No touch and go for you!

[SpiceWeasel]

Obviously the full-stop was for runway separation reasons. As you stated...you can always do a go around. That is correct! Once you do a go around, ATC's separation is done. We no longer owe you any sort of separation. So we were trying to give you the separation that we owed you...but then you went around. Now it just means that you could have a very fast airplane up your a$$ and we don't give 2 damns about it. Good luck...since your a go-around and all.

I tried to protect you with some separation....but u deemed it better to just "go around". So here you C150...enjoy a freaking CL30 up your ass with NO protection of separation!! ha ha.

Ok.... this is a head scratcher to me.... While they're context of going around may have been to get around a clearance they didn't like (anti-authority, perhaps?), I find this response a bit disturbing from someone who (potentially) is an ATCer

 

[sigmanu499]

Ok.... this is a head scratcher to me.... While they're context of going around may have been to get around a clearance they didn't like (anti-authority, perhaps?), I find this response a bit disturbing from someone who (potentially) is an ATCer

Remember in class D airspace(not to say this was), the only separation ATC has to provide to VFRs is on the runway, which is one reason for a full stop only clearance. If you do a go around, thats fine but if ATC is too busy to issue traffic and you mid air with somebody on the upwind, its all legally on the pilot. Not to say ATC doesnt have any moral obligation but speaking legally, there is no VFR-VFR separation in class D other than on the runway.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Remember in class D airspace(not to say this was), the only separation ATC has to provide to VFRs is on the runway, which is one reason for a full stop only clearance. If you do a go around, thats fine but if ATC is too busy to issue traffic and you mid air with somebody on the upwind, its all legally on the pilot. Not to say ATC doesnt have any moral obligation but speaking legally, there is no VFR-VFR separation in class D other than on the runway.

I agree the onus is on the pilot at that point to provide seperation, but my point was more along the lines of, would you sit back and watch it happen (regardless of any potential liability), or would you do this: :banghead: when the pilot calls the go around followed by "recovering" the pattern, or whatever you might call it.

Also, consider for a minute the point of "why" someone is going around. Unless it is patently obvious they are trying to get around an instruction without saying "unable" etc., would you feel like you knew the motivation for a go around well enough to be annoyed?

Side note as far as runway separation... I've been awefully close to calling for a go around since the controllers like to put us "airlines" reallllll close on approaches and landings. If we're not in a wake turbulence situation, the closest I've seen runway separation-wise is about the 100 foot call seeing the previous traffic clear the hold short line. Not a big fan of that...

 

[PilotChip]

Everybody is making good points here and we have a good "melting pot" of personal experiences and suggestions.

Just throwing in a hint of confidence, mainly at vfr towers, the controller MAY be considered a "contributing factor" to an incident (whether nmac or whatever). For instance in your go around situation with upwind converging traffic; if the controller is aware of the situation or has approved or instructed aircraft to do something that may put them in a converging situation, they SHOULD (traffic, workload permitting,etc.) be issuing traffic information.

Trust me, even if two aircraft are far from the airport, but within the D airspace, the review of the nmac may result in the controller being a contributing factor for some reason or the other. I'm not saying they will be responsible for any incident or nmac, but sometimes the controller will not just "get away" without penalty if they COULD have issued traffic but just ignored it.

 

[clestudentpilot]

Side note as far as runway separation... I've been awefully close to calling for a go around since the controllers like to put us "airlines" reallllll close on approaches and landings. If we're not in a wake turbulence situation, the closest I've seen runway separation-wise is about the 100 foot call seeing the previous traffic clear the hold short line. Not a big fan of that...

The first aircraft does not have to be past the hold short line, they only have to be clear of the runway, as long as there is nothing that will prevent that aircraft from crossing the hold short line, such as another aircraft in front of them on the taxiway. In other words, the moment an aircraft clears the white runway edge line, it is considered clear of the runway for runway separation purposes.

 

[PilotChip]

can you ref that for us please

 

[clestudentpilot]

CLEAR OF THE RUNWAY​

​

​

​

a.​

Taxiing aircraft, which is approaching a
runway, is clear of the runway when all parts of the​

2/14/08 Pilot/Controller Glossary
PCG C-3​

aircraft are held short of the applicable runway
holding position marking.​

b.​

​

​

​

​

A pilot or controller may consider an aircraft,
which is exiting or crossing a runway, to be clear of
the runway when all parts of the aircraft are beyond
the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its
continued movement beyond the applicable runway
holding position marking.​

c.​

​

​

​

​

Pilots and controllers shall exercise good
judgement to ensure that adequate separation exists
between all aircraft on runways and taxiways at
airports with inadequate runway edge lines or​

holding position markings.





This is from the 7110.65 in the pilot controller glossary

 

[subpilot]

Obviously the full-stop was for runway separation reasons. As you stated...you can always do a go around. That is correct! Once you do a go around, ATC's separation is done. We no longer owe you any sort of separation. So we were trying to give you the separation that we owed you...but then you went around. Now it just means that you could have a very fast airplane up your a$$ and we don't give 2 damns about it. Good luck...since your a go-around and all.

I tried to protect you with some separation....but u deemed it better to just "go around". So here you C150...enjoy a freaking CL30 up your ass with NO protection of separation!! ha ha.

I hope your attitude is not an indication of how you conduct your duties as an ATC'er. I was never implying a devious go around and to think that you would assume that is somewhat disturbing seeming how we are all suppose to be professionals.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

The first aircraft does not have to be past the hold short line, they only have to be clear of the runway, as long as there is nothing that will prevent that aircraft from crossing the hold short line, such as another aircraft in front of them on the taxiway. In other words, the moment an aircraft clears the white runway edge line, it is considered clear of the runway for runway separation purposes.

Aroooo????? I guess you should take my job since I don't know anything...

 

[clestudentpilot]

Aroooo????? I guess you should take my job since I don't know anything...

I didn't at all mean it like that, I was simply stating that a preceding aircraft does not have to be clear of the hold short lines to have same runway separation. I'm sorry if I upset or offended you by stating this, that was not my intent.

 

[MikeD]

Obviously the full-stop was for runway separation reasons. As you stated...you can always do a go around. That is correct! Once you do a go around, ATC's separation is done. We no longer owe you any sort of separation. So we were trying to give you the separation that we owed you...but then you went around. Now it just means that you could have a very fast airplane up your a$$ and we don't give 2 damns about it. Good luck...since your a go-around and all.

I tried to protect you with some separation....but u deemed it better to just "go around". So here you C150...enjoy a freaking CL30 up your ass with NO protection of separation!! ha ha.

If a guy did do a go around that was necessary for whatever reason, couldn't he just request present-position closed traffic in order to negate faster traffic behind?

I've even had situations where tower says to "expect go around" due to me being close with the traffic ahead (for whatever reason, maybe the traffic missed an exit or was just slow clearing the runway), then I get the go around instruction. I simply make the go around into a higher-low approach, and when the traffic clears the runway (and assuming adequate runway available), will request landing clearance on the remaining runway; and tower has no problem granting it.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

I didn't at all mean it like that, I was simply stating that a preceding aircraft does not have to be clear of the hold short lines to have same runway separation. I'm sorry if I upset or offended you by stating this, that was not my intent.

LoL no you didn't offend me man, I just looked it up. Who'da thought it... the way I was always taught was past the hold short line, not going to get by, just simply past it; though no-one referenced 7110.65 or whatever the controller glossary is...

Thanks I just kinda feel like a dummy because that's probably on the list of things I *should* know considering I get paid to fly.

 

[PilotChip]

LoL no you didn't offend me man, I just looked it up. Who'da thought it... the way I was always taught was past the hold short line, not going to get by, just simply past it; though no-one referenced 7110.65 or whatever the controller glossary is...

Thanks I just kinda feel like a dummy because that's probably on the list of things I *should* know considering I get paid to fly.

How does one know where the edge of the runway is if the only solid line to come next is the hold short bars?

 

[SpiceWeasel]

How does one know where the edge of the runway is if the only solid line to come next is the hold short bars?

Big runways sometimes have a white edge painted on them.... or you can pretty much figure that the edge of the runway is the part that is immediately adjacent to the grass.....

 

[amorris311]

i too was taught that you have to pass the hold short line in order to be clear of the runway. i know i taught my students that as well. another reason why this site is so wonderful!

 

[clestudentpilot]

How does one know where the edge of the runway is if the only solid line to come next is the hold short bars?

I'm at a facility where there are white lines on the runway edges so that makes that easier, but I don't know what a facility would do with a runway without the edge lines. I guess this is where part C of the Clear of the Runway definition would apply.

To the guys who didn't know about this...I didn't know either until I got on the other side of the mic. No one had ever told me, I just kind of assumed that ATC would need me clear of the hold short lines before I would be clear of the runway. I had never thought about it really. A lot of pilot's don't know the exact rule for runway separation (at least a lot of the guys that ask me questions about stuff at the airport I fly out of), or the fact that during the day, assuming you have suitable landmark, and you have smaller aircraft (like 172's or Archer's) that you can have two handing aircraft on the runway at the same time, as long as you have 3000 feet separation.

 

[JordanD]

Grrrr....People that stretch out the pattern!!!! Turn it into a C-141 pattern!

Just as bad at an uncontrolled field when everyone's flying so tight in that you can't get a window to squeeze onto the runway to take off. I dunno what ever happened to common courtesy, but not one person called me and said they'd extend to let me depart.

 

[MikeD]

Just as bad at an uncontrolled field when everyone's flying so tight in that you can't get a window to squeeze onto the runway to take off. I dunno what ever happened to common courtesy, but not one person called me and said they'd extend to let me depart.

Common courtesy indeed has a place! I don't know though if it was lack of courtesy, or just low situational awareness of the other pilots (the "we're the only ones using the pattern, or need to" idea).

 

[TripSix]

A student and I were doing touch and goes recently. A Piaggio was sequenced behind us and when we were on about a 3/4 mile final, the controller stated he was unable to give us a touch and go. The first taxiway turnoff is 2200' down the runway. Wouldn't it actually have been faster to do a touch and go?

Faster, maybe. Better, in this case - hard to say exactly.

For sequencing purposes, there is a difference between a touch-and-go, LA, and full stop. The T&G gives you more space on the back end than the LA does. On the flipside, the LA gives you more space on the front end. With a FS it's the whole slow, flare, roll, exit thing, but once that is done you're a non-factor for airborne traffic. Sometimes it's a pick your poison kind of thing.

It's very possible the tower had nowhere to put you after the completion of the T&G (on the back end), but had enough room to get you clear of the runway before the Catfish crossed the threshold - hence the FS over the LA/T&G.

The last thing that I would want to happen would be for you to be on the "touch" part of your T&G, not be able to hold the spacing, and have to send the 180 around as you were climbing out. That's some ugly business right there...

 

[Sunburn]

I was talking to some of the "old hats" today, and one of them told me that when he was getting busy and because of his pattern traffic he wasn't able to get his departures out, we would tell a couple of them (normally local players, if not the ones that have been in the pattern the longest) that this would be a FS taxi back, for traffic departing. Just a little insight as to what may have been going on.