Should I have been given clearance?
Perhaps the AG operator should have said 'Wind blah blah, one ahead on short final' or similar. But he wasn't obliged to and you shouldn't expect him to.
And certainly not "should" have said - no such obligation - as you say.
2 s
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: LHBS
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tobster911
'Should he have advised me there was one in front?'
In uncontrolled airfields, there can be a lot of congestions on the runways, and the main motivation for AFIS is to avoid accidents, because they are costly (think about cleaning the runway from debris, lots of paperwork, loss revenues due to RWY closure etc.). If it's only scary, it's OK. Some AFIS operators however, look out for students, especially soloing students, and clean the traffic from in front of them. The same with intructors in the air. So if you arrive to an unknown field, if you feel inexperienced - say so, and people will try to help. But as you correctly assumed, you are still in charge of your fate.
By the way have you seen this?
A Guide To Phraseology for General Aviation Pilots in Europe, section 7, Arrival
http://www.skolenipilotu.cz/skoleni-...gie-evropa.pdf
The term with uncontrolled fields is "free for landing".
Get hold of a copy of CAP 413, freely available by download from the CAA, (costs a fortune to buy a hard copy). My instructor was not "over the moon" with my RT procedure, but commented that it was greatly improved after digesting CAP 413. It is a wealth of information regarding who does what and what can be expected from various agencies.
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure the OP has a lot to learn, which is why the OP is a student. That also applies to most of us IMHO.
I'd like to think that all those with a licence would appreciate the difference in service levels (although have a sneaky feeling that this is not the case).
Sounds to me like this is A/G and therefore only information given, not permission to land.
However, the OP has said that he was fully prepared to go around if the traffic in front hadn't vacated, and that to my mind is good airmanship. After all, even if we are dealing with 'Control' (meant in its correct sense), the landing clearance is just that, permission to land, not an instruction that must be obeyed.
The decision of whether to actually land is that of the PIC regardless of the service level given by the person on the other end of the radio.
I'd like to think that all those with a licence would appreciate the difference in service levels (although have a sneaky feeling that this is not the case).
Sounds to me like this is A/G and therefore only information given, not permission to land.
However, the OP has said that he was fully prepared to go around if the traffic in front hadn't vacated, and that to my mind is good airmanship. After all, even if we are dealing with 'Control' (meant in its correct sense), the landing clearance is just that, permission to land, not an instruction that must be obeyed.
The decision of whether to actually land is that of the PIC regardless of the service level given by the person on the other end of the radio.
