Wow - heard on the air... (long)

[Nathan Young]

Today I flew RST (Rochester, MN) to 3CK (Chicago-Lake in the Hills).
As I neared Chicago I was listening to 120.55, which is ORD approach
for the North side. This was around 6pm, which is a pretty busy time
for approach, lots of arrivals and departures in the ORD area.

During the 15 minutes between Rockford and 3CK, I heard the biggest
clusterf**k on the air that I've been witness to in my 10+ years of
flying. I really wish I had a recorder handy because I couldn't
believe the level of incompetence... Maybe someone can point a link
to a LiveATC recording or simliar...

Anyway, as I tuned in approach, I heard an irrated controller giving
traffic avoidance instructions to the plane... This follows from
memory, but here goes...

Approach: Cessna 123, fly 130 for traffic"
Cessna 123: 130 (note the lack of aircraft N-number in response)

A minute later approach is reprimanding him for not flying 130, and
asking him what his heading is.

Approach: Cessna 123, what is your heading?
Cessna 123: EAST!!!
Approach: Cessna 123, say again, what is your heading?
Cessna 123: EAST!
Approach: How did you get on 090, I assigned you 130 for traffic.
Cessna 123: Didn't you assign me 110?
Approach: Nevermind. Cessna 123 fly 090, maintain 2400.
Cessna 123. EAST and 24

A minute later...

Approach: Cessna 123, I told you to fly 090, and now it looks like
you are not on that, and you are descending. Fly 090 and maintain
2400.
Cessna 123: 123, roger, 090, 24

<A few minutes pass and a few vectors are issued to Cessna 123, which
he roughly follows. During this period of time, Cessna 123 randomly
and unprompted announces his heading and altitude on frequency.>

Approach: Cessna 123, you are x miles from CUTEY< the OM>, cleared
ILS 16.
Cessna 123: OK, will you tell me when I'm at the runway?
<editors note: it is perfect VFR, clear and vis probably close to 20
miles>

<long pause>

Approach: Cessna 123, are you capable of flying an ILS?
<After a long pause> Cessna 123: Ahhh, well, I am flying the headings
you give me.
Approach: Yes, but are you capable of flying the ILS into Palwaukee?
Cessna 123: Ahhh, well, I meant to land at O'Hara, but they wouldn't
let me because I didn't have the reservation thingy that is required,
so they sent me to do the ILS at Palwaukee.
Approach; Cessna 123, that's not what I asked you. Can you fly the
ILS into Palwaukee?
Cessna 123: Ahh, <blah blah blah more about how he intended to go to
OHara> ...but we don't have an ILS chart for Palwaukee. <ed. note:
keep that in mind>
Approach: Cessna 123, OK. How about a visual into Palwaukee?
Cessna 123: OK, a visual into Palwaukee.
Approach: Cessna 123. Turn to 160 degrees, cleared visual approach
at Palwaukee.
Cessna 123: 160

A minute passes, and Cessna 123 calls out...
Cessna 123: 123 is at 2400 and 160
Approach: Cessna 123, you do not need to keep giving me your heading
and altitude.

A minute or two later...
Approach: Cessna 123. Did you want to go to OHare?
Cessna 123: Yes, but we didn't have the reservation, so they sent us
to Palwaukee. I've landed at OHara and Palwaukee before, so it does
not matter to me, unless you can clear me to O'Hara.
Approach: Cessna 123, I am Chicago Approach, I can clear you to any
airport in Chicago. Do you want to go to O'Hare?
Cessna 123: Yes, I would like to go to O'Hara.

Approach: Cessna 123, turn right to 220, vectors to OHare, expect 9L.
Cessna 123: Right 220, expect 9L, vectors.

A few minutes pass...

Cessna 123: You want me to land 9L, right?
Approach: Yes, 9L. There is going to be airline traffic landing 9R,
so do not cross the (garbled) <ed. note, I assume approach said
control tower as it separates 9L from 9R>

Cessna 123: 9L.

<At this point, I was in the pattern at 3CK, and faced with a tough
decision. Get home and see my family, or fly another 30 minutes and
listen to this guy's approach into ORD. I decided my family was more
important, so I ended up landing.

As I taxied in, a number of airliners were signing off on frequency
changes with 'good luck'...

So what's the point of posting this? One, I thought it was comical -
I was practically crying listening to the exchanges...

Second, I want to show the type of mindset that a few pilots have.
The gentleman in question obviously did little/no flight planning,
lacks basic flight skills, and lacks basic radio skills. He was
flying IFR, but apparently without proper charts (I doubt he had any
approach plates if he didn't have plates for PWK).

This is the prototype for a pilot ready to give GA a major black eye.
I guarantee if this was DC, he would have been another TFR/ADIZ bust.

I sure hope this gentleman got a phone number to call upon landing,
and a followup visit from the friendly folks at the FAA.

-Nathan

[Peter R.]

Nathan Young > wrote:

> Maybe someone can point a link
> to a LiveATC recording or simliar...

I just checked LiveATC and unfortunately they do not have this frequency,
nor most of Chicago's frequencies, yet. The closest feed is Dubuque, Iowa,
with a couple of Chicago center frequencies in the mix. That's too bad,
too, as this exchange would have been very interesting to hear.

LiveATC is made up of volunteers who are able to pick up nearby airport
frequencies and have an always-on Internet connection. If you know of
anyone who lives relatively close to ORD, talk them into sending LiveATC a
Chicago feed.


--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Doug]

Guy is nuts to go into OHare. I can just imagine what happened when
they had him taxi in. Those taxiways are complicated and crowded. I
don't think I'd go into OHare without a copilot who had been there.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Doug wrote:
> Guy is nuts to go into OHare. I can just imagine what happened when
> they had him taxi in. Those taxiways are complicated and crowded. I
> don't think I'd go into OHare without a copilot who had been there.


I've been to Hartsfield in a C-172 and JFK in a C-414. Getting in was
relatively easy; it was trying to leave that was the PITA.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Gene Seibel]

We forget that the fairly well informed and connected pilots we see
here on the internet are only a small slice of the big picture. All
around the country are little out of the way airports with pilots who
have no clue what goes on beyond the county line. Maybe they did fly
into O'Hare once 50 years ago when it was a grass strip, or have an
instructor who did. Their biennial, if they take one, is given by a
good old boy instructor that's just as disconnected as they are. They
can fly an airplane and fly it well, but they have no clue how to
interface with the world outside. Living in the open areas of the
Midwest, I've run into some real characters. I've seen doors tied shut
with baling wire, wires twisted together instead of an ignition switch,
and much, much more. Some have had their run-ins with the FAA over and
over again and the FAA has thrown up their hands and walked away. It's
the 21st century only in the big cities and on the calendar.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[[email protected]]

Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.

Will

[Peter R.]

> wrote:

> Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
> exasperation).

The first year I flew for Angel Flight I did several flights to Teterboro,
NJ (through NY class B), Baltimore-Washington Int., and Boston Logan in a
C172SP. Perhaps it was the fact that I was flying under the AF callsign,
but not one controller complained outwardly. My response was to always
remain extra sharp, listen, and immediately comply.

During the various approaches, I do recall *always* receiving a "best
speed, please" request, however. :)

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Alan]

On 19 Jul 2005 21:09:26 -0700, "Doug" >
wrote:

>Guy is nuts to go into OHare. I can just imagine what happened when
>they had him taxi in. Those taxiways are complicated and crowded. I
>don't think I'd go into OHare without a copilot who had been there.

But, he wasn't going to O'Hare. He was going to O'Har"a". He
should be de-winged just for not knowing the proper name!

[Alan]

Two weeks ago I was coming back to Boulder from Akron, CO. There was
some buildup to the north and I could see a couple of cloud patches
with virga. Listening in to Denver Fligh****ch I heard this exchange
with a pilot who seemed a bit inexperienced but was trying hard.

Cessna 234: Uh, Fligh****ch, Cessna 234.
Fligh****ch: Cessna 234, go ahead, say request.
Cessna 234: Cessna 234 would like to file a pilot report.
Fligh****ch: Cessna 234, go ahead.
Cessna 234: Cessn 234 is between Longmont and Fort Collins - Loveland
at 7000'. There are some clouds to the northwest with virga. It
looks like the virga is now going all the way to the ground. Over.
Fligh****ch: Cessna 234, do you know virga is called when it hits
the ground?
Cessna 234: (slight pause). Uh, negative, I guess that I don't.
Fligh****ch: Virga that reaches the ground is called rain!
Cessna 234: Oh, thanks for that info.

------------------------------------------
Dogs can fly.
http://www.flyingmutts.com

[Doug]

One thing a LOT of pilots don't do right. When you call fligh****ch,
you should give your position on your initial callup. This is because
although it's all the same frequency, there are different transmitters.
If you don't give your position, he has to reply on ALL the
transmitters he has becuase he doesn't know WHERE YOU ARE!

I hear this mistake time and time again.

[Alan]

Wholeheartedly agree! It saves a lot of time and multiple exchanges
if on your first contact you state your N number, position, altitude
and request. Granted it does take a little planning and forethought
which is beyond many people.



On 20 Jul 2005 10:19:00 -0700, "Doug" >
wrote:

>One thing a LOT of pilots don't do right. When you call fligh****ch,
>you should give your position on your initial callup. This is because
>although it's all the same frequency, there are different transmitters.
>If you don't give your position, he has to reply on ALL the
>transmitters he has becuase he doesn't know WHERE YOU ARE!
>
>I hear this mistake time and time again.

[Peter R.]

Doug > wrote:

> One thing a LOT of pilots don't do right. When you call fligh****ch,
> you should give your position on your initial callup. This is because
> although it's all the same frequency, there are different transmitters.
> If you don't give your position, he has to reply on ALL the
> transmitters he has becuase he doesn't know WHERE YOU ARE!
>
> I hear this mistake time and time again

I used to make this mistake all the time because I was not taught the
correct method for contacting Flight Watch during my training.

During one call I received quite the tongue-lashing from a particularly
crabby Boston Flight Watch specialist about including my location and,
presto-chango, no more mistake. :)

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Yossarian]

That's great :) Gotta give the guy credit though, at least he was
trying to give a PIREP.

Alan wrote:
> Fligh****ch: Cessna 234, do you know virga is called when it hits
> the ground?
> Cessna 234: (slight pause). Uh, negative, I guess that I don't.
> Fligh****ch: Virga that reaches the ground is called rain!
> Cessna 234: Oh, thanks for that info.

[Matt Barrow]

"Alan" > wrote in message
...
>
> Wholeheartedly agree! It saves a lot of time and multiple exchanges
> if on your first contact you state your N number, position, altitude
> and request.

Quite so...you should have the whole thing out in two exchanges:

N#, position (altitude, if relevant)..."I've got a PIREP for you..".
FSS: Go ahead.
Blah, bah, blah...DONE

> Granted it does take a little planning and forethought
> which is beyond many people.

Wow! A cheap shot at a straw man!!

[Maule Driver]

Flying something slow is not the issue. I say use the Class Bs when
they are the right thing to do. It's a privelege as sweet as any in
this country.

But keeping up with ATC is the key. If your radio work is good and your
flying precise and reliable - no problems. If you can't, speed won't
save you.

Some controllers on a good day will make it all work for you despite
yourself. But no one should put themselves in a position to have to
depend on that.

wrote:
> Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
> recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
> just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
> exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
> accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.
>
> Will
>

[Peter R.]

Matt Barrow > wrote:

> N#, position (altitude, if relevant)..."I've got a PIREP for you..".
> FSS: Go ahead.
> Blah, bah, blah...DONE

Nah, it's more like:

Pilot: PIREP blah, blah, blah.
Specialist: Thank you for that, is there anything I can get you?
Pilot: Negative at this time, NXXX out.
Specialist: Roger, local altimeter is 29.92, have a good flight.


:-)

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Maule Driver]

And I've started saying all that twice, slowly, "Flight Watch Flight
Watch, Maule N-1-2-3-4-F, 20 miles south Bonkers VOR, 20 mile south
Bonkers, destination RDU"

I heard someone do that and started myself. Can't justify it all but
makes some sense.

Anyway, I just try to switch gears from talking to ATC. FW can be
slower, more conversational, etc. But the location thing is key.

Comments?

Alan wrote:
> Wholeheartedly agree! It saves a lot of time and multiple exchanges
> if on your first contact you state your N number, position, altitude
> and request. Granted it does take a little planning and forethought
> which is beyond many people.

[pittss1c]

It is interesting... lots of people including people from that exact
area during the transition of that field from Orchard to ohare call it
ohara. (google finds lots of references to it as ohara)

I wonder why that is? Maybe it is just the older Italians I know from
that area.



Alan wrote:
> On 19 Jul 2005 21:09:26 -0700, "Doug" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Guy is nuts to go into OHare. I can just imagine what happened when
>>they had him taxi in. Those taxiways are complicated and crowded. I
>>don't think I'd go into OHare without a copilot who had been there.
>
>
> But, he wasn't going to O'Hare. He was going to O'Har"a". He
> should be de-winged just for not knowing the proper name!
>

[Peter R.]

Maule Driver > wrote:

> And I've started saying all that twice, slowly, "Flight Watch Flight
> Watch, Maule N-1-2-3-4-F, 20 miles south Bonkers VOR, 20 mile south
> Bonkers, destination RDU"
>
> I heard someone do that and started myself. Can't justify it all but
> makes some sense.
>
> Anyway, I just try to switch gears from talking to ATC. FW can be
> slower, more conversational, etc. But the location thing is key.
>
> Comments?

Up in central and western NY (where my typical flights originate), I border
multiple Flight Watch areas (Boston, NY, and Cleveland).

During t-storm time it is so busy between those three facilities that I try
to keep it short. Thus, I would skip the second location and the
destination.

Instead, I would include my request, such as "with a Skyspotter Pirep," or
"requesting radar en route to {destination}," or "requesting updated
weather at {destination}."

--
Peter

[john smith]

pittss1c wrote:
> I wonder why that is? Maybe it is just the older Italians I know from
> that area.

I thought O'Hare was Irish?

[John Galban]

john smith wrote:
> pittss1c wrote:
> > I wonder why that is? Maybe it is just the older Italians I know from
> > that area.
>
> I thought O'Hare was Irish?

As is O'Hara. They're actually just two different spellings of the
same original Irish name. Since O'Hara is the more common spelling,
I'm not surprised that people mix this up.

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

[Matt Whiting]

wrote:

> Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
> recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
> just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
> exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
> accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.
>
> Will
>

I flew my 182 into Logan, Philly, Washington National and a few other
fairly busy airports. They had no problem at all handling me with the
jets. They usually brought me in on a close-in pattern and I landed on
a runway other than what the airliners were using. I don't have any
problem with a little crosswind and it worked out great.

Now taxiing is a whole 'nother adventure at airports like that... :-)


Matt

[G. Sylvester]

> I flew my 182 into Logan, Philly, Washington National and a few other
> fairly busy airports. They had no problem at all handling me with the
> jets. They usually brought me in on a close-in pattern and I landed on
> a runway other than what the airliners were using. I don't have any
> problem with a little crosswind and it worked out great.

I flew into LAS after 160 hours TT and no IFR (now I got it) about
a year ago. It was no big deal at all. They asked me a few
times if I really meant LAS versus North Las Vegas but no big
deal. It was a quiet night though. Going out, again no big deal
even though they had be departing in the middle of 5 HP A320's, 4 SW
737's, a CO 757 and a few corporate jets and I was in a bug smashing
'PA-28-181 Heavy.' :)

> Now taxiing is a whole 'nother adventure at airports like that... :-)

I didn't have to go far at LAS. But today I was flying out of
Denver on United and I couldn't even follow the calls....actually
some of them I could but man, that sounds complicated.

gerald

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Peter R. wrote:
> During one call I received quite the tongue-lashing from a particularly
> crabby Boston Flight Watch specialist about including my location and,
> presto-chango, no more mistake. :)


As my father used to say, "you'll learn quicker from an ass-reaming than a
success". He was generally correct.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "GS" == Gene Seibel > writes:
GS> Living in the open areas
GS> of the Midwest,

Ahh, rural America. Our own version of the Third World.

[Jay Beckman]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> "GS" == Gene Seibel > writes:
> GS> Living in the open areas
> GS> of the Midwest,
>
> Ahh, rural America. Our own version of the Third World.


And you arrived at this brilliant sociological conclusion based on...?

Gimme a break.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Margy]

wrote:
> Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
> recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
> just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
> exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
> accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.
>
> Will
>
I did all my primary training in a Class B and it's not the tough, but
you have to follow the rules and be flexible! I learned very early how
to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high speed.
It's the folks who try to fly the approach at 60k who make life
intersting for the controllers.

Margy

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Margy wrote:
> I did all my primary training in a Class B and it's not the tough, but
> you have to follow the rules and be flexible! I learned very early how
> to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
> throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high speed.
> It's the folks who try to fly the approach at 60k who make life
> intersting for the controllers.


Ain't that the truth? When I was making my long solo cross country as a
student, I dragged in a long approach to RDU at 60 knots, not knowing any
better. When I wanted to leave a little later, the tower seemed to have great
difficulty "hearing" me. I got the message loud and clear. Now I bring them in
smoking and use a combination of chopped power, full flaps and slipping to stuff
them onto the ground.

A Cherokee Six can do 160 knots on the ILS if need be, and you will never hear
the controller asking you to "keep the speed up".

One exception: I was flying back to Charlotte in a C-402 one morning with only
one brake. The controller keep after me to keep the speed up. As I got closer
and closer, I kept trying to slow down but the controller got onto me again.
Alrighty then....

I was cleared on very short final to land and "make the first turnoff ASAP".
Needless to say, I rolled past that turnoff at a manly rate of speed. USAirways
behind me had to go around. So sad, too bad. He shouldn't have rushed me.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Jose]

> One exception: I was flying back to Charlotte in a C-402 one morning with only
> one brake. The controller keep after me to keep the speed up.

Did you try telling the controller "unable due to equipment problems"?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[RST Engineering]

Would you admit on the air that you took off knowing that there was an item
of no-go equipment that didn't work?

Jim



"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>> One exception: I was flying back to Charlotte in a C-402 one morning
>> with only one brake. The controller keep after me to keep the speed up.
>
> Did you try telling the controller "unable due to equipment problems"?
>
> Jose
> --
> Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> Would you admit on the air that you took off knowing that there was an item
> of no-go equipment that didn't work?

No such admission is necessary. Equipment problems can develop or be
discovered during flight, including brake problems that showed up during
the takeoff roll but at a point where lifting the nose was reasonable.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Peter R.]

Jose > wrote:

> Equipment problems can develop or be
> discovered during flight, including brake problems that showed up during
> the takeoff roll but at a point where lifting the nose was reasonable.

How does one discover a brake problem during the take-off roll?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

RST Engineering wrote:
> Would you admit on the air that you took off knowing that there was an item
> of no-go equipment that didn't work?


Bingo. Can you say "Part 135"?

The brake failed in Shelby at around 0100 when I made my pickup of auto parts.
I still had to fly to Cleveland and then back to Charlotte. Our maintenance
facility was in Charlotte. So was my home. It wasn't too difficult to figure
out what to do.

Hell, my employer expected us to continue flying to our destination with one
engine out if it was less than an hour's flying time. He sure as hell didn't
want me to sit on my ass waiting for a brake repair 500 miles from home.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Jose wrote:
>> One exception: I was flying back to Charlotte in a C-402 one morning with
>> only one brake. The controller keep after me to keep the speed up.
>
> Did you try telling the controller "unable due to equipment problems"?



Sure... right after I rolled by the turnoff. Frankly, if I'd been allowed to
make my approach at normal speeds I probably would have made it. The controller
dumped me off 1/2 mile from the approach end of the runway still at cruise
speed. It served him right. If it was that big of a problem, he should have
put me behind the USAirways jet; I wouldn't have complained. Charlotte wasn't
busy at that time of day and I was home.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[George Patterson]

Margy wrote:
>
> I learned very early how
> to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
> throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high speed.

My old Maule would've needed a JATO unit to land at that speed.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

[Jose]

> How does one discover a brake problem during the take-off roll?

The plane pulls to the right as you near takeoff speed. In any case,
you don't have to say it's a brake problem, just an equipment problem.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Darrel Toepfer]

Jose wrote:

>> How does one discover a brake problem during the take-off roll?
>
> The plane pulls to the right as you near takeoff speed. In any case,
> you don't have to say it's a brake problem, just an equipment problem.

Y'all must all have long runways to be playing with brakes during the
takeoff phase. I slide my feet back a bit and just use the rudder to
make sure I'm not holding the aviate part back...

[Jose]

> Y'all must all have long runways to be playing with brakes during the takeoff phase. I slide my feet back a bit and just use the rudder to make sure I'm not holding the aviate part back...

I was imagining a situation where the brake applied itself. Other
situations would be that a hydraulic problem is discovered in flight,
something goes "clunk, clatter" upon retraction of landing gear or when
applying the brakes prior to retraction, there are also the unexpected
things that can go wrong and warrant "UNABLE" to the controller who
wants a high speed landing and an immediate turnoff.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Maule Driver]

Actually, I can bring my Maule down an ILS at 115+ knots. Flaps in
negative (that's the key), low cruise power (about 2400rpm fixed pitch
before applying flaps), produces about 4-500 fpm and 115 knots. Just
keep the power below redline. Minimal trim changes required due to the
flaps. I fly vectors at cruise then just reflex the flaps when hitting
the slope.

It would be really awkward doing it without the reflex flaps. Lots of
trim required and a very bouyant aircraft with all that high lift wing.

The critical words here are "to the numbers". Actually, I start
chopping, triming and flapping at dh and still make an early turnoff.

BTW, my Maule cruises at 114knots at 2600 rpm, flaps normal. The only
thing limiting a faster descent down the slope is engine redline.

George Patterson wrote:
> Margy wrote:
>
>>
>> I learned very early how to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes,
>> it can be done at full throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off
>> on the first high speed.
>
>
> My old Maule would've needed a JATO unit to land at that speed.
>
> George Patterson
> Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
> and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
> Because she smells like a new truck.

[Andrew Gideon]

Jose wrote:

> who
> wants a high speed landing and an immediate turnoff.


As I read the original post, the controller only specified a high speed
approach at first. That was quite do-able, so why would the pilot claim
"unable".

It's the combination, as you note, that's a problem. But the pilot didn't
know about the immediate turnoff until much later.

- Andrew

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

George Patterson wrote:
>> I learned very early how
>> to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
>> throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high speed.
>
> My old Maule would've needed a JATO unit to land at that speed.


Your old Maule would have needed a JATO unit to *fly* at that speed. <G>




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Jose wrote:
>> How does one discover a brake problem during the take-off roll?
>
> The plane pulls to the right as you near takeoff speed. In any case,
> you don't have to say it's a brake problem, just an equipment problem.


Not in this case. First off, the brake *failed*, not hung up. Secondly,
turning moments on takeoff roll are normally handled with slight variations of
differential power in a twin. You have no reason to touch your brakes until
you're trying to stop.

Now, when the brake failed on landing in Shelby, I just rolled out longer than
usual and taxied with opposite brake and engine. It's a real PITA. Tighter
maneuvering requires a 270 degree turn to the other side. Looks a bit goofy on
the ramp but it works.

I had to land with essentially no brakes in Charleston, WV, Cleveland, OH, and
then back to Charlotte, NC. I picked up a load of ice over WV. My attitude
indicator went out on takeoff out of Cleveland. It was a hard IFR departure to
an on-top cruise. By the time I got back to Charlotte, it was clear. All in
all, an interesting flight.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Jose]

> Not in this case.

Maybe not, but the point is that you can say "unable due to equipment
problems" without admitting anything, or even raising an eyebrow, and
unless you are already being watched for suspicious activity, I doubt
there would be any fallout.

Now whether in this case it was appropriate (i.e. everything was doable
until the surprise at the end) is another question.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Matt Whiting]

Margy wrote:

> wrote:
>
>> Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
>> recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
>> just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
>> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
>> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
>> exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
>> accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.
>> Will
>>
> I did all my primary training in a Class B and it's not the tough, but
> you have to follow the rules and be flexible! I learned very early how
> to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
> throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high speed.
> It's the folks who try to fly the approach at 60k who make life
> intersting for the controllers.

Only controllers who are inept and put the 172 in line 10 miles out on
final.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jose wrote:

>> Would you admit on the air that you took off knowing that there was
>> an item of no-go equipment that didn't work?
>
>
> No such admission is necessary. Equipment problems can develop or be
> discovered during flight, including brake problems that showed up during
> the takeoff roll but at a point where lifting the nose was reasonable.
>
> Jose

Interesting. I've never hit my brakes right before lift-off. Is this a
new technique? :-)


Matt

[RST Engineering]

No, but I regularly hit them at 100 agl or so just to stop the main wheel
noise.

Jim

>
> Interesting. I've never hit my brakes right before lift-off. Is this a
> new technique? :-)
>
>
> Matt

[Margy]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Margy wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Here in southern CT I've heard some exchanges with NY Approach (don't
>>> recall if the acft in question was trying to get into JFK or LGA) that
>>> just had me shaking my head. Personally I'd never fly into a Class B
>>> airport in something slow, but I know guys that have with varying
>>> degress of success (measured by the controller's level of
>>> exasperation). The airspace just south of here is too damn busy to
>>> accommodate newbies or most weekend flyers safely.
>>> Will
>>>
>> I did all my primary training in a Class B and it's not the tough, but
>> you have to follow the rules and be flexible! I learned very early
>> how to bring a 172 to the numbers at 120k (yes, it can be done at full
>> throttle with the nose pushed over) and get off on the first high
>> speed. It's the folks who try to fly the approach at 60k who make
>> life intersting for the controllers.
>
>
> Only controllers who are inept and put the 172 in line 10 miles out on
> final.
>
> Matt
This is true as 120k won't do it if you are 10 miles out (and I wouldn't
have enough altitude to maintain 120k). 120k is in the pattern.

Margy

[Ron Natalie]

Doug wrote:
> Guy is nuts to go into OHare. I can just imagine what happened when
> they had him taxi in. Those taxiways are complicated and crowded. I
> don't think I'd go into OHare without a copilot who had been there.
>
But what about O'Hara?

[Ron Natalie]

Doug wrote:
> One thing a LOT of pilots don't do right. When you call fligh****ch,
> you should give your position on your initial callup. This is because
> although it's all the same frequency, there are different transmitters.
> If you don't give your position, he has to reply on ALL the
> transmitters he has becuase he doesn't know WHERE YOU ARE!
>
> I hear this mistake time and time again.
>
Have you been to a flight circus station in the last decade?
They know where you are because their console twinkles all the
receivers you hit.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Interesting. I've never hit my brakes right before lift-off. Is this a
> new technique? :-)


Actually, the tailwheel version of the Me-262 required one to tap the brakes for
a second during the takeoff run to pop the tail up off the ground. Aside from
that, probably not. Not too many Me-262's floating around any more.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Morgans]

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN"> wrote

> Actually, the tailwheel version of the Me-262 required one to tap the
brakes for
> a second during the takeoff run to pop the tail up off the ground. Aside
from
> that, probably not. Not too many Me-262's floating around any more.

How about the ones that are being re made from factory plans, even to the
point of getting original serial numbers? I'll bet that you have to touch
the brake of the new ones, also. <g>

I wonder how they are getting along, now?
--
Jim in NC

[Ben Hallert]

Doubtful, I believe they're only making tricycle versions.

[Morgans]

"Ben Hallert" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Doubtful, I believe they're only making tricycle versions.

Uhhhhhh, if they hit the brakes hard enough, they might get up on one!
Yahhh, that's it! On one, that's the ticket! (in my best <old> Saturday
Night Live voice) <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Thomas Borchert]

Darrel,

> I slide my feet back a bit and just use the rudder to
> make sure I'm not holding the aviate part back...
>

Not in a Tiger, a Diamond, Cirrus or Lancair, you wouldn't.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Darrel Toepfer]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Darrel,
>
>>I slide my feet back a bit and just use the rudder to
>>make sure I'm not holding the aviate part back...
>
> Not in a Tiger, a Diamond, Cirrus or Lancair, you wouldn't.

Lancair Super ES seems to have enough rudder athority. Supercharged
IO-550, you don't firewall it, just continually apply power. Can't speak
for the others you mentioned or the now named Columbia line...

[John Doe]

I would have an FAA rep meet this guy at Ohare when he lands.

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> Today I flew RST (Rochester, MN) to 3CK (Chicago-Lake in the Hills).
> As I neared Chicago I was listening to 120.55, which is ORD approach
> for the North side. This was around 6pm, which is a pretty busy time
> for approach, lots of arrivals and departures in the ORD area.
>
> During the 15 minutes between Rockford and 3CK, I heard the biggest
> clusterf**k on the air that I've been witness to in my 10+ years of
> flying. I really wish I had a recorder handy because I couldn't
> believe the level of incompetence... Maybe someone can point a link
> to a LiveATC recording or simliar...
>
> Anyway, as I tuned in approach, I heard an irrated controller giving
> traffic avoidance instructions to the plane... This follows from
> memory, but here goes...
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, fly 130 for traffic"
> Cessna 123: 130 (note the lack of aircraft N-number in response)
>
> A minute later approach is reprimanding him for not flying 130, and
> asking him what his heading is.
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, what is your heading?
> Cessna 123: EAST!!!
> Approach: Cessna 123, say again, what is your heading?
> Cessna 123: EAST!
> Approach: How did you get on 090, I assigned you 130 for traffic.
> Cessna 123: Didn't you assign me 110?
> Approach: Nevermind. Cessna 123 fly 090, maintain 2400.
> Cessna 123. EAST and 24
>
> A minute later...
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, I told you to fly 090, and now it looks like
> you are not on that, and you are descending. Fly 090 and maintain
> 2400.
> Cessna 123: 123, roger, 090, 24
>
> <A few minutes pass and a few vectors are issued to Cessna 123, which
> he roughly follows. During this period of time, Cessna 123 randomly
> and unprompted announces his heading and altitude on frequency.>
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, you are x miles from CUTEY< the OM>, cleared
> ILS 16.
> Cessna 123: OK, will you tell me when I'm at the runway?
> <editors note: it is perfect VFR, clear and vis probably close to 20
> miles>
>
> <long pause>
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, are you capable of flying an ILS?
> <After a long pause> Cessna 123: Ahhh, well, I am flying the headings
> you give me.
> Approach: Yes, but are you capable of flying the ILS into Palwaukee?
> Cessna 123: Ahhh, well, I meant to land at O'Hara, but they wouldn't
> let me because I didn't have the reservation thingy that is required,
> so they sent me to do the ILS at Palwaukee.
> Approach; Cessna 123, that's not what I asked you. Can you fly the
> ILS into Palwaukee?
> Cessna 123: Ahh, <blah blah blah more about how he intended to go to
> OHara> ...but we don't have an ILS chart for Palwaukee. <ed. note:
> keep that in mind>
> Approach: Cessna 123, OK. How about a visual into Palwaukee?
> Cessna 123: OK, a visual into Palwaukee.
> Approach: Cessna 123. Turn to 160 degrees, cleared visual approach
> at Palwaukee.
> Cessna 123: 160
>
> A minute passes, and Cessna 123 calls out...
> Cessna 123: 123 is at 2400 and 160
> Approach: Cessna 123, you do not need to keep giving me your heading
> and altitude.
>
> A minute or two later...
> Approach: Cessna 123. Did you want to go to OHare?
> Cessna 123: Yes, but we didn't have the reservation, so they sent us
> to Palwaukee. I've landed at OHara and Palwaukee before, so it does
> not matter to me, unless you can clear me to O'Hara.
> Approach: Cessna 123, I am Chicago Approach, I can clear you to any
> airport in Chicago. Do you want to go to O'Hare?
> Cessna 123: Yes, I would like to go to O'Hara.
>
> Approach: Cessna 123, turn right to 220, vectors to OHare, expect 9L.
> Cessna 123: Right 220, expect 9L, vectors.
>
> A few minutes pass...
>
> Cessna 123: You want me to land 9L, right?
> Approach: Yes, 9L. There is going to be airline traffic landing 9R,
> so do not cross the (garbled) <ed. note, I assume approach said
> control tower as it separates 9L from 9R>
>
> Cessna 123: 9L.
>
> <At this point, I was in the pattern at 3CK, and faced with a tough
> decision. Get home and see my family, or fly another 30 minutes and
> listen to this guy's approach into ORD. I decided my family was more
> important, so I ended up landing.
>
> As I taxied in, a number of airliners were signing off on frequency
> changes with 'good luck'...
>
> So what's the point of posting this? One, I thought it was comical -
> I was practically crying listening to the exchanges...
>
> Second, I want to show the type of mindset that a few pilots have.
> The gentleman in question obviously did little/no flight planning,
> lacks basic flight skills, and lacks basic radio skills. He was
> flying IFR, but apparently without proper charts (I doubt he had any
> approach plates if he didn't have plates for PWK).
>
> This is the prototype for a pilot ready to give GA a major black eye.
> I guarantee if this was DC, he would have been another TFR/ADIZ bust.
>
> I sure hope this gentleman got a phone number to call upon landing,
> and a followup visit from the friendly folks at the FAA.
>
> -Nathan

[George Patterson]

Maule Driver wrote:
> Actually, I can bring my Maule down an ILS at 115+ knots. Flaps in
> negative (that's the key), low cruise power (about 2400rpm fixed pitch
> before applying flaps), produces about 4-500 fpm and 115 knots. Just
> keep the power below redline. Minimal trim changes required due to the
> flaps. I fly vectors at cruise then just reflex the flaps when hitting
> the slope.
>
> It would be really awkward doing it without the reflex flaps. Lots of
> trim required and a very bouyant aircraft with all that high lift wing.
>
> The critical words here are "to the numbers". Actually, I start
> chopping, triming and flapping at dh and still make an early turnoff.
>
> BTW, my Maule cruises at 114knots at 2600 rpm, flaps normal. The only
> thing limiting a faster descent down the slope is engine redline.

You have the 180? I had the 160hp version. Cruise at 103 knots at just under
2650 rpm.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

[Matt Whiting]

RST Engineering wrote:

> No, but I regularly hit them at 100 agl or so just to stop the main wheel
> noise.

Is that easier than replacing the wheel bearings so they aren't so
noisy? :-)

I've never flown a plane that made enough noise from the tires spinning
to even notice. I have heard of some airplanes that need the spinning
stopped before retracting the gear...


Matt

[Andrew Gideon]

Matt Whiting wrote:

> I've never flown a plane that made enough noise from the tires spinning
> to even notice.Â*Â*IÂ*haveÂ*heardÂ*ofÂ*someÂ*airplanesÂ*th atÂ*needÂ*theÂ*spinning
> stopped before retracting the gear...

My CFII claimed to be annoyed by the vibration of the spinning gear after
takeoff in a 172. He "taught" me to tap on the breaks so as to avoid this
annoyance.

Franky, I've no idea how he could feel that while sitting behind 180hp of
noisemaker. But it was a nice habit to have when I transitioned to the
182RG which, as you note, requires that treatment.

- Andrew

[Tom Young]

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> I've never flown a plane that made enough noise from the tires spinning
>> to even notice. I have heard of some airplanes that need the spinning
>> stopped before retracting the gear...
>
> My CFII claimed to be annoyed by the vibration of the spinning gear after
> takeoff in a 172. He "taught" me to tap on the breaks so as to avoid this
> annoyance.
>
> Franky, I've no idea how he could feel that while sitting behind 180hp of
> noisemaker...

Several of the 172s I train in do get a fairly heavy vibration going not
long after takeoff. For me it wasn't so much annoying as alarming, until my
instructor told me what was going on. I don't notice it much anymore.

I read somewhere recently (can't remember where now -- magazine article?)
that braking once off the ground with the wheels spinning can make the tires
slip around and possibly shear off the valve stems. Maybe that's an aviation
urban legend, but it seems like it would be an unpleasant little surprise
upon landing. I'd be curious to know if that's actually happened to anyone.

--
Tom Young
37.7 toward PP-ASEL
t e y o u n g 1 @ c o m c a s t . n e t
(remove _this_ to reply)

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Tom Young wrote:
> I read somewhere recently (can't remember where now -- magazine article?)
> that braking once off the ground with the wheels spinning can make the tires
> slip around and possibly shear off the valve stems. Maybe that's an aviation
> urban legend, but it seems like it would be an unpleasant little surprise
> upon landing. I'd be curious to know if that's actually happened to anyone.


I can't remember ever stepping on the brakes after liftoff in anything other
than a retractible... and that's only if I remembered. As for your old wive's
tale about dire consequences, it's so much crap. Somebody was trying to scare
you.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Peter Duniho]

"Tom Young" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> I read somewhere recently (can't remember where now -- magazine article?)
> that braking once off the ground with the wheels spinning can make the
> tires slip around and possibly shear off the valve stems. Maybe that's an
> aviation urban legend, but it seems like it would be an unpleasant little
> surprise upon landing. I'd be curious to know if that's actually happened
> to anyone.

If that were true, braking while on the ground would cause the same problem.
If anything, the difference between the inertial and friction forces are
much greater in that situation than braking after takeoff.

If it does concern you, apply the brakes gently. It shouldn't take much
force to stop the wheels anyway.

One thing to note: the vibration on a 172 (and similar issues on other
airplanes) isn't the same as noisy bearings (not that I know that's the
issue on the tailwheel that started this line of discussion...that was just
the assertion we started with :) ). The vibration is because the wheels
aren't balanced, a common problem with training airplanes, due to students
and their poor braking habits. :)

Pete

[Tom Young]

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote

> ...I can't remember ever stepping on the brakes after liftoff in anything
> other than a retractible... and that's only if I remembered. As for your
> old wive's tale about dire consequences, it's so much crap. Somebody was
> trying to scare you.

No doubt, but you got me wondering where I saw it. Dug around a little:

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182683-1.html

From that article:

: Myths for the Last Millenium
: "Hit the brakes after takeoff before you retract the gear." That's a bad
habit to acquire as the need for brakes is
: very much airplane-specific. There may be a certain, small number of
airplanes on which it is necessary as the
: spinning wheels caused some sort of mischief as they hit their wells.
Okay, the World War II Hawker Typhoon
: was one, but I can't come up with any others right this moment (and you're
probably not flying a Typhoon this
: week, are you?) There are more airplanes, particularly ones with fairly
massive landing gear, on which hitting the
: brakes slams the wheels to a stop and will rotate the tire on the rim,
potentially causing it to be unable to hold air
: pressure or actually cutting the valve stem. So, unless the airplane
flight manual says to hit the brakes, don't
: bother.

I imagine he wasn't thinking of a 172 when he wrote 'fairly massive landing
gear.'

--
Tom Young
37.7 toward PP-ASEL
t e y o u n g 1 @ c o m c a s t . n e t
(remove _this_ to reply)

[Tom Young]

Peter Duniho wrote

> The vibration is because the wheels aren't balanced, a common problem with
> training airplanes, due to students and their poor braking habits. :)

I guess we students reap what we sow :-)

--
Tom Young
37.7 toward PP-ASEL
t e y o u n g 1 @ c o m c a s t . n e t
(remove _this_ to reply)

[Matt Barrow]

"Tom Young" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Duniho wrote
>
> > The vibration is because the wheels aren't balanced, a common problem
with
> > training airplanes, due to students and their poor braking habits. :)
>
> I guess we students reap what we sow :-)

It could also be that the aircraft was damaged while towing...


So, you reap what you tow. :~}

[Roger]

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:30:54 GMT, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
> wrote:

<snip>
>
>A Cherokee Six can do 160 knots on the ILS if need be, and you will never hear
>the controller asking you to "keep the speed up".

I often hear, "keep the speed up as long as praticable" prior to even
hiting the the approach, or pattern. Normally 140 is fast enough as
that is going to put you in the same category as a 737.

I was on the ILS for 28R (think it was 28) at Port Columbus doing a
practice instrument approach. The instructor told me to lift the
foggles and look out to the left. Straight off the wing tip was a 737
and as we had both intercepted well outside the outer marker we flew
like that for several miles. That is, until I put the gear down.
<:-)) That brings me down to the normal 120 I typically fly.

>
>One exception: I was flying back to Charlotte in a C-402 one morning with only
>one brake. The controller keep after me to keep the speed up. As I got closer

Been there and done that, but I only had one engine. At least I
didn't have to fly an ILS.<:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>and closer, I kept trying to slow down but the controller got onto me again.
>Alrighty then....
>
>I was cleared on very short final to land and "make the first turnoff ASAP".
>Needless to say, I rolled past that turnoff at a manly rate of speed. USAirways
>behind me had to go around. So sad, too bad. He shouldn't have rushed me.

[Chris G.]

And the Flight Service Specialist has to GUESS what transmitter to use
if there is more than one "twinkle" they have to choose from. The
correctr phraseology, so I've been taught, is: "McMinnville Radio,
Cessna 12345 on 122.45 out of Newberg." OR "McMinnville Radio, Cessna
12345 on 122.6 out of Salem." Remember that they may also have multiple
transmitters on 122.45 or 122.6 that they control, so the location is
just as important. Btw, Flight Watch is NOT Flight Service. Around
Salem, Oregon, Flight watch goes to Seattle Flight Watch, not
McMinnville, where Oregon's AFSS is located (for now).

Chris


Ron Natalie wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>
>> One thing a LOT of pilots don't do right. When you call fligh****ch,
>> you should give your position on your initial callup. This is because
>> although it's all the same frequency, there are different transmitters.
>> If you don't give your position, he has to reply on ALL the
>> transmitters he has becuase he doesn't know WHERE YOU ARE!
>>
>> I hear this mistake time and time again.
>>
> Have you been to a flight circus station in the last decade?
> They know where you are because their console twinkles all the
> receivers you hit.

[Corky Scott]

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:46:34 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>The vibration is because the wheels
>aren't balanced, a common problem with training airplanes, due to students
>and their poor braking habits. :)

That and squaring off the tires when landing.

When I was training, I too noticed the vibration when we took off. I
asked my CFI about it and he said "if you don't like it, just step on
the brakes." I did that from then on, whenever I encountered the
vibrating tires. Just takes a second.

I've read accounts of bush pilots who have huge oversize tires having
to screw the rims to the tire bead to prevent them from slipping on
the rims and cutting off the air nozzle. They have a lot more mass
behind them than the tires on a Cessna 172 though.

Corky Scott

[George Patterson]

Corky Scott wrote:
>
> I've read accounts of bush pilots who have huge oversize tires having
> to screw the rims to the tire bead to prevent them from slipping on
> the rims and cutting off the air nozzle. They have a lot more mass
> behind them than the tires on a Cessna 172 though.

That's because they run low tire pressures, not the size of the tire. You have
the same problem with off-road motorcycles.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.