Can you spell MOR?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you spell MOR?
Scene:- Little local airfield where I happen to instruct part-time, yesterday. There are two schools, one charter operator and a maintenance organisation on the field.
The first half-way decent weather for three weeks, so a busy-ish circuit with C152s and PA28s trogging round.
We spy a PA28 zipping across the upwind end of the runway at about 500', descending downwind to about 200' before a curved final to land.
(500' rule? What's that?)
I phone the tower (AFISO service only).
"Did we lower the circuit height to 200'?"
"Hmmmm. Since we're not an ATC service we can't tell 'em not to do things like that."
"OK. If you can't, at least I can."
So I go out and wait patiently until the door of the aircraft opens. Chappy is sitting in it with a stude in the LHS.
"Is there any particular reason for that circuit procedure?" I ask.
"My practice", he replies.
"I beg your pardon?"
"It's my usual practice."
"Well, would you mind doing it somewhere else where you're not likely to kill anyone else if you kill yourself? And would you mind not setting a thoroughly bad example to students here please?"
"Who are you? What's your position here?"
"I'm an instructor at that school over there" (pointing)
"Well I'm a CAA Examiner and I have the right to carry out whatever I see fit."
"In that case you ought to know better. You don't know about any non-radio traffic in the circuit, you did not follow the promulgated procedure, you broke the 500' Rule, and had there been any rotary traffic around you would have creamed straight through it."
At that he walked off, demanding to know my name.
I have written out an MOR form.
Your opinions please, ladies and gentlemen - should I file it?
The first half-way decent weather for three weeks, so a busy-ish circuit with C152s and PA28s trogging round.
We spy a PA28 zipping across the upwind end of the runway at about 500', descending downwind to about 200' before a curved final to land.
(500' rule? What's that?)
I phone the tower (AFISO service only).
"Did we lower the circuit height to 200'?"
"Hmmmm. Since we're not an ATC service we can't tell 'em not to do things like that."
"OK. If you can't, at least I can."
So I go out and wait patiently until the door of the aircraft opens. Chappy is sitting in it with a stude in the LHS.
"Is there any particular reason for that circuit procedure?" I ask.
"My practice", he replies.
"I beg your pardon?"
"It's my usual practice."
"Well, would you mind doing it somewhere else where you're not likely to kill anyone else if you kill yourself? And would you mind not setting a thoroughly bad example to students here please?"
"Who are you? What's your position here?"
"I'm an instructor at that school over there" (pointing)
"Well I'm a CAA Examiner and I have the right to carry out whatever I see fit."
"In that case you ought to know better. You don't know about any non-radio traffic in the circuit, you did not follow the promulgated procedure, you broke the 500' Rule, and had there been any rotary traffic around you would have creamed straight through it."
At that he walked off, demanding to know my name.
I have written out an MOR form.
Your opinions please, ladies and gentlemen - should I file it?
Last edited by Captain Stable; 6th Mar 2009 at 16:06.
It does sound a little odd but remember that the "500ft rule" is MSD, not height, and does not apply when taking-off or landing "in accordance with normal aviation practice".
Being judge and jury is a little tricky. Could it be that they had forgotten to set QFE? Or were flying a rather enthusiastic bad weather circuit as part of a test?, or ...
I'm not convinced that the points about other traffic are relevant since presumably at least four mk1 eyeballs were available.
If I were in your shoes I might think about getting his phone number and having a chat so that both of you get to understand the others perspective. If it was a visitor G-INFO or the airfield log should help. If I were in the other chaps shoes I would have made sure that an understanding was reached at the time. But we can't all be perfect
HFD
Being judge and jury is a little tricky. Could it be that they had forgotten to set QFE? Or were flying a rather enthusiastic bad weather circuit as part of a test?, or ...
I'm not convinced that the points about other traffic are relevant since presumably at least four mk1 eyeballs were available.
If I were in your shoes I might think about getting his phone number and having a chat so that both of you get to understand the others perspective. If it was a visitor G-INFO or the airfield log should help. If I were in the other chaps shoes I would have made sure that an understanding was reached at the time. But we can't all be perfect
HFD
Just because a manoeuvre is out of the ordinary, not in your own experience or not in your own skill set doesn't make it dangerous. It may or may not have been illegal depending upon how one construes 'normal aviation practice' when quoting the 500ft Rule Exemption for Take-off and Landing.
As a Helicopter Examiner I see all manner of manoeuvres that are 'out of the ordinary'. Depending upon the ability, experience and awareness of the Examinee reflects upon whether I consider a manoeuvre acceptable or safe.
I suggest a further quiet chat with the individual might clear things up without unwelcome intervention from the 'Feds'.
JJ
As a Helicopter Examiner I see all manner of manoeuvres that are 'out of the ordinary'. Depending upon the ability, experience and awareness of the Examinee reflects upon whether I consider a manoeuvre acceptable or safe.
I suggest a further quiet chat with the individual might clear things up without unwelcome intervention from the 'Feds'.
JJ
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At a minimum, file it with the Chief Flight Examiner at the CAA and enquire if the notion of "Well I'm a CAA Examiner and I have the right to carry out whatever I see fit." is, indeed, CAA policy.
That would have major bearings on the conduct, and results, of licensing skill tests I would imagine.
Certainly there's nothing in the ANO to suggest that they may breach any regulations or advisories simply because they are CAA examiners, so the rule must therefore be applicable to all. Let's all carve up the traffic pattern and ignore the Safety Sense Leaflets with expensive overhead joins.
I recall an occassion when a Florida based CPL candidate was awarded a fail for non compliance with "recommended" airfield arrival procedures.
When pointed out to the "CAA examiner" that the procedure was not mandatory, the response was "Don't try that one, or I'll fail him for not enough lookout".
Did he give you *his* name? Did the aircraft have a callsign, or just the registration?
Was he a "staff" examiner or a (so-called) freelance?
My PM box awaits a response with interest if you do not wish to post anything further here.
That would have major bearings on the conduct, and results, of licensing skill tests I would imagine.
Certainly there's nothing in the ANO to suggest that they may breach any regulations or advisories simply because they are CAA examiners, so the rule must therefore be applicable to all. Let's all carve up the traffic pattern and ignore the Safety Sense Leaflets with expensive overhead joins.
I recall an occassion when a Florida based CPL candidate was awarded a fail for non compliance with "recommended" airfield arrival procedures.
When pointed out to the "CAA examiner" that the procedure was not mandatory, the response was "Don't try that one, or I'll fail him for not enough lookout".
Did he give you *his* name? Did the aircraft have a callsign, or just the registration?
Was he a "staff" examiner or a (so-called) freelance?
My PM box awaits a response with interest if you do not wish to post anything further here.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know his name.
He's not a CAA Examiner, he's a PPL examiner with arrogant attitude.
The aircraft belongs to our competitor school here, and he is a freelance instructor/examiner with various places.
I think I shall file the MOR. Apart from anything else, his attitude tells me he is dangerous. The manouevre was most certainly dangerous and in breach of the 500' rule which does not apply on approach but DOES in the circuit.
I attempted a quiet word, taking a softly softly approach yesterday, but given his immediate response I don't think another attempt will reap more rewards. Had he replied "Yes, I know it was a bit of a beat-up, but it's only once in a while and I did check the circuit was totally clear at the time and notify the tower. My student here knows he's not ever to attempt it until he's got a few thousand more hours" then I might have felt a bit more sympathetic to him.
But to attempt to bluster, to lie about being a CAA examiner and to insist upon knowing my name in an aggressive manner makes me inclined to cut him no slack at all.
He's not a CAA Examiner, he's a PPL examiner with arrogant attitude.
The aircraft belongs to our competitor school here, and he is a freelance instructor/examiner with various places.
I think I shall file the MOR. Apart from anything else, his attitude tells me he is dangerous. The manouevre was most certainly dangerous and in breach of the 500' rule which does not apply on approach but DOES in the circuit.
I attempted a quiet word, taking a softly softly approach yesterday, but given his immediate response I don't think another attempt will reap more rewards. Had he replied "Yes, I know it was a bit of a beat-up, but it's only once in a while and I did check the circuit was totally clear at the time and notify the tower. My student here knows he's not ever to attempt it until he's got a few thousand more hours" then I might have felt a bit more sympathetic to him.
But to attempt to bluster, to lie about being a CAA examiner and to insist upon knowing my name in an aggressive manner makes me inclined to cut him no slack at all.
Permit me a couple of observations.
HFD
(who's wondering why he's turned into a counsellor)
- What you say happened certainly sounds slightly unusual but what exactly was dangerous about it? Joining crosswind slightly below circuit height is good airmanship because other aircraft are skylined and it's therefore easier to pick your slot. Bad weather circuits are an essential training item and part of most tests. People sometimes make altimeter setting errors.
- You say "in breach of the 500' rule which does not apply on approach but DOES in the circuit" - could you give the reference for this as the ANO simply talks about take-off or landing rather than specific points in the process. Also, as I said earlier, it's 500 MSD so may or may not have been relevant.
- Considering the circumstances, could there be some inter-school politics getting in the way one way or t'other?
- Getting involved in a "debate" (adults debate and children argue
) with the other party's subordinates, customers or peers present is always bad practice. For future reference, conversations like the one you describe should be held behind closed doors if they're going to be productive (this is basic relationship management).
HFD
(who's wondering why he's turned into a counsellor)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems all a little unnecessary. The 200' bit is just a quess or has the pilot told you how high he was? If the examiner/instructor was demonstrating to a student / ppl how you may need to fly an approach to a field for a forced landing due wx for example, then he was in the act of landing.
I used to do this often, with ATC's clearance, to show a student or PPL just how demanding it could be for a inexperienced pilot to get the plane where they want it at the speed they need it and not loose the field in deteriorating / already bad weather. I feel it assisted with understanding of keeping good VMC and having good planning.
Not dangerous and not advocating cowboy flying. ( Excellent fun for the instructor to boot )
If I had someone meet me with the conversation you had with this guy I think you would have got a very short response from me.
High horses come to mind.
I used to do this often, with ATC's clearance, to show a student or PPL just how demanding it could be for a inexperienced pilot to get the plane where they want it at the speed they need it and not loose the field in deteriorating / already bad weather. I feel it assisted with understanding of keeping good VMC and having good planning.
Not dangerous and not advocating cowboy flying. ( Excellent fun for the instructor to boot )
If I had someone meet me with the conversation you had with this guy I think you would have got a very short response from me.
High horses come to mind.
Last edited by long final; 5th Mar 2009 at 19:30. Reason: re read
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: england
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect you are on a hiding to nothing. Best thing to do is point out to your student that you don't expect him/her to fly and/or behave in such a fashion. Let the 'examiner' make a fool of himself in front of somebody else.
So I go out and wait patiently until the door of the aircraft opens. Chappy is sitting in it with a stude in the LHS.
"Is there any particular reason for that circuit procedure?" I ask.
"Is there any particular reason for that circuit procedure?" I ask.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: liverpool
Age: 47
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oohh; things not to do
I agree with bookworm. barging in while he is with his student and talking like that would breed an aggresive response from him (it sure as hell would from me). You may be in the right; but the 500 ft rule doesnt apply for the purpose of landing or takeoff; and i dont recall it saying anything about being on final approach vs. somewhere in the circuit (after all the reason for a circuit is to filter you in for landing). Perhaps a quiet word with your own CFI asking advise would have been best.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Well I'm a CAA Examiner and I have the right to carry out whatever I see fit."
As the commander of the aircraft the pilot can indeed do whatever they see fit to ensure the safety of the flight.
The granting of an authorisation to act as a flight examiner confers no exemption from the regulations.
He's not a CAA Examiner, he's a PPL examiner
He is no different from Exam01 in that respect - as soon as the test is over they have no authority regarding anything in aviation.
Here is an example that explains this further - Examminers only have the authority to demand you produce your licence and logbook as part of a Test / Exam / admin procedure for which they are authorised - and you have applied. The law is very clear on production of documents etc and requires specific CAA authorisation.
However, should they express an opinon regarding a matter then their individual experience would be taken into account and in most cases would add weight to any report.
I do not hear any report of aircraft having to take avoiding action / go round etc etc.
However, perhaps the person being complained about knows that the low flying rules do not apply?
Perhaps the person making the complaint being a current instructor should remember the rules for aircraft operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome?
The clincher for me is the question as to filing or not filing the MOR.
The purpose of the MOR it not to;
extract revenge
report misbehaviour
report law breaking.
make opinions
The purpose of an MOR is to simply report the observed facts as they happened.
The decision as to filing an MOR is that you thought something dangerous happened or there is something which if not corrected could lead to a dangerous situation in the future.
It is not a -----if he is a nice guy and says sorry then there is no need to report situation or he is an ass so I will report him situation.
You thought what you saw was unsafe so you file the report thus giving the CAA the information of what you saw and permitting them to a) take action if the CAA sees fit and b) store the report so that trends, issues and general standards etc can be tracked.
If you filled out the for them file it. Let the CAA decide what to do - that is their job - not yours.
Finally there is also CHIRP available.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ...back of the drag curve
Age: 61
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Examiner, even if employed by the CAA, can not exempt himself or anyone else from the Rules of the Air Regs, unless he has a written exemption in his hand!
Sounds like "Do you know who I am?" self importance
Sounds like "Do you know who I am?" self importance
