Right of way

[WannFly]

I was doing T&G at KFAR today AM. configured for landing, 40 degree flaps, 70 kts, nose down trim... over the fence, may be 40 ft AGL tower called for Go Around. it rattled me for a sec, but i guess it has now become mechanic reflex and i executed the go around. there was an airliner who was lined up behind me, may be its a speed thing, he couldnt slow down more or whatever, i had the right of way, the point is for students and new pilots out there, always be prepared to go around till the last moment. climbing with 40 degree flaps and nose down trim was interesting in an Archer.

on a diff note, in another landing, i landed perfectly and then for some reason yanked the yoke back and then as i was approaching critical AOA, shoved the nose down and the nose wheel touched and was setting up for a perfect porpoise. CFI was about to take controls, but before he could, i went in with full power and climbed. i have read about this recovery, but reading about something on the couch and doing it when you have less than 2 seconds to respond are two different things. I had some doubts on myself that if i would be able to react and stick to my training when the time comes, now that doubt is gone. i didnt even have to think about what to do, training kicked in and i reacted. CFI was all smiles .

 

[tspear]

I was doing T&G at KFAR today AM. configured for landing, 40 degree flaps, 70 kts, nose down trim... over the fence, may be 40 ft AGL tower called for Go Around. it rattled me for a sec, but i guess it has now become mechanic reflex and i executed the go around. there was an airliner who was lined up behind me, may be its a speed thing, he couldnt slow down more or whatever, i had the right of way, the point is for students and new pilots out there, always be prepared to go around till the last moment. climbing with 40 degree flaps and nose down trim was interesting in an Archer.

on a diff note, in another landing, i landed perfectly and then for some reason yanked the yoke back and then as i was approaching critical AOA, shoved the nose down and the nose wheel touched and was setting up for a perfect porpoise. CFI was about to take controls, but before he could, i went in with full power and climbed. i have read about this recovery, but reading about something on the couch and doing it when you have less than 2 seconds to respond are two different things. I had some doubts on myself that if i would be able to react and stick to my training when the time comes, now that doubt is gone. i didnt even have to think about what to do, training kicked in and i reacted. CFI was all smiles .

Call the tower if you want know why go around. The second plane in trail would the one required to go around. Not the lead.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

 

[WannFly]

Call the tower if you want know why go around. The second plane in trail would the one required to go around. Not the lead.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

i guess i could, but for now i am happy with the experience i got. it probably takes few thousand dollars for them to go around, and all i am doing is going in circle (rectangle) over the airport

 

[Timbeck2]

It's cheaper to make an Archer go around than a 737. (poetic license as to the term "airliner" taken) There's FARs and ATC regs, and then there's reality.

edit: the above post wasn't there when I typed my response...I swear.

 

[jordane93]

Nice job!

 

[Velocity173]

Most facilities are not going to allow a VFR conducting a T&G in the tower pattern delay an IFR arrival.

 

[Timbeck2]

Then there's the variables we don't know.

Tower: "Archer make short approach, inside a seven thirty seven, eight mile final."
(Archer flies a normal pattern making it too close)

or

Tower: "Cactus four twenty five reduce to final approach speed, following an Archer downwind, approach end."
(737 slows down five knots which doesn't help)

Lots of things that could have happened to make the pattern not work, including the controller trying to make something work that can't. One of the first things I learned as a controller, way back when I was in training twenty five years ago was "you can't fly it for 'em."

 

[tspear]

It's cheaper to make an Archer go around than a 737. (poetic license as to the term "airliner" taken) There's FARs and ATC regs, and then there's reality.

edit: the above post wasn't there when I typed my response...I swear.

Same level of service is the regs and generally the reality. If a plane is on short final and a second plane in trail that close. Having the archer attempt the go around is significantly more risky because the plane is less maneuverable and much more subject to wake turbulence.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

 

[jordane93]

Same level of service is the regs and generally the reality. If a plane is on short final and a second plane in trail that close. Having the archer attempt the go around is significantly more risky because the plane is less maneuverable and much more subject to wake turbulence.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

I'd argue that the archer is more maneuverable than a 737 fully configured. The 737 was behind the archer so wake turbulence wasn't an issue. Reality is 99.9% of the time, they're going to make the single engine piston go around rather than the airliner

 

[Timbeck2]

to tspear:

??

In this case, the Archer was number one, the "airliner" would have had to go around. I'm not following what you're saying. The Archer is less maneuverable?

 

[Timbeck2]

For the record, I was the one that used the 737 and that hypothetically, since I don't know which type "airliner" the OP was referring to.

 

[1600vw]

Maybe the person in the tower knew you are a student and was giving you some experience and practice while your instructor was sitting right seat.

 

[Timbeck2]

Its a bad controller indeed that would "purposely" set any aircraft up for a decision like that. I've unplugged controllers that set up a pattern knowing full well that their intent was to make someone go around because of their poor decision making.

 

[brcase]

I'd argue that the archer is more maneuverable than a 737 fully configured. The 737 was behind the archer so wake turbulence wasn't an issue. Reality is 99.9% of the time, they're going to make the single engine piston go around rather than the airliner

And if that single engine piston is doing touch and goes, the tower knows it is all training for the pilot, and not likely an inconvience. As in the OP's case the Go around was way more educational than the planned touch and go would have been. I have known instructors to go to, or call the tower before a lesson and say hey can you have us do a few xxxx. (like Go-arounds, Pattern changes, 360's on downwind, etc)

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[Caramon13]

Its a bad controller indeed that would "purposely" set any aircraft up for a decision like that. I've unplugged controllers that set up a pattern knowing full well that their intent was to make someone go around because of their poor decision making.

Had one controller at my local airport put a helicopter and a plane in front of me, 2 miles out from landing with "continue" instructions when asked. Sure enough, had a right 360 moments later, called that one...

 

[Timbeck2]

Agreed Brian. And I've been the recipient of those calls and it makes for a good learning experience for everyone. I was also the equivalent of a DPE for control tower operators, still am actually, and I've told pilots beforehand to make mistakes such as reading back the wrong ATIS code or squawk and to fly above or below pattern altitude for example, just to see if the controller I'm evaluating catches it.

 

[RyanB]

Doesn't sound like anything out of the ordinary. A year or two ago, I was on final for 02 at the Class C and was given "cleared low approach only" due to a C130 behind me.

It's SOP.

 

[Justin M]

Speaking of circumstances helping students ...

Saturday I was performing landings at a new-to-me uncontrolled airport. Lots of activity, including glider operations. After taking off for a closed circuit, I heard a student on their first solo doing a touch and go behind me in the pattern. New to the airport, I was probably flying a little further out than the locals usually do. Looking over my shoulder, I see that the first solo student was gaining on my position in the downwind. He announced "White Cessna on downwind turning right 360 for spacing." Almost immediately, a bright light from the ground temporarily blinded me as his CFI and airfield friends beamed with pride at the student's good decision.

 

[Timbeck2]

Doesn't sound like anything out of the ordinary. A year or two ago, I was on final for 02 at the Class C and was given "cleared low approach only" due to a C130 behind me.

It's SOP.

"Cleared low approach only" is SOP, "go around" is used because someone's decision didn't work.

 

[deonb]

Lots of activity, including glider operations. After taking off for a closed circuit, I heard a student on their first solo doing a touch and go behind me

Trying to imagine a glider doing a touch and go.

Mmm...

 

[Zeldman]

Call the tower if you want know why go around.

A couple times I was given the for no apparent reason to me go around. As I was going around, I just casually asked the controller the reason. It was given to me and I replied just curious, thank you.

 

[WannFly]

For the record, I was the one that used the 737 and that hypothetically, since I don't know which type "airliner" the OP was referring to.

i dont know the "airliner" type either. after the go around, i kept climbing above pattern altitude in upwind and i had already put in a request to go back to D54 after that T&G, the controller came back and asked if i would like to come back for a T&G, i declined and went to my home base and did pattern work there.

 

[roncachamp]

I was doing T&G at KFAR today AM. configured for landing, 40 degree flaps, 70 kts, nose down trim... over the fence, may be 40 ft AGL tower called for Go Around. it rattled me for a sec, but i guess it has now become mechanic reflex and i executed the go around. there was an airliner who was lined up behind me, may be its a speed thing, he couldnt slow down more or whatever, i had the right of way, the point is for students and new pilots out there, always be prepared to go around till the last moment. climbing with 40 degree flaps and nose down trim was interesting in an Archer.

FAR 91.113(g) doesn't really come into play at a towered field as the sequence is determined by the controller. Your guess that it was a speed thing is probably correct, there aren't many airliners that aren't faster than an Archer. Sending you around was the right call. You weren't delayed as it was your intention to stay in the pattern anyway, was it not? Conflicts between aircraft of disparate speeds are best resolved by moving the slower one.

 

[roncachamp]

Same level of service is the regs and generally the reality. If a plane is on short final and a second plane in trail that close. Having the archer attempt the go around is significantly more risky because the plane is less maneuverable and much more subject to wake turbulence.

Wake turbulence from what? The airliner behind it?

 

[WannFly]

FAR 91.113(g) doesn't really come into play at a towered field as the sequence is determined by the controller. Your guess that it was a speed thing is probably correct, there aren't many airliners that aren't faster than an Archer. Sending you around was the right call. You weren't delayed as it was your intention to stay in the pattern anyway, was it not? Conflicts between aircraft of disparate speeds are best resolved by moving the slower one.

yepp, not complaining, just saying that over the fence i never anticipated a go around call (though my CFI did that a couple of times and hence the mechanical reflex) and the fact that i should always expect some odd ball situation to crop up until i am stopped.

 

[denverpilot]

And if that single engine piston is doing touch and goes, the tower knows it is all training for the pilot, and not likely an inconvience. As in the OP's case the Go around was way more educational than the planned touch and go would have been. I have known instructors to go to, or call the tower before a lesson and say hey can you have us do a few xxxx. (like Go-arounds, Pattern changes, 360's on downwind, etc)

Yup. During the recent runway closure at KAPA, if they could even squeeze you in for T&G ops, it was pretty much a given that they were going to "spin" you a couple of times as jets and other users arrived and departed... which meant a lot of folks who had students who needed consistency went over to KFTG that month, and those who had students further along thought the "mess" going on, was good practice for their students.

 

[tspear]

FAR 91.113(g) doesn't really come into play at a towered field as the sequence is determined by the controller. Your guess that it was a speed thing is probably correct, there aren't many airliners that aren't faster than an Archer. Sending you around was the right call. You weren't delayed as it was your intention to stay in the pattern anyway, was it not? Conflicts between aircraft of disparate speeds are best resolved by moving the slower one.

Moving the slower plane which is in front is better how? Your advice also conflicts with the AIM.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

 

[tspear]

Wake turbulence from what? The airliner behind it?

If the airliner has to execute a go around, the Archer is to slow to have moved away from the field if there is a landing separation issue.
If you plan on everything going perfectly, you can bet murphy will show up.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

 

[Velocity173]

Moving the slower plane which is in front is better how? Your advice also conflicts with the AIM.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

Yeah, sending a VFR Archer around us far better than sending an IFR airliner around. Has nothing to do with saving gas or who's in front either. The IFR aircraft is a full stop and not planning on doing multiple patterns. The IFR has to be separated from other IFRs and will have approach jumping through hoops to get them resequenced. Grossly inefficient.

A VFR conducting a practice instrument approach can't interfere with an IFR conducting a full stop approach. While that's not the case here, I don't know of any tower controller that doesn't provide that policy in regards to their VFR tower pattern. If you mess up the spacing, send your VFR aircraft around and allow the IFR to land.

 

[Skyrys62]

it rattled me for a sec, but i guess it has now become mechanic reflex and i executed the go around.

I had some doubts on myself that if i would be able to react and stick to my training when the time comes, now that doubt is gone.

Hells yeah. Nicely done.

in another landing, i landed perfectly and then for some reason yanked the yoke back

Got all excited and lost some motor control. I know that one.. I call it the Giggity Goo reflex.

as i was approaching critical AOA, shoved the nose down and the nose wheel touched and was setting up for a perfect porpoise. CFI was about to take controls, but before he could, i went in with full power and climbed.

That's right... you make Kate do what you say. Talk dirty to her and make her do it. So dirty... nasty dirty.

 

[RyanB]

Your advice also conflicts with the AIM.

And? Since when is the AIM regulatory?

 

[Timbeck2]

Hells yeah. Nicely done.



Got all excited and lost some motor control. I know that one.. I call it the Giggity Goo reflex.



That's right... you make Kate do what you say. Talk dirty to her and make her do it. So dirty... nasty dirty.

Settle down Glen.

 

[Skip Miller]

If you mess up the spacing, send your VFR aircraft around and allow the IFR to land.

Landing VFR I have been given a right 360 while at 500' altitude AGL at HPN runway 11 to make way for IFR traffic landing 16. No time for errors on my part and I am glad to report it all went smoothly. Tower could have given my traffic a LAHSO clearance on that, or me also a LAHSO clearance but he didn't.... Oh well, it worked.

-Skip

 

[roncachamp]

Moving the slower plane which is in front is better how?

It gets it out of the way.

Your advice also conflicts with the AIM.

I didn't offer any advice.

 

[roncachamp]

If the airliner has to execute a go around, the Archer is to slow to have moved away from the field if there is a landing separation issue.
If you plan on everything going perfectly, you can bet murphy will show up.

One or both can sidestep.

 

[Hank S]

FAR 91.113(g) doesn't really come into play at a towered field as the sequence is determined by the controller. Your guess that it was a speed thing is probably correct, there aren't many airliners that aren't faster than an Archer. Sending you around was the right call. You weren't delayed as it was your intention to stay in the pattern anyway, was it not? Conflicts between aircraft of disparate speeds are best resolved by moving the slower one.

On my Instrument checkride, I was ~8nm out on the ILS, 90 knots with half flaps, gear up. We hear a Lear check in behind us, Tower asked him to reduce speed by 50 knots for traffic ahead making 80 knots. The disbelief in the Lear pilot's voice was obvious.

I asked the DPE if I should speed up, he said Sure, let's see what you can do. So I raised flaps, fed in throttle and came down the glideslope at 130-135 knots instead, and started slowing down as I passed 3nm. Had a nice Touch and Go, went missed and got out of his way. The Examiner was pleased, don't know about the Lear pilots . . .

 

[denverpilot]

Had a nice Touch and Go, went missed

Technically aren't those two things mutually exclusive unless you're flying a Cat III airplane and bounced off of the runway after powering up for the missed?

 

[Omalley1537]

Same level of service is the regs and generally the reality. If a plane is on short final and a second plane in trail that close. Having the archer attempt the go around is significantly more risky because the plane is less maneuverable and much more subject to wake turbulence.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk

...until the airlines run the privatized ATC system...

 

[RyanB]

Having the archer attempt the go around is significantly more risky because the plane is less maneuverable and much more subject to wake turbulence.

An Archer is less maneuverable than an airliner? Wake turbulence isn't a factor if the airliner is behind the light single, as it was in this case. Your logic confuses me.

 

[tspear]

An Archer is less maneuverable than an airliner? Wake turbulence isn't a factor if the airliner is behind the light single, as it was in this case. Your logic confuses me.

If the airliner has to go around, it will quickly pass the Archer. And the wake will be an issue....
The archer can turn faster, but it will also basically go nowhere in comparison in any lateral direction. If 50 AGL, which one can get up and away from the airport faster? the airliner. The climb rate, the lateral speed of the Archer is very small in comparison. Especially in a go around situation, the Archer gives up a lot more speed to climb then the airliner would be required too. Hence, the Archer is less maneuverable.

The point being, the tower telling the Archer to go around, and not the airliner, is increasing the risk of Murphy appearing. More variables, more issues....

Tim