I dont want no stinking RSC......
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore
I dont want no stinking RSC......
Guess what? It's winter. I dont need to hear an RSC that calls 95% bare and dry, with 5% ice patches. Why cant you give an RSC IF asked for one, aand stop tripping all over yourselves to give them.....I've had RSC's for runways I landed on five minutes ago! All the northern strips are snow covered....what's the point of hearing ten or more RSC's when each and every one is the same?
I feel the same way Doc having to give that RSC with 5% ice patches along the rwy edges everytime. But based on the rules (in my case FS ManOps) we have to give it unless we know for sure you already have it from somewhere. It's one of those things that probably won't ever change since its the lawyers who run the show.
-
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 2783
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:51 pm
- Location: Mysteryville Castle
Could not agree more, The RSC should have its own frequency.gr8gazu wrote: At YYZ can the info at least be moved from the primary to the secondary ATIS? The RSC info takes way too much time to listen to just to get back to the other pertinent data.
I don't get it when you coming in to well thunder bay for example, it's been -2 and skc for the last week, and you have rsc on the atis saying that runway such and such is this, runway such and such that.
Make another frequency for this would be awesome, that way when iit is 100% bare and dry guys don't have to listen to the atis for 10 min to get the real pertinent info that is required in this situation.
cheers
Maybe we do assume too much but maybe common sense should be applied. Big Tstorm and gusty winds, maybe issue "standing water alert" in French!cpl_atc wrote:
Maybe you've been flying in there for the last week, but how about the guy ferrying the new PC12 in from overseas? Or the guy from KMSP on his first flight up there since being off for ten days? Or the charter flight coming in from Omaha? Or, or, or....
I think one of the first defences against incidents/accidents is not making assumptions about what you think is "known" information, no matter how obvious it may seem to you.
Insensitive I know, but just a demonstration that you can't cover all bases.
A simple "RSC available on secondary ATIS frequence of 131.0 due contamination" would certainly cover your concerns and minimize our exposure to lengthy ATIS messages.
Of course, everyone would be willing to pay the additional NavCan fees associated with the maintenance of additional equipment associated with the separate frequencies across the country...flyinhigh wrote:Hence, why I said, I agree there should be a seperate frequency.cpl_atc wrote:
I think one of the first defences against incidents/accidents is not making assumptions about what you think is "known" information, no matter how obvious it may seem to you.
...whoops, wrong thread.
Comes under the major "Tin plate your ass" attitude these days.
If (BIG IF) you were to come unstuck and heaven forbid, skidded off the end of the runway, lawyers would have a field day in asking why the hell wasn't the RSC provided.
I fully agree it sucks more than the chubby chick you went to high school with, but welcome to the 21st century.
If (BIG IF) you were to come unstuck and heaven forbid, skidded off the end of the runway, lawyers would have a field day in asking why the hell wasn't the RSC provided.
I fully agree it sucks more than the chubby chick you went to high school with, but welcome to the 21st century.
- invertedattitude
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:12 pm
But, we dont get them in the summer? And, I've seen conditions far worse after a rainfall in the summer, than most winter days? I've yet to hear an RSC make a difference in a go-no-go decision.....we're not talking fifteen inches of wet snow, that fell last night, or heavy freezing rain...and we all know it.
- invertedattitude
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:12 pm
Take for example the Southwest Crash in Chicago this winter.
Had the crew not recieved a RSC report, they could have easily blamed the incident on ATC for not properly informing them.
What other things should ATC cut out? Most modern airliners have TCAS, they know the traffics there long before ATC issues a traffic advisory, so well hell, since the pilot doesn't need it, lets throw that out as well?
There's a 100 things ATC provides to pilots that 99% of the time you will never need... its the 1% of the time that makes the difference.
RSC Reports influence pilots all the time, if you have a bad brake index it can affect which runway you would land on, or at least it should be entering your thought process at least.
Had the crew not recieved a RSC report, they could have easily blamed the incident on ATC for not properly informing them.
What other things should ATC cut out? Most modern airliners have TCAS, they know the traffics there long before ATC issues a traffic advisory, so well hell, since the pilot doesn't need it, lets throw that out as well?
There's a 100 things ATC provides to pilots that 99% of the time you will never need... its the 1% of the time that makes the difference.
RSC Reports influence pilots all the time, if you have a bad brake index it can affect which runway you would land on, or at least it should be entering your thought process at least.
- invertedattitude
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:12 pm
Is this entirely true? I've heard many a tower controller adivse pilots of standing water on the runway during heavy rain conditions.Doc wrote:But, we dont get them in the summer? And, I've seen conditions far worse after a rainfall in the summer, than most winter days? I've yet to hear an RSC make a difference in a go-no-go decision.....we're not talking fifteen inches of wet snow, that fell last night, or heavy freezing rain...and we all know it.
South West still landed. They still skidded off the end. That's my point. If you think RSC's "influence pilots all the time"....well, you just keep on dreaming in colour.
And, we do get the odd "standing water" advisory, no doubt about it, but we dont get the "Cat Lake runway is a phuquen swamp!"......but we do have to hear about the "quarter inch of new snow" all winter long!
I have never been influenced by an RSC...not one time. Why? Am I some kind of moron? Probably...but I also KNOW that it snowed last night, and I've allready deceided to make the flight.....my whole point is....I AM NOT AGAINST RSC's......I JUST THINK WE SHOULD REQUEST THEM.....would that not be easier on ATC and FSS as well??
And, we do get the odd "standing water" advisory, no doubt about it, but we dont get the "Cat Lake runway is a phuquen swamp!"......but we do have to hear about the "quarter inch of new snow" all winter long!
I have never been influenced by an RSC...not one time. Why? Am I some kind of moron? Probably...but I also KNOW that it snowed last night, and I've allready deceided to make the flight.....my whole point is....I AM NOT AGAINST RSC's......I JUST THINK WE SHOULD REQUEST THEM.....would that not be easier on ATC and FSS as well??
It would be easier on us too. But I can see the lawyers side of things. What I'd like is some different standards on when we have to give it to you unprompted rather than give it every single time. i.e. wish it were 5% ice we can skip it, 95% ice we give it. I guess we can suggest it, and who knows. The powers that be finally got rid of the "VFR not recommended statement", maybe they can loosen this up to.Doc wrote: JUST THINK WE SHOULD REQUEST THEM.....would that not be easier on ATC and FSS as well??
hydro
"VFR not recommended" would make a whole hell of a lot more sence than telling the whole friggen world about 1/4 inch snow drifts!! Unsolisited bad weather reports would almost make sence....how many aircraft have been lost pushing wx vs. the dreaded quarter inch snow drift??
- invertedattitude
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:12 pm
I see your point especially if the airport normally handles nothing larger than a King Air on a 8000 foot runwayDoc wrote:"VFR not recommended" would make a whole hell of a lot more sence than telling the whole friggen world about 1/4 inch snow drifts!! Unsolisited bad weather reports would almost make sence....how many aircraft have been lost pushing wx vs. the dreaded quarter inch snow drift??
To add some more to the conversation, I know here in YQM many times pilots ask the Tower for a more current RSC than in the ATIS many times. Sometimes even when there's not really any precip. Normally is RJ pilots however.
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:59 pm
- Location: Timmins, ON
- Contact: