Position and Hold at uncontrolled field

[dave]

I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.

Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.

Dave
68 7ECA

[john smith]

dave wrote:
> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
> Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
> fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
> fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.
> Dave
> 68 7ECA

At an uncontrolled field, you do a 360 and check the airspace before
taking the active.

[C J Campbell]

It is not a new technique; people have been doing it for years. Most
instructors discourage it for the reasons you mention, but there is nothing
illegal about it. There was an enormously long thread about it last year.
Maybe the guy normally flies out of a towered airport and just doesn't know
any better.

Surprising things can happen even at towered airports. Uncontrolled fields
sometimes look like you are flying into a hive of bees. Aircraft flying
instrument approaches can come in from any direction and circle to land at
below pattern altitude. Helicopters may be flying in the opposite pattern.
Almost anybody can be using almost any pattern entry. Airplanes can be using
opposite runways simultaneously. Ultralights fly their own pattern. And
radios -- hah! If the guy is making position calls at all (if he even *has*
radios) he is likely as not broadcasting on the frequency of the airfield he
departed from and annoying the heck out of the tower there. All of it is
legal, or just common human error, a lot of it is required, and just about
anything can happen.

Pilots can holler all they want about that *$()% who just did something they
didn't like, but that's too bad. Nine times out of ten you find that it is
the guy who thinks he was wronged that needs to apologize to somebody.

Keep a sharp eye out and don't assume that everybody follows the same rules
that you do.

[Bob Fry]

"C J Campbell" > writes:

> radios -- hah! If the guy is making position calls at all (if he even *has*
> radios) he is likely as not broadcasting on the frequency of the airfield he
> departed from and annoying the heck out of the tower there.

Or calling departure, liftoff, crosswind, turning downwind, downwind
abeam the numbers, base, final, over the threshold, leaving the
runway, clear the runway, ...

And always like this:

"Uh, um, Podunk Traffic, aahhhh...Cessna...Cessna November One Two
Three Four Pa-pa uhhhh Victor aaahhh....turning...downwind....uuhhhh,
Podunk uhhh Airport. I mean Traffic."

[Michael 182]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...

> Pilots can holler all they want about that *$()% who just did something
they
> didn't like, but that's too bad. Nine times out of ten you find that it is
> the guy who thinks he was wronged that needs to apologize to somebody.

Great summary of this, and almost every other "traffic at uncontrolled
airports" thread.

Michael

[BTIZ]

> Or calling departure, liftoff, crosswind, turning downwind, downwind
> abeam the numbers, base, final, over the threshold, leaving the
> runway, clear the runway, ...
>
> And always like this:
>
> "Uh, um, Podunk Traffic, aahhhh...Cessna...Cessna November One Two
> Three Four Pa-pa uhhhh Victor aaahhh....turning...downwind....uuhhhh,
> Podunk uhhh Airport. I mean Traffic."

and by the time they get through all that.. I've entered the pattern on the
opposite side to a parallel runway.. and landed and cleared.. without a
word...

BECAUSE I COULD NOT GET A WORD IN BETWEEN ALL OF HIS RADIO CALLS AND
EVERYONE ELSE IN HIS PATTERN FOLLOWING HIS ****POOR EXAMPLE

"Glider tow clear, 20L"

Oh, and the local flight school uses the same CTAF freq to broadcast their
training positions and altitudes over a near by dry (right now wet) lake
bed.. it is within 5 miles of the airport, but outside the traffic pattern..
and then all the other "transient" calls made by pilots flying the highway..
IFR (I follow roads) well above the traffic pattern altitude...

but they know or do not know that there are gliders in the area.. its to
early in the day for lift to go that high... 50% of which don't carry
radios.. and there is an active jump zone 4 miles south.. but if they'd shut
up they could hear if the jump zone was active or not..

::: stepping down off radio discipline soapbox :::
BT

[Dave Stadt]

"dave" > wrote in message
...
> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
>
> Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
> fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
> fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.
>
> Dave
> 68 7ECA

I have never understood why some pilots use this technique to attempt
suicide. If they want to kill themselves why waste a perfectly good
airplane.

[Dale]

In article >,
dave > wrote:

> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
>
> Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
> fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
> fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.

If the guy went position and hold to do his runup would be one thing.
But getting into position as other traffic is clearing isn't a big deal.
It's only a few seconds, not much different than taxiing out and
departing as far as risk of being hit by the blind pilot on final. By
getting out on the runway he's making the runway available sooner for
landing traffic. Good thinking on his part.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Jeff]

LOL...a couple of months ago nellis approach almost let me fly into a mountain
because some guy from utah here for xmas shopping, flying out, I was right behind
him, was doing that on the radio, ummm hhmmm mmmmummm and so on, I almost told him
to spit it out and shut up but he wouldnt stop talking!
finally as I am nearing the mountain getting ready to make the decision to deviate
from my course ATC had me on, he shut up and let me ask to make my turn.

I hate it when people just dont spit out what they have to say .

Bob Fry wrote:

> And always like this:
>
> "Uh, um, Podunk Traffic, aahhhh...Cessna...Cessna November One Two
> Three Four Pa-pa uhhhh Victor aaahhh....turning...downwind....uuhhhh,
> Podunk uhhh Airport. I mean Traffic."

[Jeff]

it can be a big deal, the first and only time I flew into apple valley, those
country boys out there were landing 2 and 3 planes at a time. It was a mess.
half of them wasnt even talking, I think they figured that since the other
guy wasnt off the runway yet they did not need to make call since no one
could take off.


Dale wrote:

>
>
> If the guy went position and hold to do his runup would be one thing.
> But getting into position as other traffic is clearing isn't a big deal.
> It's only a few seconds, not much different than taxiing out and
> departing as far as risk of being hit by the blind pilot on final. By
> getting out on the runway he's making the runway available sooner for
> landing traffic. Good thinking on his part.
>
> --
> Dale L. Falk
>
> There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
> as simply messing around with airplanes.
>
> http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Doug Carter]

On 2004-02-24, dave > wrote:
> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> hold".

This technique is used to encourage go-around practice for those die
hard "airmen" who can afford goggles and scarves (not to mention an
airplane) but not a hand held radio.

[Dennis O'Connor]

Jumpers are a major problem... The jump plane is talking to ATC until close
to unloading, then switches to Unicom and makes a quick, " . . . jumpers in
two minutes", BLIND CALL, that is almost always stepped on... The next call
is ". . . . jumpers away", also done in a hurry and in the blind...
Then, when I realize that 'maybe' I heard the word jumpers in amongst all
the squeals, I call for the jump plane to repeat, but he has turned down the
volume so he can bull**** with the jumpers, or he has gone back to ATC...
So, now 'maybe' I have uncontrolled bombs coming down from above, where I
can't see well, and if I roll into a tight 360 away from the pattern what
about the nordo out there in the haze not expecting me to do that... After
40 years of operating my airplanes out of a field with jumpers, I gotta tell
ya it got really old a long time ago...
denny



"BTIZ" > wrote in message
> radios.. and there is an active jump zone 4 miles south.. but if they'd
shut
> up they could hear if the jump zone was active or not..
>
> ::: stepping down off radio discipline soapbox :::
> BT

[Dennis O'Connor]

I don't do P&H at uncontrolled fields for the simple reason I can't see what
is happening on final... I stay at the line (or where one should be) until
the runway is clear for departure, and then I simply power around the turn
and smoothly go full throttle without stopping... There is zero lost time
compared to being in position and blind to the rear...

denny

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> It is not a new technique; people have been doing it for years. Most
> instructors discourage it for the reasons you mention, but there is
nothing
> illegal about it. There was an enormously long thread about it last year.
> Maybe the guy normally flies out of a towered airport and just doesn't
know
> any better.
>
> Surprising things can happen even at towered airports. Uncontrolled fields
> sometimes look like you are flying into a hive of bees. Aircraft flying
> instrument approaches can come in from any direction and circle to land at
> below pattern altitude. Helicopters may be flying in the opposite pattern.
> Almost anybody can be using almost any pattern entry. Airplanes can be
using
> opposite runways simultaneously. Ultralights fly their own pattern. And
> radios -- hah! If the guy is making position calls at all (if he even
*has*
> radios) he is likely as not broadcasting on the frequency of the airfield
he
> departed from and annoying the heck out of the tower there. All of it is
> legal, or just common human error, a lot of it is required, and just about
> anything can happen.
>
> Pilots can holler all they want about that *$()% who just did something
they
> didn't like, but that's too bad. Nine times out of ten you find that it is
> the guy who thinks he was wronged that needs to apologize to somebody.
>
> Keep a sharp eye out and don't assume that everybody follows the same
rules
> that you do.
>
>

[Dave Stadt]

"Doug Carter" > wrote in message
...
> On 2004-02-24, dave > wrote:
> > I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> > cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> > hold".
>
> This technique is used to encourage go-around practice for those die
> hard "airmen" who can afford goggles and scarves (not to mention an
> airplane) but not a hand held radio.

The people I have seen do position and holds at non towered airports are
also the kind that have radios but use them only for transmitting.

[Andrew Sarangan]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message >...
> "dave" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> > cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> > hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> > clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> > uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> > promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> > of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> > radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
> >
> > Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
> > fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
> > fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.
> >
> > Dave
> > 68 7ECA
>
> I have never understood why some pilots use this technique to attempt
> suicide. If they want to kill themselves why waste a perfectly good
> airplane.


Position and hold at an uncontrolled runway may be stupid, but it is
not necessarily suicide. It takes an equally stupid aircraft to
collide with it.

[C J Campbell]

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...
> LOL...a couple of months ago nellis approach almost let me fly into a
mountain
> because some guy from utah here for xmas shopping, flying out, I was right
behind
> him, was doing that on the radio, ummm hhmmm mmmmummm and so on, I almost
told him
> to spit it out and shut up but he wouldnt stop talking!
> finally as I am nearing the mountain getting ready to make the decision to
deviate
> from my course ATC had me on, he shut up and let me ask to make my turn.
>
> I hate it when people just dont spit out what they have to say .
>

Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp and
laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is having
trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more while
you all argue over it.

One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.

Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on improving
your own radio habits and decision making.

[C J Campbell]

"dave" > wrote in message
...
> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
>

Are you saying that some other aircraft is going to land before the first
has cleared the runway?

[Jay Honeck]

> > Pilots can holler all they want about that *$()% who just did something
> they
> > didn't like, but that's too bad. Nine times out of ten you find that it
is
> > the guy who thinks he was wronged that needs to apologize to somebody.
>
> Great summary of this, and almost every other "traffic at uncontrolled
> airports" thread.

Maybe, but...

In my experience, it takes a pretty major -- and obviously wrong -- faux pas
to **** off a pilot to the point where he is "hollering" at someone.
Usually everyone is in "live and let live" mode, and no one gets too ruffled
when someone flies a weird pattern. (For example.)

When I've seen a blow up happen -- and I've only seen it happen twice in ten
years -- the guy getting hollered at clearly deserved it.

Or did you mean "holler" figuratively, CJ?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> it can be a big deal, the first and only time I flew into apple valley,
those
> country boys out there were landing 2 and 3 planes at a time. It was a
mess.
> half of them wasnt even talking, I think they figured that since the other
> guy wasnt off the runway yet they did not need to make call since no one
> could take off.

Are you talking about Apple Valley in Illinois, near Galena?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dale]

In article >,
"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote:

> Jumpers are a major problem... The jump plane is talking to ATC until close
> to unloading, then switches to Unicom and makes a quick, " . . . jumpers in
> two minutes", BLIND CALL, that is almost always stepped on... The next call
> is ". . . . jumpers away", also done in a hurry and in the blind...

Do you want the jump pilot to personally call you? A blind call is all
he can do. I admit tho, some guys took speaking lessons from JFK and
really do need to slow down and be understood.

> Then, when I realize that 'maybe' I heard the word jumpers in amongst all
> the squeals, I call for the jump plane to repeat, but he has turned down the
> volume so he can bull**** with the jumpers, or he has gone back to ATC...

You're at pattern altitude and hearing radio calls from people fairly
close in. The jump pilot is at 10-12K hearing radio calls from 1/2 way
around the world. <G> You wanna talk squeal? The pilot simply may not
be able to hear your call due to other radio traffic stepping on you.
(Jumpers don't have radios so the pilot probably isn't BSing with them.
<G>)

> So, now 'maybe' I have uncontrolled bombs coming down from above, where I
> can't see well, and if I roll into a tight 360 away from the pattern what
> about the nordo out there in the haze not expecting me to do that...

The jumpers will be open usually no lower than 1800 AGL unless they have
a problem. Are they opening on the downwind? Or over the runway? Talk
to the jump operation, maybe something can be worked out to ease your
concerns. I've been hauling jumpers quite a while, there are idiot jump
pilots just as there are idiot pilots in all aspects of aviation. The
only "problems" I've encountered with other pilots have been people
who've made incorrect assumptions about skydivers, skydiving and jump
pilots. Skydivers don't want to die anymore than any other person. We
also realize that we suffer from "bad PR" and the vast majority work to
correct that.

> After 40 years of operating my airplanes out of a field with jumpers, I gotta tell
> ya it got really old a long time ago...

You should go make a jump. <G>

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> Are you saying that some other aircraft is going to land before the first
> has cleared the runway?
>

Not a good idea when an airplane is holding on the runway, but there's
nothing wrong with landing behind another landing aircraft.

[Dave S]

Hmm.. gliders, uncontrolled field and meatbombs over a dry lake.. sure
sounds like Boulder City, Nevada...

Dave

BTIZ wrote:
>>Or calling departure, liftoff, crosswind, turning downwind, downwind
>>abeam the numbers, base, final, over the threshold, leaving the
>>runway, clear the runway, ...
>>
>>And always like this:
>>
>>"Uh, um, Podunk Traffic, aahhhh...Cessna...Cessna November One Two
>>Three Four Pa-pa uhhhh Victor aaahhh....turning...downwind....uuhhhh,
>>Podunk uhhh Airport. I mean Traffic."
>
>
> and by the time they get through all that.. I've entered the pattern on the
> opposite side to a parallel runway.. and landed and cleared.. without a
> word...
>
> BECAUSE I COULD NOT GET A WORD IN BETWEEN ALL OF HIS RADIO CALLS AND
> EVERYONE ELSE IN HIS PATTERN FOLLOWING HIS ****POOR EXAMPLE
>
> "Glider tow clear, 20L"
>
> Oh, and the local flight school uses the same CTAF freq to broadcast their
> training positions and altitudes over a near by dry (right now wet) lake
> bed.. it is within 5 miles of the airport, but outside the traffic pattern..
> and then all the other "transient" calls made by pilots flying the highway..
> IFR (I follow roads) well above the traffic pattern altitude...
>
> but they know or do not know that there are gliders in the area.. its to
> early in the day for lift to go that high... 50% of which don't carry
> radios.. and there is an active jump zone 4 miles south.. but if they'd shut
> up they could hear if the jump zone was active or not..
>
> ::: stepping down off radio discipline soapbox :::
> BT
>
>

[Bob Gardner]

Is there a nice way for you to point out that 123.3 is designated for flight
school use?

Bob Gardner

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:NeA_b.6214$aZ3.5471@fed1read04...
> > Or calling departure, liftoff, crosswind, turning downwind, downwind
> > abeam the numbers, base, final, over the threshold, leaving the
> > runway, clear the runway, ...
> >
> > And always like this:
> >
> > "Uh, um, Podunk Traffic, aahhhh...Cessna...Cessna November One Two
> > Three Four Pa-pa uhhhh Victor aaahhh....turning...downwind....uuhhhh,
> > Podunk uhhh Airport. I mean Traffic."
>
> and by the time they get through all that.. I've entered the pattern on
the
> opposite side to a parallel runway.. and landed and cleared.. without a
> word...
>
> BECAUSE I COULD NOT GET A WORD IN BETWEEN ALL OF HIS RADIO CALLS AND
> EVERYONE ELSE IN HIS PATTERN FOLLOWING HIS ****POOR EXAMPLE
>
> "Glider tow clear, 20L"
>
> Oh, and the local flight school uses the same CTAF freq to broadcast their
> training positions and altitudes over a near by dry (right now wet) lake
> bed.. it is within 5 miles of the airport, but outside the traffic
pattern..
> and then all the other "transient" calls made by pilots flying the
highway..
> IFR (I follow roads) well above the traffic pattern altitude...
>
> but they know or do not know that there are gliders in the area.. its to
> early in the day for lift to go that high... 50% of which don't carry
> radios.. and there is an active jump zone 4 miles south.. but if they'd
shut
> up they could hear if the jump zone was active or not..
>
> ::: stepping down off radio discipline soapbox :::
> BT
>
>

[Newps]

> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Are you saying that some other aircraft is going to land before the first
>>has cleared the runway?


What, you wouldn't? Why should I wait for someone to clear the runway
if there is enough room for me to land behind him?

[Peter Duniho]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:6wM_b.396854$na.764749@attbi_s04...
> What, you wouldn't? Why should I wait for someone to clear the runway
> if there is enough room for me to land behind him?

The same reason you take more fuel than the bare minimum, that you clear
obstacles by more than the bare minimum, and start your takeoff roll with
more than the bare minimum of required runway remaining.

It's hard enough to ensure that you will not make any mistakes while
landing, but you don't have any idea what sort of mechanical problems might
occur, such as brake failure. Or, you might have to make a go around at the
last minute that puts the other aircraft right in your way. There's all
sorts of reasons the landing might not go exactly as you expect it to. Why
reduce or eliminate your safety margin when there's absolutely no good
reason to?

The day you attempt to land while someone is still on the runway, and you
find that you can't avoid running into them, you'll understand why you
should wait.

Pete

[S Green]

"Dale" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> dave > wrote:
>
> > I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
> > cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
> > hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
> > clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
> > uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
> > promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
> > of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
> > radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
> >
> > Is this a new training technique to get students ready for controlled
> > fields? Most everybody has a radio at my home field but I fly into
> > fields where many pilots don't have or don't use their radio.
>
> If the guy went position and hold to do his runup would be one thing.
> But getting into position as other traffic is clearing isn't a big deal.
> It's only a few seconds, not much different than taxiing out and
> departing as far as risk of being hit by the blind pilot on final. By
> getting out on the runway he's making the runway available sooner for
> landing traffic. Good thinking on his part.
>
Tend to agree and it lets the clearing traffic know someone wants to go. As
a matter of course I always tell when I have vacated the runway. I often fly
from a strip with a hump and a plane can disappear over the hump and unless
the pilot radios that he is clear, the only option for the departing pilot
is to wait to see him reappear on the taxiway.

When the tower is working no problem, but when its closed it needs all
pilots to consider the needs of others.

[Rick Glasser]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:15:48 -0800, C J Campbell wrote:


>
> Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
> a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp and
> laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is having
> trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more while
> you all argue over it.
>
> One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
> 'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.
>
> Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on improving
> your own radio habits and decision making.

How 'bout the FBO that insists on welcoming every new plane and arranging
cars, taxis, hotels, sightseeing tours, evening entertainment, restaurant
reservations, parking, catering, grocery shopping, outlet mall
suggestions ......while students and other planes are in the pattern,
instead of a quick message to switch over to the ARINC freq.

Sorry, just my local pet peeve.

--
Rick/JYO
PP-ASEL-IA
remove 'nospam' to reply

[Michael 182]

Oh, you've flown to Block Island.

"Rick Glasser" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:15:48 -0800, C J Campbell wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who
have
> > a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp
and
> > laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is
having
> > trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more
while
> > you all argue over it.
> >
> > One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in
and
> > 'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.
> >
> > Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on
improving
> > your own radio habits and decision making.
>
> How 'bout the FBO that insists on welcoming every new plane and arranging
> cars, taxis, hotels, sightseeing tours, evening entertainment, restaurant
> reservations, parking, catering, grocery shopping, outlet mall
> suggestions ......while students and other planes are in the pattern,
> instead of a quick message to switch over to the ARINC freq.
>
> Sorry, just my local pet peeve.
>
> --
> Rick/JYO
> PP-ASEL-IA
> remove 'nospam' to reply
>

[Big John]

Have seen too often to count.

Big John


On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:17:54 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"dave" > wrote in message
...
>> I was returning to LOM today and after one plane had landed but not yet
>> cleared the runway, a pilot at the approach end announced "position and
>> hold". He taxied into position and waited for the previous aircraft to
>> clear the runway. He then made a normal departure. I was taught at
>> uncontrolled fields to never take the runway unless you can depart
>> promptly. Why? In case an aircraft is landing that you aren't aware
>> of. You may not be aware of the aircraft because he doesn't have a
>> radio, he called and you didn't hear him, you can't see him, etc.
>>
>
>Are you saying that some other aircraft is going to land before the first
>has cleared the runway?
>

[dave]

I'm not critizing anyone for poor radio technique. I got my private at
an uncontrolled strip, 9n1 and my IFR at PNE. I felt like a complete
idiot when I first started flying at PNE. I still make plenty of
mistakes. I'm not even concerned about radio use, just worried about
someone taking the active for no good reason. When your ready to go,
say your intentions, taxi out and go.

dave
68 7ECA




C J Campbell wrote:

> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>LOL...a couple of months ago nellis approach almost let me fly into a
>
> mountain
>
>>because some guy from utah here for xmas shopping, flying out, I was right
>
> behind
>
>>him, was doing that on the radio, ummm hhmmm mmmmummm and so on, I almost
>
> told him
>
>>to spit it out and shut up but he wouldnt stop talking!
>>finally as I am nearing the mountain getting ready to make the decision to
>
> deviate
>
>>from my course ATC had me on, he shut up and let me ask to make my turn.
>>
>>I hate it when people just dont spit out what they have to say .
>>
>
>
> Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
> a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp and
> laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is having
> trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more while
> you all argue over it.
>
> One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
> 'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.
>
> Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on improving
> your own radio habits and decision making.
>
>

[Jeff]

this guy was not a new pilot, he was flying a C-210 and he wasnt having trouble,
he was just "chatting" to Nellis approach, and really really dragging out each
word slowly.
As the person following him, in class B, I was not suppose to deviate from my
course or altitude - I tried slowing down a little to give me more time, but the
guy just kept talking.
I never said anything to him, As soon as I had the opportunity I fired off
"arrow 891 request turn on course"

the nellis AFB guys are kinda relaxed, I guess the speed of our planes put them
to sleep.



C J Campbell wrote:

> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
> > LOL...a couple of months ago nellis approach almost let me fly into a
> mountain
> > because some guy from utah here for xmas shopping, flying out, I was right
> behind
> > him, was doing that on the radio, ummm hhmmm mmmmummm and so on, I almost
> told him
> > to spit it out and shut up but he wouldnt stop talking!
> > finally as I am nearing the mountain getting ready to make the decision to
> deviate
> > from my course ATC had me on, he shut up and let me ask to make my turn.
> >
> > I hate it when people just dont spit out what they have to say .
> >
>
> Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
> a hard time learning to use the radios. Not everybody can be as crisp and
> laconic as a 10,000 hour airline captain. Jumping on some guy who is having
> trouble anyway is not helpful and simply ties up the radios even more while
> you all argue over it.
>
> One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
> 'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.
>
> Instead of criticizing how others use the radios, concentrate on improving
> your own radio habits and decision making.

[Jeff]

Sorry, apple valley california.
Just outside the Los Angeles basin.
Nice airport, nice restaurant, no tower and alot of local yahoo's use it.
las month when I was flying to LA there was even a UAV out there. I heard ATC
calling him out at 10,000 over apple valley.

Jay Honeck wrote:

> > it can be a big deal, the first and only time I flew into apple valley,
> those
> > country boys out there were landing 2 and 3 planes at a time. It was a
> mess.
> > half of them wasnt even talking, I think they figured that since the other
> > guy wasnt off the runway yet they did not need to make call since no one
> > could take off.
>
> Are you talking about Apple Valley in Illinois, near Galena?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Cub Driver]

>some guys took speaking lessons from JFK

I have always thought of JFK as the first American president to speak
with an accent :)


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[[email protected]]

Bob Gardner > wrote:
> Is there a nice way for you to point out that 123.3 is designated for flight
> school use?

If, IF... the ground station is licensed for that frequency.
Please note that ground stations are licensed for a specific
location and frequency. Really... our license on the wall
(posted per the FCC rules) licenses us for 123.3. The nearby
flight school uses the frequency for chit-chat... when they
SHOULD be using 122.9, 122.75 or 122.85.

Please note that 123.45 is NOT an air to air frequency. :-)
It is attached to the baggage handlers at KORD.


Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 197 Young Eagles!

[Bob Fry]

"C J Campbell" > writes:

> Remember that there are a lot of student pilots and low time pilots who have
> a hard time learning to use the radios.

Fair enough. But I'm thinking of pilots who should be able to do
better, but who simply have never given a thought to how their radio
hogging is messing up others.

> One of the hardest things I have to do as an instructor is not jump in and
> 'help' my student on the radios or make his radio calls for him.

Sure, students need to practice using the radio, but please take them
to a quiet field and frequency to do so. To let them flounder on the
air at a busy field is simply dangerous.

[Newps]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:6wM_b.396854$na.764749@attbi_s04...
>
>>What, you wouldn't? Why should I wait for someone to clear the runway
>>if there is enough room for me to land behind him?
>
>
> The same reason you take more fuel than the bare minimum, that you clear
> obstacles by more than the bare minimum, and start your takeoff roll with
> more than the bare minimum of required runway remaining.
>
> It's hard enough to ensure that you will not make any mistakes while
> landing, but you don't have any idea what sort of mechanical problems might
> occur, such as brake failure. Or, you might have to make a go around at the
> last minute that puts the other aircraft right in your way. There's all
> sorts of reasons the landing might not go exactly as you expect it to. Why
> reduce or eliminate your safety margin when there's absolutely no good
> reason to?
>
> The day you attempt to land while someone is still on the runway, and you
> find that you can't avoid running into them, you'll understand why you
> should wait.

And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.

[Peter Duniho]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:%uV_b.395703$xy6.2263304@attbi_s02...
> And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.

Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?
>

Folks that operate at controlled fields often land behind a previous landing
aircraft that is still on the runway.

[Peter Duniho]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> Folks that operate at controlled fields often land behind a previous
landing
> aircraft that is still on the runway.

Only if they are the type to do the same thing elsewhere. Just because a
tower controller tells you to do something, that doesn't mean you have to do
it, if you feel it's unsafe.

Beyond that, the tower controller uses very specific minima to decide
whether such a clearance can be given; for example, 3000' of separation is
required for a Category I aircraft landing behind a Category I or II
aircraft. At LOM, the runway is only 3700', so using the same criteria, the
other aircraft would have to be practically all the way at the other end of
the runway.

Pete

[Newps]

There is no requirement for the preceding aircraft to be off the runway
for the next one to land. If you are in a single engine plane then the
other plane has to be 3000 feet down the runway.



Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:%uV_b.395703$xy6.2263304@attbi_s02...
>
>>And yet you land like that at a field with a tower.
>
>
> Huh? Who lands like what at a field with a tower?
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:n%1%b.57665$4o.75853@attbi_s52...
> There is no requirement for the preceding aircraft to be off the runway
> for the next one to land. If you are in a single engine plane then the
> other plane has to be 3000 feet down the runway.

See my other post. This has little or nothing to do with your "what, you
wouldn't?" comment, nor my response to it.

Pete

[Snowbird]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message >...
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:6wM_b.396854$na.764749@attbi_s04...
> > What, you wouldn't? Why should I wait for someone to clear the runway
> > if there is enough room for me to land behind him?

> The same reason you take more fuel than the bare minimum, that you clear
> obstacles by more than the bare minimum, and start your takeoff roll with
> more than the bare minimum of required runway remaining.

Yes....but I think the point is, there is a spectrum of choices
between "the bare minimum" and landing only on a clear runway,
just as there's a spectrum of choices between "the bare minimum
fuel" and a rule such as "only take off with full tanks".

How much more runway than "the bare minimum" do you want during
takeoff? 10%? 20%? 50%? 100%?

At some point, most of us make operational choices that we're
willing to accept some margin which is more than "the bare minimum",
but less than twice what we need. Where that margin is lies with
the individual pilot. Maybe it's 20% for me and 30% for you. Maybe
vice versa.

OK, now we're landing. How much more runway than "the bare minimum"
do you want? Same operational choices apply. With me so far?

So what's the difference between landing on a 3000 ft runway when
you feel you really only need 1000 ft, vs landing on a 4000 ft
runway with a plane 3000 ft down the runway taxiing off?

> Why reduce or eliminate your safety margin when there's
> absolutely no good reason to?

Why do you feel there's "absolutely no good reason to"? Maybe
there is...

Cheers,
Sydney

[Peter Duniho]

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> Yes....but I think the point is, there is a spectrum of choices
> between "the bare minimum" and landing only on a clear runway

He asked why he should wait. I told him. I never said there are never
situations where one might not need to wait.