Any private pilots here?

[KD5NRH]

Seriously though if you have ATC questions while getting your license just speak up.

If I have an STOL equipped PA-18, can you just give me a landing clearance direct to a parking space?

[Jamisjockey]

Question: Can I just tell you I have ATIS without telling you which one?

Follow up question: There's hardly anyone around. Can I do a runup on the numbers?


 

No.  But instead you can say "I have the numbers"
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ATC.pdf

3−9−1.  
DEPARTURE INFORMATION
Provide current departure information, as appropri-
ate, to departing aircraft.
a.
Departure information contained in the ATIS
broadcast may be omitted if the pilot states the
appropriate ATIS code.
b.
Issue departure information by including the
following:
1.
Runway in
use. (May be omitted
if pilot states
“have the numbers.”)
2.
Surface wind from direct readout dial, wind
shear detection system, or automated weather
observing system information display. (May be
omitted if pilot states “have the numbers.”)
3.
Altimeter setting. (May be omitted if pilot
states “have the numbers.”)

The paragraph for arrival information mirrors that of departures.

And Yes to the second question.  As long as there is no conflict I can let you get out of the airplane and take a piss on the runway if I want.

If I have an STOL equipped PA-18, can you just give me a landing clearance direct to a parking space?

No.  You can only get a "clearance" to an approved landing surface.
And I would argue that it is very likely against the appropriate FARs to operate an airplane in such a manner.  Helicopters, sure.  But not a fixed wing aircraft.
The only mention of "at your own risk" operations for fixed wing aircraft in the FAA order 7110 references closed or unsafe runways.  

3−3−2.  
CLOSED/UNSAFE RUNWAY
INFORMATION
If an aircraft requests to takeoff, land, or
touch-and-go on a closed or unsafe runway, inform
the pilot the runway is closed or unsafe, and
a.
If the pilot persists in his/her request, quote
him/her the appropriate parts of the NOTAM
applying to the runway and inform him/her that a
clearance cannot be issued.
b.
Then, if the pilot insists and in your opinion the
intended operation would not adversely affect other
traffic, inform him/her that the operation will be at
his/her own risk.
PHRASEOLOGY
−
RUNWAY (runway number) CLOSED/UNSAFE.
If appropriate, (quote NOTAM information),
UNABLE TO ISSUE DEPARTURE/LANDING/TOUCH
−
AND
−
GO CLEARANCE.
DEPARTURE/LANDING/TOUCH
−
AND
−
GO WILL BE
AT YOUR OWN RISK

[jim in anchorage]

Very close, but more restrictions on what, where, and when you can fly.

Well I knew about the 1320 lbs max rule but don't see how the training would be any easier/cheaper. Also good luck renting a LS plane. It's not the "low cost way to start flying" thing it's made out to be.

[KD5NRH]

No.  You can only get a "clearance" to an approved landing surface.
And I would argue that it is very likely against the appropriate FARs to operate an airplane in such a manner.  Helicopters, sure.  But not a fixed wing aircraft.
The only mention of "at your own risk" operations for fixed wing aircraft in the FAA order 7110 references closed or unsafe runways.  

What if part of the parking area in question was a runway ~10 years ago?  Can you still call it a closed runway?

What about landing perpendicular to the intended direction of the runway?  Saw that one at a demo of some plane's STOL capabilities once, at IIRC, Meacham.  (I remember it was a 150ft wide runway and he had quite a bit of room to spare with a 5-10mph headwind.  That width matches Meacham, and that's where we usually saw that sort of thing.)

[Jamisjockey]

Well I knew about the 1320 lbs max rule but don't see how the training would be any easier/cheaper. Also good luck renting a LS plane. It's not the "low cost way to start flying" thing it's made out to be.

I'm always of the opinion too that flying is one of those things where more really is more.  More training and more experience is more safe.
I regularly get copies of the funny pages.  I've personally talked pilots into not flying in less than ideal conditions.  When you fly past the edge of the limitations of your abilities, there is little margin for error and the result is often death.

What if part of the parking area in question was a runway ~10 years ago?  Can you still call it a closed runway?

What about landing perpendicular to the intended direction of the runway?  Saw that one at a demo of some plane's STOL capabilities once, at IIRC, Meacham.  (I remember it was a 150ft wide runway and he had quite a bit of room to spare with a 5-10mph headwind.  That width matches Meacham, and that's where we usually saw that sort of thing.)

Only if it's still shown on the airfield diagram as a closed runway.

Nothing preventing that.  Oh, except the whole landing sequence thing.  If I've got someone behind you, and you land perpendicular, you'd better take the throat taxiway off the runaway or I'm putting both feet in your ass and sending a nice note to FSDO.
With Category I aircraft landing in sequence I need 3,000' of runaway. 

[Ben]

No.  But instead you can say "I have the numbers"
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ATC.pdf
The paragraph for arrival information mirrors that of departures.

And Yes to the second question.  As long as there is no conflict I can let you get out of the airplane and take a piss on the runway if I want.

And here I thought I was being a smartass.  

I ran the radios for a few years when we were flying out of KSBA, and those guys were kinda sticklers, especially on approach and also if the ATIS had just changed. I always got "confirm you have information Romeo" or whatever from them. I heard some people say that had the numbers with the altimeter, but during that time, the AC  in our aircraft was an Annapolis grad and she was a big stickler for all procedures, so I was never allowed. :)

They also used to hurry us up on runup a lot, even in the runup area sometimes. Though I remember a few occasions where they just told us to do it at the end of the taxiway.

[KD5NRH]

Only if it's still shown on the airfield diagram as a closed runway.

I guess "I have a really old chart" isn't a valid defense.

Nothing preventing that.  Oh, except the whole landing sequence thing.  If I've got someone behind you, and you land perpendicular, you'd better take the throat taxiway off the runaway or I'm putting both feet in your ass and sending a nice note to FSDO.
With Category I aircraft landing in sequence I need 3,000' of runaway.

In that case it was a well planned occasion, so there was no other traffic in the pattern (the regular one or his 90 degree offset one) and he was just a couple of yards from a taxiway.

Honestly, in some situations, (single runway and a strong crosswind...and hopefully very light and/or very cooperative traffic) I could see that being a reasonable action for an aircraft capable of it, but I'd want to land right at the taxiway anyway, just to minimize crosswind taxiing if the wind is that bad.

[jim in anchorage]

I'm always of the opinion too that flying is one of those things where more really is more.  More training and more experience is more safe.
I regularly get copies of the funny pages.  I've personally talked pilots into not flying in less than ideal conditions.  When you fly past the edge of the limitations of your abilities, there is little margin for error and the result is often death.

Only if it's still shown on the airfield diagram as a closed runway.

Nothing preventing that.  Oh, except the whole landing sequence thing.  If I've got someone behind you, and you land perpendicular, you'd better take the throat taxiway off the runaway or I'm putting both feet in your ass and sending a nice note to FSDO.
With Category I aircraft landing in sequence I need 3,000' of runaway. 

Oh more training is better sure if it's USEFULL training. I wasted many $$ and hours as a student pilot on VOR navigation that in this day of GPS I never use. But I needed to know it to pass the ck ride.

[Jamisjockey]

And here I thought I was being a smartass.  

I ran the radios for a few years when we were flying out of KSBA, and those guys were kinda sticklers, especially on approach and also if the ATIS had just changed. I always got "confirm you have information Romeo" or whatever from them. I heard some people say that had the numbers with the altimeter, but during that time, the AC  in our aircraft was an Annapolis grad and she was a big stickler for all procedures, so I was never allowed. :)

They also used to hurry us up on runup a lot, even in the runup area sometimes. Though I remember a few occasions where they just told us to do it at the end of the taxiway.

There's a reason for that.  If you crash, guess what one of the first things they're going to ask us?  Did they have the appropriate ATIS or landing info?
BTDT.

[Jamisjockey]

Oh more training is better sure if it's USEFULL training. I wasted many $$ and hours as a student pilot on VOR navigation that in this day of GPS I never use. But I needed to know it to pass the ck ride.

Until your GPS shits the bed.

[Ben]

There's a reason for that.  If you crash, guess what one of the first things they're going to ask us?  Did they have the appropriate ATIS or landing info?
BTDT.

Hey,  I'm right there with you on that.  I've never thought of being inside a heavier than air device as a place to get lackadaisical.  :)

[Fitz]

Until your GPS shits the bed.

This.

Same principle behind teaching privates how to use a map and compass even though GPS is ubiquitous

Because it will eventually *expletive deleted*it the bed.

[41magsnub]

This.

Same principle behind teaching privates how to use a map and compass even though GPS is ubiquitous

Because it will eventually *expletive deleted*it the bed.

Been there, we had a land nav course where our new LT ranger school grad was trying to be billy bad ass.  He had us out collecting flags from specfiic coordinates.  He used a GPS to place them and all of them were off by a couple of clicks.  He was way pissed at us until we finally got him to just look at the map and it was blindlingly obvious something was wrong- one of his flags was in the middle of the river according to his coordinates.  It ended up being more of a scavenger hunt than a land nav course!

[jim in anchorage]

Until your GPS shits the bed.

That's why I have 2 of them. Far more likely that complex antique VOR on the ground fails then my GPS .

[Jamisjockey]

Hey,  I'm right there with you on that.  I've never thought of being inside a heavier than air device as a place to get lackadaisical.  :)

 For some reason the default is to try and blame us for not ensuring you get current information....

[KD5NRH]

Been there, we had a land nav course where our new LT ranger school grad was trying to be billy bad ass.  He had us out collecting flags from specfiic coordinates.  He used a GPS to place them and all of them were off by a couple of clicks.  He was way pissed at us until we finally got him to just look at the map and it was blindlingly obvious something was wrong- one of his flags was in the middle of the river according to his coordinates.  It ended up being more of a scavenger hunt than a land nav course!

Compensating for piss poor cartography and/or spotter interpretations thereof is a critical part of land nav.

[Boomhauer]

I wasted many $$ and hours as a student pilot on VOR navigation

You coulda learned it in the simulator for damn near free.

I spent maybe an hour doing VOR work in the air. Practiced it on the simulator and also when I was on cross countries and had plenty of time use the VOR system.

[jim in anchorage]

For some reason the default is to try and blame us for not ensuring you get current information....

I trust a wind sock far more than 45 minute old ATIS information.

[KD5NRH]

I trust a wind sock far more than 45 minute old ATIS information.

Careful; sometimes the white wind sock is an orange wind sock so matted with bird crap that it stands straight out in a dead calm.

[230RN]

Nope.  I just boss them around.
Seriously though if you have ATC questions while getting your license just speak up. 

Yeah, I've listened to a couple of back-and-forths from tower to plane, and I'm wondering how you guys can understand each other.  Not from the "jargon" angle, but from the shitty microphone technique.  OTOH, maybe my ears are just getting too old.

[tokugawa]

Yeah, I've listened to a couple of back-and-forths from tower to plane, and I'm wondering how you guys can understand each other.  Not from the "jargon" angle, but from the shitty microphone technique.  OTOH, maybe my ears are just getting too old.

 they know what is expected to be said, or a variation thereof- so slurred acronyms, static,  etc are translated in the brain.  If you are trained to see golf balls, you see golf balls.

[Fitz]

BUMP!


Finally got my medical. still real low on hours, but now with a medical i'm ramping that up.

I got a super badass sim setup too. Pics will get posted on Christmas.

I'm mostly through the online ground school. Not super hard stuff. VORs are easy. Other antiquated navaids have been removed from the test entirely.

Apparently a  chunk of VORs are being decommed too. I guess they figure with most people having a GPS or two, plus the whole 2020 mandate for ADS-B, the other stuff isn't as useful

[tokugawa]

The first time I saw a GPS used was up north on a river, our pick-up pilot dropped through a solid overcast flying a set of waypoints.  We were able to talk to him on the radio and let him know there was 800ft ceiling... still, it felt slightly queasy to me, thinking about it.

[Fitz]

The first time I saw a GPS used was up north on a river, our pick-up pilot dropped through a solid overcast flying a set of waypoints.  We were able to talk to him on the radio and let him know there was 800ft ceiling... still, it felt slightly queasy to me, thinking about it.

A ton of GPS approaches now have vertical guidance. add to that a display capable of Synthetic vision, and there's no worries

[Fly320s]

A ton of GPS approaches now have vertical guidance. add to that a display capable of Synthetic vision, and there's no worries

True, but I bet Tok was talking about Joe Bob in his Husky in Nowhere's, Alaska.

We fly almost as many GPS and RNAV approaches as we do ILS approaches.