With the wind?

I will not take a 10knt tailwind to land a conventional geared aircraft..
I will take an occasional 10knt tailwind on a 6000ft runway for most of the
other light tri-cycle geared GA aircraft I fly.
Can I send the bill to the local home owners association for extra wear on
brake pads?
BT

"smallg" wrote in message
.. .
Thanks Jim, this makes perfect sense, as noise has
been an issue there for years. I just had the idea
that tailwind landings and takeoffs were never allowed,
as the FAA traditionally seemed pretty strict.
BTW, airport is Peachtree-Dekalb (Atlanta metro
area); here's a page on noise abatement there that
I found just now: http://www.pdkairport.org/abatement.htm
--
-----
Jay McKenzie
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews

You're welcome.


"smallg" wrote in message
.. .
| Thanks Jim, this makes perfect sense, as noise has
| been an issue there for years. I just had the idea
| that tailwind landings and takeoffs were never allowed,
| as the FAA traditionally seemed pretty strict.
| BTW, airport is Peachtree-Dekalb (Atlanta metro
| area); here's a page on noise abatement there that
| I found just now: http://www.pdkairport.org/abatement.htm
| --
| -----
| Jay McKenzie
| http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews
|
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:ZPVXf.7715$t22.1714@dukeread08...

If a tower phrased a take-off clearance "cleared for |
downwind takeoff" it would be because the pilot requested
that runway and the tower was getting it on tape, that the
pilot knew and accepted the procedure.


The phraseology is just "cleared for takeoff", the pilot's request would
already be on the tape so adding "downwind" would accomplish nothing..

smallg wrote:
Thanks Jim, this makes perfect sense, as noise has
been an issue there for years. I just had the idea
that tailwind landings and takeoffs were never allowed,
as the FAA traditionally seemed pretty strict.
BTW, airport is Peachtree-Dekalb (Atlanta metro
area); here's a page on noise abatement there that
I found just now: http://www.pdkairport.org/abatement.htm
--
-----
Jay McKenzie
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews


It's got a 6000 ft runway. You could land a Boeing 737. A 10 knot tail
wind is not going to make much difference to most small airplanes.

Newps wrote:

We're not you're mother. If traffic allows and you want a 20 knot
tailwind the runway is all yours.

And so are the blast pad, the approach lighting system, and the trees at
the opposite end.

--
Peter

Peter R. wrote:
Newps wrote:

We're not you're mother. If traffic allows and you want a 20 knot
tailwind the runway is all yours.

It works the other way too. I've seen HPN using 34 with a slight
tailwind and somebody says they need to use 16 for operational
requirements (or maybe it was the other way around). They get what
they ask for.

Roy Smith wrote:
Peter R. wrote:

Newps wrote:


We're not you're mother. If traffic allows and you want a 20 knot
tailwind the runway is all yours.

It works the other way too. I've seen HPN using 34 with a slight
tailwind and somebody says they need to use 16 for operational
requirements (or maybe it was the other way around). They get what
they ask for.


But not always. If it's busy you may have to land with a 5 knot tailwind.

The pilot always makes the final call. If it's busy, you may have to wait
to land without a tail wind. If you are low on fuel that may force you to
divert to another airport. But an air traffic controller can not dictate
which runway you are to use.

Mike Schumann

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Roy Smith wrote:
Peter R. wrote:

Newps wrote:


We're not you're mother. If traffic allows and you want a 20 knot
tailwind the runway is all yours.

It works the other way too. I've seen HPN using 34 with a slight
tailwind and somebody says they need to use 16 for operational
requirements (or maybe it was the other way around). They get what
they ask for.


But not always. If it's busy you may have to land with a 5 knot tailwind.

In article ,
Newps wrote:


Roy Smith wrote:
Peter R. wrote:

Newps wrote:


We're not you're mother. If traffic allows and you want a 20 knot
tailwind the runway is all yours.

It works the other way too. I've seen HPN using 34 with a slight
tailwind and somebody says they need to use 16 for operational
requirements (or maybe it was the other way around). They get what
they ask for.


But not always. If it's busy you may have to land with a 5 knot tailwind.

ATC can't force you to do something contrary to your opspecs.

Mike Schumann wrote:

The pilot always makes the final call. If it's busy, you may have to wait
to land without a tail wind. If you are low on fuel that may force you to
divert to another airport. But an air traffic controller can not dictate
which runway you are to use.

Baloney. If you get a chance go to any big airport on a day with light
winds. Most of these airports have preferred runways, landing in a
particular direction is preferred by the controllers for any number of
reasons. If the wind shifts to make that runway a tailwind, but it's
only 5 knots or so, you will land with a tailwind or you will go
somewhere else. Same as my previous example about the crosswind.