|
Download your free copy of the award winning ForPilots LogBook program today! |
Peter Duniho wrote:
> > First, no one got hurt, no metal was bent, so in that respect, you handled > things fine. And yes, youre right that asking for an elaboration when the > clearance you were given seemed unusual would have gone a long way to > avoiding any problems. (By the way, this is a general rule for > me...whenever I get a clearance that seems unusual, I make sure I understand > why it was given...unusual clearances *usually* mean some sort of > miscommunication). > > That said, I think there ARE some things to think about... > > First, especially given that the VOR is 20 miles away, its not surprising > that the controller at MMU wasnt expecting a report relative to that VOR. > To further compound the issue, you reported your position AND distance > relative to the VOR without using the term "VOR". The distance in > particular was misleading, since inbound reports to an airport are usually > given in distance from that airport. > > A controller at an airport probably doesnt care how far you are from > somewhere else. They want to know how far you are from their airport. I > think you would have been much better off to report "15 miles to the > southwest" (or 14, if you prefer :) ). > I disagree. Most towers prefer that you use a reporting point, but will accept distance/direction from the field. For instance reporting over the water tower etc, is often requested in the NOTAMs for the field. Here in Sacramento we have an airport called "Sacramento Executive". Tower is referred to as "Sacramento Exec Tower" or "Exec tower" The VOR is called "Sac" The NDB is called "Exec" The VOR is about 5 miles south of the airport, the NDB is about 2000 feet north of that. So, you can see there is opportunity for confusion. :) |
| [BACK] | Return to the ForPilots.com archive page |