"Sorry, mate - I just didn't see ya"

by **davey** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:10 pm

Yep, I regularly get asked at Bournemouth if I can accept an Immediate departure while aircraft are on final, it's my call if I decide I can. Airmanship rules OK.

by **matspart3** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:45 pm

davey wrote:Yep, I regularly get asked at Bournemouth if I can accept an Immediate departure while aircraft are on final, it's my call if I decide I can. Airmanship rules OK.

That's not quite the same as the uncontrolled environment. An ATC unit has the authority to vary or dictate the sequence. The reason we ask you is, more often than not, to alert you to the fact that you'll need to get a wriggle on once the clearance is forthcoming and, of course, for you to assess if you're happy to line up and commence your take off without delay.

by **davey** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:53 pm

Thought I said that .....

by **Flintstone** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:24 am

Living up to your signature there Davey?

:wink:

by **The Kid from Red Bank** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:05 am

That's not quite the same as the uncontrolled environment

Which is the same as the roundabout situation Paul S describes. With an aircraft on finals, whether 'cleared' by ATC or not, the only person who can judge whether its safe to line up and take off safely is the pilot of the departing aircraft. The landing aircraft has right of way, and can't land on a runway occupied by another aircraft. In an extreme situation, as long as the departing aircraft is airborne before the landing aircraft touches down, fine and dandy. Judging this from the landing aircraft is down to experience and whether the pilot is happy to continue with a potentially late go around and have fairly close spacing on finals.

Davey is right; Airmanship does rule, but it's just a shame nobody seems to teach it properly these days

by **Crash one** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:12 pm

The Kid from Red Bank wrote:
That's not quite the same as the uncontrolled environment

Which is the same as the roundabout situation Paul S describes. With an aircraft on finals, whether 'cleared' by ATC or not, the only person who can judge whether its safe to line up and take off safely is the pilot of the departing aircraft.

The landing pilot has to know that his existance is known of, otherwise his perception of the "airmanship" may be flawed.
"G-XX lining up for immediate, one on final visual" might help.

by **Flintstone** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:41 pm

The Kid from Red Bank wrote:Airmanship does rule, but it's just a shame nobody seems to teach it properly these days

I think though that airmanship is similar to common sense. Some of it can't be taught, it's a state of mind.

by **dont overfill** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:50 pm

Crash one wrote:The landing pilot has to know that his existance is known of, otherwise his perception of the "airmanship" may be flawed.
"G-XX lining up for immediate, one on final visual" might help.

Absolutely correct. Works well everywhere to put the mind at rest. "G-XX Downwind 27 right hand to land. Contact one ahead."

by **Crash one** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 10:50 pm

dont overfill wrote:
Crash one wrote:The landing pilot has to know that his existance is known of, otherwise his perception of the "airmanship" may be flawed.
"G-XX lining up for immediate, one on final visual" might help.

Absolutely correct. Works well everywhere to put the mind at rest. "G-XX Downwind 27 right hand to land. Contact one ahead."

Thank you D.O. However I have a slight issue with "Contact" one ahead. I certainly don't want the "contact" to be physical. :twisted:

I doubt whether I would "contact" the landing a/c in the same way that ATC might request me to (frinstance) "Contact Edin tower on xxx.xxx". Or am I being pedantic? Thoughts on "Contact" versus "Visual", please.
G-UR, US at this time, see you later with the bickies, Happy new year.

by **Keef** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:05 pm

I don't know if "contact one ahead" is in the CAP, but I've heard it used in many places, and use it myself. I treat is as an abbreviation for "have visual contact with..."

A passing ATCO may know!

by **Dave Phillips** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:40 pm

As an ex-RAF type I reserve the right to use "Tally".

by **Crash one** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:51 pm

Dave Phillips wrote:As an ex-RAF type I reserve the right to use "Tally".

Pity, but most of us don't have the guns to use that

by **Flyin'Dutch'** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:17 pm

Just as well he had some speed in hand.

Hauled it off before putting the power in. Could have been messy.

by **Dave Phillips** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:36 pm

Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Just as well he had some speed in hand.

Hauled it off before putting the power in. Could have been messy.

Shirley we should then be criticising his landing technique for touching down with too much energy?

by **A le Ron** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:49 pm

Dave Phillips wrote:
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Just as well he had some speed in hand.

Hauled it off before putting the power in. Could have been messy.

Shirley we should then be criticising his landing technique for touching down with too much energy?

Well, I'm glad he managed to please all the people all the time!

"Sorry, mate - I just didn't see ya"

Re: "Sorry, mate - I just didn't see ya"

Who is online