Any of you Experimental types comply with this

Velocity173 said:
Adding experimental to your call sign with towers isn’t important for normal ops. If the controller knows their types, then they’ll know your performance based on that knowledge. If they don’t know their types, then making them aware of your experimental nature means nothing. They don’t have different runway separation or procedures for EABs. That’s based on specific type.

Now, making tower aware of your EAB because you require special handling is a different story. That’s a service that should really only be used in the test flight phase and not on a day to day basis. Even then, it’s really not much in the way of special handling.

Having said that, by all means adhere to the FAR / AIM and continue to use “experimental.”
Click to expand...

There's a thread on VAF about no LAHSO operations to be given to experimental aircraft. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary...d_and_Hold_Short_Operations_(LAHSO)_FINAL.pdf

They'd need to know if you're experimental for this, at least.
 
DaleB said:
When calling ATC or tower, I use "Experimental". They occasionally ask for the type, then I'll tell them RV-12.
Click to expand...

I always say "Experimental RV" and about half the time they ask "What type of RV?" Maybe this is just an L.A. basin thing.
 
Pilawt said:
Um ... Winnebago?
Click to expand...

spaceballswinnebago.jpg
 
Salty said:
There's a thread on VAF about no LAHSO operations to be given to experimental aircraft. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary...d_and_Hold_Short_Operations_(LAHSO)_FINAL.pdf

They'd need to know if you're experimental for this, at least.
Click to expand...

They’re not explicitly listed as no LAHSO, they just haven’t been given a LAHSO category. There are a whole bunch of aircraft that don’t have LAHSO approval. Certain operations such as military and commercial that can’t accept LAHSO either. It’s ATC’s job to see if you’re on the list or not. If you inform tower you’re an RV, they will know that you’re not on their list of approved aircraft regardless of the experimental part. If you want to throw in the experimental to aid tower, be my guest.
 
Velocity173 said:
They’re not explicitly listed as no LAHSO, they just haven’t been given a LAHSO category. There are a whole bunch of aircraft that don’t have LAHSO approval. Certain operations such as military and commercial that can’t accept LAHSO either. It’s ATC’s job to see if you’re on the list or not. If you inform tower you’re an RV, they will know that you’re not on their list of approved aircraft regardless of the experimental part. If you want to throw in the experimental to aid tower, be my guest.
Click to expand...
Point taken. It's not that experimental can't get LASHO, it's that only listed types can, and experimentals can't be listed types.
 
If the type is always experimental (RV, for instance), is it sufficient to provide just the type? That's not ambiguous that it's an experimental, though it may be esoteric depending on the type.
 
arnoha said:
If the type is always experimental (RV, for instance), is it sufficient to provide just the type? That's not ambiguous that it's an experimental, though it may be esoteric depending on the type.
Click to expand...

Unless there’s a certified that uses the same type name, just using type with N number shouldn’t be ambiguous. Type is far more important to tower than just using “experimental 12345.”Experimental is ambiguous and could be a completely different category for same runway separation criteria.
 
I notified ANC tower who kept my N number on file as being Phase 1 for a month. I used experimental in my calls during that time. Not since.
 
What about the AIM recommendation to notify ATC when you can't climb at least 500 FPM? I've gotten the impression that controllers don't care about such calls, at least from the average bug-smasher.
 
Palmpilot said:
What about the AIM recommendation to notify ATC when you can't climb at least 500 FPM? I've gotten the impression that controllers don't care about such calls, at least from the average bug-smasher.
Click to expand...

Don’t forget, climb or DESCEND at 500 FPM. And no, they don’t care. The difference between someone climbing or descending at 500 fpm vs say, 300 fpm is so minor it doesn’t matter. No controller is planning to that level of precision. It’s simple, level the aircraft, vector the aircraft, get approval from another facility (point out) for that aircraft. The controller can easily adapt to slow aircraft.

Expectations on the jet side can throw a wrench into plans though. I’ve had jets that climbed or descended well above the 500 fpm but didn’t perform as I expected. Because of their speeds across the ground, that becomes a factor with other aircraft or airspace in a hurry. Had a T-33 one time that climbed out like a slug and I had to jump through hoops to clear the way for him.
 
It works the other way, too... my Fisher FP404 couldn't do 500fpm, not even close, but it was so slow that the actual climb angle was pretty good. Not that I often flew it anywhere I needed to talk to ATC (3 times, actually, over the several years I owned it).
 
Dana said:
... my Fisher FP404 couldn't do 500fpm, not even close, but it was so slow that the actual climb angle was pretty good.
Click to expand...

Flying a Challenger II ultralight Sport Plane you can climb pretty well (light load & cool day) at somewhere near 1200fpm but the forward speed will be in the low to mid 40's. o_O

I never flew mine where I needed to talk to anyone ...
 
Dana said:
On the rare occasion I go into a class D, I make the call as "experimental Hatz 205GM", and they always come back to me as "experimental 205GM." Once they realize how slow I'm going, I usually get "experimental 5GM, say again type aircraft?"
Click to expand...

Yeah, who builds their own airplane to go slow...

;-)
 
Palmpilot said:
What about the AIM recommendation to notify ATC when you can't climb at least 500 FPM? I've gotten the impression that controllers don't care about such calls, at least from the average bug-smasher.
Click to expand...

Every controller I've seen comment on this seems to not care about this at all. If they need more, they'll ask if you can do more.
 
I’ve flown an RV for two years and even done a Checkride in it. I’ve never said the words experimental to a controller. I guess I’m a rule breaker!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
I’m of the opinion that this particular rule harkens back to the era of mainly plans built E-AB aircraft that rarely visited controlled airports. Starting in the 90s with the proliferation of kit built aircraft, particularly RVs, the rule is now an anachronism that really provides little to no value. YMMV.....
 
tsts4 said:
Initial call “experimental RV 728TT”. After that I drop the “experimental”.
Click to expand...


This is how I do it.
Then, however the controller answers me back, either with or without the "experimental", ie. experimental 781DM, or 781DM, or 1DM. It's happened all three ways the past 2 flights. I respond with the same.
 
Last edited:
Yup say "experimental xxx" Sometimes they ask what type of experimental you are and sometimes not.

Funny thing is that "technically" you are supposed to say the type on the AWC. So my RV-6 was built by William Carter so "technically" its a "William Carter" and not an RV-6
 
luvflyin said:
A few years a company in Madras, OR was turning MD80’s into Borate Bombers. They used ‘experimental.’ Caused some grief flying one into Hillsboro KHIO one day, using that, experimental, nothing else. Called up, said we’re here. Tower said do this and report there. It turned into a little bit of an air show when an MD80 came screamin into the pattern and reported ‘there.’
Click to expand...
I've seen those folks fly. Absolutely amazing what they do with transport category aircraft. They were probably laughing the whole time.
 
Well hell, when I fly everything is classified as experiments… Ah.. experimental.
 
I check in with “Experimental Gyro xxxxxx” and have that posted on my panel so I don’t forget the wording. I don’t say the type of gyro on initial call-up since we’re all the same basic speed and performance. For the rare controller who does ask for type, I have “MM16/U” posted on my panel as well.

All that said, seems to me “Experimental Gyro” is redundant: there are probably literally less than 10 that aren’t Experimental in the US right now.
 
luvflyin said:
A few years a company in Madras, OR was turning MD80’s into Borate Bombers. They used ‘experimental.’ Caused some grief flying one into Hillsboro KHIO one day, using that, experimental, nothing else. Called up, said we’re here. Tower said do this and report there. It turned into a little bit of an air show when an MD80 came screamin into the pattern and reported ‘there.’
Click to expand...
Or the wiseguy in a Stearman who (technically correctly) uses "Boeing"... :biggrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top