Run up question

I think people are getting confused about terminology. The only time I hear a pilot use the term, "Have the Numbers" is when they forgot to get the atis and then called up ground, trying to be slick about it.

Have the numbers... The key to that was in the example given, "Approach Control".. If the guy in the tower is doing his job correctly, he will give you the wind and direction during an ILS or any approach that has timing involved. You realize the times on an approach plate are accurate only with ground speed, not indicated. The hope is that the tower gives you the wind and direction, you can use it to figure out your ground speed so you know which time will work better for you. Of course I guess everyone assumes now that they have a GPS or DME in the airplane...
If the towered airport does not have an atis, then you have the weather from the asos or awos... Have the weather..
Stop being a robot who reads the far/aim and being confused with mindless trivia, and start using common sense that agrees with the far aim. Everything will make much more sense.
 
BillH said:
Stop being a robot who reads the far/aim and being confused with mindless trivia, and start using common sense that agrees with the far aim. Everything will make much more sense.
Click to expand...

GASP...What is this common sense you speak of???:drool:
 
BillH said:
Stop being a robot who reads the far/aim and being confused with mindless trivia, and start using common sense that agrees with the far aim. Everything will make much more sense.
Click to expand...

It's not mindless trivia, it's called standardized phraseology and knowing what it means when; but don't slam the standardization by calling it anti-common sense; it's all what you do with it. You can say "have the weather" all you like and works just fine, but DON'T slam someone for saying "have the numbers" if in fact that's what they have and they're using the correct term for it. And further, one shouldn't slam said phraseology for being completely wrong if one din't know it's even there in the AIM/PCG in the first place.
 
MikeD said:
It's not mindless trivia, it's called standardized phraseology and knowing what it means when; but don't slam the standardization by calling it anti-common sense; it's all what you do with it. You can say "have the weather" all you like and works just fine, but DON'T slam someone for saying "have the numbers" if in fact that's what they have and they're using the correct term for it. And further, one shouldn't slam said phraseology for being completely wrong if one din't know it's even there in the AIM/PCG in the first place.
Click to expand...
Just because it is in the AIM and PCG, does not mean it is correct. It MUST be used in the correct context for it to be correct, and that is where using common sense comes into play.
 
BillH said:
Just because it is in the AIM and PCG, does not mean it is correct. It MUST be used in the correct context for it to be correct, and that is where using common sense comes into play.
Click to expand...

Huh? On your first sentence?

If it's in the AIM and PCG, then it IS correct; as its defined as a standard piece of phraseology.

You're second sentence makes more sense, yet I alerady said that in my last post.
 
MikeD said:
Huh? On your first sentence?

If it's in the AIM and PCG, then it IS correct; as its defined as a standard piece of phraseology.

You're second sentence makes more sense, yet I alerady said that in my last post.
Click to expand...
All about the context
 
BillH said:
Interesting, do you read only half my post then edit your post after you finish reading the full post?
Click to expand...

No, I read and responded to your countering and nonsensical first sentence. Then had to make sense out of the rest of the post.

EDIT: Speaking of edits.....
 
MikeD said:
No, I read and responded to your countering and nonsensical first sentence. Then had to make sense out of the rest of the post.

EDIT: Speaking of edits.....
Click to expand...
I edited my post because the first time I posted it came across to me as being very snotty towards you. Since you're digging I'll just comment that I find it interesting that you read half of my post make a remark then say say it is ok, all in the same post...
My first sentence only makes no sense if you IGNORE everything else I said...
That is selective rationalizing...
Have you ever considered a career in journalism?
 
BillH said:
I edited my post because the first time I posted it came across to me as being very snotty towards you. Since you're digging I'll just comment that I find it interesting that you read half of my post make a remark then say say it is ok, all in the same post...
My first sentence only makes no sense if you IGNORE everything else I said...
That is selective rationalizing...
Have you ever considered a career in journalism?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't want the job in journalism. Not being snotty, or taking any as such. I think we're running into the "stumbling over one another in posting, responding, responding"

To clear all this up, my only point was who cares what someone uses as long as it's clear/concise and correct use, or standard phraseology, or if none of those work, plain english. That checks the standardization, common sense, and making sense... boxes all in one.

I believe we agree on that. :)
 
MikeD said:
Wouldn't want the job in journalism. Not being snotty, or taking any as such. I think we're running into the "stumbling over one another in posting, responding, responding"

To clear all this up, my only point was who cares what someone uses as long as it's clear/concise and correct use, or standard phraseology, or if none of those work, plain english. That checks the standardization, common sense, and making sense... boxes all in one.

I believe we agree on that. :)
Click to expand...
agreed
 
A rolling run up is a good way to get in trouble.
Attention diverted for a second, high power, riding brakes. Not good. taxi means taxi, run up means run up.
For two of the operators I worked for, a rolling run up noticed by management meant you had some 'splaining to do.
 
PGT said:
but I have to program the 3 GPS' and set the A/P! :sarcasm:

and make sure to take extra long if Boris is behind ya
Click to expand...
I know you put up the sarcasm warning, but some will think you're serious. For those. Program the GPS in the blocks.

Douglas said:
Personally not a fan.
Click to expand...
And I have no problem with that...as long as you aren't holding up the show.
Roger said:
:yeahthat:Except when operating with 2 pilots in the Twinstar. Just a FADEC check and takeoff brief, no runup.
Click to expand...
...before engine failure checklist complete. :D

Itchy said:
A rolling run up is a good way to get in trouble.
Attention diverted for a second, high power, riding brakes. Not good. taxi means taxi, run up means run up.
Click to expand...
Again...if it takes you more than 30 seconds, you're doing something wrong. Know your airplane. The checklist is a checklist...not a see and do list.

-mini
 
minitour said:
...before engine failure checklist complete. :D
Click to expand...
I don't know if you were referring to the flight training environment...or to the Twinstar itself. Either one is probably accurate :banghead:

minitour said:
Again...if it takes you more than 30 seconds, you're doing something wrong. Know your airplane. The checklist is a checklist...not a see and do list.
Click to expand...
Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes. I try to convey that to students...with mixed success.
 
ctab5060X said:
Flow, then check. Flow, then check.

Take the checklist away from them while just sitting in the airplane. Make them go through what is required, then let them read the checklist.
Click to expand...
BTDT.

Actually, that is pretty much what I am currently doing.
 
More than one pilot has taken his Cirrus off road trying to a rolling run-up.

There have been a couple of brake fires to boot from doing that.

There is no chance in hell that I'll do a rolling run-up in a Cirrus. Too much power on a castering nosewheel, with brakes that have been known to catch fire.

That being said you can do a runup in less that 20 seconds in a cirrus if you have your together. It's the boneheads that haven't programmed their 430's and various other whiz bang gizmos that holds up the line.

I'm sorry mini and your self centered world, if 30 seconds of your time is more valuable than the safety of my flight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top