I don't care that much about callsigns as long as people announce where they are clearly, but I'll mention the increasingly common use of "Experimental 12 Bravo" as a pretty meaningless call sign. You might as well say "Airplane 12 Bravo" since it could be practically anything.

rw2 wrote:

kg wrote:Having recently starting using ADSB and with the Scout unit magically tied to Foreflight on my iPad, I realized that many N numbers are displayed. So when N12345, N54321, and N98765 are all in the pattern, I am better aware of where each of them are.

That is a very interesting point...

Kind of along with the repeating the airport name at the end, or just missing the meat of a call, I’ve had instances where the tail number was still echoing between the ears and I’ve been able take a half second glance at the iPad and see where that person is. Yes, true, not all plane have or will have ADS-B out, but a half second glance can give me a more complete picture if they do.

When I started flying planes with TCAS, it was surprising how much traffic existed that I never saw. I’ve found the same to be true with ADS-B. Not because I was looking, but simply because I wasn’t seeing.

Twice in the last couple of months it saved my bacon from what easily could have been midairs. First was climbing out of Preston, Idaho. A flight school plane was calling some RNAV approach which meant nothing to me. My old iPad was having issues showing traffic so I grabbed my phone and opened FF. As soon as it opened it showed a target at 3 o’clock high and 600’ same direction. I was climbing, he was descending. I banked away and sure enough, there he was. I’m a high wing, he was a low wing. No matter how much my head was on a swivel, I’d never of seen him in that position. I got home and ordered a new iPad that could handle the data coming into it from Stratus.

Second one was leaving Boulder City. Just departed and had a 210 descending for the airport on a collision course. Frequency was very congested. All the local guys were using local “known to them” fixes. I barely picked the 210 up within a half mile, but knew he was there because of ADS-B in. Had I not adjusted course because of that, I believe we likely would have traded paint. Scary stuff!

With all the new gadgets in the cockpit, the trick is to not get your head buried in them, but instead to wisely allot each the amount of time that makes it useful, and not cross over to where it becomes a distraction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Grassstrippilot wrote:With all the new gadgets in the cockpit, the trick is to not get your head buried in them, but instead to wisely allot each the amount of time that makes it useful, and not cross over to where it becomes a distraction.

Amen, but much easier said than done, particularly on small screens.

MTV

Very true! Especially old eyes on small screens with sun glare. Eye doc says I’ve got a few more years before I’ll need something done. Blah! Not looking forward to that!

One thing FF added was the voice warning with range and bearing. A nice feature. Another small piece to the puzzle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just to stir the pot a little more...

There's more than one airplane flying around out there without ANY radio...perfectly legal, too.

When my radio dies I'd say there's a 50/50 chance I won't replace it. Anyone looking at their ipad or relying on radio transmissions to keep from hitting things in the air had better have one eye out the window, or they're going to ruin both our days.

I now use a description because my Cub flys a much slower and smaller pattern then the rest of the guys around these parts.

And.......the harder you kick that pony, the deader she gets [emoji1591]

Any traffic in the area, please advise [emoji482][emoji482][emoji482]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Skalywag wrote:And.......the harder you kick that pony, the deader she gets [emoji1591]

Any traffic in the area, please advise [emoji482][emoji482][emoji482]

LOL - "last call, over and out."

All that radio chatter is great. Whatever type. They often say they find the Cirus pilot in the smokin' crater with his finger clinched to the PTT button.

I fly NORDO all the time. However, I do have the best moving map with brightest nits at better than 4k resolution that displays all types of traffic. VFR. IFR. Baloon. Blimp. Ultralight. LSA. It's called a windshield.

Sometimes I fly a Luscombe with an radio run by a wind generator and I don't like wasting electricity. No problem. Perfectly compliant not transmitting and following non-towered procedures as designed.

I do make exceptions. Like a local non-towered field where it seems everybody does straight-in approaches (doesn't anybody follow advice in the AIM?). Sometimes if some hotdog is doing a 10 to 5 mile final without flying the pattern I will transmit telling them to be careful as there is a no-radio taildragger on downwind doing touch and goes and he may not see you before he turns base. It's me naturally but maybe they'll see the value in always doing pattern entries per the AIM.

jliltd wrote:...
Sometimes I fly a Luscombe with an radio run by a wind generator and I don't like wasting electricity. No problem. Perfectly compliant not transmitting and following non-towered procedures as designed.

I do make exceptions. Like a local non-towered field where it seems everybody does straight-in approaches (doesn't anybody follow advice in the AIM?). Sometimes if some hotdog is doing a 10 to 5 mile final without flying the pattern I will transmit telling them to be careful as there is a no-radio taildragger on downwind doing touch and goes and he may not see you before he turns base. It's me naturally but maybe they'll see the value in always doing pattern entries per the AIM.

Along with it recommending pilots follow pattern procedures as designed, the AIM also recommends transmitting on the radio if you have one. In the words of a wise pilot who sometimes flies a Luscombe with a radio run by a wind generator, "Doesn't anybody follow advice in the AIM?"

asa wrote:

jliltd wrote:...
Sometimes I fly a Luscombe with an radio run by a wind generator and I don't like wasting electricity. No problem. Perfectly compliant not transmitting and following non-towered procedures as designed.

I do make exceptions. Like a local non-towered field where it seems everybody does straight-in approaches (doesn't anybody follow advice in the AIM?). Sometimes if some hotdog is doing a 10 to 5 mile final without flying the pattern I will transmit telling them to be careful as there is a no-radio taildragger on downwind doing touch and goes and he may not see you before he turns base. It's me naturally but maybe they'll see the value in always doing pattern entries per the AIM.

Along with recommending pilots follow pattern procedures as designed, the AIM also recommends transmitting on the radio if you have one. In the words of a wise pilot who sometimes flies a Luscombe with a radio run by a wind generator, "Doesn't anybody follow advice in the AIM?"

heh heh heh heh heh heh heh Very well said sir.

The guys that always want to do straight in approaches drive me nuts. If nobody is in the pattern its fine, but when there's traffic they really need to just enter the pattern instead of forcing everyone else to adjust to suit them.

As for radios, I know they aren't required, but it seems silly and unsafe not to use them if your equipped.

Kansas Flyer wrote: The guys that always want to do straight in approaches drive me nuts. If nobody is in the pattern its fine, but when there's traffic they really need to just enter the pattern instead of forcing everyone else to adjust to suit them.
As for radios, I know they aren't required, but it seems silly and unsafe not to use them if your equipped.

Ditto on the radio comment.
It's a pretty good tool for coordinating evryone in the pattern, if used correctly.

Re straight-ins,
I always get a kick out of the guy who says "5 mile (or whatever) straight-in, traffic permitting"....
with 4 or 5 airplanes in the pattern, all reporting their positions..
IMHO what that translates to is "here I come, get out of my way".

hotrod180 wrote:

Kansas Flyer wrote: The guys that always want to do straight in approaches drive me nuts. If nobody is in the pattern its fine, but when there's traffic they really need to just enter the pattern instead of forcing everyone else to adjust to suit them.
As for radios, I know they aren't required, but it seems silly and unsafe not to use them if your equipped.

Ditto on the radio comment.
It's a pretty good tool for coordinating evryone in the pattern, if used correctly.

Re straight-ins,
I always get a kick out of the guy who says "5 mile (or whatever) straight-in, traffic permitting"....
with 4 or 5 airplanes in the pattern, all reporting their positions..
IMHO what that translates to is "here I come, get out of my way".

I don't think so. In a normal pattern, there are going to be gaps--not everyone butts up to the airplane ahead. If I'm doing a long straight-in (such as on a practice RNAV or ILS approach, which all have long straight-in legs), I'll meld into the pattern if I can, such as if when I'm on a 1 mile final and the nearest other traffic is mid-downwind or even close to turning base. But if when I get to a mile out and there's someone on base, I'll break off and go upwind if I'm still planning to land, or leave the area altogether if not. I think most who are practicing instrument approaches take that view, i.e., fit in if possible, but if not, don't interfere with the pattern. Many, myself included, make that clear in one of our call-ups.

On the other hand, there are those who really do intend to bull themselves into the pattern, regardless of other traffic. So those already in the pattern obviously have to keep an eye out for jerks like that. Unfortunately, there are pilots who think the world revolves around them, just like there are those in every other pursuit of happiness or dollars.

Maintaining a congenial atmosphere is really the best way, if at all possible. I had a good example just a few days ago. I was doing a mock RNAV 10 approach to GXY. At 10 miles out, my radio call was similar to what I said earlier, "Greeley-Weld traffic, Cessna xxx is 10 miles out on the RNAV 10 approach, straight in for 10." In the interim, i.e., the almost 5 minutes it took me to get to the pattern at roughly 120 mph, it was clear that there were several airplanes in the pattern, and a couple were obviously students. So I made a couple more calls as I got closer, each time saying I was on a practice RNAV 10 approach and giving the distance out.

At roughly 3 miles out, I just announced that I was on a 3 mile final. There was an airplane on downwind, and the pilot announced, "Skyhawk xxx will extend downwind for the traffic on final." I replied, "Thanks--xxx is now on a 1 mile final". That's being congenial.

He had turned final before I exited the runway, but I could make the first turn-off, to get out of his way. He did me a favor; I returned the favor.

However, I've certainly seen airplanes decide to taxi the length of runways rather than exit ASAP. To me, that's the opposite of trying to create a congenial atmosphere, just as insisting on barging into an active pattern is. The more we treat the other guy like we want to be treated, the better off we all are.

Cary

Cary wrote:I do get a kick out of hearing, "Skyhawk xxx is on left final."

Cary

I was on a left final once.

Tower put me on a 4 mile left base and cleared me for a full stop. .....JUST before a Citation called in 10 miles out.

After a pause, tower told me, in a nutshell, "Skyhawk xxx, ignore pattern, aim for the numbers, get on the ground, and turn left first taxiway."

Now I don't know if that was the right thing for the tower to do, but I had alot of fun with that "left final". It wasn't long after I was clear of the runway that I saw the Citation touch down.

(Once they clear you to land, can they not change that?) Maybe he was concerned about wake turbulence.

Anyway, back on topic. I think I am going to go with color and model at non-towered airports. I learned using my N-number. I don't know if I would say one method is better than the other.

The color might really help depending on your plane. Sure there are lots of white planes, but if yours is mostly red, yellow, green, blue, etc., then it may help others know what to look for.

As said earlier, whats more important is location. What airfield and where from the airfield.... followed by the airfield again.

By the time my mind focuses on your radio call, or I stop talking with a passenger; I may entirely miss what airfield you said. That is why I always end with restating the airfield.

kevinmax wrote:On the other hand I've had people jump on the radio and ask "doesn't that plane have a tail number?" I since have asked other instructors about it and the answers seem to be about 50/50.

If they were being silly, then I would ignore them. However, in the up and coming world of ADS-B, they may just be asking so they know which blip on the screen you are. (I assume thats how it works because I don't use it yet.)

ShadowAviator wrote: .....Anyway, back on topic. I think I am going to go with color and model at non-towered airports. I learned using my N-number. I don't know if I would say one method is better than the other.
The color might really help depending on your plane. Sure there are lots of white planes, but if yours is mostly red, yellow, green, blue, etc., then it may help others know what to look for.
As said earlier, whats more important is location. What airfield and where from the airfield.... followed by the airfield again.
By the time my mind focuses on your radio call, or I stop talking with a passenger; I may entirely miss what airfield you said. That is why I always end with restating the airfield. ....

Since this topic started I have noticed several times while flying people NOT adding the airport name at the end of their position report.
I've realized that it does better help me catch which airport they're at.
I think sometimes the airport gets clipped off the beginning--
maybe by pilot starting to talk before hitting (or releasing) the mike switch?

I've also realized that when others report aircraft type but not color, it doesn't hinder my situational awareness.
So from now on I'm probably just going with "skywagon".

I was chatting with my flight instructor yesterday and he told me about a near miss he had a couple weeks ago.

Buddy calls "Squamish traffic, Cessna XXX, Inbound for landing from the Northwest, 18 mile"

All good, except he was not saying he was 18 miles out, he was referring to a fairly well known intersection of two logging roads which is only about 8 miles from the airport. My instructor was climbing out of the circuit and passed way to close for comfort as Buddy entered.

Classic case of using local landmarks that aren't on the chart, but egregious because the landmark name was so confusing. My instructor admitted he should have been more clear about his own location as well.

I fly in the DFW area at a towered control airport. I would just be happy if I could understand what some of these pilots say. Either they are from a non English speaking country with very poor English skills, or they are country folks that are talking mush mouth. I flew over to East Texas, and as I was trying to call in for landing at the airport, there were two Country Hick’s talking with each other on the airport frequency, and I never could find a break in their conversation to call in. As I was heading in on final, they paused long enough for me to announce, and then ask the to go to the air to air frequency. The frequency is for communications about locations, intent, etc, speak clearly, enunciate your words, and make it brief. I really could care less about the farmers old ford pick up truck not running well.

FWIW FAA just pout out a new draft of an advisory circular about operating at a non-towered airport.
I read through it, and little to nothing new that I could discern.
Not a helluva lot about radio calls, at least the phraseology.

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs ... d_Copy.pdf

Like many others I was taught using my tailnumber, but have adopted color/type.

"Yellow Cub" is faster to say, and gives others more information than "Cub 8-1-5"

There isnt a wrong or a right (since radios arent required) so go with what makes more sense to you. To me color/type has more value added, nobody cares what my tailnumber is, but they know what a yellow cub looks like.