Does anybody read the AIM anymore?

[IFLYHI]

Please tell me you're not serious.

At an untowered (FAA doesn't call them uncontrolled) field, you'd better fly the appropriate pattern and not just bomb straight in. 200 knots and 80 knots mix fine when the piston is at 1000 AGL and the turbine is at 1500 AGL (LIKE THE AIM SAYS). The only time you should be straight in at an untowered airport is when completing an instrument approach. And yes, if the wrong guy is watching, you WILL be violated for careless and reckless operation if flying a visual approach using something other than AIM standard pattern entry appropriate to the field.

If you're going to give someone a hard time about his phraseology, you better make sure you get it right yourself!!! I don't think the FAA has ever used the term "untowered", and they have used the term uncontrolled in the past. I can find references to "non-towered", which is what I think you were trying to say. Anyway, enough of that...

While the AIM is a useful document, it is not the only document we should be referencing. I did a quick search and found AC90-66A. Among other things, it says:
"The FAA encourages pilots to use the standard traffic pattern. However, for those pilots who choose to execute a straight-in approach, maneuvering for and execution of the approach should be completed so as not to disrupt the flow of arriving and departing traffic. Therefore, pilots operating in the traffic pattern should be alert at all times to aircraft executing straight-in approaches."

I believe the FAA's current stance on straight in approaches is that while they don't specifically condone them, they recognize that they may be "operationally advantageous" for some operations.

Greg

 

[dime line]

I like how in the back and forth attacks in this thread (and others), everyone feels the need to call the other one, "junior" or "son", just to make sure that the other guy and everyone else knows he is not as "seasoned and salty" as his attacker.........

Ok slick.....

 

[RNObased]

Go ahead junior say and do what you want, I don't care if you pee your pants and sit in it all day; I don't have to fly with you.

Calling "any traffic in the area please advise" once is bad enough but to do it six times inbound is something even a student pilot wouldn't do. Correct phraseology’s purpose is to minimize congestion on the frequency so everyone can announce their position.

Enjoy yourself up there above FL180 but when you come down to my territory act like a professional.

(By the way if you haven't been above FL 600 you don't have anything to brag about to me).

Now who isn't acting like a professional???? Pee in my pants???? Where do you come up with these zingers.

I'm not bragging, just stating facts.

I'm done with you, even if you are older then me, you sure as hell aren't wiser.

 

[bluefishbeagle]

Now who isn't acting like a professional???? Pee in my pants???? Where do you come up with these zingers.

I'm not bragging, just stating facts.

I'm done with you, even if you are older then me, you sure as hell aren't wiser.

Everyone knows that if you want to wrestle a pig you have to get in the mud.

 

[HSDriver]

Then I hope your AOPA legal insurance is paid up. Let me know the next time you're going to be using an untowered field in the southwest and I'll have my former co-worker from the local FSDO drop by with his note pad......

Will do...

 

[HSDriver]

If you're going to give someone a hard time about his phraseology, you better make sure you get it right yourself!!! I don't think the FAA has ever used the term "untowered", and they have used the term uncontrolled in the past. I can find references to "non-towered", which is what I think you were trying to say. Anyway, enough of that...

While the AIM is a useful document, it is not the only document we should be referencing. I did a quick search and found AC90-66A. Among other things, it says:
"The FAA encourages pilots to use the standard traffic pattern. However, for those pilots who choose to execute a straight-in approach, maneuvering for and execution of the approach should be completed so as not to disrupt the flow of arriving and departing traffic. Therefore, pilots operating in the traffic pattern should be alert at all times to aircraft executing straight-in approaches."

I believe the FAA's current stance on straight in approaches is that while they don't specifically condone them, they recognize that they may be "operationally advantageous" for some operations.

Greg

Well said. I'm done with this thread now.

 

[cush]

I have to laugh at this! A month ago I decided to get a rental check out in a 172 so I could take my kids flying. As I hadn't flown a single in over 5 years. Taxiing out to the runway I said, "cessna 1234 taxiing for departure runway 27, ANY TRAFFIC PLEASE ADVISE" as I had been on the frequency for just moments and wanted to know if any other A/C had already been making reports.

So anyway, after the checkout the wet behind the ears instructor said, "great job. But, the only thing I would say is, not to do the any traffic please advise call." Anyway Kudos to him for noticing the change, but I still think common sense would dictate, on your FIRST TRANSMISSION I like to get a heads up on what's been going on. At risk others may assume you heard their transmissions. My .02.

 

[bluefishbeagle]

I have to laugh at this! A month ago I decided to get a rental check out in a 172 so I could take my kids flying. As I hadn't flown a single in over 5 years. Taxiing out to the runway I said, "cessna 1234 taxiing for departure runway 27, ANY TRAFFIC PLEASE ADVISE" as I had been on the frequency for just moments and wanted to know if any other A/C had already been making reports.

So anyway, after the checkout the wet behind the ears instructor said, "great job. But, the only thing I would say is, not to do the any traffic please advise call." Anyway Kudos to him for noticing the change, but I still think common sense would dictate, on your FIRST TRANSMISSION I like to get a heads up on what's been going on. At risk others may assume you heard their transmissions. My .02.

Everyone please remember that this phase is banned by the AIM as inappropriate; it is not the whim of some wet behind the ears flight instructor.


Some feel they can pick and choose the Regs or AIM operating procedures that apply to them and ignore the rest but in my opinion that attitude is unprofessional.

Pilots on this forum are supposed to be some of the "best of the best". When a lowly wet behind the ears flight instructor is trying to teach his students properly and the "professional's" display the attitude that they are free to do as they please what impression does that leave?

How about a little discussion on why the Feds would not want it (ATITAPA) used? There must be some thought and reason for it's excusion.

 

[Fozzy]

There must be some thought and reason for it's excusion.

Thought and reason and the FAA!?! Sorry that argument holds no water.

 

[fischman]

Everyone please remember that this phase is banned by the AIM as inappropriate; it is not the whim of some wet behind the ears flight instructor.


Some feel they can pick and choose the Regs or AIM operating procedures that apply to them and ignore the rest but in my opinion that attitude is unprofessional.

Pilots on this forum are supposed to be some of the "best of the best". When a lowly wet behind the ears flight instructor is trying to teach his students properly and the "professional's" display the attitude that they are free to do as they please what impression does that leave?

How about a little discussion on why the Feds would not want it (ATITAPA) used? There must be some thought and reason for it's excusion.

I'm glad you posted that. That was going to be my next post. I'll be honest, I don't understand the harm in asking if there is any traffic on the radio.

Does anyone have an answer for this?