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 |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
"Antoņio" wrote in message
ups.com... Slow flight would have been good had there been time. I was abeam the end of the runway when cleared to follow the Arrow. I was in B airspace (so it seems) around 20 seconds later. Where you aware, abeam the numbers, that you were approaching the Class B airspace? If so, why not just slow down when abeam the numbers? It doesn't take 20 seconds (or 30, which is what you wrote before) to slow an airplane down, and of course as you are slowing, you get more time. BFI has radar and is separating me from other traffic, right? That is not technically "radar service"? KBFI, as is the case at many Class D airports, has a radar display. In almost all cases (and as far as I know, this includes KBFI), the tower controller uses this strictly for informational purposes. They aren't providing radar services, nor do they provide separation any more than any tower without a radar display would (that is, they basically don't, even though it may sound like they are sometimes). Pete |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
"Antoņio" wrote in message
oups.com... How could I have done that in this case? You could ask the Class D controller to obtain a clearance for you, though given how busy you say the airport was at that time, I doubt he would have. You could have contacted the Class B approach controller yourself to obtain the clearance. The fact that neither of those methods would have been very practical at that point in time is immaterial. They still remain the only options for obtaining the required clearance. However, the question is moot, since you did not need to enter the Class B airspace, and thus did not need to obtain a clearance to do so. Pete |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "Jose" wrote in message m... It's not unreasonable. I've been told to turn off mode C, and if the radio is causing interference (a stuck mike comes to mind) it's a reasonable request. If your mike is stuck you're not going to hear a request to turn off your radio. Mike, many planes have more than one radio these days. moo |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message \ "Jose"
wrote in message m... It doesn't block the other frequency. It only broadcasts on one frequency. Maybe your tower won't do that. No tower will. They often broadcast on ground and tower frequencies simultaneously. moo |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
"Antoņio" wrote in message
oups.com... Gary Drescher wrote: I don't think there's anything in the FARs themselves that would let a pilot conclude that following ATC instructions is secondary to complying with the other FARs. That's not the way analogous situations work when driving a car, for example; there, police directives do take precedence over the traffic laws that would otherwise hold (even though there are other, implicit exceptions of the sort you mentioned; e.g. if you're instructed to stop your car ten feet above the pavement, you presumably can't be penalized for failing to comply). --Gary Well said and exactly my dilema which, as yet, is unresolved. Hm, I'm not sure why it's still unresolved. Even though the AIM does not set forth regulations as such, it is nonetheless an official document that the FAA expects pilots to be familiar with as an advisory about best practices. AIM 4-4-1a says: "An ATC clearance... IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION FOR A PILOT TO DEVIATE FROM ANY RULE, REGULATION, OR MINIMUM ALTITUDE." (capitalization in the original) And AIM 4-4-1b says: "If ATC issues a clearance that would cause a pilot to deviate from a rule or regulation... IT IS THE PILOT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO REQUEST AN AMENDED CLEARANCE." (capitalization in the original) Admittedly, these passages only talk about clearances, not instructions more generally. But it would make no sense for other instructions to override the FARs if a clearance--which is an especially formal kind of instruction--does not. (I'm not addressing emergency instructions here, since it goes without saying that emergencies take precedence over everything.) Although I'd be happier if the statement that the FARs override clearances were in the FARs rather than just the AIM, it still strikes me that these passages in the AIM resolve the question without ambiguity. Can you explain why you think otherwise? Thanks, Gary |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
On 29 May 2005 00:11:05 -0700, Antoņio wrote:
Slow flight would have been good had there been time. I was abeam the end of the runway when cleared to follow the Arrow. I was in B airspace (so it seems) around 20 seconds later. Antonio, Sounds to me, you may need to assess your own flying. Based on your statement above, sounds to me, that you were 20 seconds behind the airplane rather then ahead of the plane. FOR ME, by the time I am abeam the numbers, unless I am asked to keep my speed up, I am at my final approach speed of 70 knots in my Sundowner. This allows for a shorter final at this speed and I am taking a lot less real estate in my pattern. Allen |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
"Jose" wrote in message ... You were there? I didn't have to be. I was. You didn't understand what was happening. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
"Antoņio" wrote in message oups.com... Not so Pete... The controller told me to "follow the Arrow" . To do so *safely* (in my opinion) required I extend the downwind leg right into class B. But to do *safely* (in fact) probably didn't require you to extend the downwind leg right into Class B airspace. Where were you on the downwind when the instruction to follow the Arrow was issued and what were you flying? |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
"Antoņio" wrote in message ups.com... You mean flight into class B for landing at BFI is not *normally* required. In this particular case I maintain it was for safe separation. You can maintain that if you like, but that doesn't make it so. All it does is cause others to question your knowledge and abilities. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sports class tasking | [email protected] | Soaring | 12 | April 25th 05 01:32 PM |
Class III vs. Class II medical | G. Sylvester | Piloting | 11 | February 8th 05 06:41 PM |
One Design viability? | Stewart Kissel | Soaring | 41 | December 10th 03 03:27 AM |
RF interference issue again (esp. for E Drucker and Jim Weir and other RF wizards) | Snowbird | Home Built | 78 | December 3rd 03 09:10 PM |
RF interference issue again (esp. for E Drucker and Jim Weir and other RF wizards) | Snowbird | Owning | 77 | December 3rd 03 09:10 PM |