Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
I don't normally post on here anymore but I'll make an exception.Cat Driver wrote:TWAS sometimes I just get lazy and pick on the easy ones...small penguin never fails to entertain me.
In a case like that, airmanship dictates. Yes, I would have switch the approach for the other runway and tell FSS so. What's wrong with that?IFRATC wrote:YQA is a strange place for us ATC because of freq coverage. IFR a/c in decent will be lost on atc freq because it is based in YYZ. Traffic or weather depending, the a/c cannot necessarily request or get the visual from us. I would say the split is 60/40 whether the a/c goes over to the MF with the approach or goes over and then gets it relayed by FSS.
My initial point though was this. If the a/c has been cleared for a specific approach it won't deviate from this. The Lear could not just transition to another approach to comply with VFR circuits. I think the biggest factor here as mentioned, is courtesy and proper airmanship. EVEN IF the Lear cancelled IFR and joined the circuit someone would have to move. I have many many years of flying experience both civil and military, I know what I would have done in that cessna.
IFRATC
You cannot just switch the type of IFR approach or the runway that you are landing without getting a new clearance from the Center. ATC may be basing separation with another arrival or departure on your cleared approach.AuxBatOn wrote:In a case like that, airmanship dictates. Yes, I would have switch the approach for the other runway and tell FSS so. What's wrong with that?IFRATC wrote:YQA is a strange place for us ATC because of freq coverage. IFR a/c in decent will be lost on atc freq because it is based in YYZ. Traffic or weather depending, the a/c cannot necessarily request or get the visual from us. I would say the split is 60/40 whether the a/c goes over to the MF with the approach or goes over and then gets it relayed by FSS.
My initial point though was this. If the a/c has been cleared for a specific approach it won't deviate from this. The Lear could not just transition to another approach to comply with VFR circuits. I think the biggest factor here as mentioned, is courtesy and proper airmanship. EVEN IF the Lear cancelled IFR and joined the circuit someone would have to move. I have many many years of flying experience both civil and military, I know what I would have done in that cessna.
IFRATC
COCO THE MONKEY wrote:I used to fly a Lear 24 and in training we flew circuits with a flock of little guys. ref+30 worked for maneuvering which came out to about 150KIAS. We kept the circuits outside and a 500' higher than the smaller circuit traffic and had no problem fitting in. The wider and higher circuit kept our circuit times to about the same as the others. In this situation we would have gladly fitted into the circuit pattern no problem. There is no excuse for faster traffic to go against the pattern in this case, just poor airmanship. And by the way, we're not talking about a circling procedure here, just a simple VFR circuit to another runway other than that with which you are aligned when still way out. It was a matter of pride to us that our airmanship was up to mixing it in with the slower guys.
They clear you for an approach. You tell them what you'll do. If you tell FSS that you changed you mind for valid reason, they have ways to communicate that to center. I've done it a few times myself without any issues.Mac wrote:You cannot just switch the type of IFR approach or the runway that you are landing without getting a new clearance from the Center. ATC may be basing separation with another arrival or departure on your cleared approach.AuxBatOn wrote:In a case like that, airmanship dictates. Yes, I would have switch the approach for the other runway and tell FSS so. What's wrong with that?IFRATC wrote:YQA is a strange place for us ATC because of freq coverage. IFR a/c in decent will be lost on atc freq because it is based in YYZ. Traffic or weather depending, the a/c cannot necessarily request or get the visual from us. I would say the split is 60/40 whether the a/c goes over to the MF with the approach or goes over and then gets it relayed by FSS.
My initial point though was this. If the a/c has been cleared for a specific approach it won't deviate from this. The Lear could not just transition to another approach to comply with VFR circuits. I think the biggest factor here as mentioned, is courtesy and proper airmanship. EVEN IF the Lear cancelled IFR and joined the circuit someone would have to move. I have many many years of flying experience both civil and military, I know what I would have done in that cessna.
IFRATC
Gillette,GilletteNorth wrote:Mag, sorry, you are like every person I've ever talked to trying to make the situations seem more complicated than they are. Even three aircraft in the circuit doing circuits takes only a few seconds to sort...
You continue to imply the largest aggravating factor is FSS talking too much...
Once FSS confirm each aircraft is aware of each other, there is no further need to continue 'tying up' the frequency. That's why pilot's are required to make the mandatory calls, the updates ensure the FSS don't have to repeatedly call them.
IFR aircraft trying to airfile on the MF are a real source of problems with regards to frequency use. However I've found this to be extremely rare. If an aircraft confirms it's unable to contact the FIC using the enroute freq's and insists FSS take the flight plan, we must comply. Don't blame us for ensuring their safety is covered vis-a-vis flight plans if they do insist. Maybe you should talk to the pilots and insist they file on the ground.
I've said it before, if pilot's think there is a problem with the frequency being so crowded that they can't be bothered to make calls, or respond, either stop flying or call the appropriate Nav Canada manager and make your views known. This sort of thing is taken seriously.
Ummmmmm, Crazy Aviator, could you please tell me how you are "adhearing" to the REGS, when you state that you don't join the circuit in accordance with the REGS?crazyaviator wrote:I have stumbled upon this topic only this evening and have read most of the replies. A little background, I live near CYQA, am an AME and commercial pilot and I believe I know the offender in the 172. I have flown out of Muskoka on and off for 20 years.
MR. SF, most likely the person involved in ALL the Cadors is a difficult and sad person. I wish the best for him! He has violated regulations, Previously lost his AMO, and continues to cut corners in many things! I was the unfortunate soul who did an annual inspection on his plane ( RVX) and i believe there were over 120 "snags". It took 3 months before he would say " Hi" again to me. ( Did he finally realize that i desired to save his ass and his students asses ? ) We fixed most snags , 2 notable ones that he didnt want to have fixed were 1) there are NO door handles for closing the doors on the plane and 2) Every time the rudder was moved by hand there was buckling of the rudder structure DUE to a bent vertical fin!! ( I fought the AMO to have these snags included in the logbook signoff ) This rudder only was repaired at the annual I did due to CRACKING of the spar! The bent Vert fin was causing cracking of the rudder spar! Ive been told his other plane is a piece of junk. As an AME, i was hardly supported by the AMO with whom i was employed with. Mr. SF has over a $20,000 debt with this AMO and the annuals have been POORLY done , perhaps because of this fact and the fact that loosing this customer may well also entail loosing the $20,000 debt!
I have since resigned from this company to persue other things,,,,
John Donaldson , by the way is a great person and is a professional in all ways !
Concerning circuit procedures, ATC, FSS and the remoteness, I applaud the FSS over the years, having to work with the "manops" and an airport that has a mix of local and small aircraft AND business jet celebrities flying in to their cottages. I have , on occasion, taken off on 36 and done test flying out of the circuit and zone and landed on 36 , joined base, joined long final etc etc etc ,,,,there has been no negative reply from ATC. ( I do all these things with safety in mind, being mindful of all or any traffic) and i adhere to the regs !! When there is a mix or a jet in the circuit or arriving (( Jets are never in the circuit lol )) I give them preference. Concerning the cadors incident, i believe both pilots were wrong BUT Mr. SF? was likely trying to "fix" a problem that he perceives is "wrong" . Understandably, as LOCO mentioned in his eloquent reply, jets CAN mix and mingle at local airports with small planes! Small planes, however , aught to be accomodating to the jets even though some jet pilots want all traffic to HEED their arrival with due respect and accomodate their expedicious arrival because of their precious cargo lol.
Should the 2 small planes have extended their downwind ? YES, Should the inbound jet conform to the "landing runway in a safe manner" Yes ! Is there too much "chatter" at YQA ? Yes, but only in times of congestion and mostly because of PILOT ignorance and poor phraseology. MOST pilots dont know that FSS communications for YQA are mostly advisory in nature and that the pilot is NOT talking to a control tower but he/she him/herself makes the decisions with respect to weather, runway selection, joining circuits etc IAW the applicable CARS.
I hope this answers a question or 2 and assists in the discussion !
PS: aviatrixfss , may i pm you , im curious of whom RD is ( I think i know)
I musta read something wrong, cause you say you join, straight in, on base etc. etc......crazyaviator wrote:I looked at my posting and i couldnt find where i mentioned that "I dont join the circuit in accordance with the regs" Hmm, anyways, There are many ways to join the circuit both at uncontrolled airports and also nordo at uncontrolled airports ( Bear in mind that "should" in the regs is a suggestion and SHALL is a requirement , both have SAFETY in mind !!
At a class E airport ( CYQA) it is the Pilots responsibility to determine runway in use, winds, traffic and to Determine the runway to use , using the CARS as a base and safety AND conformity and basic airmanship as part of his/ her decision right ? ,,,,,,,
AuxBatOn wrote:Those are should. It's not REQUIRED to do it this way. You can rejoin however you please, as long as it is safe. However, TC recommends the TECHNIQUES you described.
Flying may be your profession. Its not mine. Its my hobby. Therefore, I dont care about rushing to get 1000 hours TT.TAWS wrote:I can't wait to hear him when he breaks a thousand hours.....stay tuned for more penguin adventures!
The instructor should teach the student the correct stuff (ie: you don't have to join that way, but it will keep you out of trouble most of the time). Yes, it all come down to airmanship. If you read my previous post, I sayAIM 4.5 wrote:(a) Joining the Circuit
(i) Landing and takeoff should be accomplished on or parallel to the runway most nearly aligned into the wind. However, the pilot has the final authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the aircraft and another runway may be used if it is determined to be necessary in the interest of safety.
(ii) Unless otherwise specified or required by the applicable distance from cloud criteria, aircraft should approach the traffic circuit from the upwind side. Alternatively, once the pilot has ascertained without any doubt that there will be no conflict with other traffic entering the circuit or traffic established within the circuit, the pilot may also join the circuit on the downwind leg (Figure 4.6). When joining from the upwind side, plan the descent to cross the runway in level flight at 1 000 ft AAE or the published circuit altitude. Maintain that altitude until further descent is required for landing.
(iii) If it is necessary for an aircraft to cross the airport before joining the circuit, it is recommended that the crossover be accomplished at least 500 ft above the circuit altitude.
(iv) All descents should be made on the upwind side or well clear of the circuit pattern.
(v) Aerodromes not within an MF area: Where no MF procedures are in effect, aircraft should approach the traffic circuit from the upwind side. Alternatively, once the pilot has ascertained without any doubt that there will be no conflict with other traffic entering the circuit or traffic established within the circuit, the pilot may join the circuit on the downwind leg (Figure 4.6).
(vi) Aerodromes within an MF area when airport advisory information is available: Aircraft may join the circuit pattern straight-in or at 45˚ to the downwind leg or straight-in to the base or final legs (Figure 4.1). Pilots should be alert for other VFR traffic entering the circuit at these positions and for IFR straight-in or circling approaches.
(vii) Aerodromes within an MF area when airport advisory information is not available: Aircraft should approach the traffic circuit from the upwind side. Alternatively, once the pilot has ascertained without any doubt that there will be no conflict with other traffic entering the circuit or traffic established within the circuit, the pilot may join the circuit on the downwind leg (Figure 4.6).
NOTE: Where an uncontrolled aerodrome lies within an MF area, the pilot must follow the MF reporting procedures set out in CARs 602.97 to 602.103 inclusive. (See RAC 4.5.4 and 4.5.7.)
(b) Continuous Circuits: Aircraft performing a series of circuits and landings should, after each takeoff, reach circuit altitude before joining the downwind leg.
(c) Departing the Circuit or Airport: Aircraft departing the circuit or airport should climb straight ahead on the runway heading until reaching the circuit traffic altitude before commencing a turn in any direction to an en route heading. Turns back toward the circuit or airport should not be initiated until at least 500 ft above the circuit altitude
Safety can be accomplished only with good airmanship on everyone's part. IMHO, there was a lack of airmanship on the lear's part and the C172's part.You can rejoin however you please, as long as it is safe
So he had been in the circuit and rejoined?FYI, the lear wasn't rejoining VFR for the straight in, he was rejoining on a Straight In IFR approach.
Sorry, I made a mistake translating all that in my little head... Replace the rejoining for joining.Cat Driver wrote:So he had been in the circuit and rejoined?FYI, the lear wasn't rejoining VFR for the straight in, he was rejoining on a Straight In IFR approach.
No wonder everything and everyone got all mixed up.
|
Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!
We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal
behavior is apparent.
All rights reserved.
