Least favorite ATC instructions... ... ...

[caleb]

My top three are:

1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"

2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
outer marker"

and as Ben Jackson said:

3) "cleared to land on any runway"

[Peter R.]

caleb > wrote:

> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"

What is the scenario that results in this command? Traffic separation?
Crash at the airport?

--
Peter

[John Clear]

In article . com>,
caleb > wrote:
>My top three are:
>
>1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
>2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
>outer marker"
>
>and as Ben Jackson said:
>
>3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>

4) "I have a phone number for you to call after you land. Advise when
ready to copy."
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Peter R.]

John Clear > wrote:

> 4) "I have a phone number for you to call after you land. Advise when
> ready to copy."

Heard this on the frequency the other day. The recipient was a regional
pilot. He replied a couple times with "Why, what happened?" The
controller finally came back, slightly perturbed, and stated, "just call
the number when you get on the ground, contact XXX on XXX.XX, good day."

There was a notable chill in the air after that.

--
Peter

[Frank Stutzman]

caleb > wrote:
> My top three are:

Can't say that I'm terribly fond of:

"Call following number when on the ground, advise when ready to copy"

(happened once, ended up not being a big deal)
--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[kontiki]

John Clear wrote:
> 4) "I have a phone number for you to call after you land. Advise when
> ready to copy."

or: "N12345 I cleared you runway 26 via echo, what are you doing?"

[Nils Rostedt]

"No clearance until you've repaired that radio".

(well justified, by the way)

[Jim Burns]

Repost, but I can still remember hearing this over the radio while at
Lawrenceville, GA....

"Cessna 1234 go
around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing 25
and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
"mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind leg
for runway 25, I said runway 25!"

Nope, I wasn't the driver of either airplane, I was already on the ground.

Jim




"caleb" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My top three are:
>
> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"
>
> and as Ben Jackson said:
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>

[Bob Noel]

In article . com>,
"caleb" > wrote:

> My top three are:
>
> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"
>
> and as Ben Jackson said:
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"

.... break, Aircraft calling, remain clear and try again in 15 minutes, break....

--
Bob Noel
New NHL? what a joke

[Robert M. Gary]

"Cleared to land on any runway" isn't bad. You get that when you are
doing a contact approach (at least a KSAC). How about "Call tower after
shutdown".

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

How about "expect 30 minute delay for release". I got this Feburary
from Brown field after clearing customs and having taxied to the
runway. Apparently, ATC doesn't know what to do when they actually get
IMC in SoCal.

-Robert

[Michelle P]

Cleared to land any runway means one of two things. The wind is calm and
you are the only Traffic. or....
You are having a bad day, declared an emergency and need to land now!
I have had the second one once.....
Michelle

Robert M. Gary wrote:

>"Cleared to land on any runway" isn't bad. You get that when you are
>doing a contact approach (at least a KSAC). How about "Call tower after
>shutdown".
>
>-Robert
>
>
>

[Robert M. Gary]

Is that true? I always get "cleared to land any runway" after a contact
approach. I'm not sure if all contact approches are that way or if this
is something specific to the operation.

-Robert

[Matt Barrow]

"caleb" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My top three are:
>

Six Mike Kilo, you are number seven behind the United heavy.....

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Is that true? I always get "cleared to land any runway" after a contact
> approach. I'm not sure if all contact approches are that way or if this
> is something specific to the operation.
>

Well, all contact approaches can't be that way as all contact approaches are
not flown at towered fields and a landing clearance requires a towered
field. The phrase "cleared to land any runway" does not appear in FAA
Order 7110.65.

[Ken Reed]

> My top three are:

I did three practice ILS approaches today. I got my favorite ATC
instruction on each of the first two:

1) Cirrus 0CM, slow to 110 knots for the Mooney in front of you.

2) Cirrus 0CM, slow 20 knots for the 737 ahead.

I was at 140 KIAS at the IAF each time.
---
Ken Reed

[Matt Whiting]

Ken Reed wrote:
>> My top three are:
>
>
> I did three practice ILS approaches today. I got my favorite ATC
> instruction on each of the first two:
>
> 1) Cirrus 0CM, slow to 110 knots for the Mooney in front of you.
>
> 2) Cirrus 0CM, slow 20 knots for the 737 ahead.
>
> I was at 140 KIAS at the IAF each time.

Why? Haven't learned energy management yet? :-)

Matt

[Mike Adams]

"caleb" > wrote:

> My top three are:
>
>

How about, "N12345, say souls on board and fuel remaining"

[A Lieberman]

My favorite ATC instructions.

Sundowner one niner four three lima read back correct

Sundowner one niner four three lima cleared for takeoff

Sundowner one niner four three lima, cleared to land.

[Michelle P]

When I was flying an approach into San Diego a Years ago received the
instructions.
At first I was told to keep my speed up on the approach.
"Maule NNXXX reduced speed 10 Kts. You are gaining on the 737 in front
of you."
"The flight strip says you are a Maule. Is that Correct?"
Yes.
I thought they were slow airplanes.
They can be. I have the big engine.
Michelle

Ken Reed wrote:

>> My top three are:
>
>
> I did three practice ILS approaches today. I got my favorite ATC
> instruction on each of the first two:
>
> 1) Cirrus 0CM, slow to 110 knots for the Mooney in front of you.
>
> 2) Cirrus 0CM, slow 20 knots for the 737 ahead.
>
> I was at 140 KIAS at the IAF each time.
> ---
> Ken Reed

[Jeff]

As a student pilot still preping for my first cross-country and concerned I
might make a wrong turn, This one tops my list:

"Gelöscht, um Laufbahn 24 zu landen"



Jeff


(used an online translator, dunno if it did it right :) )

[GS]

I did an approach into HWD right after getting my IFR ticket.
I got a popup clearance a while out in VMC while I was under
the hood and my friend being the safety pilot. While on the
approach, at some point we went into IMC and broke
out at about 700 feet AGL. The original plan was to fly
down to minimums and then fly back to SQL VFR. Well
I had to land since VFR wasn't possible and the guy in the
tower kindly got a pop up (?) IFR clearance back to SQL.
(a popup is usually from the air although i guess you can get
them on the ground). Anyway he read the clearance back something
like....

"Cherokee N12345, stay on present squawk, climb 2000, cleared
to SQL, right turn 090 on departure."

I started to read it back but was obviously confused as I tried
putting everything in order as I
was reading back in the usual CRATE sequence. Note, he didn't even
give me a departure frequency.

He replied, "Uh, ok, stupid me. Let me try it so even I can
understand it."

Gerald

[Dan Luke]

Heard from Houston TRACON while in the clouds after departing on a void
time clearance:

"Maintain VFR..."

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Orval Fairbairn]

Mt favorite:

"Rocket Flight, cleared for the break; Cherokee 12345 expedite clearing
runway, flight of four behind you; Cessna 3456 enter downwind behind
flight of our coming into the break; expedite, another flight of four
will break behind you."

This is typical at Titusville (TIX) on a Saturday morning.

Least favorite:
Tower chewing somebody out when I am on final and #2 or #3 in my flight
with wingman on the runway. I can't get a word in edgewise to clear
wingman to cross and exit, so I have to go around.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Ken Reed > said:
>> My top three are:

My top one is "Cleared to land on the green dot, welcome to Oshkosh".


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Never meddle in the affairs of NT. It is slow to boot and quick to crash.
-- Stephen Harris

[Steve Foley]

Heard at Oshkosh:

All landing traffic, please look at your magnetic compass. If it says 9,
break off. We are landing on 27.


"caleb" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My top three are:
>
> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"
>
> and as Ben Jackson said:
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>

[Mike Adams]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

> My top one is "Cleared to land on the green dot, welcome to Oshkosh".
>
>

Folks, we have a winner....

[Otis Winslow]

caleb wrote:
> My top three are:
>
> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"
>
> and as Ben Jackson said:
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>

I had that #3 one once .. after I told them I had smoke in the
cockpit and needed to be thinking about being back on the ground.

[Howard Nelson]

"John Clear" > wrote in message
...
> In article . com>,
> caleb > wrote:

> 4) "I have a phone number for you to call after you land. Advise when
> ready to copy."

That would be my least favorite. Haven't had the pleasure however. My next
least favorite is to be anywhere in the LA basin and hear (without
requesting it) "Flight following terminated, squawk VFR. Good-day".

Howard

> --
> John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/
>

[Paul kgyy]

Happens without fail when approaching the VFR corridor south of
Chicago, just when you'd really like to have FF.

[Aaron Coolidge]

Heard over London, Ontario on the way back from Oshkosh this year:

London App> Cherokee 76J say indicated airspeed
Me> 76J One Zero Three, 103 Knots
London App> Cherokee 76J reduce speed to one zero zero knots,
contact next approach on xxx.xx, inform them of your speed restriction

A three knot speed restriction. ??? Turns out I was catching my next-
tiedown neighbor's Archer.
--
Aaron C.

[Jim Burns]

> How about, "N12345, say souls on board and fuel remaining"

....and add to that "equipment is rolling, cleared to land 26R, no other
traffic in the pattern, is there anything else we can do for you? Roger
that, just try to touch down as smooth and slowly as possible."

Had that one... once.

Jim

>

[Matt Whiting]

Otis Winslow wrote:
> caleb wrote:
>
>> My top three are:
>>
>> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>>
>> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
>> outer marker"
>>
>> and as Ben Jackson said:
>>
>> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>>
>
> I had that #3 one once .. after I told them I had smoke in the
> cockpit and needed to be thinking about being back on the ground.
>

How long did you have to think about getting back on the ground? :-)

Matt

[Erik Andersen]

> around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
> RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
> LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
> rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing
> 25
> and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
> landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
> responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
> "mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
> you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
> runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind
> leg
> for runway 25, I said runway 25!"
>

Reminds me of a guy a couple a weeks ago in Kissimmee Gateway (ISM), he was
told to do a right pattern for runway 15, then he
turned right when he was midfield.... or the student that was coming home
way to late so it was dark. He was about to land
on highway 192 when the controller told him that his transponder was
reporting an altitude of 150 and the controller still didn't have him in
sight... the same student landed in Melbourne (tower controlled) thinking he
was in Sebastian (non controlled), doing fine on the radio exept
it was on the wrong frequency. He landed in Melbourne, taxied back and did
an immidiate departure, tower was a bit
p****d off that day.

[Brien K. Meehan]

My most favorite dialog went like this:

UALXXX: Tower, United XXX heavy, ready to go, 3L.
DTW: United XXX heavy, hold short runway 3L, you're number 2 behind a
little guy back-taxiing.
UALXXX: Okay, but I don't see him.
Me: Tower, umm, "Little Guy" 12345 in position 3L.
Tower: Little Guy 12345, caution wake turbulence parallel runway, fly
heading 020, clear for takeoff 3L.
Me: Zero two zero, clear for takeoff 3L, Little Guy 12345.
Tower: United XXX heavy, clear for takeoff 3L, caution, Cessna wake
turbulence.

[Jack Allison]

Mike Adams wrote:
> (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
>
>
>>My top one is "Cleared to land on the green dot, welcome to Oshkosh".
>>
>>
>
>
> Folks, we have a winner....
Similar to Paul's..."White Cessna, good job, welcome to Oshkosh".
Happened on my first OSH landing three years back.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-IA Student
Arrow N2104T

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

[Brien K. Meehan]

I had an un-favorite dialog at a Class D once. There were three of us
in the pattern:

Tower: Cessna 123, clear touch-and-go 27R.
Cessna 123: Cessna 123.
Tower, Cessna 456, you're number two, clear touch-and-go 27R.
Cessna 456: Umm, okay, clear touch-and-go 27R.
Me: Tower, Cessna 789, I believe I'm number 2 for 27R.
Tower: Cessna 789, you're number 3, continue downwind, I'll call your
base leg.
Me: 789, I'm 1/2 mile final 27R, departing traffic in sight, no one
else.
(pause)
Me: Tower, 789, confirm I'm clear touch-and-go 27R.
(pause)
Me: Tower, 789 going around 27R.
(pause)
Citation: Tower, Citation XXX, 6 miles out, visiual 27L.
(pause)
Tower: Okay, which aircraft is on final 27R?
Me: 789 over the numbers, going around 27R.
Cessna 456: I'm turning base for 27R.
(pause)
Tower: Cessna 789, turn crosswind now, right traffic for 27R.
Me: Okay, confirm you want me to turn in front of Cessna 123 for right
traffic 27R.
(new voice from the tower, no pause)
Tower: Skyhawk 789, continue runway heading, follow the Cessna on
crosswind, right traffic 27R.
Me: Okay, Skyhawk 789.
Tower: Cessna 456, clear touch-and-go 27R.
Cessna 456: Clear touch and go, Cessna 456.
Tower: Citation XXX, clear to land 27L, three Cessnas in the pattern on
the parallel.
Citation: We're lookin', clear to land 27L.
Tower: Skyhawk 123, you're number two, clear touch-and-go 27R.
Cessna 123: Cessna 123.

.... whereupon my instructor said to me, "Well, someone's going to get a
phone call, that first guy was the same controller who tried to kill me
yesterday."

[Gene Seibel]

Once I was accused of busting Class C before calling in. (I was inside
the outer ring, but under it) They didn't ask me to call the tower, but
asked where I was based. I worried for weeks about whether I was going
to hear from them.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Once I was accused of busting Class C before calling in. (I was inside
> the outer ring, but under it) They didn't ask me to call the tower, but
> asked where I was based. I worried for weeks about whether I was going
> to hear from them.
>

If you're under the outer ring just say your altitude.

[[email protected]]

On 22-Dec-2005, Ken Reed > wrote:

> I did three practice ILS approaches today. I got my favorite ATC
> instruction on each of the first two:
>
> 1) Cirrus 0CM, slow to 110 knots for the Mooney in front of you.
>
> 2) Cirrus 0CM, slow 20 knots for the 737 ahead.
>
> I was at 140 KIAS at the IAF each time.


Most high performance singles can go that fast on approach if you want (or
need) to. What I really like to hear (while cruising at 8000) is "Arrow
41N, you are overtaking traffic ahead. I'll need to move you to 7000 or
9000 for a few miles, your choice."

--
-Elliott Drucker

[[email protected]]

Musketeer N1234 please keep your speed up for the C152 behind you.

j/k



A Lieberman wrote:
> My favorite ATC instructions.
>
> Sundowner one niner four three lima read back correct
>
> Sundowner one niner four three lima cleared for takeoff
>
> Sundowner one niner four three lima, cleared to land.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> wrote in message
news:z4rrf.2354$Q73.1263@trnddc03...
>
> What I really like to hear (while cruising at 8000) is "Arrow
> 41N, you are overtaking traffic ahead. I'll need to move you to 7000 or
> 9000 for a few miles, your choice."
>

You dropped the "would" from that sentence.

[A Lieberman]

On 24 Dec 2005 23:22:25 -0800, wrote:

> Musketeer N1234 please keep your speed up for the C152 behind you.
>
> j/k

Didn't you mean "Slowdowner"? :-))

[Don Byrer]

"Skyhawk 08L, Cleared for the option rwy 7. Caution Wake
turbulence, Departing Heavy DC-8"

Say what?

This was at TOL, Toledo OH...HQ of BAX global. Lots of DC-8s as well
as ANG F16s

Made it a short field landing and t/o...was turning crosswind before
the point at which the DC-8 had rotated...Was about 11PM, I was doing
my Night requirements for my Commercial.

--Don


Don Byrer
Commercial Pilot / CFI Student
Electronics Technician, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
Amateur Radio KJ5KB

"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without bending the gear..."
"I know what it sounds like....when doves cry"

[Otis Winslow]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Otis Winslow wrote:
>
>> caleb wrote:
>>
>>> My top three are:
>>>
>>> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>>>
>>> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
>>> outer marker"
>>>
>>> and as Ben Jackson said:
>>>
>>> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>>>
>>
>> I had that #3 one once .. after I told them I had smoke in the
>> cockpit and needed to be thinking about being back on the ground.
>>
>
> How long did you have to think about getting back on the ground? :-)
>
> Matt

Certainly it was under a second. It's the ride down that makes your
butt hole real tight.

[Douglas Paterson]

"caleb" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>

#3 doesn't bother me if it's the "field is wide open land wherever you want"
variety; if it's the "you have big problems, go ahead and land wherever you
can, trucks are rolling" sort, then it's no fun!

My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):

"Cleared to land runway XX; land at your own risk" -- given by tower when wx
drops below published mins (above mins when approach started, broke out
at/before reaching DH [despite "official" wx]). No big deal, I guess, but
the "at your own risk" wording sure got our attention!!

(my first post to r.a.o, seems like a pleasant bunch in here; getting back
into GA after several years' absence; wannabe/hopeful soon-to-be owner)
--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[George Patterson]

Douglas Paterson wrote:

> seems like a pleasant bunch in here;

You'll learn soon enough. :-)

Welcome!

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

[Montblack]

("Douglas Paterson" wrote)
[snip]
> (my first post to r.a.o, seems like a pleasant bunch in here; getting back
> into GA after several years' absence; wannabe/hopeful soon-to-be owner)


What do you have your eye on?


Montblack

[Don Tuite]

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 20:37:35 -0700, "Douglas Paterson"
> wrote:

>My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):
>
I had the old "alternating red/green" light signal once.

Flying a 65-hp Taylorcraft, NORDO, mid-1970s, up the California
central valley, out of Porterville on this particular leg.

I was trying to make some northing before a winter cold front shut
things down. WX was clear departing Porterville, with a lusty
tailwind (which should have told me something), but around Stockton, I
decided I needed to make a 180 and find a place to land. Of course,
the tailwind was now on my nose. By the time I was over Merced, I
decided that NORDO or not, this was not the time to be insisting on an
uncontrolled field.

So I made a low pass, flew the pattern once more, and on final, I got
the alternating red/green. "Thanks, fellas," I thought. "Extreme
caution is exactly what I am executing right at this moment."

Actually, the tower was great. No sooner had the tail come down (at
about zero groundspeed) when there were two guys from the FBO hanging
on each set of struts. They walked me to a tie-down and we all got to
the office shortly before the first rain shower hit.

The front blew through in a few hours, the sun came out, and from that
point, there was nothing in the way but some easily avoidable squall
lines. I talked to the tower on the phone, topped off, got flashing
green and then steady green and was out of there.

[Cal Vanize]

caleb wrote:
> My top three are:
>
> 1) "TAKE IMMEDIATE EVASIVE ACTION!"
>
> 2) "Execute Published Missed Approach WITH OUT DELAY, and hold at the
> outer marker"
>
> and as Ben Jackson said:
>
> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"

"There's a moderate thunderstorm rappidly increasing in intensity 1 mile
west of the airport moving east at 40 miles per hour. You are now three
miles north of the airport and it should be in sight. RADAR service
terminated. Good day."

(actual message)

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Douglas Paterson" > said:
>"caleb" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> 3) "cleared to land on any runway"
>>
>
>#3 doesn't bother me if it's the "field is wide open land wherever you want"
>variety; if it's the "you have big problems, go ahead and land wherever you
>can, trucks are rolling" sort, then it's no fun!

I still like the fact that Captain Haines had enough cool to say "You
want to be particular and make it a runway, huh?" It's hard to overstate
what heros that whole crew were.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Every fleeting thought you've ever had in your life, no matter how bizarre,
is someone's lifelong obsession. And he has a website.
-- Skif's Internet Theorem

[Douglas Paterson]

Heh. That's the big question, of course!

Please check out a thread I just started, "Resource for choosing a plane?"
In short, I'm looking for a comparison tool to help narrow the choices--I'm
a bit overwhelmed by this most basic of questions you've asked!

Thanks....
--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Douglas Paterson" wrote)
> [snip]
>> (my first post to r.a.o, seems like a pleasant bunch in here; getting
>> back into GA after several years' absence; wannabe/hopeful soon-to-be
>> owner)
>
>
> What do you have your eye on?
>
>
> Montblack

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
...
>
> My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):
>
> "Cleared to land runway XX; land at your own risk" -- given by tower when
> wx drops below published mins (above mins when approach started, broke out
> at/before reaching DH [despite "official" wx]). No big deal, I guess, but
> the "at your own risk" wording sure got our attention!!
>

What tower uses that wording?

[Newps]

> "Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):
>>
>>"Cleared to land runway XX; land at your own risk" -- given by tower when
>>wx drops below published mins (above mins when approach started, broke out
>>at/before reaching DH [despite "official" wx]). No big deal, I guess, but
>>the "at your own risk" wording sure got our attention!!

No tower says that when the runway is open.

[Douglas Paterson]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> "Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):
>>
>> "Cleared to land runway XX; land at your own risk" -- given by tower when
>> wx drops below published mins (above mins when approach started, broke
>> out
>> at/before reaching DH [despite "official" wx]). No big deal, I guess,
>> but
>> the "at your own risk" wording sure got our attention!!
>>
>
> What tower uses that wording?
>

First time I heard it was McConnell AFB, Wichita, KS (KIAB). Training
sortie, KC-135, we were shooting the full VOR procedure, so several minutes
had elapsed between being cleared for the approach and switching over to
tower. We actually already had the runway more or less in sight when they
called out the weather (below mins; heavy rainshowers) and asked us for our
intentions. When we said we intended to complete the approach and
full-stop, they came back with "Roger, Turbo XX, cleared to land runway 35L;
land at your own risk." For whatever reason, the "official" weather was
wrong, we had plenty of visibility. Landed uneventfully, were asked for a
PIREP, but they didn't change anything based on our input, at least while we
were still on frequency.

I'd never heard that before ("at your own risk"), and we had them
repeat--got the same verbiage. I queried tower on the phone after landing,
they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it essentially means
"hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane, we don't
mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not exist in the
civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own rules--they mirror
both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle differences (as there
are between FAA and ICAO). I have an easier time sorting out the
differences between NFL and college ball! ;) That, actually, is a subject
to which I will have to dedicate some serious study as I ease back into
GA....

Second time was at Al Udeid AB, near Doha, Qatar (OTBH). Operational
sortie, KC-135 again, returning from an Enduring Freedom mission. We got
handed off to tower (USAF controllers in a Qatari tower), who told us vis
was below minimums (that area gets some wicked shallow morning fog; vertical
vis typically more-or-less unimpeded, horizontal can go to near zero). We
told them we'd continue and evaluate visibility on final, which got us the
"at your own risk" clearance. Having heard it before, I got to explain what
that meant to the rest of the crew! ;) Landed uneventfully, were asked for
a PIREP, they immediately changed the "official" visibility to match our
observation.

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[Douglas Paterson]

Au contraire. Please read my response to Steven's question....

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>> "Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>My personal least-favorite (which I've received twice):
>>>
>>>"Cleared to land runway XX; land at your own risk" -- given by tower when
>>>wx drops below published mins (above mins when approach started, broke
>>>out
>>>at/before reaching DH [despite "official" wx]). No big deal, I guess,
>>>but
>>>the "at your own risk" wording sure got our attention!!
>
> No tower says that when the runway is open.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
...
>
> First time I heard it was McConnell AFB, Wichita, KS (KIAB). Training
> sortie, KC-135, we were shooting the full VOR procedure, so several
> minutes had elapsed between being cleared for the approach and switching
> over to tower. We actually already had the runway more or less in sight
> when they called out the weather (below mins; heavy rainshowers) and asked
> us for our intentions. When we said we intended to complete the approach
> and full-stop, they came back with "Roger, Turbo XX, cleared to land
> runway 35L; land at your own risk." For whatever reason, the "official"
> weather was wrong, we had plenty of visibility. Landed uneventfully, were
> asked for a PIREP, but they didn't change anything based on our input, at
> least while we were still on frequency.
>
> I'd never heard that before ("at your own risk"), and we had them
> repeat--got the same verbiage. I queried tower on the phone after
> landing, they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it essentially
> means "hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane,
> we don't mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not
> exist in the civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own
> rules--they mirror both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle
> differences (as there are between FAA and ICAO). I have an easier time
> sorting out the differences between NFL and college ball! ;) That,
> actually, is a subject to which I will have to dedicate some serious study
> as I ease back into GA....
>
> Second time was at Al Udeid AB, near Doha, Qatar (OTBH). Operational
> sortie, KC-135 again, returning from an Enduring Freedom mission. We got
> handed off to tower (USAF controllers in a Qatari tower), who told us vis
> was below minimums (that area gets some wicked shallow morning fog;
> vertical vis typically more-or-less unimpeded, horizontal can go to near
> zero). We told them we'd continue and evaluate visibility on final, which
> got us the "at your own risk" clearance. Having heard it before, I got to
> explain what that meant to the rest of the crew! ;) Landed uneventfully,
> were asked for a PIREP, they immediately changed the "official" visibility
> to match our observation.
>

So someone within the USAF thought USAF tower controllers should inform
flight crews that landing was at their own risk when the weather was below
approach minimums? What does that mean, exactly? Does someone else assume
the risk when weather is above approach minimums?

That phraseology doesn't exist in the civilian world, but it's not because
the USAF "flies under its own rules." All controllers in the US are
required to provide services in accordance with FAA Order 7110.65, it
doesn't matter if they wear a uniform.

[Matt Whiting]

Douglas Paterson wrote:

> I'd never heard that before ("at your own risk"), and we had them
> repeat--got the same verbiage. I queried tower on the phone after landing,
> they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it essentially means
> "hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane, we don't
> mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not exist in the
> civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own rules--they mirror
> both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle differences (as there
> are between FAA and ICAO). I have an easier time sorting out the
> differences between NFL and college ball! ;) That, actually, is a subject
> to which I will have to dedicate some serious study as I ease back into
> GA....

I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
made it even more comical.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> "Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>First time I heard it was McConnell AFB, Wichita, KS (KIAB). Training
>>sortie, KC-135, we were shooting the full VOR procedure, so several
>>minutes had elapsed between being cleared for the approach and switching
>>over to tower. We actually already had the runway more or less in sight
>>when they called out the weather (below mins; heavy rainshowers) and asked
>>us for our intentions. When we said we intended to complete the approach
>>and full-stop, they came back with "Roger, Turbo XX, cleared to land
>>runway 35L; land at your own risk." For whatever reason, the "official"
>>weather was wrong, we had plenty of visibility. Landed uneventfully, were
>>asked for a PIREP, but they didn't change anything based on our input, at
>>least while we were still on frequency.
>>
>>I'd never heard that before ("at your own risk"), and we had them
>>repeat--got the same verbiage. I queried tower on the phone after
>>landing, they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it essentially
>>means "hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane,
>>we don't mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not
>>exist in the civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own
>>rules--they mirror both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle
>>differences (as there are between FAA and ICAO). I have an easier time
>>sorting out the differences between NFL and college ball! ;) That,
>>actually, is a subject to which I will have to dedicate some serious study
>>as I ease back into GA....
>>
>>Second time was at Al Udeid AB, near Doha, Qatar (OTBH). Operational
>>sortie, KC-135 again, returning from an Enduring Freedom mission. We got
>>handed off to tower (USAF controllers in a Qatari tower), who told us vis
>>was below minimums (that area gets some wicked shallow morning fog;
>>vertical vis typically more-or-less unimpeded, horizontal can go to near
>>zero). We told them we'd continue and evaluate visibility on final, which
>>got us the "at your own risk" clearance. Having heard it before, I got to
>>explain what that meant to the rest of the crew! ;) Landed uneventfully,
>>were asked for a PIREP, they immediately changed the "official" visibility
>>to match our observation.
>>
>
>
> So someone within the USAF thought USAF tower controllers should inform
> flight crews that landing was at their own risk when the weather was below
> approach minimums? What does that mean, exactly? Does someone else assume
> the risk when weather is above approach minimums?
>
> That phraseology doesn't exist in the civilian world, but it's not because
> the USAF "flies under its own rules." All controllers in the US are
> required to provide services in accordance with FAA Order 7110.65, it
> doesn't matter if they wear a uniform.

Does 7110.65 prohibit saying "check gear down?"


Matt

[A Lieberman]

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:55:37 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

> I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
> before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
> made it even more comical.

I got this on my Beech Sundowner at GLH which is a commercial airport.

Tower got a chuckle when I replied "fixed and welded."

Maybe he thought I was a Sierra, who knows :-)

Allen

[Aaron Coolidge]

A Lieberman > wrote:
: On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:55:37 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

:> I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
:> before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
:> made it even more comical.

: I got this on my Beech Sundowner at GLH which is a commercial airport.
: Tower got a chuckle when I replied "fixed and welded."
: Maybe he thought I was a Sierra, who knows :-)

I was a passenger in my friend's Swift - tailwheel retract. We were landing
at Bridgport, perhaps - I can't remember. On short final tower called out
"Swift go around! Swift go around go around!". We did a go-around. On
downwind we asked "why did you have us go around?" Tower said "your nosegear
was not down!" We were laughing pretty hard, and eventually my friend
managed to say "Tower, the little wheel of this airplane is on the *back*".
--
Aaron C.

[Douglas Paterson]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
> ...
>>[snip]
>> I queried tower on the phone after
>> landing, they explained (and cited an appropriate reg) that it
>> essentially
>> means "hey, we told you the weather's below mins; you fly your airplane,
>> we don't mind if you land on our runway." That clearance may or may not
>> exist in the civilian world, I don't know. USAF flies under its own
>> rules--they mirror both FAA and ICAO regs, but there are plenty of subtle
>> differences (as there are between FAA and ICAO).
>[snip]
> So someone within the USAF thought USAF tower controllers should inform
> flight crews that landing was at their own risk when the weather was below
> approach minimums? What does that mean, exactly? Does someone else
> assume the risk when weather is above approach minimums?
>
> That phraseology doesn't exist in the civilian world, but it's not because
> the USAF "flies under its own rules." All controllers in the US are
> required to provide services in accordance with FAA Order 7110.65, it
> doesn't matter if they wear a uniform.
>

HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
(my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is going
to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).

I spoke imprecisely when I said the USAF flies under its own rules--yes, it
flies in compliance with FAA (and ICAO and host-nation, where applicable)
rules. There are some pretty broad exceptions granted to the military *by
the FARs*, though, and that's the point I was trying to make....

Air Force Instruction 11-202 Volume 3
[http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfiles/af/11/afi11-202v3/afi11-202v3.pdf]
is the "General Flight Rules" for USAF pilots--chapter 1 of that pub does a
pretty decent job of explaining that inter-relation if you want the details.
Similar relationships exist as well, for example, for the control of
aircraft (though I'm not familiar enough with that side of things to give
you a citation).

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[Douglas Paterson]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Douglas Paterson wrote:
>
> I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
> before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
> made it even more comical.
>

This one I can answer a bit more directly, since it came about during my
tenure in the Air Force. USAF got tired of "too many" gear-up landing (how
many was that? dunno; 1 is "too many" in my book), so they implemented a
policy that eventually worked its way into the rule books. I'll cite the
pilot side of things; I'm reasonably certain that the (USAF) tower
controllers' books have more or less the same guidance for their side of the
radio. I have no idea what, if any, reduction in gear-up landings is
attributed to this rule.

From AFI 11-202 v3
[http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfiles/af/11/afi11-202v3/afi11-202v3.pdf],
para 5.9.6:

5.9.6. Landing Gear Reporting Procedures. Pilots operating retractable gear
aircraft must report "gear down" to the ATC agency or runway supervisory
unit after extending the landing gear. This report shall be made during any
approach to an airport prior to crossing the runway threshold.

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[Matt Whiting]

Douglas Paterson wrote:

> HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
> there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
> flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
> controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
> controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
> being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
> because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
> less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
> (my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
> mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
> that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is going
> to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).

Every landing is at the pilot's risk. The controller has much less at
stake. :-)


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Douglas Paterson wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Douglas Paterson wrote:
>>
>>I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
>>before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
>>made it even more comical.
>>
>
>
> This one I can answer a bit more directly, since it came about during my
> tenure in the Air Force. USAF got tired of "too many" gear-up landing (how
> many was that? dunno; 1 is "too many" in my book), so they implemented a
> policy that eventually worked its way into the rule books. I'll cite the
> pilot side of things; I'm reasonably certain that the (USAF) tower
> controllers' books have more or less the same guidance for their side of the
> radio. I have no idea what, if any, reduction in gear-up landings is
> attributed to this rule.
>
> From AFI 11-202 v3
> [http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfiles/af/11/afi11-202v3/afi11-202v3.pdf],
> para 5.9.6:
>
> 5.9.6. Landing Gear Reporting Procedures. Pilots operating retractable gear
> aircraft must report "gear down" to the ATC agency or runway supervisory
> unit after extending the landing gear. This report shall be made during any
> approach to an airport prior to crossing the runway threshold.
>

So if I had called the controller on downwind and reported "gear down
and welded", I wouldn't have gotten that reminder when I was cleared to
land? :-)

Matt

[Douglas Paterson]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> So if I had called the controller on downwind and reported "gear down and
> welded", I wouldn't have gotten that reminder when I was cleared to land?
> :-)
>

In theory? No. In practice? Almost certainly. It pretty much becomes a
part of the controllers' automatic phraseology: "<call sign>, cleared to
land rwy XX, check gear down." That happens to me more often than not even
after reporting the gear down; indeed, I made it a habit to call at the FAF
(which, by another USAF rule, is the latest point by which the gear must be
down), "<call sign>, final approach fix, gear down"--which was typically
followed immediately by tower with, "roger, <call sign>, cleared to land rwy
XX, check gear down".... <*sigh*>.... :)

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[Dave Butler]

Matt Whiting wrote:

> I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
> before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
> made it even more comical.

I've heard "...check gear down, no landing light observed" on short final at
RDU, a non-military airport. My landing light was inop and anyway is not related
to the gear position. Nevertheless I thanked the controller for his concern.

Dave

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> I've not heard that before either, but I'd never heard "check gear down"
> before I flew into a military field either. And this was in a 182 which
> made it even more comical.
>

Controllers at military fields are required to issue a wheels down check,
there's no exemption for fixed-gear aircraft. I belonged to a USAF Aero
Club almost thirty years ago. A tower controller at one of our safety
meetings attempted to explain why this was necessary even for our club
aircraft, which were all fixed-gear. I don't recall his explanation, but I
do remember thinking at the time it was completely absurd. Links to the
requirements below:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp2/atc0201.html#2-1-12

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp2/atc0201.html#2-1-24

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> Does 7110.65 prohibit saying "check gear down?"
>

Nope. It actually requires some controllers to say it, although the book
phraseology is "check wheels down".

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Douglas Paterson" > wrote in message
...
>
> HOW it got into the regs, I can't say; I read it for myself, though, it's
> there (or at least it was at the time). It "means" what I somewhat
> flippantly said in my earlier response--it emphasizes the fact that the
> controller has advised the pilot of the below-mins wx conditions. The
> controller tells the pilot that he may land on the runway (as opposed to
> being *denied clearance to land* and diverting or holding, etc.), but that
> because of the conditions he's doing so "at his own risk." I think it's
> less about assuming risk, exactly, and more about communicating that point
> (my opinion). Of course, the pilot will always be responsible for any
> mishap; but, let's say the controller clears an aircraft to land knowing
> that the weather is below minimums--in any mishap, that controller is
> going to be hung to dry as well (at least in the USAF world).
>

How does the controller know when the weather is below minimums for any
particular operation? If the controller is going to be hung to dry in the
event of a mishap if he doesn't state "at your own risk", then to cover his
ass he'd have to state it whenever the weather drops below the highest user
minima, which may still be above what's required for the arriving aircraft.
Seems to me it'd be better to just state the latest weather information.
I'd expect the pilot is going to ask for it anyway when told "at your own
risk."

[Douglas Paterson]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> How does the controller know when the weather is below minimums for any
> particular operation? If the controller is going to be hung to dry in the
> event of a mishap if he doesn't state "at your own risk", then to cover
> his ass he'd have to state it whenever the weather drops below the highest
> user minima, which may still be above what's required for the arriving
> aircraft. Seems to me it'd be better to just state the latest weather
> information. I'd expect the pilot is going to ask for it anyway when told
> "at your own risk."

I believe that it only applies when the weather is below the minimums for
the lowest applicable approach to the field--that was the case both times I
received that clearance. Also, now that you remind me, both times, the
clearance included the weather in the same transmission: "<call sign>,
weather is ____________, cleared to land rwy XX, land at your own risk."

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[Douglas Paterson]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> Controllers at military fields are required to issue a wheels down check,
> there's no exemption for fixed-gear aircraft. I belonged to a USAF Aero
> Club almost thirty years ago.

Interesting. I had been told that the "gear down" report was a new
requirement when I was in pilot training; however, if you operated under it
almost 30 years ago, it was hardly "new," it was ~15 or so years old at the
time. I was apparently misinformed on the origins of that requirement....


--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

[[email protected]]

My favorite?

"Katana 227RD, there is a Cessna in your assigned taxiway. I'm going to
have him taxi onto the far corner of the runway, see if you can't sneak
past him."

This was after we had received landing instructions to follow the
runway to the end and use the last taxiway. Apparently after he gave
that instruction, the controller had someone else taxi to the hold
short line on that same taxiway.

My instructor said, and I quote, "I've never had to do this before", as
we inched pased the Cessna 182 with about 4 feet to spare.

Happened yesterday at SUS, there were calm winds so they were taking
off and landing in both directions (whichever was convenient).