If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
"B A R R Y" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:42:38 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Have you seen anything which prohibits such discussions? Have you seen anything which prohibits one pilot from surrendering the right-of-way granted by FAR 91.113 to another pilot? I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G You didn't. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
On Tue, 20 May 2008 19:02:46 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: You didn't. I didn't think so, but I didn't want Larry to turn me in. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
"B A R R Y" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 May 2008 19:02:46 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: You didn't. I didn't think so, but I didn't want Larry to turn me in. In another thread today Larry expressed a preference for incorrect procedure. Go figure. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
B A R R Y wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:42:38 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Have you seen anything which prohibits such discussions? Have you seen anything which prohibits one pilot from surrendering the right-of-way granted by FAR 91.113 to another pilot? I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G While you might have surrendered ROW via radio I doubt the FAA will find that it relieved the other pilot from his responsibility under the regs. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:
I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G While you might have surrendered ROW via radio I doubt the FAA will find that it relieved the other pilot from his responsibility under the regs. That's an interesting question. Let's say I'm on final and I call you on the CTAF and tell you that I'm coming in slow and you have plenty of time to depart before I get there. You can see me on final, but you can't really tell how fast I'm moving. You go ahead and start your departure role, and I end up colliding with you somewhere down the runway. Are you at fault for not giving way to traffic on final? Even if I advised you to go ahead? For you nitpickers that will claim that you should be able to tell the speed and distance of an aircraft on final from the runup area, assume the vis is 3 miles and I'm flying a helicopter. For the record, I give way to other aircraft all the time when I have the ROW. They are usually bigger, faster and burning a lot more fuel. I like flying, so I don't have a problem remaining aloft for a few extra minutes. We coordinate on CTAF and I've never had a problem. Much like when I'm talking to ATC, if there's any question about what each of us is going to do, I ask for clarification before proceeding. John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) -- Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
On Tue, 20 May 2008 19:50:57 -0400, B A R R Y
wrote in : On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:42:38 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Have you seen anything which prohibits such discussions? Have you seen anything which prohibits one pilot from surrendering the right-of-way granted by FAR 91.113 to another pilot? I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G While I am fully aware that it is common practice for aircraft participating in the CTAF self-announcement position broadcast system at uncontrolled air fields to negotiate via two-way radio, despite it being neither recommended in FAA published Advisory Circulars nor being mentioned in federal regulations, my view is that if such negotiation hadn't been conducted in this incident, the mishap may not have occurred. Are you are able to appreciate the logic of that point of view in this incident? Implicit in that analysis is the question, by what authority is the airman who negotiates right-of-way, contrary to what the Administrator has codified in federal regulation 91.113(g), empowered to override those regulations? Are you able to cite a regulation, other than 91.3(b), or another authoritative source that grants an airman that authority to deviate from federal regulations? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Lou wrote in news:ee8fa5a7-9927-4c7c-8576- : Im very impressed on the ability of the stinson on not collapsing. Lou it's a real airplane,. not a beer can! Nice thing about the older airplanes, especially the rag and tube ones, is you can rebuild them from the data plate up if you want to. they'e also safer in an accident. You carry your own roll cage around with you. Bertie Considering that most of the older "rag and tube" aircraft employ a coating of powdered aluminum (AKA rocket fuel) and highly flammable dope, your chances of surviving a controlled crash in the Cherokee are much better. :-) |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
On Wed, 21 May 2008 08:22:33 -0500, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:42:38 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Have you seen anything which prohibits such discussions? Have you seen anything which prohibits one pilot from surrendering the right-of-way granted by FAR 91.113 to another pilot? I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G While you might have surrendered ROW via radio I doubt the FAA will find that it relieved the other pilot from his responsibility under the regs. Possibly... But I'm still not landing if I can't see him. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
B A R R Y wrote:
On Wed, 21 May 2008 08:22:33 -0500, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:42:38 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: Have you seen anything which prohibits such discussions? Have you seen anything which prohibits one pilot from surrendering the right-of-way granted by FAR 91.113 to another pilot? I've surrendered my ROW via a two way conversation. I hope I haven't broken any regs. G While you might have surrendered ROW via radio I doubt the FAA will find that it relieved the other pilot from his responsibility under the regs. Possibly... But I'm still not landing if I can't see him. Fully agreed but since we weren't there and didn't see what the pilots involved saw we can only use this accident as a starting place for a hypothetical discussion and hopefully learn something from it. There are a few facts though. Considering what we know or at least think we know the Cherokee had the ROW. The regs give it to him. No where do the regs give a pilot on CTAS the authorization to give away the ROW. Given that, the Stinson pilot can be found at fault for violation of 91.113. Now we get to the Cherokee pilot. He THOUGHT he negotiated away the ROW. The fact that he didn't makes no difference. But it does prove that he knew there was another airplane down there and that alone should have made him hyper-observant. So the FAA have a real good case against him for reckless and careless. What should have happened in all this was the Cherokee and the Stinson pilots thought the Stinson had time to take the runway and take-off and that's what they tried. The Stinson pilot lost sight of the Cherokee and knew he would the moment he took the runway. Before the Cherokee loss sight of the Stinson (which high wing and low wing had nothing to do with it was the nose of the Cherokee that was in the way) the Cherokee should have broken off the approach. If for some reason I can't think of they never had each other in sight or especially if the Cherokee never had the Stinson in sight the Cherokee should have broken off the approach if he had any reason to think the Stinson was on the runway. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in message news:847dd43febab4@uwe... That's an interesting question. Let's say I'm on final and I call you on the CTAF and tell you that I'm coming in slow and you have plenty of time to depart before I get there. You can see me on final, but you can't really tell how fast I'm moving. You go ahead and start your departure role, and I end up colliding with you somewhere down the runway. Are you at fault for not giving way to traffic on final? Even if I advised you to go ahead? For you nitpickers that will claim that you should be able to tell the speed and distance of an aircraft on final from the runup area, assume the vis is 3 miles and I'm flying a helicopter. Why do you even bother with runways when you're flying a helicopter? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
stinson 108-3 | cc0248037 | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | February 13th 07 08:07 PM |
stinson 108-3 | cc0248037 | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | November 7th 06 02:30 AM |
stinson 108-3 | cc0248037 | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | November 4th 06 05:44 PM |
FS Stinson 108-2 | Robert Little | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | April 11th 06 01:08 AM |
stinson stc | [email protected] | Home Built | 7 | December 10th 05 10:12 PM |