A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CHEROKEE LANDS ON STINSON: ALL OK



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 21st 08, 01:02 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 01:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
B A R R Y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 517
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 02:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 02:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Gig 601Xl Builder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 683
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 05:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
JGalban via AviationKB.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 356
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 06:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,953
Default 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?

  #28  
Old May 21st 08, 06:17 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
B A R R Y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 517
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 07:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Gig 601Xl Builder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 683
Default 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  
Old May 21st 08, 09:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
stinson 108-3 cc0248037 Aviation Marketplace 0 February 13th 07 09:07 PM
stinson 108-3 cc0248037 Aviation Marketplace 1 November 7th 06 03:30 AM
stinson 108-3 cc0248037 Aviation Marketplace 1 November 4th 06 06:44 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 11:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.