Radio usage plea

[Shiny Side Up]

One of my personal pet peeves is how some guys seem to go out of their way to give student pilots grief. Its usually the guys in the PPL IFR crowd though its not exclusive to them. I will say most of the commercial operators I've seen are usually pretty helpful, so thanks to those of you who are out there who have taken a little bit of patientce with some poor Joe out by himself for the first time. Its not hard usually to figure out who's a student and who isn't out there, so give them a bit of space and time.

[spaner]

jump154, do you want to know what it is that they should have done. Or is it that you want to know how to do it when you get there?
On the ATF as apposed to Centre or Enroute.

The standard for these calls is that they are made in the "blind" with VFR reporting positions and procedural references. Regardless of WX, or procedure type, ie. IFR vs VFR.

They are learning too don't forget, but the calls made were simulated atc requirement; at best.

AND, once a contact has been made, "in the blind calls" END. Now they are "direct"...to you, AND the language and information given, SHOULD be modified for the understanding of the conflict, again, that's you.

"this-place" traffic..fastman-1, overhead the field @2000, SE bound to intercept the 12DME arc for GPS 18, landing in 10.
"fastman-1, slow-poke-2 mid-left-downwind 18, continuous circuits "this-place"
"slow-poke-2, understood, we will be circling at 12 miles away from the field @2000 until final for 18. We will call you 10 final for 18 and workout the circuit"
"roger"
"fastman-1, 12 SE "this-place" @2000, DME arc for gps 18, landing in 5"
"fastman-1, turning 10 mile final for the overshoot 18 in 2; "this-place". slow-poke-2, what is your position......

as apposed to,

"fastman-1, slow-poke trainer-2, over RONTO for WETCO landing full-stop 18 in 5"
"roger, spacing looks good for fastman-1, intercepting the arc @ BEPOA, we'll call WETCO"
"Roger, we'll call you on the back-track"

Note, I think that it's wrong to also have the trainer making simulated ATC calls, on the ATF and/or dead-calls. Causes simulation confusion. Make the proper calls for the current location and situation. It you want to make the ATC calls, then actually talk to ATC, and make the actual calls. Then the student will actually know what to do in an actual situation.

Simulated vs actual?
Try doing a few procedures on an RCO/MF while on the base radio sipp'in your coffee. Now that is simulated. Think you learn anything?

[jump154]

jump154, do you want to know what it is that they should have done. Or is it that you want to know how to do it when you get there......

Not exactly - my point was there was a lot of transmissions that meant absolutely nothing to me. "ABCDE, THEYR next" does nothing for me working out where they are, apart from making me worry that I'm going to get ploughed into by a faster aircraft..... The only thing that was meaningful was the intial "overhead the field at 2000" - so then I knew he was above and turning away, but where did he go?

I think what was missing was "Landing in 15 minutes" - if I had heard that, then I'd know not to worry on this circuit - maybe in a couple. Even when they called 12 mile final, still no ETA at the field.... Decided to keep doing my circuits the standard way and keep my head on a swivel, but still basically worried there was an aircraft out there, coming to where I was, but no idea from which direction and when.

[Colonel Sanders]

VFR pilots not understanding cryptic IFR radio calls is exactly a new topic.

This was discussed decades ago, and I suspect that if there was a simple
solution to that problem, it would have been solved before you were born.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I don't see this as very complicated. If you are flying a simulated IFR approach then all the calls should be exactly the same as if you VFR. The unique to the approach calls (eg OBGOB inbound) should be "simulated" inside the cockpit.

If you are on a IFR clearance but operating in VFR conditions then a requirement for the exercise of basic airmanship is for you to provide the necessary information to allow other traffic to know where you are and what you are doing. The most common way is to provide a distance and bearing (eg 10 South descending through 3000 airport in 3 minutes).

Being on a IFR clearance but operating in VFR does not give you any additional privileges over VFR traffic. It is up to you to fit your self into the circuit like everybody else. One of the most egregious examples of this was one beautiful clear and bright day in Tofino. Some clown in a Mooney came in on the GPS approach. The only position calls were the approach way points and he insisted on joining a straight in requiring 2 airplanes ahead of him to extend on the downwind. It was chaos because nobody knew where he was because repeated requests he give a geographic location he instead insisted that he was "IFR" and would give his reports in reference to the GPS approach waypoints

A final note for inbound IFR traffic. Good airmanship also means showing some consideration. So for example the other day at Nanaimo I was pleased to see a C 150 announce he was going to extend his downwind to allow a jet inbound on the approach continue for a straight in landing.

[iflyforpie]

Ha! Reminds me of CMA calling into Penticton on a 20 mile final. We say we are joining base over the lakeshore (5 miles from the airport) and they whine 'but we're on final!'. I'm pretty sure we were shut down and parked before we heard the reversing props.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Ha! Reminds me of CMA calling into Penticton on a 20 mile final. We say we are joining base over the lakeshore (5 miles from the airport) and they whine 'but we're on final!'. I'm pretty sure we were shut down and parked before we heard the reversing props.

I had a similar case with a regional T-Prop operator who expected the skies to part for the "SkyGod" on a long straight in. I could have helped him out by extending my downwind in my little bug smasher but he was such a jerk I turned base at the usual place. As soon as I turned final he demands I keep the speed up, so I said OK I will fly " Ref +5 "

I know it was unprofessional, but it sure was satisfying

[Colonel Sanders]

my little bug smasher ... he demands I keep the speed up

Heh. Two can play at that game. In my tiny Pitts I am comfortable approaching
the airport with all the knobs forward. Makes a glorious sound, and an easy
200 mph in the descent, which I can keep until very short final when the throttle
goes all the way back, the 3 blades go flat and toss you forward into your harness.

If you time it right, you plop the mains on the numbers at 120 mph and sail down
the runway with your tail up in the air. Sean Tucker, Skip Stewart and Freddy
Cabanas love that approach.

Never had ATC complain about 200 mph being too slow on very short final.
That's F-104 territory, and I'm not sure many turboprops, regardless of all
the glorious white shirts and gold bars in the cockpit, approach faster than
a -104.

I love descending in the C421, too. You can really get it humping. The
objective is to have ATC give me a speed reduction for jet traffic in front
of me

[FlyGy]

Reading these posts from the various professional pilots here about how they cut in front of aircraft on "final" or try to rush other aircraft on final kinda makes me wonder about all those CPLs who hate us PPLs for pulling stunts like that....

...is it really the PPLs who are the problem or CPLs flying their bug smashers and pissing off the other CPLs.

Just jesting gents.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Reading these posts from the various professional pilots here about how they cut in front of aircraft on "final" or try to rush other aircraft on final kinda makes me wonder about all those CPLs who hate us PPLs for pulling stunts like that....

...is it really the PPLs who are the problem or CPLs flying their bug smashers and pissing off the other CPLs.

Just jesting gents.

"Professional" has nothing to do with what license you hold, it is ultimately a reflection of your character. One of the most professional pilots I know flies on a PPL and the worst pilot I have ever met had an ATPL..........

And for the record I did not "cut off" the T prop as I was already in the circuit and he was arriving on a straight in. What I did do was not elect to help him out by either extending my downwind or speeding up on final because I usually only extend "professional courtesies" to pilots who demonstrate professional levels of airmanship, something that is totally independent of license held or airplane type flown and was totally absent in the arriving "Skygod".

[Colonel Sanders]

the worst pilot I have ever met had an ATPL

Oooh, that smarts!!

[767]

As soon as I turned final he demands I keep the speed up, so I said OK I will fly " Ref +5 "

If Trey Kule or AuxBatOn were in your place, they wouldve probably told him to stfu.

[trey kule]

I cant speak for aux bat, but that is way to crude and unsubtle for me.
I save those remarks on the radio for the loud mouthed instructors who play ATC.
I like to ask for an estimate..Ask twice to confirm it....then I start timing.
None of these 20 milers can ever do an estimate worth a darn..Look at the GPS and blab the time..No thought that they are in a descent and going to slow down.

Worst oneI ever heard was a 5 minute estimate that took 11 mins...(IIRC)

Oh,,,and I make sure to stay on frequencey so I can cheerfully remind them of their error and why I did not bother to take any real notice of them....it is all about helping out your fellow pilot.

On the other hand, I could use the 767 pilot-ATC and issue them instructions..That , I am sure, would be welcome.

[767]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nyvhfUo ... re=related[/youtube]

[jump154]

jump154, do you want to know what it is that they should have done. Or is it that you want to know how to do it when you get there......

Not exactly - my point was there was a lot of transmissions that meant absolutely nothing to me. "ABCDE, THEYR next" does nothing for me working out where they are, apart from making me worry that I'm going to get ploughed into by a faster aircraft..... The only thing that was meaningful was the intial "overhead the field at 2000" - so then I knew he was above and turning away, but where did he go?

I think what was missing was "Landing in 15 minutes" - if I had heard that, then I'd know not to worry on this circuit - maybe in a couple. Even when they called 12 mile final, still no ETA at the field.... Decided to keep doing my circuits the standard way and keep my head on a swivel, but still basically worried there was an aircraft out there, coming to where I was, but no idea from which direction and when.

Last night, same field, similar situation, perfect call.

"Fast Plane, 20 miles out, will be at field in 5 minutes, will be doign GPS approach and landing on long runway"

I knew exactly what was going to impact me, and could plan accordingly (in this case, decided not to do one last circuit) -especially as his runway was not the one the rest of us were using due to length requirements. Absolutely perfect.

Of course, I was jealous that I could not do 20 miles in 5 minutes

[Colonel Sanders]

I could not do 20 miles in 5 minutes

Neither could he, if he was going to land out of the approach.

That's an average of 240 knots groundspeed, from where
he was, to touchdown on the runway.

He can't indicate more than 250 knots below 10,000 feet, and
he has to slow down on final well below 250 knots if he's going
to land, so it's impossible for him to average 240 knots over
that 20 mile segment.

The above gets even more improbable if he was not landing
in zero wind. Any headwind on final approach would reduce
his groundspeed even more.

Even a MiG-21 or F-104 or SR-71 is going to slow down to 170
knots or so on short final. Was your rocketboy flying something
hotter than these boring aircraft? It must have been something
considerably faster than the pokey SR-71 which is only good for
mach 3.2

[jump154]

Should have bet on it - I knew when typing that someone would pick up on the numbers not making sense - but that's how I remember it. Next time I'll take a better transcript

But not to loose the point, I had a good idea of what was going to happen, confirmed by watching the faster plane land as I was tidying up my aircraft after the flight. Much better than my previous example.

[trey kule]

Jumpster....from my post a few back

None of these 20 milers can ever do an estimate worth a darn..Look at the GPS and blab the time..No thought that they are in a descent and going to slow down.

Worst oneI ever heard was a 5 minute estimate that took 11 mins...(IIRC)

Oh,,,and I make sure to stay on frequencey so I can cheerfully remind them of their error and why I did not bother to take any real notice of them....it is all about helping out your fellow pilot.

Feel free to use my technique....embarrassment seems to be a good learning tool sometimes

[coreydotcom]

What's really a pity is that the gay porn star from
Quebec that just mailed the body parts, didn't kill a
few people who end every radio transmission with
"Conflicting Traffic, Please Advice <aircraft make,
model and registration> on <frequency>.

See, our legal system gives volume discounts, and
why couldn't the gay porn star killer from Quebec
have helped us out?

I don't see why you twice felt the need to point out he is from Quebec. I am thus compelled to inform you he is from Ontario (Peterborough, I believe). No hostility intended.

[Rookie50]

Uncontrolled radio procedure...a pet peeve of mine. One of the worst is idiots that fly right by a busy uncontrolled airport, like within 2 or 3 miles, on a sunny weekend, without a radio call either on 126.70 or more importantly the ad freq., just above circuit height. legal? Sure. Smart? No way. This happened to me while decesending for the (straight in) downwind 3 miles from a busy uncontrolled field. No reported conflicts on either frequency, I announce my intentions, and at 3 miles and 500 above circuit height a guy appears transiting at a right angle to me and the active runway, not talking or listening apparently. Not too bright.....if I am doing a low level cc for some reason I call up traffic at the busier uncontrolled fields, when passing nearby with my position, intentions and altitude....and never transiting closer than 5 miles when near circuit heights....

[schmoo]

Uncontrolled radio procedure...a pet peeve of mine. One of the worst is idiots that fly right by a busy uncontrolled airport, like within 2 or 3 miles, on a sunny weekend, without a radio call either on 126.70 or more importantly the ad freq., just above circuit height. legal? Sure. Smart? No way...

Reminds me of the terrible midair that occurred just north of Brampton 5 or 6 years ago. I don't know the details, but where it happened is just a few miles north of the airport where Pearson's rings has most VFR traffic flying around 2300 give or take 100'. It's a pretty busy corridor and I always get a little tense around that area.

Reading this post has me thinking....when coming into Brampton, I only scan the ATF, but now I'm thinking I should be checking the en route as well.

[Colonel Sanders]

I might humbly suggest that when coming into Brampton,
you LOOK OUTSIDE.

Anyone that relies upon their VHF comm as a form of
VFR separation is in for a world of hurt. You keep playing
Russian Roulette like that, sooner or later it's not going
to be pretty.

[shitdisturber]

I don't see why you twice felt the need to point out he is from Quebec. I am thus compelled to inform you he is from Ontario (Peterborough, I believe). No hostility intended.

I'm the same way. I take pains to point out that Stephen Harper is from Toronto, not Alberta!

[shitdisturber]

One of my personal pet peeves is how some guys seem to go out of their way to give student pilots grief. Its usually the guys in the PPL IFR crowd though its not exclusive to them. I will say most of the commercial operators I've seen are usually pretty helpful, so thanks to those of you who are out there who have taken a little bit of patientce with some poor Joe out by himself for the first time. Its not hard usually to figure out who's a student and who isn't out there, so give them a bit of space and time.

Can't I do both?

[Lurch]

just above circuit height. legal? Sure. Smart? No way.

Odd how I read the CARs it is Illegal

602.96 (1) This section applies to persons operating VFR or IFR aircraft at or in the vicinity of an uncontrolled or controlled aerodrome.

(4) Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit, no pilot-in-command shall operate an aircraft at an altitude of less than 2,000 feet over an aerodrome except for the purpose of landing or taking off or if the aircraft is operated pursuant to subsection (5).