A tower-induced go-round

On Mar 22, 4:27 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...



Neither,,,because the Pilot incommand has the FINAL responsibility for
the safety of any given flight. That leaves out a controller that
spaces planes too closely and any FAA order that can't conform to a
given situation on short notice.

What controller spaces planes too closely?

FAR 91.3(a) states; "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that
aircraft." If a preceding properly-spaced aircraft uses his final authority
as to the operation of his aircraft and stops on the runway ahead of you,
forcing the tower controller to issue a go around, who would you hold
directly responsible?

You just don't give up, !!!! In the 25 years I have been flying in
EVERY instance I was cleared to land by a controller in a tight
spacing situation the call from the tower to the preceding plane was "
N12345 exit runway as soon as possible, landing aircraft on a 1/2 mile
final behind you" Jay stated there was no communication from that
tower to the offending aircraft stopped on the runway. So, my question
to you ,almighty controller, Isn't the tower operator responsible for
the traffic on 'HIS" runway? A simple one word answer will do. YES or
NO ? I can't wait to see how you will spin this one. GGGGG

I swore I wouldn't do this, but here goes....

On 3/16 you wrote:

"Having landed at OSH and SNF a few times, I knew I was spaced just
fine -- IF the 172 would only get off the danged runway."

On 3/18 you wrote:

"Face it, the controller should have had the 172 follow me in. He
misjudged the spacing."

Going from "spaced just fine" to "he misjudged the spacing" sure looks like
a change to me.

"Spaced just fine for Oshkosh" -- in pilot-speak -- means that I
probably won't die, but it's TOO DAMNED CLOSE FOR REGULAR OPERATIONS
AT A ONE-HORSE AIRPORT.

Get it now?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
...and I'll trust my
skills, and the skills of my fellow airmen before I EVER again trust a
guy on the ground with binoculars.

I just had the weirest flashback/visual of Arte Johnson, in that goofy
German costume on Laugh-In, peering over the sandbags with binoculars...

Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

To which I say: Either give the poor sap in the tower radar, or stay
home. Go away. Save our tax money and possibly our lives. Uncontrolled
airports work just fine, thank you very much, and I'll trust my
skills, and the skills of my fellow airmen before I EVER again trust a
guy on the ground with binoculars.

I don't agree. In the case of closely spaced airports with many kinds of
traffic, I would think it is good to know the local activity. An example;
Cleveland's Burke Lakefront airport (Class D) is close enough to Hopkin's
Class B's first layer (2000') that all local VFR is scooting under that,
and by the time you've left Burke's airspace to the East, you're in
Cuyahoga County airport's Class D space, which is still under Hopkin's
4,000. Both County and Burke have BizJet traffic as well as GA, and Burke
has a lot of helo traffic as well. I don't think that making those
airports uncontrolled would make that airspace safer. On some days it gets
your adrenalin flowing fast to fly in there.

Neil

wrote in message
oups.com...

You just don't give up, !!!!


Would you give up if you were in my position?



In the 25 years I have been flying in
EVERY instance I was cleared to land by a controller in a tight
spacing situation the call from the tower to the preceding plane was "
N12345 exit runway as soon as possible, landing aircraft on a 1/2 mile
final behind you" Jay stated there was no communication from that
tower to the offending aircraft stopped on the runway. So, my question
to you ,almighty controller, Isn't the tower operator responsible for
the traffic on 'HIS" runway? A simple one word answer will do. YES or
NO ? I can't wait to see how you will spin this one. GGGGG


I'll be happy to answer your question, right after you answer mine. That's
only fair, I asked first. To make it easy for you, here it is again:

FAR 91.3(a) states; "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that
aircraft." If a preceding properly-spaced aircraft uses his final authority
as to the operation of his aircraft and stops on the runway ahead of you,
forcing the tower controller to issue a go around, who would you hold
directly responsible?

A simple one word answer will do. PILOT or CONTROLLER?

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

Ah, forever the non-radar Class D controller's cop-out. "We only
provide sequencing, not separation."


What makes that a cop-out?



In other words, you THINK you know where we are, and you HOPE we'll
follow your directions, and you PRAY it will all work out, and we had
BETTER follow your instructions (or else!) -- but, oh, shoot, it
*didn't* work out when I directed both of you to land on the same
runway? Dang, sorry about that -- we were only providing sequencing
(not!) -- it was up to YOU to not actually hit each other.


Not me, I've never worked a non-radar tower. I also doubt those that do
think that.



To which I say: Either give the poor sap in the tower radar, or stay
home. Go away. Save our tax money and possibly our lives. Uncontrolled
airports work just fine, thank you very much, and I'll trust my
skills, and the skills of my fellow airmen before I EVER again trust a
guy on the ground with binoculars.


So you'll be driving to AirVenture from now on.



We don't need Class D'oh! faux air traffic "control", anywhere.


I can't see any competent pilot having the problems that you have with Class
D airspace. It's become obvious the problem is you, your skills are just
not up to it. For your own safety and the safety of others you should just
avoid Class D airspace until you upgrade your skills and knowledge.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

I swore I wouldn't do this, but here goes....


To thine own self be true.



On 3/16 you wrote:

"Having landed at OSH and SNF a few times, I knew I was spaced just
fine -- IF the 172 would only get off the danged runway."

On 3/18 you wrote:

"Face it, the controller should have had the 172 follow me in. He
misjudged the spacing."

Going from "spaced just fine" to "he misjudged the spacing" sure looks
like
a change to me.


"Spaced just fine for Oshkosh" -- in pilot-speak -- means that I
probably won't die, but it's TOO DAMNED CLOSE FOR REGULAR OPERATIONS
AT A ONE-HORSE AIRPORT.


That's swell, Jay, but "Spaced just fine for Oshkosh" did not appear in any
of your previous messages.



Get it now?


I sure do. You hold an incorrect understanding of Class D airspace and ATC
and you hold controllers responsible for pilot's actions.

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:55:40 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
. net:

For your own safety and the safety of others you should just
avoid Class D airspace until you upgrade your skills and knowledge.

Oh, his skills are probably up to the task, but his expectations are
inconsistent with regulations. He really needs to get his IFR rating.

On Mar 22, 2:15 pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...



You just don't give up, !!!!

Would you give up if you were in my position?



In the 25 years I have been flying in
EVERY instance I was cleared to land by a controller in a tight
spacing situation the call from the tower to the preceding plane was "
N12345 exit runway as soon as possible, landing aircraft on a 1/2 mile
final behind you" Jay stated there was no communication from that
tower to the offending aircraft stopped on the runway. So, my question
to you ,almighty controller, Isn't the tower operator responsible for
the traffic on 'HIS" runway? A simple one word answer will do. YES or
NO ? I can't wait to see how you will spin this one. GGGGG

I'll be happy to answer your question, right after you answer mine. That's
only fair, I asked first. To make it easy for you, here it is again:

FAR 91.3(a) states; "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that
aircraft." If a preceding properly-spaced aircraft uses his final authority
as to the operation of his aircraft and stops on the runway ahead of you,
forcing the tower controller to issue a go around, who would you hold
directly responsible?

A simple one word answer will do. PILOT or CONTROLLER?

Hell, Thats an easy answer. Even a caveman or a pilot can answer that.
G

Read this real slow thickhead...

A competent tower controller that just stuck a slower and higher
landing trafffic in front of another aircraft that he/she ALREADY
cleared to land should have stated to the preceding plane " exit the
runway without delay, landing traffic on a 1/2 mile final" while the
preceding plane was still on the rollout. He/she should not have
waited for the guy/girl to make a complete stop on the runway. If you
just go back and reread this whole thread it should become crystal
clear to a sane and competent controller that Jay was given a go
around because of the tower controller was asleep at the switch. There
are those of us who make a living in the private sector and have to
prove ourselves every day to stay employed. Then there is the
government workers who BS their way though life and the system to make
it to retirement, milking the system the whole time.... Jay and I and
alot of others work for the private sector and are surviving in the
black. Your employer is the US government who is 9+ trillion in the
red. It is either your move or checkmate on our part...

In closing I still admit that Steven. P. Mc Nicoll knows his regs
probably better then most other aviation people ,, But he forgot his
common sense at the office..

Blueskies and tailwinds......

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

Oh, his skills are probably up to the task, but his expectations are
inconsistent with regulations. He really needs to get his IFR rating.


If he can't handle Class D airspace he certainly can't handle the IFR
system.