Airmanship at Ardmore.

[clack100]

Airmanship.

It's quite a simple concept really. If you are conducting a practice forced landing that sees you gliding straight through the traffic pattern of an airfield, the least you could do would be to tell the other aircraft that happened to be in the pattern what your intentions are.

Sadly that was not the case at Kelly field near Mercer on Monday. I joined the circuit at Kellys only to find an AFS C172 carrying out a practice forced landing that saw him or her glide right over the field at well less than circuit height, at right angles to the pattern. That would be OK if said aeroplane was landing at Kelly Field! In this instance, said 172 was gliding towards a paddock nearby.

OK - I could have lived with that! However common courtesy would have made things a tad easier for me. Perhaps a reply to my radio calls advising me of their intentions. I even asked! Not a reply. We extended a significant distance downwind to ensure clearance from this blind, deaf and obviously dumb aviator.

After landing, my passenger and I both sat back and watched as several AFS 172s practiced their forced landings into various paddocks nearby. It was as if Kelly Field did not even exist. There was no respect for the traffic pattern whatsoever! These aeroplanes glided overhead toward their chosen crash sites - one was no more than 2-300 feet (yes I can estimate heights rather well) and obviously did not know he was overhead an airfeild. As we departed, we made several radio calls to which we heard no reply offering advise on intentions or position.

On the subject of position, what is the "Big Green Shed". That raised myself and fellow friend/colleagues brows to hear another 172 commencing a forced landing from overhead "the big green shed". At least said instructor knew the difference between big and small, and had learnt his or her colours because they seemed to have learnt little about airmanship.

Perhaps it is time CFI took a wee look at what his junior instructors get up to while clear of the circuit. The fellow that shot past me doing a "beat-up" at Mercer several months ago, against the traffic direction and on the wrong frequency is a case in point. For my student, to see a 172 going past him in the opposite direction while we were only 200 feet after takeoff cemented in his mind where NOT to train.

Airmanship. It's got a much better ring than "human factors" don't you think? I can never see myself saying that I exercised good "human factors" by staying on the ground when the weather is bad. And our friends in Wellington wonder why the GA accident rate is so high.

I feel better now. And even more so when I report that next beat-up at Mercer to our friends in Wellington.

[Itai101]

Well I couldn't agree more.. more of this needs reporting. Unfortunately they sit around patting themselves on the back so much that they start to believe their own rubbish. I simply try to stay away from AR now.. I'm sick of getting pulled out in front of when on final forcing me to go around.. I think they think its funny. Airmanship doesn't enter into it.. as you rightly point out it is a lost term. .... Unfortunately the incoming pt141 requirements are going to remove more experienced part time instruction from the industry and force people to learn from pt141 organizations who are largely employing arrogant low time instructors that are just wanting to move on like they deserve .. or rather.. think they deserve. It doesn't bode well for the future.

[slackie]

Yeh...gotta admit that the "airmanship" at Ardmore is "variable". I've experienced some really good airmanship along with the other types. I don't do alot in the circuit at AR, but do a bit out in the training area and the Mercer MBZ. It seems that some do not use the Mercer MBZ freq as each time I've been in there I seem to be the only one (apart from the meatbombers) that are making regular position reports. And it is a bit of a surprise to see other aircraft meander through the MBZ, or even operate inside it without the accomanying position reports. Must admit that I have used the "Green shed" (the lumberyard on the northwestern corner - eastern side of SH1 from Pokeno) from time to time as a reporting point as there is a nice straight 1km long road just adjacent to it that's a pretty good estimation of the size of an aerobatic box. I know of a few other aero pilots that also use this location for the same reason...
The green shed really does stick out like dogsballs...can't believe you haven't seen it.

[Edit] Added GoogleEarth pictures

Don't you just love GoogleEarth!!
http://www.aerobatics.co.nz/images/BigGreenShed2.jpg
Note the interchange on the south side of the Bombays.
http://www.aerobatics.co.nz/images/BigGreenShed.jpg

[clack100]

I do know the shed you mean Slackie. However let's imagine a pilot from someplace south of Ardmore transitting through the Mercer MBZ and being unfamiliar with the "green shed". Her or she would have no idea where the aircraft are using it as a reporting point. Given the MBZ is not that large, surely it would be better to simply reference your position to Mercer AD?
I think I have suggested it here before, but those pilots who have little experience or knowledge of airfields other than AR should take a trip to Paraparaumu. My hat goes off to the operators there who, while undoubtedly on opposing "teams" exercise good airmanship and courtesy to all. I was impressed last time I went through PP to hear pilots offering to extend downwind so as to let other operators line up and take their time teaching the student pilot how to commence the takeoff roll without some balding CFI yelling at them to get off the runway!
Itai is quite correct - if the standards that the likes of AFS aspire to are "industry standard", said industry is in trouble. Thankfully there are other places in NZ where airmanship and professionalism are still taught. It's up to the industry to weed out those who have been through the lower standard processing plants and send the message back that what they produce are simply not good enough.
Heading off on a tangent other than the one I'm on now, perhaps the release of Cessna's 162 will see some of our smaller aero clubs start to recover. That's where we can see some decent standards taught. As Itai mentioned, it's up to industry now to ensure the changes to Part 141 as proposed by the AIA (oops I mean CAA) will permit the smaller aero clubs to operate the likes of a 162 within a sensible legal framework that will allow them to do so economically. If not, if the principle proponents of this rule change (the processing factories) get their way, there is no way our accident rate will reduce.
(For our goaty-bearded boy racer AFS fraternity, the AIA stands for "Aviation Industry Association" - it's a body of aviation-related company officials out to better their own bottom lines at the expense of standards and safety).

[clack100]

That's brilliant Slackie - you can almost see my house!!
Pity the pro's at AR will print it out and use it as a VNC.....:ugh:

[6080ft]

ah winge moan winge moan.

If you heard an aircraft report at the 'big green shed', and you did not know where it was, why did you not ask where it was?

I flew in around the ardmore circuit for a few years as an instructor, up until not too long ago. It all worked pretty good - all instructors from the various got on pretty well and we all knew everyone. The problem always arose when wallys from out of town, who did not read the lenghty information in the VOL 4 about proceedures at ardmore, came charging along and messed the circuit up. Some people seem to think that coming in via clevedon and calling 'establised' final 21 gave them right of way. Rubbish. But despite all the info in the aip and common sense people still do it and get cranky when they finally spot aircraft on a tight left base.
Oh and then theres the people who think a low level circuit will be great, then call the helicopter they just enncounted joining for the southern aiming point at 500ft!

With regards to FLWOP at mercer and surrounding paddocks. It is a training area, and there will always be problems when there are that many people around. If you see something you don't agree with, call the operators CFI and with a rego and a time tell them about the problem.
200-300 ft you say, well read part 91.311 very carefully. CAA themselves were even unclear on this a while back. They got a legal opinion on this matter which was an interesting read. But indeed going low around cattle is not a smart or clever thing to do!

Pt 141 - yes it seems like a total waste of time and resources to me, that will give smaller clubs a hard time. But who says a 141 needs to be a long winded full of crap document. It really only needs to be brief (as CAA told me once) stating whos incharge, responsible for what etc. I think that it could be good, but will definately make life hard for some instructors out there in their spare time treaching mates to fly.

Itai101 - so your sick of people forcing you to go around. Maybe you are one of the many people who see 4 aircraft at the holding pt, but still turn very close base? If this is not he case and you keep getting cut off, call unicom, call the CFI - or go and see the CFI!

ah well thats a little over my 10cents worth!

[kiwiblue]

ah well thats a little over my 10cents worth!

...and a lot more than it's worth. What about the aircraft not operating on freq? Not answering calls? To be perfectly Francis with you, students from some of the AR schools (to be fair, amongst others) have a very poor reputation throughout the country -again for not being on the correct freq's, failing to follow published procedures, not making mandatory calls and generally ballsing things up for everyone else. And that's without mentioning the arrogant individuals that quite happily and blithely treat a tourist business premises like (one assumes) they treat their home club-house... spreading maps and AIP documents from ar$ehole to elbow, wandering in & through clearly marked "staff only" areas, making themselves free with the amenities provided for customer benefit and generally behaving like the rest of the world exists solely at their pleasure!!!

If I were you, I wouldn't be too proud that you once counted yourself amongst their mentors -the rest of us have seen the quality of your product.

[slackie]

The main problem with most of the "product" that is turned out of AR is their lack of familiarity with controlled airspace. This isn't unexpected of course, as the bulk of their training is carried out without having to contend with those "scary controllers"!!

Unfortunately, since ATC was withdrawn from AR back in the 90s, the standard fell almost immediately and hasn't really recovered.

Clack100
Unfortunately to reference every position report to either Mercer or Kelly Field isn't without its problems either. It is surprising how different one pilot's "5nm" is from another. The number of times you hear "5nm east of xxxx" and the aircraft is actually "8nm WEST of xxx" would surprise you!!

I tend to use "the northwest edge of the Mercer MBZ" and sometimes include "StateHighway2" for those with better local knowledge.

[FL440]

ahhh,
once again, another Thread that starts about things gernerally around the Ardmore area and ends up bashing AFS aircraft.
I also used to instruct around the ardmore area, and yes it has its problems like anywhere, but also you have to look at a simple statistic.....students are students, they are exactly that! learning, making mistakes....isnt that why once you get to the 'big ones' you have stopped making mistakes......to a point?
Im not defending the place, and some of the things you have said are bad, but lets face it, if you have 15 AFS cessnas going up every 1 1/2 hours statistically they are going to be involved in more incidents than say EFT 2 172's??
Kiwiblue - what part of the country are you from? It seems that the whole country has issue with people from AFS, yet for some reason airlines and operators (more than 10,000lb aeroplanes) seem to think the quality of people coming out of the organisations are good?
Maybe thats why its full of young guys?
As for airmanship in the circuit at AR, i can remember many times being in a twin, single engine training and having someone turn inside me whilst on base for a glide approach, or making a short approach for the seal! not legal but i dealt with it
Mercer MBZ - always has been a problem, always will be a problem due to lateral boundry constraints and also as said Kelly field and Mercer airfield, I agree that the position reports need to be accurate and agreed if your in the circuit at Kelly field it shows poor 'big picture/airmanship' to blast through that circuit on a FLWOP, especially if you are making radio calls. I agree with 6080ft, if you have an issue, call the operator, talk to the CFI or a senior instructor, you may be suprised how understanding they are of the issue and that you can be assured it will be dealt with. When i used to instruct out of AR i know that we always used to call up other operators and have a freindly chat, and no harm done, student learns and we all move on.
If you dont want to ever have an issue while flying and you only want things to be black and white i suggest we all stop flying, and just read part 91 law.
As i said, not defending AFS just giving a different perspective
FL440

[6080ft]

ah yes the old, not on freq, ballsing up proceedures etc. Crickey that happens all over the country everyday. By airline pilots too! As FL440 says - students will be students. I was at WHK last week - along came a BOP operators student joining the wrong way. realising that they were no doubt a student it didn't overly worry me. you learn from mistakes like that.

FL440 - yes good point, it is funny how many afs students have ended up at various pt 135 and pt125 operators around the country.

Slackie - good point re the controlled airspace comment.

[kiwiblue]

The main problem with most of the "product" that is turned out of AR is their lack of familiarity with controlled airspace.

I disagree. Whilst that may be a problem in the major centres, where I was speaking of specifically is uncontrolled airspace with a very high traffic density and hence a heavy reliance on procedural traffic-flows and clear, precise, concise communication. I have seen these 'bonzai processions' of aircraft from AR & another large training organisation drill through these areas with no briefing from any local operator, no regard at all for published AIP procedures and all the while treating the MBZ/CTAF frequency like a down-home chat-channel!!! For many English is a 2nd language of which they have at best a vague grasp.

what part of the country are you from?

That should make no difference at all -piss poor airmanship is just that, no matter where it occurs. Suffice to say most of my operations take place S of the Waimakariri River. I was not having a dig at AFS specifically - have never been there, nor do I recall ever having had a specific issue with anyone I can positively identify as being from there -my comments were more generally directed at the AR/Massey students. Perhaps the heavies are more accepting of the products of these environments because when they come out, they are very unlikely to be in command of an aircraft for quite some years and can be more readily moulded into the wee cookie-cutter clones required.

On more than one occasion I have been involved in guiding these aircraft to where they need to be after they have gotten themselves all 'geographically challenged', which I see at least in part as being because their training organisation sent them off on a mission that was patently beyond their skill-levels and/or preparedness, not to mention their language skills in some cases.

Many of them could use some training in plain, common courtesy both in the air & on the ground also.

[slackie]

For many English is a 2nd language of which they have at best a vague grasp.
Yes...roll on the ICAO requirement for "Level 4 English"...however, just having a good command of the english language doesn't necessarily mean that a student will understand and comply with instructions/clearances/procedures any better!!
Unfortunately, even when procedures are published in the AIP it is CAA's point of view that if they are in uncontrolled airspace (Ardmore, Milford, etc.) then they are merely suggestions, not requirements.

[Much Ado]

Lets keep this thread a little more non specific shall we...or I'll lock it.

[nike]

Kiwiblue -

I was not having a dig at AFS specifically - have never been there, nor do I recall ever having had a specific issue with anyone I can positively identify as being from there -my comments were more generally directed at the AR/Massey students

What are you like the Labour Party MP for waimak?

[kiwiblue]

Excuse me? Do you have a point you wish to make?

[FL440]

Kiwiblue - my comment as to where you were from was more to guage how much traffic you see from AR etc.
Given how far south from us you are, i would be suprised if more than 20 aeroplanes from the AR region make it south of you.

Perhaps the heavies are more accepting of the products of these environments because when they come out, they are very unlikely to be in command of an aircraft for quite some years and can be more readily moulded into the wee cookie-cutter clones required

With comments like this i assume that you are not in the "heavies" as you put it? I sense you have issues with aircraft from the north, beleive me i have seen many a brave mountain pilot from the south island struggle and get lost trying to find Hamilton airport.!:ugh:

Good on you for helping these people when they have got themselves into that situation, im sure that they were more than grateful and have learnt a great lesson! Thats what learning to fly is all about!!

I understand your points regarding airmanship etc but i think that you need you to have your head read if you think the only bad pilots seem to come from where you say?
Ive seen many south island pilots enter the Ardmore MBZ and Mercer MBZ areas and make a complete arse of it, no drama though! When that happens we understand that they are somewhere unfamiliar and we make adjustments accordingly, whether its a freindly speel on the radio or an extension downwind so that they can get on the ground!

Surely you cannot expect a pilot from somewhere totally unfamiliar to be absaloutely perfect the first time they fly in your region?

Kiwiblue, this is not aimed personally at you, im just trying to find out where your coming form :ok:

[kiwiblue]

FL440: likewise, I have no wish for my comments to be misinterpreted. It is not the students I blame for their shortcomings, but the organisations that train them. Whilst the training offered may be appropriate to achieve a minimum standard for entry to the majors, the emphasis on the majors as a part of that training serves the students poorly in the environments that are being thrust upon them as a part of their training. You're quite right -we don't see a lot of them, sometimes several months between appearances, but when we do, we may see as many as 3-4 "gaggles" of up to 5 machines at a time in as many weeks. Often there is not an instructor or pilot with experience in the area amongst them. The number of times that a pilot from these places has approached anyone in the area for a briefing or even a little information, you could count on the fingers of one hand. Far more likely they will simply pour through with scant regard or attention to what is going on around them, causing sometimes quite serious havoc. Personally, I wouldn't dream of coming into 'your patch' without 1st trying to get some information on procedural issues of which I am ignorant. I've only flown up that way a handful of times over the last 30 years. If I had to, I could probably get where I was going without screwing the pooch too badly -but I would certainly want that information/local knowledge if time & circumstances allowed me to pursue it -and I would do whatever I could to conform with published procedures where available and avoid cluttering common frequencies with inane chatter.

We all do whatever we can to assist whenever necessary, as we should. Lord knows there have been times I have needed sorted... for my sins! My point however (again) is that these guys are not being taught the basics of airmanship properly. Again, they are being let down by their training organisations and cut loose in command in a system for which they are ill-prepared. Mountain flying -particularly in a high-traffic density area- is a demanding exercise. You cannot have your head in the cockpit trying to sort out what it is you need to do now/next. That should have been sorted on the ground, before you launched, preferably in a properly structured briefing. If that isn't possible at the minimum a briefing from an experienced local pilot can save a lot of grief -for everyone. Need I mention the C310 at QN on RWY 14? Or the Cardinal that ran out of fuel winding up on the steps of the hospital 200m from the RWY threshold? Any one of us would offer whatever advice/assistance we can if asked, even to the extent of 'follow me, do what I do' if necessary and traffic permits. The emphasis is on 'if asked' there, because we rarely are. I am not suggesting that all bad pilots come from N of the Bombays or anything of the kind -just that many of the classic pooch-screws we see are from that area and the point of origin (sometimes down to the particular location on the tarmac!) monotonously regular.

Surely you cannot expect a pilot from somewhere totally unfamiliar to be absaloutely perfect the first time they fly in your region?

Of course not. I do however expect courtesy, no more or less that they would expect from me in their area, and some respect for the task they are undertaking. A quick flip around the Coromandel it ain't. Yet that seems to be how many from that area treat it.

Some of the previous comments in this thread have left me virtually in a state of despair for the falling standards... "she'll be right" doesn't cut it. Students have to be properly prepared and assessed competent before they are launched on some of these extended solo missions. They also need to be advised to approach locals before entering unfamiliar areas -I don't think I've ever been knocked back when I have sought advice from someone more experienced. There's always more to learn, more places to go. There's always someone that knows more than me too -those are the people I seek out every time.

Not a bad idea when you think about it.

[haughtney1]

KiwiBlue..
Need I mention the C310 at QN on RWY 14?

Thats crap...no bloody amount of "local" procedural knowledge would have prevented that accident:=
An appreciation of the effects of a false horizon and high density altitudes would have done much much more.....

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly however with the decline in training standards, but its been a problem since the mid 80's and so far no one has come up with a better system.

As far as general airmanship at AR, well its no better or worse than anywhere else.

[kiwiblue]

haughtney1: I don't recall what the specific Density Altitude was that day, but I don't reckon it can have been too bad -the rest of us were on/off 14 all day in aircraft at/near gross... but no, that wasn't my point either. Every one of us that has operated 14 with any sort of regularity have given itinerants likely to be operating off 14 warning of the false horizon in the turn and the proximity to terrain -which does come back to my point: lack of training and preparedness is at the root of many of these crashes and incidents... which IMO comes back again to airmanship. As far as I'm concerned, local procedural knowledge includes information of this nature that is immediately pertinent to the intended operation.

As you are no doubt aware there were other factors that militated against this particular pilot which we don't need to be getting into here.

[kiwi chick]

Well, I've never been to AR - yet.

I have 600 hours GA - I know, I know, not a lot compared to you big boys - but more than your average PPL student - and I have no doubt whatsoever that when I do go in there, I will cock something up!

(*I will however keep an eye out for the Big Green Shed...) ;)

[Got the horn]

The big Red Sheds make good reporting points.......just an observation :}

[travnz]

What do you expect from Student/Training Pilots.
Nobody is perfect, I can guarantee that you were once a student pilot, surely you must know what it is like trying to learn all the ins and outs of aviation?
You are going to make mistakes and I bet most people learn from them

Now lets be honest, this is the first time I have heard of someone actually landing at Kelly Field:p This is possibly why people treat it like they do. Lets be honest its nothing more than an Ag strip.

[pakeha-boy]

....after reading this thread.....I now have more appreciation in climbing to FL 390...staying up there and out of trouble....and not getting a tounge-lashing from you blokes...or having to do anything with that bloody green barn.....

I,m thankful I get babysat all day....do this,do that.....makes me think my # is not all that bad......

[haughtney1]

Here here PB. give me a canarsi onto 13L at JFK anytime of the week.....mayby all that ETOPS plotting aint so bad after all, at least there aren't too many red or green sheds mid atlantic to get shouted at about:ooh:

Kiwi Blue
As far as I'm concerned, local procedural knowledge includes information of this nature that is immediately pertinent to the intended operation
So are you suggesting a group of aeroclub members lie in wait for the days when rwy14 is in use...to make sure "the folks from not round ere" are set straight as to the dangers of mountain flying?
Mayby you could petition the CAA to ban anyone unfamiliar with QN and its surrounds?
:hmm:

[kiwiblue]

haughtney1: I expect better from you. That suggestion is at best peurile. You know damn well what I mean.

With 14 in use most days there is absolutely no need for aeroclub members (your suggestion, not mine) or anyone else to 'lie in wait' for anyone. What I am saying is that if asked, the information offered will include reference at least to the false horizon and terrain proximity on the 14 departure most likely in use on the day.

[Nikai]

Its not unusual for the training area to be crowded and if using prominent geographical features (eg. quarry lake, the big green shed, hotel du vin, pokeno paddocks) means that student pilots are making radio calls, rather than trying to figure out how many miles N/S/E/W they are from NZME, personally I'm happy. I can see how some of these could be confusing for people transiting the area however, hopefully a pilot travelling through an unfamiliar training area would be keeping an adequate lookout to avoid any issues. Airmanship around NZAR/NZME is obviously going to be an issue with so many solo students and so many training flights. The point about being a student is that these people are still learning! This means the actual flying skills and the airmanship that accompanies them. 6080ft and FL440 are exactly right, if you run into a problem contact the CFI of the school concerned. Like all flight training organisations those at NZAR have good and bad instructors and students alike, in the case of solo students they might not even be aware of what they are doing wrong. It might not be an offence worth filing on, but if you're concerned try bringing it to someone's attention so it can be dealt with. I know its not the pilot way, but how about increasing awareness of these things rather than just whinging?

[haughtney1]

Kiwi Blue, I WASN'T being puerile, I was playing the devils advocate..which I do a lot of on this board.
At least now however....we actually know what you were trying to say..What I am saying is that if asked, the information offered will include reference at least to the false horizon and terrain proximity on the 14 departure most likely in use on the day.
rather than having to interpret or read between the lines of your previous statements.
As it happens, I think your final statement conveys what I've lamented privately for years with my NZ flying mates, and that is the loss of the culture of openness at the local aeroclub.
To often I've found when I come home for a visit...and do a bit of flying, you pitch up at the local club house (to pay landing fee's etc...) only to be met with suspicious contempt.
I thought it was just me, but I've had plenty of other "normal" mates say the same very thing.
Kiwi Blue... it appears that you are an individual that believes that you can help and have something to offer, thats about as good as it gets in my book.

[FL440]

Kiwiblue- I totally agree with regard to courtesy! Back when i was instructing i did a few south island trips as a Multi B Cat with 1500 hrs and i had not dont alot of flying in south island, maybe 50 hrs, so i would consider myself ver unfamiliar with the region, we rang the wakatipu aeroclub for a brief prior to arriving in QN and a few days later when we wished to fly into Milford, we also got a very extensive breif from one of the scenic pilots!
I think like anything, it only takes a 'few' to spoil it for the majority! And again, back to the original topic i think that there are alot of good pilots coming out of the AR region but there will always be that "few"

FL440: likewise, I have no wish for my comments to be misinterpreted. It is not the students I blame for their shortcomings, but the organisations that train them. Whilst the training offered may be appropriate to achieve a minimum standard for entry to the majors, the emphasis on the majors as a part of that training serves the students poorly in the environments that are being thrust upon them as a part of their training

Again, i think with the recent introduction of the magical 'training standards guide' from ASL, i think alot of that expereince is now hard to pass on as a student is now prepared to pass a flight test rather than prepared to be a commercial Pilot, i beleive alot of that is now left to the operation that they join be it scenic flying in QN or mountain air etc....i agree that this is where some of the short comings are!

With regards to aircraft coming down to the south, i know in the past the organisation that i was with, we had a policy that there must be an instructor in each aircraft and at least one B cat on the trip. We knew that with the level of experience some of these PPLs had that they would find the south island a very daunting experience, and as i preciously said the instructors were certainly not afraid to speak up and ask the locals, why wouldnt you? its free and you learn something! Fantastic

:ok:

[qtn]

Kiwiblue, you and I must have worked together, somewhere along the line. I agree that the standard and arrogance of these institution pilots is is apalling. We were even told by one of their instuctors (on a day when no other commercial operator were flying due to the weather) that they would be ok because they are instructors. :eek:

[mattyj]

Now you know how the guys from Pukekohe East feel for all these years:hmm:

[haughtney1]

Matty, are you flying out of Pukee East? (thats about 5 mins down the road from my NZ manor :E)

[kiwiblue]

qtn: quite possibly. What you report sounds nauseatingly familiar.

[FL440]

Guys,
I presume from the way you guys speak you are instructors?

If so, i presume that pilots coming out of the 'south' are perfect?
:ok:

What are your thoughts on how some of the airliners operate? How do you feel about an operator based in Auckland ie Eagle, Nelson, Airwork, National....etc flying into QN without a breifing from 'the locals' and that the checks are conducted by someone who is not a local?

Just another point to consider?

:ok:

[slackie]

FL440...is that not why AIP pg QN 45.1 etc are stamped "For Approved Operators Only"? So that they get the required training by pseudo-locals and use equipment appropriate for the job at hand??

[Now there's a term worth adopting...pseudo-local:ok:]


[Edited for format]

[clack100]

Matty, are you flying out of Pukee East? (thats about 5 mins down the road from my NZ manor
I must admit to operating out of Puke. Great fun if you can dodge the 172's on finals but not on frequency..
Yeah I know, here we go again, "on the wrong frequency, blah blah"

[FL440]

Slackie - good point, certainly for the Rnav's. But absaloutely nothing stopping a freshly qualified IF pilot going and having a crack at the VOR/DME Alfa Etc?

I was thinking with regard to some of the stuff that has been said with regard to Mercer/Ardmore and poor radio calls, heres a thought, have you flown through Alps traffic and listened to some of the radio calls there? I could not make any sense of what they were saying, yet im sure if you were a local operator it would of made total sense????

So surely this is as bad the the 'green shed'?
:hmm:

[NZ06AR]

People.... I have to say that this has, to a degree been blown way out.... with regards to comments made about the averageness of radio calls in the Mercer MBZ area, I have to say that there are always going to be people that do not agree or like the way people report out there, also don't forget that some students are going to be nervous and muck it up, we all have, it is a learning curve, but lets be honest how many published reporting points are actually in that area? For people to be reporting at more precise points, which are not hard to find, is a good thing, rather than something to have a rant about...

FL440- i have to agree with the point you make about Alps traffic, with regard to understanding position reports, but i do not think the use of 'the big green shed' is such a bad thing.

NZ06AR

[Wombat35]

NZ06AR, I agree, Ardmore and the surrounding areas are primarily a training environment. So it's a VERY foolish person who fly's around relying on radio calls without looking outside!

I have found the AFS guys great (get to know them) and I have flown 200+ hours in the AR circuit in the last 12 Months with no major incidents....

It's all about a bit of respect, it's a busy place, instead of pushing the tx button and having a spit, or whining about being cut off etc, just stop have a think that everyone else may not have your experience...

If guys are doing big circuits, I just ask XYZ, may I just pop in front of you...? Never been a problem...

Interesting that most of the slagging comments are from guys, who should know better... you can't come to Ardmore and expect the circuit to be perfect, aircraft free, with radio calls clipped to perfection...

Why not share some of you experience to make things better... safer...

I'd be very interested to know your thoughts..

Cheers

Wombat

[haughtney1]

It's all about a bit of respect, it's a busy place, instead of pushing the tx button and having a spit, or whining about being cut off etc, just stop have a think that everyone else may not have your experience...

Reminds me of a story doing the rounds a few years back when there was an ATC service at AR.

Grizzled old instructor "tower..XXX fu%king off to the training area for 20 minutes"
Immediate response by well known TWR guy "aircraft saying fu%k on the radio identify yourself........." followed by 10 seconds radio silence then..........all different responders
"I didn't say fu%k on the radio"
"I didn't say fu%k on the radio either..who said fu%k on the radio"
"me neither I didn't say fu%k on the radio"
and so on and so on...:p

[Wombat35]

Yeah, I'm F^&king off not F^&king stupid :}:}

Oh well, I'm off to practice my calls before yet another couple of hours in the circuit this arvo.. and I have to think of some new area to run up....

now that should be a good topic about Ardmore...

Is it safe to put a run up area upwind of a main taxi way?

Ohh but it's for the noise....

Wonder what noise a Cessna makes as it's blown over taxiing behind my DC3... :ugh:

Or what noise does an instructor make when his fabric aircraft is peppered with loose stones.... :{:{:{

[slackie]

haughtney1 - brilliant story...sorta makes a busy day in the tower worthwhile!!:D
Knowing the environment (busy tower) well, the odd bit of light relief certainly can pick up the spirits...but only know and then...I don't want to be seen as encouraging endless mindless babble on the RT...why only yesterday morning an exchange with an EAG pilot kept me chortling to myself for at least half an hour...but that's a whole other thread!!!

[27/09]

Radio Calls - position reports

It is my experience that a lot of younger/newer pilots talk too much on the radio. More on that shortly

The original post was about aircraft operating near certain airfields and not making appropriate radio calls while carrying out PFL's. By nature the location of the said airfields the probability is that these aircraft were from Ardmore, however I suspect this sort of thing could happen anywhere.

To me this indicates a lack of knowledge about the position of the said fields or a lack of knowledge about the correct frequency that should be used when operating around said field or an arrogance that it doesn't matter as there is normally no one else using the field.

I suspect use of the incorrect frequency.

Where does the lack of knowledge come from, it comes from the instructors and the organisations they work for. If the instructors showed a good example when flying with their students and briefed the students thoroughly before a solo exercise the incidence of the these incursions would decrease dramatically.

I must admit that I would be hard pressed to know where Kelly field is so perhaps in this case a call to the operators at Ardmore with the details might help them and their instructors to better brief their students.

Now to radio calls and position reports.

As I mentioned on another thread. How often have you heard a position report to XYZ traffic when the said aircraft is nowhere near the traffic circuit and it's tracking will never take it anywhere close to that airfield. It is a total waste of breathe and clutters up the frequency.

I get the feeling that some pilots think that by talking on the radio it absolves them from looking out the window and other pilots will keep out of their way. VFR flying is see and be seen, you shouldn't be using the radio for your look out.

As for using the big green shed as a reporting point. It's a bit like winking at the good looking girl in the dark. If I don't know where said shed is that report is totally useless to me. It is far better to give your position relative to a point that any passing pilot can expect to know or at least be able to find on his/her charts.

It doesn't matter if the pilot says 5 miles north instead of 3 miles north of Mercer at least you know approximately where they are relative to you instead of not knowing at all when a point like the big green shed is used. Lets face it even if you were exactly over head the the green shed when you made your report, within a minute you are going to be about 2 miles away from it.

Haughtney,

I can think of only one instructor who might make that depature call. First name begins with the seventh letter of the alphabet.

[kiwi chick]

I get the feeling that some pilots think that by talking on the radio it absolves them from looking out the window and other pilots will keep out of their way. VFR flying is see and be seen, you shouldn't be using the radio for your look out.

I'm afraid :ooh: i have to disagree with this just slightly...

I was one of those student who "made unecessary radio calls", however more as a warning to other pilots than anything else.

For eg... first time doing solo wing drop stalls - I hardly knew myself where the bloody aircraft was gonna end up, so I felt it only fair to warn all and sundry in the area. I mean - I may be at 3,000 feet above Te Horo now, but in 90 seconds i could end up at Otaki at 1,500 feet!

(let me just add here, this is clearly an exaggeration of my inept skils but I think you get the point!) :uhoh:

So, I agree that yes, while the radio is busy, chit chat and calls should be kept to a minimum; but when it's not busy, and there are ****loads of new students around, I don't think it can hurt.

Knowledge is power :ok:

[27/09]

but I think you get the point!)

NO.

What happened to the lookout part of your HASELL checks. Lookout - clear of airfields, clear of traffic above and below.

[kiwi chick]

What happened to the lookout part of your HASELL checks. Lookout - clear of airfields, clear of traffic above and below.

Nothing happened to it - it was there, just like the rest of my checks.

But then along come people who don't believe in unnecessary radio calls, haven't called for 10 minutes, who perhaps got their position slightly wrong at the last call, travelling faster than what they have indicated, maybe popping out from behind Kapiti Island... for example, or perhaps a valley that is frequented by scenic flight goers...

But I supposed if we discounted all this, kept quiet and just did our HASELL checks there'd never be any near misses. :ugh:

Tell that to Massey Aviation.

[27/09]

kiwi chick,

When was it ever a requirement to give a position report every 10 minutes. That was precisely part of the point of my post. Unless you are operating inside an MBZ there are no prescribed time frames to make position reports. Yet it seems that some pilots see the need to continually broadcast their position to all and sundry at very regular intervals no matter where they are.

Part of the lookout when carrying out stalling or aeros is to make sure that you are clear of such areas like you mention, i.e a scenic flight path or aircraft popping out from behind Kapiti as you so eloquently put it.

As for the very unfortunate Massey accident. We will probably never know the full story. A radio call may have helped, however I suspect that both pilots were aware of each others presence in that area. A vigilant lookout from both parties would certainly have helped avoid this accident.

[kiwi chick]

Hi there

I never intmated that it WAS a requirement to broadcast every ten minutes - which is entirely the basis of my point.

How far, up, down, to the side, can an aircraft get in ten minutes??? Especially one with brand spanking new students in it???

I am NOT advocating replacing lookouts with radio calls - I am merely saying that I certainly don't think there is any harm in making them.

Graeme Leach - you know him? could validate a story of my C-Cat flight test where a lookout was done before entering my "lesson" of fully developed stalls - a lookout done by two fairly intelligent peoples with somewhat satisfactory vision - which confirmed one aircraft over Kapiti Island doing aeros (we were over the coastline at 3,000) - fairly good separation i would have thought.

Upon recovering from the stall we discovered "said" aircraft flying overhead us from left to right at a distance that entailed a change of underwear. Had he made a call to say "yeah, i'm finished doin aeros and heading back to the coast, right towards that other plane" then perhaps we would have changed out position slightly.

And, interestingly, it IS a MBZ... didn't appear to make much difference. So yes whilst I am more than confident in my own skills to make a good lookout, i say again that there are some idiots out there that just can't be taken for granted. :{

Go on... give it to me then. :(

[27/09]

Go on... give it to me then.
Sorry you lost me there.

After reading your last post I think we are talking about two different things. The example you give that happened during your flight test is a perfect example of when radio calls should be made when operating in an MBZ. The offender should have had their backside well and truely kicked. If GL knew who it was I'm sure he did just that.

I'll give you an example of what I am talking about and then tell me what you think. "Thames traffic XYZ overhead Paeroa tracking towards Matamata... blah blah blah". Paeroa is 15 miles from Thames the aircraft isn't anywhere near and hasn't been anywhere near and isn't going anywhere near the Thames circuit. Is that an appropriate use of the radio?

(edited to better illustrate the sort of radio call I was referring to)

[Wombat35]

Hey, you are BOTH right...


Nothing beats a good look out however it's not perfect, as I found out last week... I'm x-Mil so my head and eyes NEVER stop moving however, my B Cat student and I both missed a potential conflict with an aircraft joining overhead as we were turning x wind, so lookout is not infallible...

27/09 As for the radio call... overhead is no good on it's own, however overhead ABC tracking for DEF is useful. So yes radio calls are a very useful tool helping other pilots develop good S/A.

And Kiwi Chick, I'd be more than happy to help you confidently operate at Ardmore should you wish to.

Cheers

Wombat

[kiwi chick]

Wombat - thank you, might have to take you up on that - I got my Vol 4 out last night and saw there's about 135 pages dedicated to AR alone... lol! :hmm:

Sorry you lost me there.

27/09 - I was referring to the lashing I thought you were going to give me in reply to my post ;)

And yes I agree with the comment you were making in part. It would have been appropriate had they said "ABC overhead Paeroa TRACKING to Thames" if they were indeed on their way... to warn everyone perhaps - but not if they were nowhere near...

Unless of course DEF was just airborne Thames on THEIR way to Paeroa... ;)

[hard_yakka]

And yes I agree with the comment you were making in part. It would have been appropriate had they said "ABC overhead Paeroa TRACKING to Thames" if they were indeed on their way... to warn everyone perhaps - but not if they were nowhere near...

Unless of course DEF was just airborne Thames on THEIR way to Paeroa...What I hate is hearing "ABC overhead Paeroa TRACKING to Thames" when I am "DEF overhead Paeroa TRACKING to Thames".

[kiwi chick]

I'm with you there Hard Yakka!

27/09 I just thought of another example where I "clutter up the frequency" and I'm gonna share it with you - and you can tell me I'm wrong!

I fly in Dannevirke quite a bit, unattended freq 119.1. Sometimes I heard traffic leaving Palmy for a xc and I address my calls to "Dannevirke AND Manawatu traffic".

I base this decision on information I have gleaned (and I mean no disrespect by any of the following)

solo student - I have no idea of their hours or experience but if they're out on their first "solo cross country" then F:mad:K all. Can read a map but not recognise half the reporting points - if they aren't entirely sure where they are, then how the hell am I supposed to know? English as a second language - again if I can't understand them very well (again I mean no disrespect, but it HAPPENS) then how can I be sure where they are?

By making a radio call to them ON THEIR WAY TOWARDS ME I am just trying to increase my chances of not being surprised if - god forbid - my lookout is not 100%.

Does that make any sense? :(

[muttly's pigeon]

I hav'nt been thrashing around the Pokeno paddocks for eons and until I saw the map posted here had never heard of kelly field.
All I can say is that rightly or wrongly if you establish an airfield in the middle of one of the busiest training areas in the country and fill it with a/c being flown by guys/girls with about 20hrs total time you are going to get some problems. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT??!!

Casting my mind back to my own learning to fly and observing others I would be cautious about stating a lack of airmanship as the problem..... It would be better to be more specific and say a lack of situational awareness which we were all once guily of. We have all experienced a stage of our student days were sheer luck played a part in our outcome. As we matured and became more experienced our S/A improved and it would be nice to see some open mindedness when seeing someone whose still at the stages of keeping the a/c upright doing something they really shouldnt ie missing radio calls etc.

The AR circut is no different, alot of out of towners make an arse of themselves but everyone else there knows the feeling and a little understanding goes along way. Its is a busy student airfield that is uncontrolled so there will always be cock-ups.... Doesnt matter if you uproot the enitre airport/system/people to the Canterbury plains or the the Wiarapa etc it will be the same story.....unfortuante but TRUE.

There are good and bad in all circles of aviation but some of the most piss poor airmanship I have ever seen is at NZQN..... Anyone who has mistakenly taken a 'local operators park' will know what I mean - And that was on the part of one of the old boys there.
(Nothing mentioned in the VFG about reserved a/c parks?)

[kiwiblue]

Anyone who has mistakenly taken a 'local operators park' will know what I mean - And that was on the part of one of the old boys there.

I fail to see how that equates to 'piss poor airmanship' -that's a courtesy issue on the part of both individuals involved, pure and simple. Believe me, I've seen this issue from both sides of the fence. First, as you are no doubt aware, parking for aircraft on QN is at a premium. The parks are owned by the airport company and are generally not allocated to any individual or organisation -the area directly in front of the aeroclub building may be the exception. Now, the local operators by long-standing tradition generally park their aircraft together in the same general area. Again, they don't own the parks; they do however own the pickets and tie-downs that are there. So some itinerant pops in, sees a tie-down, secures his aircraft and buggers off for who knows how long??? Would you be a little pissed off at that??? I'm damn sure I would be!

All that needs be done is ask (That again) -there's plenty of people on the airport that will be only too happy to help if asked! If you are in the 'wrong' spot, they'll at the very least direct you to where you can ask permission to use an existing tie-down or place your own pickets.

[27/09]

Kiwi Chick

Does that make any sense?
None what so ever.

Dannevirke airfield and the Manawatu CFZ are on different frequencies, so making a "Dannevirke AND Manawatu traffic". call makes no sense.

If a student can read a map they should be able to recognise any relevant reporting points as well. Besides solo cross countrys should be chosen carefully to ensure that student can handle that route. If this is not the case their instuctor is failing them by letting them loose.

If these students are as geographically challenged as you suggest they might be, telling them where you are is of no use what so ever. If the don't know where they are how the hell are they going to know where they are relative to you?

As for the English as a second language issue, these students probably have as much trouble understanding you as you do them, so all you end up doing by babbling at them is to confuse them.

kiwiblue

Spot On. What ever happened to that old fashioned way where a visiting pilot who was unfamiliar with the local field went and asked if it was OK to park where he/she was for a while or tie down for the night?

[kiwiblue]

What ever happened to that old fashioned way where a visiting pilot who was unfamiliar with the local field went and asked if it was OK to park where he/she was for a while or tie down for the night?

It's got me beat. IMO its just plain, common courtesy to ask. Lately it seems it's a courtesy no longer plain, nor common. It's the gall of the people that then come to a place like this and make it everyone else's fault for their lack of courtesy that gob-smacks me but.

[antinnz82]

I am relatively new to aviation and learning to fly at Ardmore.

I have read the comments with some interest and would like to add my two cents worth.

I have asked a lot of my fellow students and some of the instructors - none have ever seen or heard an aircraft using Kelly Field.From what I can make out it is hardly ever used so yes - aircraft practicing forced landings may well use that bit of airspace without thought.

It was interesting to read about poor airmanship - I didn't realise that students in the past never made mistakes. Or is it simply that as students of today move on they will be replaced by new stduents who will no doubt make the same mistakes all over again.

Re - the Green Shed - yes - there is also Quarry Lake - Hotel De Vine - the Cable Way etc etc. While doing cross countries I have often been confused when Air Traffic Control directs me to a position that is not on the map but a positon that is known to local operators only.

Joining straight in - I asked an Instructor - the AIP and Ardmore local proceedures manual clearly states that aircraft established in the circuit have right of way over aircraft joining straight in. Aircraft joining straight in are urged to go for the grass or join overhead.

I asked why?

Answer:- Aircraft in the circuit are frequently being flown by students who might be on their first solo or students who are practicing. Lookout is usually not as good as it could be. The rule is also designed to keep the circuit tight - how often have you been annoyed by someone who has extended down to Clevedon to fit in behind an aircraft joining straight in.

On several occaisons I have extended to allow twins in etc - I think the system works pretty well.

The old saying - "you can't please all of the people all of the time"

If you see someone doing something out of order in the training area - they be new and inexperienced - cut some slack - give them a call or ring the school concerned.

[kiwi chick]

Dannevirke airfield and the Manawatu CFZ are on different frequencies, so making a


27/09 - this was in the days before CFZ and it was once airborne clear of the zone and tower had told them to switch to 119.1.

I would have to be pretty unintelligent to broadcast to pilots who weren't even on my frequency, wouldn't I?! ;)

Then again [tongue in cheek], I AM just a girl....

[randyolddog]

Just a thought, I trained at AR in the early 90's.
we had a control tower and all was rosey:D.

However as a young aviator in the prime of my youth one reason we use to rush around the circuit and oush and barge others out of the way was not be "jumped" on by the old queen of the skys saddlebags.

Does Baron Von Saddler still lurk in the deep dark cracks of a certain school at AR looking to "help" any poor young fella.

We all wondered if he carried a spare dipstick in his trousers or was he just happy to "help".

Saddle bags, if you are reading this you said i would never get anywhere..........:(

Whos driving a big 777 now wazza:E

Love from the class bafoon of 92..............

P.s Long live hostee bringing the warm cuppas and the paper!:ok:

[kiwi chick]

I bet you're happily married... :p

Haha!

[randyolddog]

Yes Maam I most certainly am:} But I can still look at the hostee but not touch:E

[kiwi chick]

Hahaha! :)

I was once taught a very good saying:

"It doesn't matter where you get your appetite, as long as you eat at home."

:ok:

[hard_yakka]

I have asked a lot of my fellow students and some of the instructors - none have ever seen or heard an aircraft using Kelly Field.From what I can make out it is hardly ever used so yes - aircraft practicing forced landings may well use that bit of airspace without thought.Kelly Field IS in the AIP as you can see here (http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZKC1.pdf) , so it's circuit should be treated like any other published unattended field. There is a "Caution Heavy traffic from Ardmore and Mercer" note on the AIP page.

When the Vintage Aero Club last met there (earlier this year), we heard about half-a-dozen aircraft making approaches and then powering away (FLWOPs?). Not a peep on the airfield frequency.

Russell does currently operate his Luscombe out of there, but he spends a lot of time overseas. His shed is full of some really cool old aircraft in various states of restoration. It is his private field and traffic levels will never be huge, but it will increase as Russell disengages from his American business and concentrates on becoming an aircraft restorer.

A good lookout will become more vital as activity increases. I'll see you in the circuit (and I hope you see me).

[muttly's pigeon]

It's got me beat. IMO its just plain, common courtesy to ask.

Agreed blue...... but lets just say I arrived after hours with the tower off watch an noone around at all....... sun is quickly setting..... use my own tie downs etc. While in the car park, in the dark by now, while waiting for my ride have some old git come and tell me one if his a/c will be needing that park in the morning and he has taken the liberty to untie my a/c and push it out into the main GA taxiway. I have heard this incident is not uncommon.

Thats what piss poor airmanship is.

As a curtosy gesture. I always leave a contact number in the window..... was it too much to ring me?

[kiwiblue]

I still fail to see what that has to do with airmanship. IMO it is still a courtesy issue. I have never seen anyone push anothers aircraft out onto a taxiway, no matter how upset they may be. That's not in anyone's best interests. Are you sure he was a local??? Would be interested what time it was you got there... with QN being a daylight hours only airport, it's very very unusual for there to be no-one on the airfield at all at the time of your arrival.

No comment on the phone issue -I don't know the circumstances, his or yours. Seems from your post that he did track you down to tell you he had shifted your aircraft though... strange he wasn't about for you to ask earlier.

[muttly's pigeon]

Airmanship is not limited to what goes on in the air.

Blue, It was only by chance my ride was as late as it was that I was still lurking about the airport and was found, no attempt to find me I dont think and in anycase the a/c had already been shifted. Yes it was late in the evening an no, nobody was around although there are many a hangers anyone could have been.

Yes the pilik was local as he was wearing the uniform for whatever outfit he worked for (it was is/was one of the scenic operators there. It was a familiar brand name there but I dont recall exactly who this long after nor should it matter)

Eitherway... were his actions justifiable? un-tieing someones a/c who you dont know and just leaving it in the taxiway? Me thinks not. I would rather someone innocently line up infront of me at AR than have to do deal with that sort of tantrum again.

[6080ft]

Wombat35 - Interesting you mention that runup bay at AR. Have they sealed it properly yet? When I had a winge to Gates about it he told me they were going to seal it. But something told me they are too tight for that.
The airport company also as a 'FOD BOSS' which is towed behind a vehicle to pick up stones, but as it periodically needs maintenance, I was told they are saving ithe use of it for emergencies! Auckland INternational has two of these devices and when I worked there we towed it around daily and it went forever before maintenance! So another excuse from the good old Ardmore Airport Authority.

[kiwiblue]

...than have to do deal with that sort of tantrum again.

Put yourself in his (and other NZQN operators) shoes for a minute then. It probably was not the 1st time he'd had an itinerant aircraft 'squatting' on his pickets -even that week!!! It may be the 1st time you had done it, but believe me, it is a constant frustration for all who operate from that airport dealing with this level of constant discourtesy on a daily basis during the peak season. I'm not excusing what you report was done, nor justifying it -just asking you to take a wee amble in that 'pillock's' shoes.

Could you have tried harder to ensure where you parked was appropriate? Or was the draw of the bright lights and bars too insistent?

One wonders.

[nike]

kiwiblue -

Like people have been trying to point out to you, maybe there is another side to the various generalised arguments you have been trumpeting.

An example given that appears to be a little closer to home (geographically) and your tone changes.

Have been trying to get an idea of what your points are but they now just come across as an opportunity to bag out pilots from north of the waimak??? I'm sure thats not what you intended, and maybe you lost your point somewhere in the keyboard, but after that last post it does appear that way.



Anyway, regards the original thread....

For whatever reasons, the fact remains that aircraft have been operating in, around, near this particular field inappropriately.
That needs to be addressed. In this case, it appears that it could be resolved reasonably amicably by taking the initiative to approach the flying schools concerned.

Unfortunately the original poster has chosen this forum to vent his/her frustration instead of taking a more proactive approach to trying to resolve the issue.

Is there a Ardmore Airport users group where these type of issues can be discussed?


Regards the thread drift....

I completely agree, local knowledge is pretty much the key to operating safely, no matter how big or small the aircraft.

The problem can sometimes be getting access to that knowledge. For whatever reason not everyone you meet on the airfield can be all that thrilled to say hello. The key is overcoming that initial reluctance and promoting the sharing of ideas for the improvement of safety.

Unfortunately students can be hesitant to approach locals for fear of being wrong, embarrassed, unsure of their operation, all those silly reasons that should not really be present but are, and particularly those from flying schools as they miss out on the closer ties of the aero club scene, and also unfortunately sometimes from stories and examples getting passed down like Mutley has described.

It appears that the root of most concerns are itinerant pilots not appreciating local procedures. Generally, most itinerant pilots are students.

If you're an instructor out there reading this thread, maybe take this opportunity to review how you promote the importance of local procedural knowledge to your students, look at how your company or club improves their knowledge of operating into the various aerodromes they frequent, and more importantly, those they fly to not so frequently.

[kiwiblue]

I assure you Nike, my arguments are anything but generalised. I speak from very personal, oft repeated experience, but choose to modify the tone of my posts to suit the situation, nothing more or less.

[muttly's pigeon]

Blue, doesnt matter if it was the tenth time that day.... Still not a justified move is it not?

If I were the indivual and had a problem then I would have a sign put up or something in the AIP (like NZHN does). Heck I could even ring the 'culprit'. Really no need to for happened.
Cant believe you would try and defend this particular action of the individual. :rolleyes:

RE: NZAR - would have thought things might be quieter there nowaways with Massey gone and CTC/simuflight gone? Judging by this thread I guess not?

[FL440]

muttly's pigeon - heck dont say that, they'll put something in the AIP that says we must ring all the 'local operators' In QN and seek permission prior to being allowed to park at QN.

Actually bugger it, ill give Qantas and Air New Zealand a ring and get a gate, at least ill get some sense from them even if it does cost a small fortune to have an air birdge to my C172 :ugh:

Seems to me you boys in QN have a few issues!

:ok:

[kiwi chick]

even if it does cost a small fortune to have an air birdge to my C172

he he he!! Stopped work for a coffee and to thaw out the other day and the controller at Palmy let me park my cherokee at Gate 1... even had pretty yellow footprints to help me find my way to the terminal :ok:

[5qu14t]

Two words sirrr ... "Situational Awareness, mehh". That third word was for effect.

[diseasel]

Given the density of traffic at HN these days with CTC and the rest, it would be worse than AR if the tower did not exist. I've been in and out of Papakura International once or twice in my time, and it turns out if you real the bloody AIP and follow the procedures, plus give a little understanding for solo students, bugger me it works just fine!!

Those who think they should be able to rock up to a busy airport in an 'airspace corner' and do as you would for any other place, and then BITCH about it - pull your f****n heads in.

[6080ft]

diseasel - well put!

[jd8]

On the back of Ardmore talk, any idea why an instructor on the Unicom thinks they can tell planes to 'go around'? Some AR instructors think they are God's gift.
I know it gets busy but pilots in the circuit should be using their nouse and helping each other out.
I know where I would be telling them where to go around to. :mad:

[6080ft]

well i spent over 4 years in and out of the ardmore circuit and never once heard that.

I do not for one instant believe that any instrutor or unicom operator would tell someone to go around. And I know ALOT of instructors, and all of the uniucom operators over the last 4 years. Top guys and girls!

[conflict alert]

For them to be issuing any instructions in any form (if thats the case) is also highly illegal, and does not comply with what a Unicom service can do as determined by CAA, and would wind them up in a pile of **** if an aircraft incident or accident occurred as a result of that instruction. If AR Unicom service IS providing instructions (psuedo ATC) then it should be reported to CAA as this is a breach of their certificate!!!

[slackie]

The safest place for a UNICOM service to be provided from is a room with no windows so they aren't tempted to issue any form of instructions or traffic information. Stick them in the tower as they are and some may "get ideas above their station".

[dudduddud]

I can't imagine an AR instructor/UNICOM operator being so silly. I can, however, imagine a PPRUNE contributer misinterpreting a "suggested go-around due to a queue at the take-off hold point" as being a go-around command.

[slackie]

Dudd....hmmm...so how come I continue to hear reports from Unicom on number of aircraft in the circuit, etc

[6080ft]

slackie - time for you to read up on what a unicom service is there for, and what they are allowed, and not allowed to do.

they are allowed to say how many aircraft are reported in the circuit - a handy piece of information

perhaps you should call Alan, the manager at AR unicom and he can explain it all to you. :ugh:

[FL440]

Slackie!
Thats unfortunately exactly the response i would expect from someone working at Airways, however not from someone who operates from Ardmore!
UNICOM is allowed to report the number of aircraft in the circuit
1) so long as someone requests the information
2) UNICOM uses the word [B]reported[B] in that phrase
3) at any time UNICOM sees fit using the above phraseology, 'due care' ie not allowing planes to crash into each other???
Also, i do beleive, correct me if im wrong, UNICOM in Taupo (prior to closure) used to be in the air Nz back office, when the poor Seneca crashed didnt notify airways for nearly 20 minutes even though they had talked with UNICOM on the apporach about the conditions....hmmm wonder if that would happen at AR.
Then mysteriously, they are put back in the tower not long after....

Never heard UNICOM direct anyone, have heard the word "suggest" which is Legal, and as others have said maybe they have averted a few situations .....one comes to mind.....

[slackie]

FL440/6080ft...to avoid "thread creep" (who is that??) I'll shortly start a new thread titled something like UNICOM v AFIS v ATC...just give me a chance to type my view!! Two finger "hunt and peck" takes time.

6080ft...I'd suggest that YOU re-read what UNICOM is legally permitted to do...try the new thread for some background

Who I work for is immaterial (Air Traffic Controller)...apart from possibly being more familiar with the regulations surround air traffic control/flight information and other services, and being an operator at AR allows me to observe "uncontrolled aerodrome operations" first hand...I have also sat up in the tower with UNICOM on a couple of occasions (although not in the last 12 months or so).

New thread is http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=3518288

[slackie]

FL440 - to address a couple of your observations... (1)/(2) UNICOM are only permitted to pass on the number of aircraft that are "REPORTED IN THE CCT" and the position that they reported in the circuit...how quickly is this information obsolete...how many pilots report clear of the circuit and report clear of the RWY....as this is the information that UNICOM are permitted to pass on. UNICOM place a strip when the aircraft REPORTS entering the runway for departure and remove the strip when they report clear of the circuit MBZ...if pilots don't do that then the information is invalid and not permitted to be updated by visual observation by UNICOM!!!! (3) this is NOT their job nor their responsibility nor their "duty of care". Location of AP UNICOM and its move had nothing to do with the Seneca crash, but on availability of the TWR and addressing OSH requirements.

[Cloud Cutter]

how many pilots report clear of the circuit and report clear of the RWY

You are showing your lack of familiarity with AR there slackie. Pilot's would very quickly be corrected if they failed to give these reports. It is a typical Airways view that people must stick rigidly to legislation or guidlines even when a more practical approach would be benificial. I would like to see you sitting in the Unicom tower at Ardmore and carefully following your little black MATS book as one aircraft runs over another. Time for a little common sense please.

I come from a sosciety where people will at times step beyond there job, resposibiliby or duty of care to fill an obvious requirement. Ardmore is an uncontrolled aerodrome. Pilots know that anything said by unicom is of an advisory nature only. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[slackie]

CloudCutter...this has nothing to do with Airways...Airways has no interest in AR...are all your views exactly the same as your employers...'cos I guarantee you not all mine are!!! This is probably closer to the view of our regulator - CAA. It is a common misconception that Airways are the policemen...they are not, they are just an ANSP - CAA are the policemen!

I have never said that I am particularly familiar with AR, but I do operate in and out of there, and am just reporting what I hear personally. And, out of interest, who would correct a pilot if they failed to make one of these calls???

I wouldn't sit in AR UNICOM as anything other than an observer, as I sit in my own location DOING MY OWN JOB.

following your little black MATS bookOh and by the way...our MATS is blue!!! My little black book has other stuff in it!!

[Cloud Cutter]

Touché salesman.

You will appreciate my answer was somewhat tongue in cheek. As you know, we pilots love to give you guys a rev-up whenever we see an opportunity (and vise-versa of course).

I do think however that pilots would quickly be asked to lift their game (by either unicom, or any other local operator) if not making adequate position reports, i.e. 'XYZ, confirm you've vacated the MBZ'. At least that's how it was back in the dark ages when I was there.

Cheers

[conflict alert]

I come from a sosciety where people will at times step beyond there job, resposibiliby or duty of care to fill an obvious requirement. Ardmore is an uncontrolled aerodrome. Pilots know that anything said by unicom is of an advisory nature only. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


In addition to this comment and a previous post by someone that AR Unicom have ''saved the day'' would perhapes indicate that the service CAA have deemed adequate at AR would not be the case if they (Unicom) are operating outside the scope of their Rule part certification??

Also, i do beleive, correct me if im wrong, UNICOM in Taupo (prior to closure) used to be in the air Nz back office, when the poor Seneca crashed didnt notify airways for nearly 20 minutes even though they had talked with UNICOM on the apporach about the conditions....hmmm wonder if that would happen at AR.
Then mysteriously, they are put back in the tower not long after....

Wouldn't have changed a thing regardless of the level of service (ATC / FIO / Unicom) being provided. There is no low level radar coverage and the only way someone could have perhapes warned the aircraft was off track would have been through the use of a VDF in the tower which gives the bearing. If that device wasn't available (and it wasn't) it wouldn't have mattered if it was ATC FIO or Unicom on.

Finally, as Slackie has put it - CAA are the regulators and it is CAA who determine the level of service required within airspace and airports NOT Airways.

[swine]

Wouldn't have changed a thing regardless of the level of service (ATC / FIO / Unicom) being provided. There is no low level radar coverage and the only way someone could have perhapes warned the aircraft was off track would have been through the use of a VDF in the tower which gives the bearing. If that device wasn't available (and it wasn't) it wouldn't have mattered if it was ATC FIO or Unicom on.

I don't think he was suggesting that the unicom would have prevented the accident involving the seneca - more that after a short period of time when no aircraft appeared on the runway or there was no call made that the aircraft had commenced the missed approach - that there may be something wrong.