TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
So I still don't understand why you got mad. Did the guy do something wrong?
No Callsign?
- Thread starter Phantom017
- Start date
So I still don't understand why you got mad. Did the guy do something wrong?
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Reference please. I agree generally that if your failure to follow an AIM SOP contributes to an incident, you will probably be at fault.
I just don't see it in the context of giving information that more easily identifies you in the pattern.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
I think the "red" means embarrassed, not angry.
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
Corona California, 2 years ago. 5 killed in a traffic pattern midair. NTSB places blame on departing pilot who turned crosswind too early. Pilot's estate and his flight school both being sued.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Found at fault by whom? The AIM is pretty explicit that it is not regulatory and thus compliance isn't legally binding like the CFR is.
drunkenbeagle
Gang Member
Guidance on when to turn crosswind is in an AC, not the AIM. And that only applies to pattern traffic, not departing traffic. In any case, what does this have to do with using a full callsign?
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
First, that "non-regulatory" stuff is only a half-truth since a lot of what the AIM contains is a summary of information that is regulatory. Also, when placing the blame in a court case, whether it's aviation or any other type of activity, the generally accepted standard for that activity are always relevant to assignment of fault, and the AIM is at least that.
My point was specific to the question being discussed. It's not just the AIM "violation," is whether it contributed to an incident. In the example of making that unexpected pattern turn too early, I can definitely see it. But I don't see how identifying an aircraft by visible color increases the risk as opposed to calling out an impossible-to-see-without binoculars-and-only-if-you-are-in-perfect-position N-Number.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
...exactly what I said in my post; it's not regulatory like the CFR. If someone wants to point out a violation, they need to reference the appropriate source material, which isn't the AIM. If they're not able to find it anywhere else, then that's all she wrote.
Note that the use of of "procedure" in the AIM directly references the ATC portion, not the aviators portion.
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
See accident report at KAJO where 5 were killed last year.
jonnydwolf
Well-Known Member
Since we are talking about CTAF usage and you brought up CVO, a few times I have flown in there and no puedo entender una palabra que están diciendo, otra entonces su número de N (I can not understand a word they are saying, other then their N number).
I just kindly told them repita por favor en inglés.
Sorry if my Spanish is poor, I used babelfish.
Anyone ever run into that?
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Very constructive.
If you're flying something that cruises at 110 knots that may be acceptable. Faster, other people making accurate position reports is crucial.
Nark
Macho Superpilot
What I said is constructive, just not very tactful.
The radio is a great tool in situational awareness, however don't pin your hopes and dreams on it to avoid other aircraft from hitting you.
And just that, making accurate position reports. Several, if not every time "Dr Farnsworth's" would make a position report, he or the student was really 4-5 miles away from it. In Kansas, that wouldn't be a big deal, but it some area's where 5 planes are bottle necked between two scheduled routes, knowing the exact position is critical. Especially if you can only see 1 maybe 2 miles.
The radio is a great tool in situational awareness, however don't pin your hopes and dreams on it to avoid other aircraft from hitting you.
And just that, making accurate position reports. Several, if not every time "Dr Farnsworth's" would make a position report, he or the student was really 4-5 miles away from it. In Kansas, that wouldn't be a big deal, but it some area's where 5 planes are bottle necked between two scheduled routes, knowing the exact position is critical. Especially if you can only see 1 maybe 2 miles.
"Pretty damn ssssmmMMOOOOOTH!"
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:
drunkenbeagle
Gang Member
I don't think anyone is saying don't make position reports. In the context of an non-towered field, I care far more about knowing the altitude, position and type of aircraft than I do about the tail #.
"Cessna 42XIR Left Base 18" is not as useful to me as-
"Caravan 3 mile left base 3000' 18" or "Skyhawk close in left base 18"
But in any case, it isn't doing much for you collision-avoidance wise at many fields, 'cause the meat missiles, autogyros, experimentals and old cubs ain't using radios.