fun with controllers at OSU

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
. net...
Note that FAR 91.126 begins with "Unless otherwise authorized or
required".


That is splashing all around what I was talking about when Mike mentioned
the field in the boonies....Blueskies also asked the question about going
there to practice. There may have been a place where full-stop, back-taxi,
ground-looping (: , what-ever may have been authorized and could be done
safely in a training environment.

I really enjoy this forum as it has a relaxed and cordial atmosphere and I
had no intention of writing a brief on the legal requirements of practicing
right-hand traffic that Mike W likes to do. I've been flying disaster
relief into Mississippi and Louisiana over the past several weeks and
although there are control towers, it goes something like this, "xxxx,
advise what you'd like to do." There is right-hand traffic landing short as
intersection take-offs roll out and helicopters land on the parallel
taxiway, all at the same time.

If you can find a place to safely practice non-standard stuff, then good for
you. It is a skill that may come in very handy.

Stephen

I wouldn't really call it unfriendly, it just seems they contradict
themselves sometimes, then blame the pilot for the mistake

One time I was with my instructor, we were in Buckeye 4 (N40SU) waiting at
9R. The governor's king air was taxiing out to 9R from the north side. I
believe their tail # was N440H or something like that, it had a 4 and an OH
on the end. Anyway, I call up the tower and tell them we are ready to go.
tower : '40SU position and hold'. we roll out and stop, with the king air on
the taxiway on the north side, waiting.
so 30-45 seconds go by, no instructions to anybody, no radio comm. Then,
tower: '40SU, exit rw 9R'. What the hell!? I was speechless. I just looked
at my instructor, who was shaking his head.
Later, when we were done with the lesson, he had talked to the controller, I
don't know who initiated the call. But he told me that the controller had
read him the riot act about 'holding up the governor' and all this crap. The
idiot just read the wrong call sign and wouldn't admit it. If he would have
just cleared us to go, we would have been gone and out of the way. By having
us hold, then exit probably ate up a couple of minutes.

"Bruce E Butts" wrote in message
. ..
I fly out of OSU as well and have found that since it is a Non Federal
Control Tower the controllers there can have an unfriendly attitude
depending on which controller is working at the time. I do not know them
except having met the control tower manager a few times, he is concerned
about the less than friendly treatment that students and others get at
OSU so I encourage you to call.

The management is aware that they have a reputation as being nonstudent
friendly and have encouraged local pilots to respond to surveys
regarding the service.

It sounds like to me that the controller made a mistake.

Bruce.

"Hotel 179" wrote in news:dgjobe02da4
@enews2.newsguy.com:




I don't know if there is an AC for this situation or not, but you
definitely don't need an AC to explain this.

A straight-in instrument is not a violation of 91.126. Flying a traffic
pattern is not a requirement, but if you choose to fly a traffic
pattern, then flying it in the correct direction is a requirement.






--
Andrew Sarangan
CFII
http://www.sarangan.org/aviation/

Newps wrote in
:



A stop and go is one of your options is he doesn't specifically tell
you no stop and go's. We have an instructor here that will ask for
options and then have his student fly the length of our 2 mile runway
at about 3 agl. In that 2 miles the student may touch the runway 5 or
6 times. The instructor just can't understand why this is a problem.

Cleared for the option means you can do a "touch-and-go, low approach,
missed approach, stop-and-go, or full stop landing" (from the AIM).

Flying at 3agl is an excellent training exercise. I see nothing wrong
with doing it when you are cleared for the option.

If ATC expects a normal landing, then they should not clear you for the
option.





--
Andrew Sarangan
CFII
http://www.sarangan.org/aviation/

--

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
I don't know if there is an AC for this situation or not, but you
definitely don't need an AC to explain this.
Andrew Sarangan


I hate it when I'm wrong....aargh -

Stephen

"Hotel 179" wrote in message
...

That is splashing all around what I was talking about when Mike mentioned
the field in the boonies....


I have no idea what that means.



Blueskies also asked the question about going there to practice. There
may have been a place where full-stop, back-taxi, ground-looping (: ,
what-ever may have been authorized and could be done safely in a training
environment.

I really enjoy this forum as it has a relaxed and cordial atmosphere and I
had no intention of writing a brief on the legal requirements of
practicing right-hand traffic that Mike W likes to do. I've been flying
disaster relief into Mississippi and Louisiana over the past several weeks
and although there are control towers, it goes something like this, "xxxx,
advise what you'd like to do." There is right-hand traffic landing short
as intersection take-offs roll out and helicopters land on the parallel
taxiway, all at the same time.

If you can find a place to safely practice non-standard stuff, then good
for you. It is a skill that may come in very handy.


You can practice right-traffic at controlled fields and at uncontrolled
fields that have right-traffic. You can't practice right-traffic at
uncontrolled fields that have left traffic.

Garner Miller wrote:

That isn't what you asked for. You asked for a back-taxi on the active
runway, and that's something completely different. A stop-and-go means
you stop, and then GO. Not turn around, saunter back, line back up,
etc...

The controller was upset about the stop and go not the request for a
back taxi. The controller was out of line.

Steve Foley wrote:

OK, I'll bite. Why is this a probem?

"Newps" wrote in message
...

We have an instructor here that will ask for options
and then have his student fly the length of our 2 mile runway at about 3
agl. In that 2 miles the student may touch the runway 5 or 6 times.
The instructor just can't understand why this is a problem.

A touch and go, an option or a stop and go allows you one operation. As
soon as you takeoff again you cannot then land without another
clearance. As soon as you takeoff I can launch the next departure. Now
if you land again that is certain to be a pilot deviation as you have
caused a loss of seperation.

Garner Miller wrote:

In article , Bob Gardner
wrote:


According to the Pilot/Controller Glossary, you were right and the
controller was wrong. You might want to talk to a quality control person at
OSU.


How do you figure?

From the P/CG:

"OPTION APPROACH- An approach requested and conducted by a pilot which
will result in either a touch-and-go, missed approach, low approach,
stop- and-go, or full stop landing."

Says the same thing the AIM says. A back-taxi is not on the above list.

Read his post. The controller was ****ed off about the fact that he
stopped, not that he wanted to back taxi.

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Newps wrote in
:



A stop and go is one of your options is he doesn't specifically tell
you no stop and go's. We have an instructor here that will ask for
options and then have his student fly the length of our 2 mile runway
at about 3 agl. In that 2 miles the student may touch the runway 5 or
6 times. The instructor just can't understand why this is a problem.


Cleared for the option means you can do a "touch-and-go, low approach,
missed approach, stop-and-go, or full stop landing" (from the AIM).

Flying at 3agl is an excellent training exercise. I see nothing wrong
with doing it when you are cleared for the option.

If ATC expects a normal landing, then they should not clear you for the
option.

My point was as a controller I have given a lot of option clearances and
then also stated that you could do anything except a stop and go.