Open letter to the corp jet jock that tried to blame me for an airspace violation

Status
Not open for further replies.
smigaldi said:
I was not flying through his approach path, as has been stated many times I was well below the minimum altitude for that approach. Since the AC I was flying was also certified for IFR flight and met the requirements of part 91 the altimeter was not going to be off by a hundred or more feet. I use the altimeter setting of PWK after take off when I obtain their ATIS.
Click to expand...

It has to be within 75 feet of a known altitude. If you're 75 feet one way and he's 75 feet the other, that's 150 feet of overlap.. Just throwing that out there.
 
gprellwitz said:
Scott,
As I understand it, you were 100' below the lowest altitude he would have been cleared for, since pilots generally cleared to intercept the glideslope inside the FAF. -?
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true, and not true on this approach. Here the GS intercept is outside the FAF. Sometimes they are co-located and sometimes they aren't.
 
Patch said:
BTW what is a FLIB?
Click to expand...

First hit on a Google search was "Funny Little Itinerant Blip (military slang for commercial aircraft) "

Somehow I suspect it has degenerated from there.

Oh, and on the IT side, the same site gave "Fixed-Length Information Block", but that has nothing to do with flying.
 
Patch said:
That's not necessarily true, and not true on this approach. Here the GS intercept is outside the FAF. Sometimes they are co-located and sometimes they aren't.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant to say pilots generally aren't cleared to intercept the GS inside the FAF. In this case, the FAF was GS interception at 2300', which, as you point out, is not collocated with the OM (presuming an ILS approach, which really isn't in evidence here, unless I'm mistaken). At the OM, the altitude would have been 2279', and this should have been used by the pilot as a check on his altimeter setting, had he gotten that far. Note that for an ILS approach the FAF is the GS intercept. The OM is the FAF only for the LOC approach.

So my original contention stands. The pilot would not have been cleared below 2300' until intercepting the GS, which is done south of the VOR, which Scott was north of by as much as a mile. The OM was further south yet, though only a little bit. (I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to calculate the horizontal distance traveled on a glideslope for a 21' vertical loss. It ain't much.)

Rough calculations indicate th me that, at the VOR, approximately 1nm north of the FAF, the glideslope would have been approximately 370' higher, so around 2770. So the pilot of the jet at the VOR should have had an altitude between 2300' and 2770'. Scott, an unspecified distance north of the VOR, was at 2200'.

But remember, it's SEE AND AVOID, even for IFR pilots!

I'll admit, and I suspect Scott may too, that we don't like getting that close to the jets.

Unfortunately, airspace and C90 controllers in the Chicago area have rather tied our hands if we want to avoid long detours. They don't know VFR Advisories or VFR Corridors from French Toast. I'm not saying they wouldn't like to help us (though you'll find plenty here who'll make that claim), but they do have some very busy airspace, and VFR advisories are on the bottom of their priority list! And they, not we, designed the airspace and neglected to put any transitions into it. With much of the airspace to the east of Chicago off-limits to many single-engine drivers because of safety concerns, it really hampers transitions through the area. Note that I'm speaking generally here, not about Scott's flight in particular.
 
Last edited:
Patch said:
Yes, I flew out of New Orleans for two years. We had a VFR corridor and almost always had flight following. Not exactly chicago, but still bravo airspace.
Click to expand...

Almost always had flight following? "Not exactly" Chicago? More like polar opposite of Chicago. I've flown in other Bravos, none that I've been in were anything like Chicago. (I have not flown in LAX, NYC, or ATL bravos, I assume those suck too, but probably don't have Chicago's attitude.)
 
Patch said:
Yet the other guy had filed IFR. I understand full well that VFR requires your cranium to be on a swivel.
Click to expand...

So does IFR. Pop quiz: Who does ATC separate all the time?

Are you saying you wouldn't be mad if you had to discontinue an approach because you nearly speared someone on final with your nose cone?
Click to expand...

Mad, sure... Blame him for violating airspace, no. Hell, *anything* on frequency, no. :no: :mad:
 
gprellwitz said:
Scott,
As I understand it, you were 100' below the lowest altitude he would have been cleared for, since pilots generally cleared to intercept the glideslope inside the FAF. The glideslope intercept altitude is 2278' (from memory), and the altitude he'd have been cleared for was 2300', the altitude at the OBK VOR. You've already stated that you were North of that at all times. Did I get all that right?
Click to expand...

yes. The FAF was south of my position.
 
Ghery said:
First hit on a Google search was "Funny Little Itinerant Blip (military slang for commercial aircraft) "
Click to expand...

FLIB? Replace "Funny" with slang for intercourse and "Blip" with the offspring of an unmarried couple and you'll have the uncensored version. Purty much means most of us.
 
Patch said:
You're not understanding the scope here. You can't really compare a 30 mile straight in with a fixed gear aircraft with a complex/high performance aircraft.
Click to expand...

You don't know what Lance flies, do you?

Most ILS finals put you about 10 miles out. At 3 miles per minute, that happens fairly quickly. A turbine powered aircraft like the corporate jet isn't the most maneuverable with the gear and flaps hanging. At 5-7 miles, it's just like a cessna on 2 mile final.

You just can't compare the two and say the distances should be interchangeable. If the aircraft is configured and on final (at any distance), you should give way. It really doesn't matter who has the legal definition (which I'd still argue is the guy on the ILS final having not seen evidence otherwise) right of way. If you're doing the cross country and he's configured on final approach to landing, you're in a better position to get out of the way.
Click to expand...

"N123XX is over ICING on the approach, everyone out of my way". Yeah, I heard something exactly like that one day. Sure sounds like what you're advocating.

In visual conditions, see-and-avoid applies regardless of whether you're under VFR or IFR.
 
Patch said:
Yes, I flew out of New Orleans for two years. We had a VFR corridor and almost always had flight following. Not exactly chicago, but still bravo airspace.
Click to expand...

New Orleans? IMHO, hardly warrants a Class B. Chicago - like Washington, New York, Dallas, and Houston is significantly more complex, and significantly busier than New Orleans. There are no VFR corridors. And there is a LOT more traffic of all kinds, including VFR folks that are circumnavigating because there is no way to go through. With the Lake, it's hard for many single engine planes to go around to the east.

Add to that the fact that VFR pilots are not required to have instrument charts, and may well not know what configuration the satellite airports are using (which are determined by O'Hare and Midway, in that order).

As for your suggestion to "stay at least 10 miles away" from Cl. D and above airports with a final approach course, I would suggest that you whip out a VFR chart, plot those distances for all the approaches at the Chicago satellites, and then see how much airspace is left. It'll be a LOT different than doing it for NEW.
 
gprellwitz said:
Rough calculations indicate th me that, at the VOR, approximately 1nm north of the FAF, the glideslope would have been approximately 370' higher, so around 2770. So the pilot of the jet at the VOR should have had an altitude between 2300' and 2770'. Scott, an unspecified distance north of the VOR, was at 2200'.
Click to expand...

That's really at the option of the pilot. Some maintain the last assigned altitude until intercepting the glideslope (and therefore would be higher on glidepath), some descend to the next altitude restriction (2300) and intercept it as published. Either way, you're possibly only building 100' of altitude separation. Throw in altimeter error, and it could be even less.

But remember, it's SEE AND AVOID, even for IFR pilots!
Click to expand...

Agreed. But why put yourself in that situation in the first place? If you know the conflict potential exists? I said this earlier, but would it have been that much farther to transition a few more miles to the north?

I'll admit, and I suspect Scott may too, that we don't like getting that close to the jets.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone does, especially when they're possibly cranium down in the cockpit looking at an approach plate.

Unfortunately, airspace and C90 controllers in the Chicago area have rather tied our hands if we want to avoid long detours. They don't know VFR Advisories or VFR Corridors from French Toast. I'm not saying they wouldn't like to help us (though you'll find plenty here who'll make that claim), but they do have some very busy airspace, and VFR advisories are on the bottom of their priority list! And they, not we, designed the airspace and neglected to put any transitions into it. With much of the airspace to the east of Chicago off-limits to many single-engine drivers because of safety concerns, it really hampers transitions through the area. Note that I'm speaking generally here, not about Scott's flight in particular.
Click to expand...


I can understand that. Flight following is based on controller workload, and these guys are likely very busy. I'm sure they're not likely to clear you through the bravo either, but it doesn't hurt to try. It also doesn't hurt to fly that few more miles to the north where you can get a higher altitude and clear nearby airports.
 
wsuffa said:
You don't know what Lance flies, do you?
Click to expand...

:dunno:

"N123XX is over ICING on the approach, everyone out of my way". Yeah, I heard something exactly like that one day. Sure sounds like what you're advocating.
Click to expand...
No, I'm advocating that the less maneuverable aircraft should have the right of way.
 
Patch said:
No, I'm advocating that the less maneuverable aircraft should have the right of way.
Click to expand...
I guess if you're in a Pitts you have to give way to almost everyone. :goofy:

Granted, a business jet has more speed and momentum than a smaller, slower airplane so they will have a larger turning radius, but they maneuver just fine even with the gear and flaps down.
 
Everskyward said:
Granted, a business jet has more speed and momentum than a smaller, slower airplane so they will have a larger turning radius, but they maneuver just fine even with the gear and flaps down.
Click to expand...

They also go UP a lot faster...
 
Patch said:
I don't think anyone does, especially when they're possibly cranium down in the cockpit looking at an approach plate.
Click to expand...

...Trying to figure out where the jets might be instead of looking out the damn window for them. :rolleyes:
 
Patch said:
I can understand that. Flight following is based on controller workload, and these guys are likely very busy. I'm sure they're not likely to clear you through the bravo either, but it doesn't hurt to try. It also doesn't hurt to fly that few more miles to the north where you can get a higher altitude and clear nearby airports.
Click to expand...
The day/weekday controller for that sector volunteered though NATCA to come to a AOPA Air Safety sponsored meeting at PIA last month. We couldn't get ANYONE to come through FAA.

His comment, "I usually have 10 on the scope at any given time and I am therefore not interested in adidtional load."

"Yes, I know it's hard".
 
Everskyward said:
I guess if you're in a Pitts you have to give way to almost everyone. :goofy:

Granted, a business jet has more speed and momentum than a smaller, slower airplane so they will have a larger turning radius, but they maneuver just fine even with the gear and flaps down.
Click to expand...

Depends on the airplane. I haven't flown any business jets, but I have seen airplanes that are absolute pigs at approach speeds/aoa with everything hanging.

Jesse - you're right, there is the vertical, but you're also at approach AOA where you don't exactly have that abrupt climb without the risk of a stall.
 
Patch,
You're really missing the point, and although it's been an absolutely entertaining thread (99 responses/34 from you alone), that point is the CORP jock was just whining. Scott was following a well practiced route and was clearly "NO FACTOR". All the rest is just nonsense.
Other than to cover his own butt, would a PROFESSIONAL PILOT really need to resort to whining. Maybe he was having a bad day, maybe he never flew into a busy class D environment before, maybe it was his first day in the left seat. Who cares! You don't act like a baby. You're a damned professional. Act like one.
 
Patch said:
Depends on the airplane. I haven't flown any business jets, but I have seen airplanes that are absolute pigs at approach speeds/aoa with everything hanging.

Jesse - you're right, there is the vertical, but you're also at approach AOA where you don't exactly have that abrupt climb without the risk of a stall.
Click to expand...

Well--considering how Mari sits left seat in Lears..I think I might just have to believe her.
 
Why take the word a Lear captain, when you can take the word of a student who's never flown in one?
 
jesse said:
Because she is a mere mortal.
Click to expand...
DO NOT QUESTION Patch for he is an aviation god and questioning his authority will result in your demise!

india_3.jpg
[/quote]

:rofl: This coming from a dude who has an avatar of himself pointing to a t-shirt that says "World's Greatest Pilot" and is a self-proclaimed "Young BOLD pilot"? YGBSM.
 
EdFred said:
Sorry, hasn't flown ANY business jets. You're right there was no need to insult the Lear.
Click to expand...
You're right, I haven't flown any business jets. I have flown jets though, does that make you feel better?
 
Patch said:
This coming from a dude who has an avatar of himself pointing to a t-shirt that says "World's Greatest Pilot" and is a self-proclaimed "Young BOLD pilot"? YGBSM.
Click to expand...

You'll also find that I'm a smart ass.

I discovered that if everyone on the forum is saying one thing and I'm the only one saying the other thing I should probably just shut up because I'm wrong. Although that did take me awhile--You'll learn too.

The trick is--don't **** anyone off before Gastons otherwise you won't get to fly in their plane!
 
jesse said:
You'll also find that I'm a smart ass.

I discovered that if everyone on the forum is saying one thing and I'm the only one saying the other thing I should probably just shut up because I'm wrong. Although that did take me awhile--You'll learn too.
Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

The trick is--don't **** anyone off before Gastons otherwise you won't get to fly in their plane!
Click to expand...

Ok??
 
Keep it friendly folks...

No, I don't think anyone's over the line yet - but you can stop toeing it so closely too...
 
Patch said:
:rolleyes: Why get personal? Lears aren't the only jets out there.
Click to expand...
And they aren't the only jets that Mari flies. ;)

This thread is getting mean, y'all! Patch is stuck on what he thinks is important, the thread was actually about something else, but drift happens, I reckon.

Can't we all just get along? :rolleyes:
 
smigaldi said:
Also the 2300MSL glide slope intercept is to the south of my position. He was supposed to be well above 2300, he was not he was under the glide slope by a good deal, probably at least 300 to 500 feet.

Yeah I am sure he was mad, but that is no reason to blame me for his mistakes.
Click to expand...

Were you in his jet? How would you know he was off?
 
Why are my ears burning? :confused:

In the interest of full disclosure those would be Lear 35, 55 and Hawker 800. I've never flown a jet on MSFS. I would probably crash. :dunno:
 
jesse said:
The trick is--don't **** anyone off before Gastons otherwise you won't get to fly in their plane!
Click to expand...

Patch said:
Ok??
Click to expand...
Patch, since you're new here, you probably don't know about our annual aviation forum fly-in at Gaston's resort in northwest Arkansas. Here is our web site:

http://www.gastonsflyin.com

We spend a lot of time giving each other rides and spend most of the weekend flying.

It would be great if you could join us, but it sounds like you might have a hard time getting away about that time. :)
 
Patch, it's a very congenial group of generally successful people in all phases of life. Thanks to Greg Bockelman for putting up with my efforts to do an ATP hooded steep turn in his C195. It was memorable (maybe laughable).

I was able to give the guy from Wisconsin his first Multi time. I was brought back to Tailwheel currency by Diana's ever patient husband. On and on it goes.

Cessna 140, E188, and PA34 guy
 
Diana said:
Patch, since you're new here, you probably don't know about our annual aviation forum fly-in at Gaston's resort in northwest Arkansas. Here is our web site:

http://www.gastonsflyin.com

We spend a lot of time giving each other rides and spend most of the weekend flying.

It would be great if you could join us, but it sounds like you might have a hard time getting away about that time. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, that'll be a pretty busy weekend. ;)

Looks like a lot of fun though. Reminds me of Ama.
 
Patch said:
Looks like a lot of fun though. Reminds me of Ama.
Click to expand...
Now, I'm curious. What is the Ama? The only Ama I know of is the American Medical Association. Do they have as much fun as we do at Gaston's? :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top