One thing that should have been taught to you in basic training, but was not.

[flyingcheesehead]

Ahh... so the jet pilot departing an uncontrolled field who will be accelerating to 250 kts (at least 300 mph at a high altitude field), doesn't have any business knowing about a Cessna three miles from the field because he had not yet made a call. He may not realize the direction or speed of the jet departure so may not feel it necessary to announce.
As one who has been in the jet's position more times than I can count, I want the big picture of where the local traffic is.

If you don't already have the big picture before you take off, ATITAPA isn't going to help you. If there's more than one plane in the area, they're either going to step on each other trying to reply to you, or they're not going to reply. You're also wasting frequency time on a useless statement - Just announce that you're departing and in which direction, and any pilot in that direction is going to respond.

I specifically do not reply to ATITAPA when there's more than one plane in the area to avoid stepping on others. I also think you sound very unprofessional, and yes I'm silently judging you because you can't even follow a simple statement from the AIM, 4-1-9(g)(1): "Pilots stating, “Traffic in the area, please advise” is not a recognized Self−Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition."

So you think the FAA is incorrect?

 

[Kritchlow]

If you don't already have the big picture before you take off, ATITAPA isn't going to help you. If there's more than one plane in the area, they're either going to step on each other trying to reply to you, or they're not going to reply. You're also wasting frequency time on a useless statement - Just announce that you're departing and in which direction, and any pilot in that direction is going to respond.

I specifically do not reply to ATITAPA when there's more than one plane in the area to avoid stepping on others. I also think you sound very unprofessional, and yes I'm silently judging you because you can't even follow a simple statement from the AIM, 4-1-9(g)(1): "Pilots stating, “Traffic in the area, please advise” is not a recognized Self−Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition."

So you think the FAA is incorrect?

Don't care about the AIM advisory. I've got too many years inadvertently over running small guys in the pattern. Experience does count for something.
If I hear two planes step on each other the flag goes up and I wait..
departing in a jet often we are getting clearances or releases at the threshold, so can't always monitor like most ga craft.

I'm just not going to trust a solo student to understand the performance of a jet climbing out of the pattern.

You don't have to respond when I ask. But, you may have increased the chances of a closure rate in your windshield of more than .5 Mach. I think that's awesome that you are so stubborn as to disregard safety.

I didn't make this up. I was a PP flying a small airplane once also. I couldn't understand certain things at that point either. Live and learn.
There are bigger problems in aviation than a professional pilot wanting to know where the traffic is.

 

[denverpilot]

I count myself fairly fortunate that my PPL training covered most of the stuff that is listed in this thread.

One thing I would have liked to have covered is how to properly tie down the plane with chains. (Depending on the size of the links/hooks and the tie-downs on the plane it can be a little tricky). I watched a few youtube videos on it prior to my first XC after getting my PPL when I was going to be parking the plane overnight. I got it done, but a hands on demonstration would have been nice.

Watch this. Keith was so distraught after seeing 40 aircraft destroyed at Chandler, AZ by a microburst, that he had his daughter help him shoot the video. He grew up flying in Wyoming, and if you know anything about Wyoming wind...

Also the carabiner idea is awful. Just learn how to use the chain properly. The chain is (supposed to be) rated for the pulling force. People who rarely use carabiners for heavy loads, buy the weak pot metal crap for keychains, and then they break. The clips and their through-pins are usually the severe weak-point on carabiners. Granted, many here probably do use carabiners for real loads, and those who do, know a set of carabiners capable of being screwed together (no "snap clips" allowed) after installation and that have ratings of thousands of pounds, are NOT cheap. But you simply don't need to spend over $100 (maybe $200 if you're serious about it) on three good carabiners. The chain can do the entire job, when used properly.

In the video, the chains are into solid anchors... out on a ramp, you USUALLY see (if chains are done properly), chains attached to a cable. The CABLE will allow enough slack that the chains don't have to be loose or have any play in them, at all. In fact, usually you want to LIFT the cable slightly with your foot as you pick how much chain to put through the tie-down on the aircraft. Think "bow and arrow" here... you're pre-tensioning the cable just a bit without removing ALL ability for the aircraft to move.

The other trick is to do the wings first with the chains directly under the tie-downs, and if you got the tension on the cable right, you can push the airplane BACK just a LITTLE BIT before attaching the tail chain. That will also pre-tension the whole system a bit to try to pull the aircraft forward slightly keeping a little tension on the tail chain. (You get used to how much tension is needed with your foot, and how much can be taken up by a slight push-back with only a few minutes of practice. You don't want the cable pulled way up off the ground or pulled back so hard it's trying to spring the airplane forward, but you also don't want it just lying there flat on the ground with no tension at all. What you're trying to do is keep the airplane from using the slack in the cable to "hop" up and down if the wind comes up enough to create that much lift.

I've seen an entire row of aircraft on a properly built cable/chain system at BJC "flying" in their tie-downs... all off the ground a bit, doing small hops as gusts come and go, and none of them going anywhere. The NCAR facility near BJC and the NOAA monitoring a couple miles away near Rocky Flats, both regularly measure winds on bad days in excess of 100 MPH. The winds at BJC can be absolutely brutal a couple of days a year.

 

[jordane93]

If a CFI or CFII suggested or tried to turned off the plane like this while I was in it they would be fired as soon as we got back to the ramp.

Ok. I've never lost a student doing it so I guess I'm doing something right

 

[flyingcheesehead]

There is never a need to kill an entire panel or an engine in the air during training. Pulling a breaker to simulate a partial panel loss is okay, but there is no guarantee a full panel kill will be benign.

The Instrument Checkride PTS for example: "When flight TASKS are accomplished in an aircraft, certain TASK elements may be accomplished through “simulated” actions in the interest of safety and practicality..." "For example, when in an aircraft, a simulated engine fire may be addressed by retarding the throttle to idle, simulating the shutdown of the engine, simulating the discharge of the fire suppression agent, if applicable, simulating the disconnection of associated electrical, hydraulic, and pneumatics systems."

An engine fire is an entirely different beast, as the actions you take in response to it are going to kill your engine. Not something that should be done in practice or without a full briefing at least.

But what is wrong with killing the panel when practicing emergency procedures? It's certainly not worth firing a CFI over the mere suggestion of it.

 

[James331]

Watch this. Keith was so distraught after seeing 40 aircraft destroyed at Chandler, AZ by a microburst, that he had his daughter help him shoot the video. He grew up flying in Wyoming, and if you know anything about Wyoming wind...

Also the carabiner idea is awful. Just learn how to use the chain properly. The chain is (supposed to be) rated for the pulling force. People who rarely use carabiners for heavy loads, buy the weak pot metal crap for keychains, and then they break. The clips and their through-pins are usually the severe weak-point on carabiners. Granted, many here probably do use carabiners for real loads, and those who do, know a set of carabiners capable of being screwed together (no "snap clips" allowed) after installation and that have ratings of thousands of pounds, are NOT cheap. But you simply don't need to spend over $100 (maybe $200 if you're serious about it) on three good carabiners. The chain can do the entire job, when used properly.

In the video, the chains are into solid anchors... out on a ramp, you USUALLY see (if chains are done properly), chains attached to a cable. The CABLE will allow enough slack that the chains don't have to be loose or have any play in them, at all. In fact, usually you want to LIFT the cable slightly with your foot as you pick how much chain to put through the tie-down on the aircraft. Think "bow and arrow" here... you're pre-tensioning the cable just a bit without removing ALL ability for the aircraft to move.

The other trick is to do the wings first with the chains directly under the tie-downs, and if you got the tension on the cable right, you can push the airplane BACK just a LITTLE BIT before attaching the tail chain. That will also pre-tension the whole system a bit to try to pull the aircraft forward slightly keeping a little tension on the tail chain. (You get used to how much tension is needed with your foot, and how much can be taken up by a slight push-back with only a few minutes of practice. You don't want the cable pulled way up off the ground or pulled back so hard it's trying to spring the airplane forward, but you also don't want it just lying there flat on the ground with no tension at all. What you're trying to do is keep the airplane from using the slack in the cable to "hop" up and down if the wind comes up enough to create that much lift.

I've seen an entire row of aircraft on a properly built cable/chain system at BJC "flying" in their tie-downs... all off the ground a bit, doing small hops as gusts come and go, and none of them going anywhere. The NCAR facility near BJC and the NOAA monitoring a couple miles away near Rocky Flats, both regularly measure winds on bad days in excess of 100 MPH. The winds at BJC can be absolutely brutal a couple of days a year.

West marine SS carabiners, spliced 3 strand FTW

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Don't care about the AIM advisory. I've got too many years inadvertently over running small guys in the pattern.

And you've never run over anyone with ATITAPA? How do you think it helps? And which group of pilots do you think there is that responds to ATITAPA that doesn't respond to a jet making a depature call?

departing in a jet often we are getting clearances or releases at the threshold, so can't always monitor like most ga craft.

Bah. You have two pilots in most jets. One can monitor while one gets the clearance. If you're single pilot, guess what - You're just like the rest of us. We have to get our clearances and releases before takeoff too.

You don't have to respond when I ask. But, you may have increased the chances of a closure rate in your windshield of more than .5 Mach. I think that's awesome that you are so stubborn as to disregard safety.

I'll still make my calls. I'm not going to be entirely silent - But I'm also not going to respond immediately just because you said ATITAPA. I'm going to respond the same as if you didn't... Except for maybe a hair delayed to make sure I'm not stepping on anyone.

There are bigger problems in aviation than a professional pilot wanting to know where the traffic is.

Yeah, like frequency congestion due to all the "professionals" who disregard both the FAA's guideline and the uselessness of the phrase and do it anyway.

 

[denverpilot]

West marine SS carabiners, spliced 3 strand FTW

Still ridiculously expensive and unnecessary considering the chain will do the job, and it's right there in your hand. LOL!

 

[NoHeat]

Also the carabiner idea is awful. Just learn how to use the chain properly.

The tail tie-down is not a big eye-bolt, for a Cirrus. See the photo. Its opening is too small for most chains, with their S-hooks or clips. So how do you propose to "use the chain properly"?

The $10 screw-type carabiner I bought for this purpose (still haven't used it) is not the cheap kind used for key rings. It is intended for climbers, and it is rated for 5400 pounds along its main axis, which exceeds the 3000 pound minimum suggested by the FAA for ropes. It will pass through the opening of the tie-down. What's wrong with that?

 

[denverpilot]

The tail tie-down is not a big eye-bolt, for a Cirrus. See the photo. Its opening is too small for most chains, with their S-hooks or clips. So how do you propose to "use the chain properly"?View attachment 53298

The $10 screw-type carabiner I bought for this purpose (still haven't used it) is not the cheap kind used for key rings. It is intended for climbers, and it is rated for 5400 pounds along its main axis, which exceeds the 3000 pound minimum suggested by the FAA for ropes. It will pass through the opening of the tie-down. What's wrong with that?

Nothing. Just have to be careful telling folks to buy carabiners who don't know carabiners.

Where are these gargantuan chains that won't fit thru? That looks to be at least 1.5" diameter if not 2"... sheesh. What airports are using larger than 2" across chain links?!

(If the S won't fit through, a pair of $3 pliers in the airplane toolbox will fix that. Yes, I've seen a FEW (dumb) airports use 2.5" S-hooks or bigger, WAY bigger than the chain links, and they need to be slapped.)

 

[Clark1961]

Nothing. Just have to be careful telling folks to buy carabiners who don't know carabiners.

Where are these gargantuan chains that won't fit thru? That looks to be at least 1.5" diameter if not 2"... sheesh. What airports are using larger than 2" across chain links?!

(If the S won't fit through, a pair of $3 pliers in the airplane toolbox will fix that. Yes, I've seen a FEW (dumb) airports use 2.5" S-hooks or bigger, WAY bigger than the chain links, and they need to be slapped.)

Any airport using chains without cables or some other soft tensioning needs to be slapped. Carry rope or straps so use of bad tie downs is not required. Of course rental aircraft can be a bit of a problem.

The anchor points can also be a problem for straps. I have found some that are too large for the hooks on straps and they don't have enough clearance to pass the hook around. Have also found ice filling the anchor bowl. No fun chipping it out. Oh the joys of flying to unattended/little used airports.

 

[eaglepilot]

Trimming the plane and flying hands off. Throttle makes the plane go up or down. Yoke makes it go fast or slow. Playing with those things for muscle memory. e.g. when I fly the Supercub, I set the engine at 1500, and can either be straight and level at 65 mph or nose high at 43 mph. With no change in altitude. Can`t make it stall. YMMV. Haven`t tried it in a 172.

If you are coming in too high for a good approach, it`s better to slow the plane to almost stall, and drift down rather than diving for the runway.

 

[Rebel Lord]

For those of us that have our PPL's or are working towards them. Name something that you feel should be taught, but most people are not. Or something you have learned since you ticket that you feel is extremely useful. My two thing to start.

Actual spins
Skew t graphs.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

How to lean

 

[Hank S]

departing in a jet often we are getting clearances or releases at the threshold, so can't always monitor like most ga craft.

There are bigger problems in aviation than a professional pilot wanting to know where the traffic is.

Bless your heart! I would think that a professional pilot flying a jet airplane would be able to listen to the radio at some point before pulling out to the runway to depart, and asking if anyone else is around . . . . . Surely you were able to do that as a lowly piston pilot before the Jet A fumes ruined your senses? I think either you don't care, or you think it's beneath you as a jet pilot, and everyone else should just get out of your way, because you know, you're flying a jet.

Get over yourself, turn on the radio (you do have more than one, right?), set it to CTAF / UNICOM and use it for something other than your landing requests for fuel, cars and catering--you know, the Common Traffic Advisory Frequency, designed for air traffic to communicate with each other in the vicinity of airports?

P.S.--I sometimes get my clearance before I taxi out, so that other planes don't have to sit and wait behind me while I ask for clearance . . . . But then again, my momma learnt me manners . . .

 

[Kritchlow]

And you've never run over anyone with ATITAPA? How do you think it helps? And which group of pilots do you think there is that responds to ATITAPA that doesn't respond to a jet making a depature call?



Bah. You have two pilots in most jets. One can monitor while one gets the clearance. If you're single pilot, guess what - You're just like the rest of us. We have to get our clearances and releases before takeoff too.



I'll still make my calls. I'm not going to be entirely silent - But I'm also not going to respond immediately just because you said ATITAPA. I'm going to respond the same as if you didn't... Except for maybe a hair delayed to make sure I'm not stepping on anyone.



Yeah, like frequency congestion due to all the "professionals" who disregard both the FAA's guideline and the uselessness of the phrase and do it anyway.

Okay... I'll try to respond although I'm on my phone.

1) It does help. It's not perfect, but if the GA community took their hobby a bit more seriously it would help. Even if 1/2 of the people respond that is half in my favor.

2) not quite. Many companies SOPs require both pilots to get clearance. Not always as easy as you make it seem.
Plus you're guaranteeing the student pilot five miles out made a call..??

3) again, many PP have no concept of a .5 Mach closure rate. My intention for the calm is in the interest of safety. If some idiot wants to stay silent, he may get a windshield full of airplane faster than he can wish he responded.

4) funny how you disregard "professional" pilots. Let's compare safety records.

 

[denverpilot]

Trimming the plane and flying hands off.

That this was not taught to you by your CFI makes me want to find them and slap them. Hard.

 

[Zeldman]

I'll go round on that one all you like. For now I'll just leave it as I respectfully disagree.

I am not surprised.

 

[Kritchlow]

I am not surprised.

Yeah.... I only wish I didn't get suckered in and renig on my statement.

Any further traffic pattern stuff I will wait for a specific thread on that.

Over & out onthe aatooa (or whatever the eff it is) I'll bow out for now.

 

[dell30rb]

If I end up getting my CFI ticket I will spend a lot of time going over NTSB reports with my students. Fun things like solo XC's and practicing maneuvers will be punctuated with the occasional sobering review of NTSB reports...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[denverpilot]

If I end up getting my CFI ticket I will spend a lot of time going over NTSB reports with my students. Fun things like solo XC's and practicing maneuvers will be punctuated with the occasional sobering review of NTSB reports...

No need to scare them that much. (Some people are honestly scared unnecessarily by such things early on.) Just summarize.

My current instructor spent some "quality time" digging up every Seminole accident ever recorded, printed them all, put them in a big binder, and then categorized them all down to about ten different types of accident.

That way, he knew what students would do both during training and afterward to try to kill themselves in that aircraft.

He kinda did his own little Nall Report for the airplane.

Then he likes to ask, "What do you suppose the most common accident is in this airplane?" as a conversation starter sometime during training. Especially to CFI candidates. Knowing that the book (he prints new accidents and keeps it updated) is sitting on the shelf right behind the student. Heh.

"Why don't you reach over there and hand me that binder that says 'Seminole Accidents'... and let's take a look."

When you open it you realize it's already tabbed and a couple of the tabs are ugh thicker than others. You've been had. Ha. The tabs however, are NOT marked. You have to read a few in each tab to figure out what the mistake or problem is that's common to them.

I feel like the point of his "lesson" is that the CFI had better do the legwork on the NTSB reports and know the answer before they try to pop quiz the student.

So yeah. NTSB reports. But know your stuff before you whip those puppies out!

 

[Kritchlow]

Bless your heart! I would think that a professional pilot flying a jet airplane would be able to listen to the radio at some point before pulling out to the runway to depart, and asking if anyone else is around . . . . . Surely you were able to do that as a lowly piston pilot before the Jet A fumes ruined your senses? I think either you don't care, or you think it's beneath you as a jet pilot, and everyone else should just get out of your way, because you know, you're flying a jet.

Get over yourself, turn on the radio (you do have more than one, right?), set it to CTAF / UNICOM and use it for something other than your landing requests for fuel, cars and catering--you know, the Common Traffic Advisory Frequency, designed for air traffic to communicate with each other in the vicinity of airports?

P.S.--I sometimes get my clearance before I taxi out, so that other planes don't have to sit and wait behind me while I ask for clearance . . . . But then again, my momma learnt me manners . . .

Air carriers have SOPs. It's not about getting over myself. I'm sorry you don't understand that.

Many (most?) ATC facilities won't give you a clearance until you're ready to go. Granted some do give a clearance with a "hold for release", but that's far from a guarantee.

So, before you start digging into me you may want to get your facts straight.

I love GA. I'm all for it. But, I call it like I see it. In all liklyhood I have more time in reverse than most here have in the airplane.
Not a boast, just saying that *maybe* I've learned something along the way.

Perhaps I've learned a thing or two to pass along here at POA. Something that is not published in the AIM but is acquired after 30 years/20,000 hours experience.
Oh, I forgot.. everyone here is an expert.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

1) It does help. It's not perfect, but if the GA community took their hobby a bit more seriously it would help. Even if 1/2 of the people respond that is half in my favor.

I would posit that you'd get at least as many responses without ATITAPA, so it's nothing in your favor. Who is this mythical pilot that responds to ATITAPA but not to a normal traffic call?

2) not quite. Many companies SOPs require both pilots to get clearance. Not always as easy as you make it seem.

Okay, so then you're reduced to being like the rest of us who don't have the luxury of a right seater and actually monitoring both radios. If I can do it, why can't you?

Plus you're guaranteeing the student pilot five miles out made a call..??

You're guaranteeing they're going to make a call after you do *only* if you add ATITAPA?

4) funny how you disregard "professional" pilots. Let's compare safety records.

I hold professional pilots in high regard. Professional pilots are the ones that do what the FAA and their OpSpecs say, not those who make up their own way because they think it's safer.

Many (most?) ATC facilities won't give you a clearance until you're ready to go. Granted some do give a clearance with a "hold for release", but that's far from a guarantee.

I've never had one refuse a hold-for-release clearance *when I asked for it*. Not sure why they would ever have a reason to do so. Would love to hear from a controller on this one.

But even when I do get my clearance at the hold short line, I'm still monitoring CTAF. If I hear something but can't understand it because I was listening to the clearance or for whatever other reason, I'll pay extra-close attention when I check final and pause for a few seconds after I make my departure call to ensure that anyone who's in the area has a chance to respond before I cross the hold short line. No ATITAPA necessary.

 

[Kritchlow]

I would posit that you'd get at least as many responses without ATITAPA, so it's nothing in your favor. Who is this mythical pilot that responds to ATITAPA but not to a normal traffic call?



Okay, so then you're reduced to being like the rest of us who don't have the luxury of a right seater and actually monitoring both radios. If I can do it, why can't you?



You're guaranteeing they're going to make a call after you do *only* if you add ATITAPA?



I hold professional pilots in high regard. Professional pilots are the ones that do what the FAA and their OpSpecs say, not those who make up their own way because they think it's safer.



I've never had one refuse a hold-for-release clearance *when I asked for it*. Not sure why they would ever have a reason to do so. Would love to hear from a controller on this one.

But even when I do get my clearance at the hold short line, I'm still monitoring CTAF. If I hear something but can't understand it because I was listening to the clearance or for whatever other reason, I'll pay extra-close attention when I check final and pause for a few seconds after I make my departure call to ensure that anyone who's in the area has a chance to respond before I cross the hold short line. No ATITAPA necessary.

Alright... I'm suckered in here...

The point is when we depart, a small airplane that may or may have not made there I iniail call may be in our path. They just may not understand what's happening with a closure rate in excess of half the speed of sound. Even if he is aware, great. That makes one of us. But why not two?? Or even a double check?? Makes sense to me. Im all about double checking.

You apparantly haven't been around long enough to have hold for release denied.

If every pro did everything EXACTLY by the book, there would be no room for experience.
I'm just saying... if you always want the obligatory 20 miles between cells, you may never get where you are trying to go.

 

[Clark1961]

Alright... I'm suckered in here...

The point is when we depart, a small airplane that may or may have not made there I iniail call may be in our path. They just may not understand what's happening with a closure rate in excess of half the speed of sound. Even if he is aware, great. That makes one of us. But why not two?? Or even a double check?? Makes sense to me. Im all about double checking.

You apparantly haven't been around long enough to have hold for release denied.

If every pro did everything EXACTLY by the book, there would be no room for experience.
I'm just saying... if you always want the obligatory 20 miles between cells, you may never get where you are trying to go.

Funny guy. Thinks using ATITA somehow compels folks. I'm sure textbooks have a name for that.

 

[Hank S]

Hmmm . . . Jets have two pilots and two radios, all four of which are required from engine start through taxi up until taking the runway, to run checklists and copy clearance.

How in hell do I, operating IFR all by myself, get weather, taxi and copy clearance while maintaining situational awareness on the ground and aircraft in the air, so that when I'm ready to pull onto the runway and depart, I know what's going on around me without asking on the radio for "any traffic in the area, let me know you're there cause my head's been up my patoottie and I can't keep up with what's going on around me?"

Now please bring on the lecture about how we don't know about your jet and how fast it is. It must be about 100 knots faster than its pilot, by the sound of it . . . . .

 

[Hank S]

Funny guy. Thinks using ATITA somehow compels folks. I'm sure textbooks have a name for that.

Seven letters, Clark. First letter, D. Last letter, SS. In between are UMBA.

 

[Skates97]

Watch this. Keith was so distraught after seeing 40 aircraft destroyed at Chandler, AZ by a microburst, that he had his daughter help him shoot the video. He grew up flying in Wyoming, and if you know anything about Wyoming wind...

Also the carabiner idea is awful. Just learn how to use the chain properly. The chain is (supposed to be) rated for the pulling force. People who rarely use carabiners for heavy loads, buy the weak pot metal crap for keychains, and then they break. The clips and their through-pins are usually the severe weak-point on carabiners. Granted, many here probably do use carabiners for real loads, and those who do, know a set of carabiners capable of being screwed together (no "snap clips" allowed) after installation and that have ratings of thousands of pounds, are NOT cheap. But you simply don't need to spend over $100 (maybe $200 if you're serious about it) on three good carabiners. The chain can do the entire job, when used properly.

In the video, the chains are into solid anchors... out on a ramp, you USUALLY see (if chains are done properly), chains attached to a cable. The CABLE will allow enough slack that the chains don't have to be loose or have any play in them, at all. In fact, usually you want to LIFT the cable slightly with your foot as you pick how much chain to put through the tie-down on the aircraft. Think "bow and arrow" here... you're pre-tensioning the cable just a bit without removing ALL ability for the aircraft to move.

The other trick is to do the wings first with the chains directly under the tie-downs, and if you got the tension on the cable right, you can push the airplane BACK just a LITTLE BIT before attaching the tail chain. That will also pre-tension the whole system a bit to try to pull the aircraft forward slightly keeping a little tension on the tail chain. (You get used to how much tension is needed with your foot, and how much can be taken up by a slight push-back with only a few minutes of practice. You don't want the cable pulled way up off the ground or pulled back so hard it's trying to spring the airplane forward, but you also don't want it just lying there flat on the ground with no tension at all. What you're trying to do is keep the airplane from using the slack in the cable to "hop" up and down if the wind comes up enough to create that much lift.

I've seen an entire row of aircraft on a properly built cable/chain system at BJC "flying" in their tie-downs... all off the ground a bit, doing small hops as gusts come and go, and none of them going anywhere. The NCAR facility near BJC and the NOAA monitoring a couple miles away near Rocky Flats, both regularly measure winds on bad days in excess of 100 MPH. The winds at BJC can be absolutely brutal a couple of days a year.

That's one of the videos I watched to learn how to use chains to tie down. Even if you can't get the s-hook through the tie-down like in the video you can usually get one link through far enough to put another link through it (like in the video) and then the s-hook through the link to lock it off so that the force is on the link, not the s-hook.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Hmmm . . . Jets have two pilots and two radios, all four of which are required....

Show me where two radios are required.

 

[Hank S]

Show me where two radios are required.

Show me a two-pilot jet with only one radio installed.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Show me a two-pilot jet with only one radio installed.

"Installed" is something entirely different than "required". I have MEL'd a comm radio more than once.

 

[kayoh190]

Just throwing this out there, but my airliner requires both radios to be working for dispatch. I can only MEL the VHF radio that's used for ACARS.

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled ATTITAPA ****ing match.

 

[Everskyward]

We could MEL the #2 VHF radio but not #1 because #1 would still work if the airplane was down to the emergency bus. I know this because we did it once or twice.

 

[kayoh190]

We could MEL the #2 VHF radio but not #1 because #1 would still work if the airplane was down to the emergency bus. I know this because we did it once or twice.

MEL the #2 radio, or be down to the emergency bus?

 

[Everskyward]

MEL the #2 radio, or be down to the emergency bus?

MEL the #2 radio!

 

[MauleSkinner]

Just throwing this out there, but my airliner requires both radios to be working for dispatch. I can only MEL the VHF radio that's used for ACARS.

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled ATTITAPA ****ing match.

An airline or other operator can choose to be more restrictive than the MMEL. not necessarily a bad thing.

Ive also had the "You can MEL that and fly," "true, but under these conditions it would be stupid, so I won't," conversation more than once.

 

[kayoh190]

An airline or other operator can choose to be more restrictive than the MMEL. not necessarily a bad thing.

Oh right. Good point!

 

[Kritchlow]

Seven letters, Clark. First letter, D. Last letter, SS. In between are UMBA.

Did this unprovoked attack make you feel better?

Grow up. You're acting like you're in third grade.

 

[Ravioli]

How to justify paying about $150/hour for your hobby when you only make $100/hr at your job?

Not sure where to put that in the curriculum. Maybe it is left out at the behest of the divorce lawyer lobby?

 

[Hank S]

Did this unprovoked attack make you feel better?

Grow up. You're acting like you're in third grade.

You're right, I shouldn't have lowered myself to his level. No professional pilot (define professional to suit yourself) should ever use, or defense the use of, ATITAPA radio calls.

By the way, it wasn't an unprovoked attack, it is a general statement that is applicable to any pilot who makes ATITAPA calls on the radio, at any time, near any airport, for any reason. Listen while you are taxiing, make calls while you are taxiing (starting when you begin to move), listen while approaching, make calls while approaching, and don't wait until just a couple of miles away--ten miles out on approach is a good place for your first call, but you should begin ,intending before that.

This is all basic stuff, covered in AIM and reinforced by my primary CFI. Rules don't stop being applicable on your way home from your checkride . . . . Neither do good manners. It also keeps Flight Reviews simple.

 

[denverpilot]

How to justify paying about $150/hour for your hobby when you only make $100/hr at your job?

Not sure where to put that in the curriculum. Maybe it is left out at the behest of the divorce lawyer lobby?

Work an extra .4 and eat ramen for dinner? ;-)

I've come to one conclusion that I can't totally get over but I'll have to stay out of... my wife and I want to start helping people with financial coaching in the next year or so... just simple budget and anti-debt themes... and then I'll have students who will be running up debt for flight training and I'll just have to cringe and act like I don't know they're doing it.

Goes against everything I believe fiscally, and even gives my morals a little skin irritation, but what-cha gonna do? They're adults. They get to play the game however they like.

Personally, I wouldn't go into debt for anything, especially not flying. But if I end up working through a club, I'm going to see lots of people swiping the plastic and wondering to myself how many are paying it off every month.

I'll just hum the Disney tune to myself... Let it gooooooo, let it goooooo... LOL.

I doubt I'll be asking to use a training room at the airport to be teaching any personal finance classes. LOL. There'd probably be a line of instructors waiting outside after class ready to beat my ass if I did, anyway. By the numbers, 80% of their students would quit. Hahaha.