Switching to ground....

I landed at BED a couple of days ago, and as I was rolling out
the controllers switched, so I never got the usual instruction
to "turn off at Golf, ground .7". Since Golf was the first
taxiway to turn off on anyway, I made the turn off.

Tower was now so busy (common at BED) that I could not get a word
in on the frequency. With the controller switch, I had clearly
been forgotten -- the new controller told someone else to turn off
on Golf before noticing that I was there, not moving. After
probably 60-90 seconds the frequency was clear enough for me to
ask whether she wanted me over on Ground.

At the time, and in retrospect, I think my choice to stay on
Tower frequency was correct under the regs, but silly -- that
I should have just contacted Ground and told them I was switching
over since I was sure Tower really wanted me on Ground but had
forgotten me.

I'm wondering if anyone disagrees and thinks the right thing to
do was what I actually did -- stay with the Tower until I could
get permission to change to Ground.

--
David Rind

In article , David Rind
wrote:

I'm wondering if anyone disagrees and thinks the right thing to
do was what I actually did -- stay with the Tower until I could
get permission to change to Ground.

It's rare, but not unusual for the BED tower to not do the "left
at Golf, ground .7" thing. It's happened to me more than once.
I just turn off and tune ground. At BED, ground is much quieter
than the tower frew. But in the above scenario, I probably should
also monitor the tower (sometimes I do, sometimes I don't).

--
Bob Noel

"David Rind" wrote:
At the time, and in retrospect, I think my choice to stay on
Tower frequency was correct under the regs,...

From the AIM: "A pilot who has just landed should not change from the
tower frequency to the ground control frequency until directed to do so
by the controller."

...but silly -- that I should have just contacted Ground and
told them I was switching over since I was sure Tower really
wanted me on Ground but had forgotten me.

I'm wondering if anyone disagrees and thinks the right thing to
do was what I actually did -- stay with the Tower until I could
get permission to change to Ground.

I would have done just as you did.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

David Rind wrote:

I landed at BED a couple of days ago, and as I was rolling out
the controllers switched, so I never got the usual instruction
to "turn off at Golf, ground .7". Since Golf was the first
taxiway to turn off on anyway, I made the turn off.

Tower was now so busy (common at BED) that I could not get a word
in on the frequency. With the controller switch, I had clearly
been forgotten -- the new controller told someone else to turn off
on Golf before noticing that I was there, not moving. After
probably 60-90 seconds the frequency was clear enough for me to
ask whether she wanted me over on Ground.

At the time, and in retrospect, I think my choice to stay on
Tower frequency was correct under the regs, but silly -- that
I should have just contacted Ground and told them I was switching
over since I was sure Tower really wanted me on Ground but had
forgotten me.

I'm wondering if anyone disagrees and thinks the right thing to
do was what I actually did -- stay with the Tower until I could
get permission to change to Ground.

The by the book answer is to stay with the tower. The right and
practical thing to do is contact ground.

Newps wrote:

The by the book answer is to stay with the tower. The right and
practical thing to do is contact ground.

There have been more than one accidents due to pilots doing some self
defined "right and practical thing".

Stefan

"Stefan" wrote in message
...

There have been more than one accidents due to pilots doing some self
defined "right and practical thing".


Please provide an example.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

There have been more than one accidents due to pilots doing some self
defined "right and practical thing".

Please provide an example.

Runway incursion at Hamburg, Germany, 29 January 2004. Luckily no
accident because the Airbus managed to abort the take off. The incursing
Fokker could not be warned because, you guessed it, it had already tuned
in Ground freqeuncy.

Preliminary report at http://www.bfu-web.de/Bulletin/Bulletin0401.pdf
page 16/17.

Stefan

"Stefan" wrote in message
...

Runway incursion at Hamburg, Germany, 29 January 2004. Luckily
no accident because the Airbus managed to abort the take off. The
incursing Fokker could not be warned because, you guessed it, it
had already tuned in Ground freqeuncy.


If he switched to ground while still on the runway it's a different
situation.

I disagree.

The by the book answer is to stay with the tower.

The right and practical thing is to monitor tower on one radio while
calling ground and explaining the situation on the other radio. This way
you satisfy the regulations and do your job, which is to communicate
effectively without causing problems, while using common sense and
following the CFR's (there is no such thing as FAR's for pilots anymore).


Newps wrote in news:iBTdc.110547$w54.785621
@attbi_s01:

The by the book answer is to stay with the tower. The right and
practical thing to do is contact ground.

rwerw wrote:

The right and practical thing is to monitor tower on one radio while
calling ground and explaining the situation on the other radio.

What other radio? Some of us are lucky to have 1.

George Patterson
This marriage is off to a shaky start. The groom just asked the band to
play "Your cheatin' heart", and the bride just requested "Don't come home
a'drinkin' with lovin' on your mind".