Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 15, 3:07*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
"Brian" wrote in message

...



I agree it sounds like an error on the part of the controller.

It doesn't just sound like an error, it's definitely an error.

FAA Order 7110.65R Air Traffic Control

Chapter 3. Airport Traffic Control- Terminal

Is there an online source for this? The AIM is online, but it didn't
have an answer to the OP.

wrote:
On Jan 15, 3:07 pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
"Brian" wrote in message

...



I agree it sounds like an error on the part of the controller.
It doesn't just sound like an error, it's definitely an error.

FAA Order 7110.65R Air Traffic Control

Chapter 3. Airport Traffic Control- Terminal

Is there an online source for this? The AIM is online, but it didn't
have an answer to the OP.


http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff.../Atc/index.htm

wrote in message
...

Is there an online source for this? The AIM is online, but it didn't
have an answer to the OP.


http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff.../media/ATC.pdf

But there is a requirement to obtain all relevant information for a flight
and I think there is a argument to be made that you should at least be aware
of both vfr and ifr reporting points in close proximity to your intended
landing point. and if you hear a radio report of someone inbound to a
airport that your flying in to and don't know where that point is, it
behooves you to ask .

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jan 15, 12:24 pm, kontiki wrote:
wrote:

I can't see much sense in demanding that VFR pilots learn about IFR
and buy or download the approach plates so they can understand a radio
message from an IFR flight doing practice in VFR conditions (or when
conditions are VFR at the relevant airport).

If an instructor can't explain to a student (with a simple diagram)
what the fixes are for the common instrument approaches at the airport
they are doing their students a disfavor.


There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an
instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is no
requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute
charts for cross country airports.

-Robert

wrote:
If they do
regulate, I'd bet money on the rule requiring IFR pilots to announce
position rather than the FAA requiring IFR knowledge from VFR pilots.

The FAA currently has a non-regulatory advisory that recommends IFR
pilots include distance and direction from the airport in their position
reports:

"Pilots who wish to conduct instrument approaches should be particularly
alert for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the
flow of traffic. Position reports on the CTAF should include distance
and direction from the airport, as well as the pilot's intentions upon
completion of the approach."

From section 7 of:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/74c9017c9457e4ab862569d800780551/$FILE/AC90-66A.pdf

"Pilots who wish to conduct instrument approaches should be particularly
alert for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the
flow of traffic. Position reports on the CTAF should include distance
and direction from the airport, as well as the pilot's intentions upon
completion of the approach."

From section 7 of:http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...visoryCircular...

Well.

I think it boils down to this: a pilot should not depend on other
pilots going beyond what is required of them to be in the air.

A student pilot does not need to know anything about IFR operations to
be in the air. Can you count on him knowing what IFR announcements on
the radio mean? No.

A private pilot does not need to know anything about IFR operations to
be in the air. Can't count on him either.

I appreciate that it's a good idea to learn about IFR, and I am.
However, in my spare time studies of this I haven't read yet about
approach procedures or the radio announcements that describe it. I
wouldn't advise anyone with an IFR rating counting on me understanding
such communications.

The FAA doesn't advise that either.

On Jan 15, 12:55*pm, kontiki wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an
instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is no
requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute
charts for cross country airports.

Of course there "is no requirement...". No one said anything about
VFR pilots purchasing approach plates and teaching them IFR (perish the
mere thought!). Re-read my post. Where I trained (and where I now teach)
there are constantly people practicing instrument approaches and we
hear calls like "...N1234a is procedure turn inbound ILS23.." or
"N1234a is YUPPY inbound ILS 32..." Most students want to know what
that means. In any case it behooves an instructor to explain.. once
explained the student will no longer be ignorant and will ultimately
be a safer pilot when he's out soloing.

So do you disagree that the IFR pilot was wrong to use language that
other pilots may not understand? The IFR pilot would certainly be
foolish if he relied on all VFR pilots knowing the IFR waypoints and
approach fixes at each airport.

-Robert

"John" wrote:

But there is a requirement to obtain all relevant information for a flight
and I think there is a argument to be made that you should at least be aware
of both vfr and ifr reporting points in close proximity to your intended
landing point. and if you hear a radio report of someone inbound to a
airport that your flying in to and don't know where that point is, it
behooves you to ask .

Can't agree with you on this. I go to a lot of new airports and I
don't intend to know where every IFR position is.

Ron Lee

On Jan 15, 5:28*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:5fdc8536-11f5-4348-993f-
:

Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I
got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site,
landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a
landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the
tower ATC phrase book? Why would he tell me that landing was own risk
if he wasn't going to clear me to land?

BTW: It always struck me as odd that a Mooney and a 747 have the same
vis requirements on an ILS. A 1/2 mile is probably like 2 seconds in a
747 but an 1/8 mile is like 10 seconds in a Mooney.

No, usually it's classified by category. On some runways the vis
requirement is the smae, but on some it would be higher for a C or D
airplane. It's mostly down to the OCL.

Bertie

I understand that. On a standard ILS if a cat C is 1/2 mile vis I
believe a cat A should be 1/8 mile vis. The vis requirements should be
based on how many seconds the pilot can see down the runway. I can't
think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be
stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis
requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with
regard to precision approaches.

-robert

-Robert

On Jan 15, 5:36*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:0b1f9eb2-37b7-4f0c-b4c0-
:





On Jan 15, 12:55*pm, kontiki wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an
instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is no
requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute
charts for cross country airports.

Of course there "is no requirement...". No one said anything about
VFR pilots purchasing approach plates and teaching them IFR (perish the
mere thought!). Re-read my post. Where I trained (and where I now teach)
there are constantly people practicing instrument approaches and we
hear calls like "...N1234a is procedure turn inbound ILS23.." or
"N1234a is YUPPY inbound ILS 32..." Most students want to know what
that means. In any case it behooves an instructor to explain.. once
explained the student will no longer be ignorant and will ultimately
be a safer pilot when he's out soloing.

So do you disagree that the IFR pilot was wrong to use language that
other pilots may not understand? The IFR pilot would certainly be
foolish if he relied on all VFR pilots knowing the IFR waypoints and
approach fixes at each airport.

NOT WHAT HE SAID!

Sorry for shouting. Seemed appropriate for some reason.

That's why I posted that. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. I'm
saying IFR pilots should use proper phrasing and he's coming back with
VFR pilots should know IFR waypoints. Its not clear if he believes his
suggestion is a "nice extra" or if he believes it really soves the
problem at hand.

-robert