MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Unfortunately what you’re trying to kick people off of isn’t your lawn.
Stupid Question Monday..
- Thread starter Doomer
- Start date
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I didn't kick anybody anywhere, lol. I was pretty clear about that.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
But you’re arguing otherwise.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm not arguing anything, I was just trying to figure out what you were talking about.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
“Shouldn’t be flying” is what I’m talking about, and appears to me to be your argument.
Dana
Final Approach
We get some IFR traffic, not much. In this case anybody in an IFR approach would broken out into good visibility well outside the tight traffic patterns us biplane drivers fly. And I was still a few hundred feet below cloudbase, though not the 500' that would have been required if I was onset over 700' AGL.
Now if cloudbase was at 700', it still would be legal, but not smart.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
So he should be flying illegally?
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
No. He should be flying legally.
“shouldn’t be flying” includes “shouldn’t be flying legally” and “shouldn’t be flying safely” in addition to “shouldn’t be flying illegally.”
Last edited:
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Ah, so we agree, good.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
maybe we agree, but you said he shouldn’t be flying, which is something entirely different than he should be flying legally.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Interesting. I didn't say "he shouldn't be flying" in my original post that started this mess, I said:
Context matters, and correctly quoting someone matters too. The simple matter is he shouldn't have been flying that day, as I quoted and you keep misquoting and apparently misunderstanding because you are trying parse sentences (incorrectly) rather than paying attention to the context of the post.
But the important part of this is that we agree on my original post, you just disagree with the straw man you made up and I never said, because he did like 25 touch and goes that day, he can fly, he just needs to work on his judgement.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Words matter…present tense “he shouldn’t be flying” vs past tense “he shouldn’t have been flying that day” is largely irrelevant. You didn’t want him on your lawn.
“he shouldn’t have been flying VFR” is an absolute statement that still includes “he shouldn’t have been flying VFR legally.”
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Lol, ah no, lol. You really hate being wrong don't you?
BladeSlap
Ejection Handle Pulled
TPA, traffic pattern altitude is a suggestion, unlike traffic direction.
14 CFR 91.126 and 91.127: Traffic flow rules at nontowered
vs
AC 90-66: Recommended Standards Traffic for Aeronautical Operations at Airports without Operating Control Towers
1050AGL is VFR, saying flying in such weather is bad would take out a good majority of flight in Alaska, as well as many helicopter operations.
A 1k ceiling with good visibility is plenty safe for most GA aircraft.
If the IFR arrival was simply making clear radio calls, like you would on a cloudless summer day, and listening on frequency, that is all that’s required to keep things safe
When the other pilot offered to clear out for you, if you were scared you should have taken him up on his offer, don’t try to fly his airplane for him, I know many pilots who would fly helicopters on a day like that who stopped logging hours after they hit 10,000, which was like back when I was in grade school, the guy flying visually below that deck might just be more qualified to be in the air than the private pilot who just got his instrument rating.
People should just fly their own airplane.
Even following the guidance in the AFD, I could have been flying with your 1050AGL ceiling, I believe airplane people in crop dusting and other speciality areas commonly fly lower patterns too.
14 CFR 91.126 and 91.127: Traffic flow rules at nontowered
vs
AC 90-66: Recommended Standards Traffic for Aeronautical Operations at Airports without Operating Control Towers
1050AGL is VFR, saying flying in such weather is bad would take out a good majority of flight in Alaska, as well as many helicopter operations.
A 1k ceiling with good visibility is plenty safe for most GA aircraft.
If the IFR arrival was simply making clear radio calls, like you would on a cloudless summer day, and listening on frequency, that is all that’s required to keep things safe
When the other pilot offered to clear out for you, if you were scared you should have taken him up on his offer, don’t try to fly his airplane for him, I know many pilots who would fly helicopters on a day like that who stopped logging hours after they hit 10,000, which was like back when I was in grade school, the guy flying visually below that deck might just be more qualified to be in the air than the private pilot who just got his instrument rating.
People should just fly their own airplane.
Even following the guidance in the AFD, I could have been flying with your 1050AGL ceiling, I believe airplane people in crop dusting and other speciality areas commonly fly lower patterns too.
Attachments
Last edited:
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
You hate communicating clearly, don’t you?
Means the same thing as
On the other hand, your responses are opposite…
Last edited:
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Lol, yes, I am the unclear one....
Let's sum up:
He shouldn't have been flying illegally -- we agree on that.
He should fly legal vfr -- we agree on that too.
Nothing else to talk about really.
BladeSlap
Ejection Handle Pulled
Lol, yes, I am the unclear one....
Let's sum up:
He shouldn't have been flying illegally -- we agree on that.
He should fly legal vfr -- we agree on that too.
Nothing else to talk about really.
If it was a 1050AGL ceiling, how was he not legal? Just fly a 500’ pattern
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I did fly my own airplane, he flew his. He asked me if I wanted him to go over the lake, I said no, let's see if I can circle. He was free to fly over the lake if he wanted to at any time, I suspect he thought better of it.
He was busting cloud minimums, he was in an airplane, not a helicopter. He should not have been there, flying the pattern, skimming the clouds. It's not a difficult scenario.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Lol, ok ace. Been through this a few times, go back and reread the posts. It's all there. Another good talk.
Dana
Final Approach
He wasn't legal because he wasn't flying a 500' pattern; if he had been at 500' then he would have been legal as he'd have been in G airspace. Even at 699' he would have been legal (as I was under a similar ceiling).
BladeSlap
Ejection Handle Pulled
No worries champ
How did you know his indicated altitude and cloud clearance as seen from in his cockpit?
Trying to judge elevation within hundreds of feet and cloud clearance of one moving aircraft as you are in another aircraft, especially flying instruments, this is not a exact science by any means and if you were looking close enough at his aircraft for possible rule violations, during a critical phase of flight in your own plane, did you have a safety pilot who had eyes on the instruments and your final approach visual?
The comment about flying owns own airplane is based on you saying what others should or shouldn’t do, assuming he was a student pilot for some reason, and making the call to not take him up on his offer to go to the lake, even though you were scared, because you somehow knew he was not as qualified to fly to the lake?
There have been plenty of days I flew like that, around other traffic too, we each coordinated and everything was fine, I wonder if I have been mentioned like this on a internet message group too
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 19,777
- Location
- Oakland, CA
- Display Name
Display name:
Bro do you even lift