Steven P, McNicoll just ****ed me off

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Slightly, but having another airplane land on top of you delays your
departure even more.



Well, if the visibility is such that the arriving aircraft can't see you and
it lands on top of you, then it's unlikely that sitting kind of sideways
would allow you to see him.



Boy, I just checked my log book. I landed at Sarasota Florida on
runway 14 on March 10, 2000 on top of a black spot on the runway.

An honest-to-God FAA controller had cleared a plane for position and
hold and at the same time cleared another airplane to take off.

They hit at the intersection where the first plane was in position and
hold. The plane that hit them was an instructor with a student pilot.

For the life of me, I can't see why it happened, but the plane that
was in position and hold never had a chance to see the plane that ran
into them.

So what is so honest-to-God bad about not lining up perfectly on the
runway instead of stopping a little bit crossways to watch what is
happening on the runway?

And don't give me any excuses about one of the aircraft not obeying
ATC instructions. Neither plane did anything against ATC
instructions. Read the NTSB report. It was a human error on the part
of the controller.

Mike Weller

Steven was the tower controller? I thought he worked in Wisconsin.

On 17 Aug 2005 09:23:50 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

Steven was the tower controller? I thought he worked in Wisconsin.

Cute. I thought you were going to tell me that I can't spell.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124291160.a4b773a96257a25b104a0209edc5c8ac@o nlynews...

Boy, I just checked my log book. I landed at Sarasota Florida on
runway 14 on March 10, 2000 on top of a black spot on the runway.

An honest-to-God FAA controller had cleared a plane for position and
hold and at the same time cleared another airplane to take off.


I'm familiar with this incident. The local controller believed the Skyhawk
was departing full length because strip marking indicated that's where he
was and there was a Skyhawk in that position. The Skyhawk pilot did not
properly identify his position as being at an intersection downfield.



They hit at the intersection where the first plane was in position and
hold. The plane that hit them was an instructor with a student pilot.

For the life of me, I can't see why it happened, but the plane that
was in position and hold never had a chance to see the plane that ran
into them.


Did you not read the report? Did the aircraft departing full length have a
chance to see the plane downfield? Why did the Skyhawk pilot not hear the
takeoff clearance issued to the full length departure?



So what is so honest-to-God bad about not lining up perfectly on the
runway instead of stopping a little bit crossways to watch what is
happening on the runway?


How far off the runway alignment would a Skyhawk at an intersection need to
be in order to have an unobstructed view?



And don't give me any excuses about one of the aircraft not obeying
ATC instructions. Neither plane did anything against ATC
instructions. Read the NTSB report. It was a human error on the part
of the controller.


Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but not by
the local controller.

So, what ****ed you off?

Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:
(much snipped collision on the runway)

Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but
not by the local controller.

Wait a second... if the tower and ground controllers are two different
people...where and when do ground controllers give position & hold or
clearances for departure?

Neil

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:
(much snipped collision on the runway)

Errors were made by the ground controller and the Skyhawk pilot, but
not by the local controller.

Wait a second... if the tower and ground controllers are two different
people...where and when do ground controllers give position & hold or
clearances for departure?


The local controller issued a "taxi into position and hold" instruction to
an Skyhawk he believed to be at the end of the runway. He believed that
because the strip, which was prepared by the ground controller, was marked
to indicate a full length departure. The Skyhawk involved in the collision
called ready to go but did not indicate he was an intersection departure.
It so happened that there was a Skyhawk at the far end of the runway. It
was the Skyhawk at the full length position that the local controller
believed had called ready to go.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:53:32 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124291160.a4b773a96257a25b104a0209edc5c8ac@ onlynews...

Boy, I just checked my log book. I landed at Sarasota Florida on
runway 14 on March 10, 2000 on top of a black spot on the runway.

An honest-to-God FAA controller had cleared a plane for position and
hold and at the same time cleared another airplane to take off.



So, what ****ed you off?


Your know it all attitude.

Mike Weller

How far off the runway alignment would a Skyhawk at an intersection need to
be in order to have an unobstructed view?

30 degrees would do it. It would take about one second to straighten
out during the start of the takeoff roll, and since the takeoff roll is
a necessary maneuver to fly most 172s, there would be minimum ... er...
impact on the takeoff.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
news:1124304865.3ffa3812a56509dda6ca3417c2357737@o nlynews...

Your know it all attitude.


I never claimed to know it all, but I do know a lot. I think you're reading
things in to my messages.

"Jose" wrote in message
m...

30 degrees would do it.

It probably would, if the wing was transparent.