 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
In an unsolicited attempt to provide spacing at the threshold of the runway the pilot of piper J3 elected to turn final close to and slightly above and behind the C-172 he was to follow. When the instructor pilot of the cessna took exception to the J3's unagreed to propinquity a verbal exchange resulted.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1021994 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201207 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | MYF.Airport |
| State Reference | CA |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | J3 Cub |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Final Approach |
| Flight Plan | None |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Flight Phase | Landing |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Flying Single Pilot |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Flight Instructor Flight Crew Flight Engineer |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 160 Flight Crew Total 8000 Flight Crew Type 4000 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Conflict NMAC |
Narrative:
Right hand pattern for 28R myf; a cessna had just turned final. I was on downwind about to turn base at pattern altitude; and a cirrus was #3 for touch and go. All of us had clearances. I told the tower to assure the cessna that they were in sight.cessna was on about a mile and a half final; and I turned above and to the north of that aircraft to establish spacing at the runway. The cessna pilot asked if I saw her; and the tower answered in the affirmative. Altitude separation estimated at 300 ft and lateral distance approximately the same. That is roughly 420 ft slant-range separation.tower changed me to the left runway; because the cirrus was closing from behind. The cirrus touched down before I did; and the cessna was west of the field turning downwind as I touched down. This interesting scenario is due to disparate approach speeds: I estimate the 172 at about 65 KTS; the cirrus at perhaps 75; and my approach was 35.as the cessna was turning right base on the next circuit; she started an extended transmission criticizing my flying. It seemed to go on forever; but was probably less than a half minute nonstop. My answer - on the tower frequency - was 'come see me at my hangar.' the answer: 'I don't have time.'so I landed and dropped by as the pilot was debriefing her student. I introduced myself and she again said 'I do not have time to talk to you.'putting aside whether paralleling an aircraft on final is some kind of violation or bad judgment - my impression is that it just makes sense for a slow aircraft to try to optimize separation on the runway - the point of this report is that criticizing another pilot on an ATC frequency is bad policy; even if a student is not involved. But adding a student to the mix; and then teaching that such a transmission is good practice is not good instructing. The student has learned that resolving problems should be restricted to ATC frequencies; and that ground and/or telephone discussions are not appropriate.an appropriate response is to call the tower on the telephone; get the n-number of the pilot you wish to discuss something with; and then either do it on the phone; or in person; or simply call the FSDO.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: In an unsolicited attempt to provide spacing at the threshold of the runway the pilot of Piper J3 elected to turn final close to and slightly above and behind the C-172 he was to follow. When the Instructor pilot of the Cessna took exception to the J3's unagreed to propinquity a verbal exchange resulted.
Narrative: Right hand pattern for 28R MYF; a Cessna had just turned final. I was on downwind about to turn base at pattern altitude; and a Cirrus was #3 for touch and go. All of us had clearances. I told the Tower to assure the Cessna that they were in sight.Cessna was on about a mile and a half final; and I turned above and to the north of that aircraft to establish spacing at the runway. The Cessna pilot asked if I saw her; and the Tower answered in the affirmative. Altitude separation estimated at 300 FT and lateral distance approximately the same. That is roughly 420 FT slant-range separation.Tower changed me to the left runway; because the Cirrus was closing from behind. The Cirrus touched down before I did; and the Cessna was west of the field turning downwind as I touched down. This interesting scenario is due to disparate approach speeds: I estimate the 172 at about 65 KTS; the Cirrus at perhaps 75; and my approach was 35.As the Cessna was turning right base on the next circuit; she started an extended transmission criticizing my flying. It seemed to go on forever; but was probably less than a half minute nonstop. My answer - on the Tower frequency - was 'come see me at my hangar.' The answer: 'I don't have time.'So I landed and dropped by as the pilot was debriefing her student. I introduced myself and she again said 'I do not have time to talk to you.'Putting aside whether paralleling an aircraft on final is some kind of violation or bad judgment - my impression is that it just makes sense for a slow aircraft to try to optimize separation on the runway - the point of this report is that criticizing another pilot on an ATC frequency is bad policy; even if a student is not involved. But adding a student to the mix; and then teaching that such a transmission is good practice is not good instructing. The student has learned that resolving problems should be restricted to ATC frequencies; and that ground and/or telephone discussions are not appropriate.An appropriate response is to call the Tower on the telephone; get the N-number of the pilot you wish to discuss something with; and then either do it on the phone; or in person; or simply call the FSDO.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.