that's not overly congested.
let's pick the average of 8 circuits per hour. that means, in a given
hour, you make eight radio calls. are you saying that it takes you
22-30 minutes to make it to an airport from 10nm in your 182? 3-4
reports, right? BS. even in a 182, you can easily see 130 KIAS,
especially on a properly planned descent. let's say you've got 7nm to
go from the handoff to the 45 entry. do you know how long it takes to
go 7nm at 130kt GS? three minutes and twelve seconds.

that 3-4 reports isn't starting to look so hot, is it. survey says?
BZZZRT. sorry.

so apparently it is 100% possible, and might even be more probable to
happen than not, that you'll enter the pattern with one other person in
it, and not hear a single radio call from them, because they only call
midfield downwind. which is *exactly* where you will be entering the
downwind from the 45, because you only follow certain parts of the AIM
you agree with, but not the others that just don't make sense to someone
like you.

the *maximum* groundspeed to go 7nm in the eight minutes required or
more, is 52.5kt. that's *required* if you're going to hear that once
every seven-eight minute call before you enter the pattern. even given
10 takeoff/landings per hour, hence 10 calls per hour, the maximum
airspeed to guarantee hearing that *ONE* radio call before you enter the
pattern is 70kt. for all 7nm to the 45. yeah, right.

now you're starting to sound like quite an ass. apparently you did need
me to draw a picture for you, after all.

notice i didn't even bring up getting a handoff at 210KIAS at 4000' MSL
on a 20C day. OR maybe i will: it takes 1.8 minutes to make it from
handoff to 45, assuming a constant speed. we can add .5 for a slowdown
to gear speed, 2.3 minutes sounds okay. suddenly that call per leg
model starts to sound alot more attractive, especially considering the
closure rates of higher performance aircraft.

don't even bother replying if you're just going to blather on about how
i'm wrong and you're right; i expect a cogent, comprehensible argument
as to how these numbers, and this simple, simple math doesn't actually
mean what it does.

%nfsd

[Robert Henry]

"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> Everyone has their comfort level. If an uncontrolled airport
> is that busy, I'm outta there. I don't like it one bit. 3
> people in the pattern is no big deal. 4 starts getting tight
> since that 5th person might be on approach. 5 forget it. bye
> bye. That is my comfort level. If you are at airports with
> all trainers, it gets even more hairy since the students
> workload is quite high already, they aren't flying very
> tight patterns, they are 100 feet too high, 200 feet too high,
> all over horizontally, make your reports. If there isn't
> room to make one, land and get out or fly away to another
> airport.

Well, I'll never forget the call I got from PCT last year,

"cancellation of IFR received, radar services terminated, keep assigned
beacon code until on the ground, 15 plus targets in the vicinity of the
airport, switch to advisory approved, good luck!"

We flew away from the airport, set up the 45 entry and joined the
conflagration, which got interesting when someone made an overhead entry
above the pattern to make the descending right turn to join the 45. I made
as many position reports as possible, but not every one, and I'm not saying
it was ideal, but it all worked.

[Robert Henry]

"Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi" > wrote in message
news:lYLOb.38240$Ar1.6538@fed1read04...
> Newps wrote:
>
> >
> > And then what good is the 48 radio calls you just made if there's no one
> > there?
>

The inbound IFR over the IAF can hear you, if desired. Inbound to airport,
I monitor the CTAF from 25 miles out, if possible. This may very well be
the reason for the "any traffic advise please" line, because someone thinks
they are all alone.

Before I get beat up for that, I was reading the NTSB investigation on the
Quincy, MA accident involving a 1900C and a biz jet. The use of the
despised phrase appears to be recommended as described in the report.

[Dave Stadt]

"Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi" > wrote in message
news:lYLOb.38240$Ar1.6538@fed1read04...
> Newps wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi wrote:
>
> >> in all seriousness, i certainly hope you don't come into contact with
> >> student pilots or pilots that are still malleable in their attention
> >> to detail or attitude towards doing every last useful thing to further
> >> safety of flight for everyone; not just themselves.
> >
> > As a matter of fact I do, as a rep of the FAA no less. Every pilot
> > meeting we have with the college I speak of I reccomend that they talk
> > less and look more, just from a personal preference standpoint.
>
> so, as a representative of the FAA, you're foisting your personal
> preferences on students and college CFIs instead of the recommended
> procedure in the AIM? how interesting. you wouldn't want to back up
> your claim of being an FAA employee with a certificate number? and i
> don't think cleaning the toilets at your FSDO counts as being a
> representative.

If every pilot at every airport assigned 122.8 (and probably a couple other
CTAF frequencies) made radio calls per the AIM in the metro Chicago area on
busy summer weekends no one would hear anything except squawks and squeals.
Unfortunately the AIM does not allow for common sense.

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "Dave
Stadt" > wrote:

> If every pilot at every airport assigned 122.8 (and probably a couple
> other
> CTAF frequencies) made radio calls per the AIM in the metro Chicago area
> on
> busy summer weekends no one would hear anything except squawks and
> squeals.
> Unfortunately the AIM does not allow for common sense.

contributing to the problem is the insufficient number of
unicom frequencies available.

--
Bob Noel

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 07:33:55 -0500, "Robert Henry"
> wrote:

>This may very well be
>the reason for the "any traffic advise please" line, because someone thinks
>they are all alone.

So if the pilot uttering that request (despite it not being
recommended by the Advisory Circular) receives no reply, is he to
erroneously believe that he is alone in the pattern? What of the
NORDO aircraft that is incapable of radio communication, or the pilot
who chooses not to respond to such a nonstandard radio broadcast?

Just make the self announced position report broadcasts as the AC
suggests:

The FAA Advisory Circular web site
<http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/CurACFARFrame?OpenFrameSet>
provides AC 90-42, here
<http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/ACNumber/C54E50252A7FA56D862569D8007804BA?OpenDocument>

AC 90-42 defines CTAF "Self-announce" usage as limited to:

"Self-announce" is a procedure whereby pilots broadcast
their position, intended flight activity or ground operation on
the designated CTAF.


Back in February 2002 Roger Long started a message thread on this
topic that accreted 235 articles:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=b19q7u4dae0hon8cgmgqk7gp9jb10cob1a%40news-server.socal.rr.com&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fas_q%3DAdvisory%2520Circular%26safe%3Dima ges%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26as_ugroup%3Drec.aviation.piloting%26as_uauthor s%3Dlarry%2520Dighera%26lr%3D%26hl%3Den>

[Paul Sengupta]

"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Also as they say, there is a reason why you have two ears (and
> two eyes) and one mouth.

For flying?

Paul

[Newps]

Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi wrote:


>>> you need only consider the situation where instrument traffic gets a
>>> late handoff to an uncontrolled CTAF,

So what? He calls in a few miles from the airport and you answer.
Patterns are adjusted as necessary. What's so hard about that?


> what good are the course corrections in the clouds if there's no
> mountains there? or other planes?

Irrelavant to the discussion.



> oh, i'm sorry. you must not have heard. we have these things called
> headsets now. they actually have the microphones *attached* to the
> headset, so you don't have to bend down and pick it up, and talk into it
> while contemplating your navel any more.

I didn't think you looked outside. You ought to try it. That's where
the airplanes are.

why don't
> you use the radio? just sounds like you're scared to use it. either
> that or you have a thpeech impediment, and have a complexsh about it.

Yep, that's me, I'm afraid to us the radio. All those people out there
listening. Didn't think you ever read this group, now you proved it.


> i've flown everything from a citabria to a PC12. and being an FAA
> employee *snort*, you'll realize that you don't get handoffs based on
> groundspeed. you get them based on distance and in some cases, altitude.

I'm pretty familiar with handoffs.


>
> the simple facts related to this are laid out thusly:
>
> one call per circuit results in approximately 6-10 calls per hour, given
> a suitable landing runway and a pattern that's not overly congested.
> let's pick the average of 8 circuits per hour.

Over 7 minutes per pattern? You have got to be kidding. But we'll
follow along.



that means, in a given
> hour, you make eight radio calls. are you saying that it takes you
> 22-30 minutes to make it to an airport from 10nm in your 182?

No I'm saying normal people don't take 7 minutes to fly around the
pattern one time.


3-4
> reports, right? BS. even in a 182, you can easily see 130 KIAS,
> especially on a properly planned descent. let's say you've got 7nm to
> go from the handoff to the 45 entry.

I don't do 45 entries unless I am coming from exactly that direction. I
will enter on the downwind or the crosswind over the center of the
airport. Around here there's no handoff either.


do you know how long it takes to
> go 7nm at 130kt GS? three minutes and twelve seconds.

That's wonderful.



> so apparently it is 100% possible, and might even be more probable to
> happen than not, that you'll enter the pattern with one other person in
> it, and not hear a single radio call from them, because they only call
> midfield downwind.

I don't need any reports. I will see them from several miles out.


which is *exactly* where you will be entering the
> downwind from the 45,

I don't think so.


> the *maximum* groundspeed to go 7nm in the eight minutes required or
> more, is 52.5kt. that's *required* if you're going to hear that once
> every seven-eight minute call before you enter the pattern.

Again flawed reasoning. Nobody that is all alone in the pattern flies a
7 minute pattern.


Other drivel snipped.

[lardsoup]

Cool. I thought I was the only one who thought that.

>"Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi"
> you, sir, are an idiot.

[lardsoup]

I concur.

"Enefesdi Varspooli Bhootpalamdi" > you, sir, are an idiot.

[Shirley]

Newps wrote:
>>Again flawed reasoning. Nobody that is all alone
>>in the pattern flies a 7 minute pattern.

A Lieberman wrote:
>Actually, to me a 7 minute pattern sounds
>reasonable IF a person runs a 1000 foot AGL
>pattern in a typical Cessna [snip]

Flying a Cessna 150, my patterns vary between 6 and 9 minutes -- 800' TPA,
varying wind and weight, alone and/or with others in the pattern. Am I doing
something wrong?

--Shirley

[A Lieberman]

Newps wrote:

> Again flawed reasoning. Nobody that is all alone in the pattern flies a
> 7 minute pattern.

Actually, to me a 7 minute pattern sounds reasonable IF a person runs a
1000 foot AGL pattern in a typical Cessna as follows in a touch and go
in a no wind situation. (numbers would be approximate based on my
experiences)

Climbout 1 1/2 minutes (climb to 800 AGL at 500 feet per minute)
Crosswind 1/4 minute (climb to 900 AGL)
Downwind (Climb to 1000 AGL, level off, pick up speed) 3/4 minute
Abeam the numbers (throttle back start descent) 1/2 minute
Base 1/4 minute
Final 3/4 minute
Touchdown to clearing the length of the runway and getting back to 800
AGL (assuming 4500 foot runway or so) 2 minutes.

The above adds up to 6 minutes. Add in a little wind, and the headwind
component would add time to the leg that is in the headwind (crosswind,
base or final).

Now throw in a 800 foot pattern, then maybe knock off a minute, but I
don't run 800 foot patterns that I have seen others do. All airports I
have been had 1000 TPA

Looking at my log book, the above would consistent for when I did 10
touch and goes in 1.3 hours.

Allen

[G.R. Patterson III]

Shirley wrote:
>
> Flying a Cessna 150, my patterns vary between 6 and 9 minutes -- 800' TPA,
> varying wind and weight, alone and/or with others in the pattern. Am I doing
> something wrong?

Probably not. Looking at my first logbook, it appears that I was fairly consistently
doing about 10 T&Ls in an hour in a rental 150. Our pattern altitude was 1,000' AGL,
and I didn't usually do T&Gs.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[A Lieberman]

Shirley wrote:
>
> Newps wrote:
> >>Again flawed reasoning. Nobody that is all alone
> >>in the pattern flies a 7 minute pattern.
>
> A Lieberman wrote:
> >Actually, to me a 7 minute pattern sounds
> >reasonable IF a person runs a 1000 foot AGL
> >pattern in a typical Cessna [snip]
>
> Flying a Cessna 150, my patterns vary between 6 and 9 minutes -- 800' TPA,
> varying wind and weight, alone and/or with others in the pattern. Am I doing
> something wrong?

Hi Shirley,

Never flew a 150 or 152, but expecting the 150 to be slower then a 172
which I trained in, I would think you are dong it perfectly normal.

Allen
>
> --Shirley

[Happy Dog]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:51GOb.81209$sv6.190650@attbi_s52...
>
>
> gatorcog wrote:
> > I didn't hit the bonanza precisely because I did see and avoid him. I
call
> > all my positions and listen for others, too.
>
> Don't call every position, it's unnecessary and annoying. For example
> if you are alone in the pattern then one call per pattern, midfield
> downwind, is all you need. If the pattern is really busy and you are
> following the same guy then same deal, one call midfield. If somebody
> is nearing the airport and will be joining the pattern then more calls
> make sense. We have a college flight school that trains at an airport
> 11 SW of here and with three in the pattern you'd think it was O'Hare.
> It is a constant nonstop barrage of totally useless traffic calls. Fer
> Christ sakes they are making a call when they taxi from the ramp to the
> runway.

Agree with the last part. When it's busy, there's not much advantage in
calling every position. But, I've thought that I've been alone a couple
times when I wasn't. So I tend to make more calls when I think I'm alone.

le moo

[Robert Henry]

> wrote in message
...
>
>> So if the pilot uttering that request (despite it not being
> recommended by the Advisory Circular) receives no reply, is he to
> erroneously believe that he is alone in the pattern?

I was very clear on that point.

> What of the
> NORDO aircraft that is incapable of radio communication, or the pilot
> who chooses not to respond to such a nonstandard radio broadcast?

The former will not respond, though may have the ability to receive such
transmissions; the latter need only provide the calls specified in the AIM
to satisfy the request.

I agree that the 10 mile announcement serves attention to the lonely pattern
flyer that now would be a good time to start talking, so the extra
"...please advise" words are unnecessary.

>
> Just make the self announced position report broadcasts as the AC
> suggests:

or as set forth in the AIM, which "contains _the fundamentals required in
order to fly in the United States NAS_.

[Gerald Sylvester]

Paul Sengupta wrote:
> "Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>Also as they say, there is a reason why you have two ears (and
>>two eyes) and one mouth.
> For flying?

yes but only for flying.


:)
gerald

[Big John]

Allen

You guys are pussies <G>

Used to pitch off the deck at 250+ MPH. Hard pull up in climbing turn
with throttle going to idle and drop gear and flaps when airspeed
below limit speed. Continue turn down to final and touch down under 30
seconds with that Merlin poppety popping all the way. <G>

Big John
Pilot ROCAF


On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:04:06 -0800, A Lieberman >
wrote:

>Newps wrote:
>
>> Again flawed reasoning. Nobody that is all alone in the pattern flies a
>> 7 minute pattern.
>
>Actually, to me a 7 minute pattern sounds reasonable IF a person runs a
>1000 foot AGL pattern in a typical Cessna as follows in a touch and go
>in a no wind situation. (numbers would be approximate based on my
>experiences)
>
>Climbout 1 1/2 minutes (climb to 800 AGL at 500 feet per minute)
>Crosswind 1/4 minute (climb to 900 AGL)
>Downwind (Climb to 1000 AGL, level off, pick up speed) 3/4 minute
>Abeam the numbers (throttle back start descent) 1/2 minute
>Base 1/4 minute
>Final 3/4 minute
>Touchdown to clearing the length of the runway and getting back to 800
>AGL (assuming 4500 foot runway or so) 2 minutes.
>
>The above adds up to 6 minutes. Add in a little wind, and the headwind
>component would add time to the leg that is in the headwind (crosswind,
>base or final).
>
>Now throw in a 800 foot pattern, then maybe knock off a minute, but I
>don't run 800 foot patterns that I have seen others do. All airports I
>have been had 1000 TPA
>
>Looking at my log book, the above would consistent for when I did 10
>touch and goes in 1.3 hours.
>
>Allen

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:39:35 -0500, "Robert Henry"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...

>> Just make the self announced position report broadcasts as the AC
>> suggests:
>
>or as set forth in the AIM, which "contains _the fundamentals required in
>order to fly in the United States NAS_.

You'll find that the AIM is a non-regulatory distillation of FAA
Orders, Regulations, and Advisory Circulars paraphrased for pilots.
The AIM is a handy resource that contains much information gathered
from many documents into a single volume. Personally, I prefer to dig
a little deeper at times, and research the original documents for a
more in-depth understanding of an issue.