Catch 22 clearance??

[Max Rampwaite]

How are we meant to handle this (am I missing something??)

ATC says "Line up" - so you do - in a Cessna 152. Enter the runway, point in the right direction and watch the jet ahead accelerate into its take off roll.

Then, just before the point of rotation of the jet, ATC says "Cessna 152, cleared immediate take off, no delay, aircraft on short final has a landing clearance, caution wake vortex from the departing (whatever)."

[Jhieminga]

Hmm, try to get the airplane off the runway before the point of rotation of the guy before you (shouldn't be hard given the difference in size) and if there's a crosswind move to the upwind side of the runway, staying above or away from the jet's climbout path.

After this: start thinking of a way to get rid of that controller!

[Bright-Ling]

If he hasn't previously asked you to accept an immediate departure I would sit there. (You should be asked before lining up - as should you inform the controller if you want more than the minimum vortex seperation)

The aircraft going around would be a bit peeved, but it might teach the controller not to do it again!!!!

Vortex minima is just that ...... MINIMUM. (assuming the departing jet was in the small/med/heavy category.) and it MUST be applied by the controller.

However - the tips stated by Jhieminga are valid, but at 100 feet in climb out I would rather not risk being knocked around.

[Gonzo]

Tell ATC you're staying where you are until you get the proper vortex seperation (2 mins in the UK).

So ATC had cleared an arriving aircraft to land before lining you up?:eek:

But knew that you'd have to roll before getting vortex separation?
:eek:
Surely ATC should have suspected that you may not roll straight away. And yet he cleared someone to land behind you.

Hummmmmmm, interesting!

[Lanceair]

I find it interesting that youd even line up in a C152 with a jet still on the runway just starting his takeoff roll, unless he's a fair way down the runway doing an intersection departure.

And even more interesting that youd line up with another aircraft obviously so close on final. Did you not have a look before lining up ?

Just because ATC says so, doesnt mean you have to.

I learnt to fly in C152 and C172's at an airport sharing the runway with up to 767's and was always cautioned about taxiing anywhere near the rear end of a jet aircraft, let alone one on the runway.

Lanceair

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Then ATC would be wrong. In the UK we are bound to provide vortex separation. If the controller has cocked things up he ought to tell you exactly what is going on, get you off the runway fast and then line you up behind the landing traffic.

[Four Seven Eleven]

Another alternative:

"Unable, vacating....and thanks a lot!!!"

[Standard Noise]

If this happened in the UK (but I have my doubts), your response should have been, "Roger tower, but when would you like me to file the 1261, before or after take off?"
Then phone the Campaign Against Aviation and ask to have the ATCO humanely put down.

[niknak]

All this assumes that the jet concerned is of a higher vortex wake category then a C152, if that was the case, then the atco concerned was wrong for the reasons already given.
However, there are a number of "jets" which are in the smae vortex wake band as your aircraft, consequently, the departure separation would not apply, (even if the atco gave you misleading information).
When I learnt to fly, my instructor was fairly picky about me assessing whether I could accept an immediate departure behind the preceeding aircraft, and also looking up the approach prior to departure to find out where the next aircraft to land actually was.

If in doubt, stay where you are and remain comfortable.

[nodelay]

ATC is required to apply one minute minimum vortex separation between same vortex type a/c. As Niknak said, some small jets (cessnas LJ's etc) are the same vortex wake category as your cessna. It may have been better for the ATCO to have asked you if you could accept the one minute or an immediate, but if in any doubt you always have the option to refuse line up if you don't think you'll get the prescribed minimum, thereby avoiding a go around.

[Gonzo]

nodelay,

Last time I checked (admittedly a while ago:D - don't tell my LCE!!!! ), I didn't have to apply any vortex separation on departure for aircraft of similar categories. It was either two (three if from an intersection) minutes if the following a/c was lighter, or nothing at all.

The 'one minute' you refer to is just the basic route separation, which with certain a/c types can get down to 40 seconds when we use 'wheels up'. If they're all mediums and nobody hangs about you can easily get 5 departures airborne in 4 minutes.

Gonzo.

[radar707]

Gonzo has hit the nail on the head there, the other thing to add is if you were in the same vortex category, and flying VFR, then there is no required time separation, however I would question two things, firstly the controllers situational awareness, in the UK, unless specific criteria are met then a landing clearance cannot be issued until an aircraft has vacated the runway, or got airborne (land after or land after the departing), the latter only when specific permission has been granted by the authority and certain criteria will be met.
Secondly, I would question your airmanship skills, are pilots now not taught to check the final approach before entering an active runway, i for one would question a clearance to line up if I saw an aircraft on short final.

My final point is this, you have the right to say, I'll wait for 1 / 2 / 3 minutes for vortex, the controller concerned will no doubt scream and shout, calling you every name under the sun, but it is your right, you are responsible for the safety of your aircraft.
I would suggest you call the tower and try to speak to the controller to discuss the matter

[Vlax]

Max Rampwaite : What was the departing jet type?
Can you confirm which country this happend in?
Nodelay : whoops!

[tired]

As Lanceair says, Max, that was brave of you lining up in a 152 behind a jet, whatever size. My instructor would have shot me if I'd try to do that. And without even a glance up the final approach too...........?!

[Vlax]

Max Rampwaite – The Controller may well have started his transmission at the point of rotation, knowing that by the time you receive your actual take off clearance the proceeding aircraft’s wheels will have left the ground.
He may well be advising you of the reason for the immediate take off i.e. jet on short final to land, which is only implying that the issue of a landing clearance is pending.
Finally, the Controller then warns you, of the small jet (as in physical size), that has just departed. It will be the same “light” vortex as your C152, hence no need to apply the 2 or 3 min vortex departure separation. All aircraft produce some vortex turbulence, and because you are at the opposite end of the “light” category, it may be prudent to arrange your flight to avoid it.
This is what you may have heard on the R/T. “G-XX, A320 3 miles final to land. Cleared immediate takeoff, caution possible vortex turbulence from the departing C550”.
I hope the above rings true and the Controller in question is indeed doing a good job and because of him/her your name is not Max HoldingpointWaite!
Otherwise the Controller needs sacking…………

:D

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

"Well, best you cancel the landing clearance" would be my response.

[Bigmouth]

Easy now.
The 152 is going to be airborne half a mile before the jet rotates. Get an early turn out (preferably upwind) and you´ll never even be close to any wake.
Cut all this ¨I got my rights¨ cr@p and work together.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

BM, you make an extremely valid point. However, the story, as told, implies that the ATCO didn't quite sell his/her plan to the 152 pilot before implementing it.

A bit more communication may well have resolved the situation

[Standard Noise]

Whipping Boy - Hear! Hear!
I always drum into a trainee, the importance of keeping the pilot informed and get his agreement to any such quick departure, be it a PPL or a professional. Possibly the ATCO in question wasn't taught that way, or just assumed that the PPL was telepathic - who knows. Either way, it's a poor show by the ATCO.

[alphaalpha]

I fly a 172, sometimes from mixed light/heavy traffic airports. Two thoughts:

1. Controllers can make mistakes, if something doesn't sound right -- ask. I nearly wasted a lot of time in my 172 following a SID from Glasgow designed for jets because I didn't query the clearance when it was given differently to the one I expected. If Max is remembering the RT accurately, the controller surely made a mistake lining him up after giving the other a/c a landing clearance (would Max have to be already lined up before the controller could issue a 'land-after-the-departing' clearance?).

2. Situational awareness helps to avoid this situation -- either from the r/t (light a/c in the circuit calling downwind or heavies checking in with the tower at 5 miles or so) or visually checking final before lining up.

I'd say both the above may have combined to create the situation Max found himself in. But, it's easy to be wise sitting at a desk, isn't it.

Regards

[radar707]

Alphaahlpha, were you in G-IY??

[alphaalpha]

Radar707:

No, I was in G-YBAA on 6th February departing Glasgow around 2pm. I say I nearly had to follow the jet SID because, although I was given it during taxi (and spent 5 mins finding & understanding it and setting up my navaids again), the takeoff clearance was much simpler (climb & maintain 3000' I think) and the clearance at 500 feet from Approach was even better (turn L/R direct on track Talla -- which was exactly where I wanted to go). So no problems with what actually happened, the only problem was the 5 mins near the hold to re-setup. I phoned Glasgow from home afterwards and asked why I was given the jet SID and was told 'whoops, sorry, it was a mistake.'

However the point of my story was not to be critical, but to say that if I had queried the unexpected clearance as soon as it was given, I would have saved myself a lot of work. And flying single pilot IFR (and fairly inexperienced), some heartache as well.

Regards

[Max Rampwaite]

Thanks for the input from one and all - apologies for the delay in my response. Initially I was watching the thread - then I had to go away for a while.

The departing aircraft (on THIS occassion) was a Beech 1900 (OK, OK, a turboprop, not a "jet"). The arriving aircraft was another Cessna trainer that had been cleared to land some time before we came on tower frequency.

Student was handling the aircraft as part of a check ride...and he took the controller instructions and crossed the hold short line in the bat of an eye.

I did take control when airborne and turn upwind - whilst student was explaining to me that we would 'rotate before the Beech did'. We had some post flight discussion about relative rates of climb.

The same scenario has happened again, since, and this time I was ready for it. Refused the line up clearance.

No - it was not in the United kingdom....as I'm sure you all knew.