Seth

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    2,589
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Seth last won the day on July 19

Seth had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

761 Excellent

2 Followers

About Seth

  • Rank
    Won't Leave!
  • Birthday 12/03/1981

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Rockville, MD
  • Interests
    Aviation, Athletics, Piano, Finance, world domination
  • Reg #
    N1165N
  • Model
    '83 M20J Missile 300

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Seth

    Too soon to move on to a Mooney 231? 130TT

    GREAT chart. Where is my Missile on that chart? -Seth
  2. I am based in the SFRA. I sweat when I’m on the ground and squawk 1200 prior to departure when away from my home base . . .
  3. Correct, Uncontrolled is the proper term. I personally like stating non-towered for when I discuss this with the non-pilot population. The look of horror when I say I'm based at an "uncontroled" field vs a "non-towered" field. Kind of like renting out my former townhouse basement. If it was a "lower level suite" I'd get $200 more per month than a "basement for rent." -Seth
  4. Drilled into my head at some point - and no, I haven't check to see if this is actually the case - was that outside of special circumstances like formation flight, no two aircraft are to be on any runway pavement at the same time. So that means waiting until the airplane is clear before taxing on for takeoff at a non-towered airport. At a towered field it is different as you have someone in the tower "watching" your blindside. If an airplane is not clear of the runway but clearing you are not allowed to touch down even if they will be clear or are toward the end of their takeoff roll. It makes perfect sense for safety, but what is the rule at non-towered fields. Thanks! -Seth
  5. Yes - the purpose of this was the legality of a line up and wait type of operation at a non towered field. Is it legal? At busy non towered fields there is often 4-6 aircraft in the pattern and a line up and getting onto the runway for takeoff before the landing aircraft has taken back off or cleared is the difference between sitting on the ground for 10+ min and departing. I feel communication when everyone is working together sometimes beats control towers. The question is the legality. -Seth
  6. Seth

    Parts Needed for M20K

    Also contact Alan Fox here on Mooney Space
  7. In a separate topic there is discussion over line up and wait. The purpose of this thread is to review two scenarios and ask what is legal, and then what is reasonable. I have found that busy non-towered airports where everyone is working together can sometimes be more efficient than a towered field where certain safety rules are applied, however from an efficineny standpoint, less traffic is able to use the runway at once. I have also been at a non-towered field where even if one pilot does not "work with" or have consideration for the others in the pattern, it would be much safer with a tower at the field. Case in point, I was at a Class D airport about two weeks ago #1 for departure and waited for three landing aircraft. It added maybe 6-8 minutes to my trip - not really a big deal, but I did have passengers with a time constraint. I easily could have departed between two of them, but also understood the tower did feel comfortable with a "line up and wait" and then depart no delay. Earlier in the day, I departed between landing traffic at a class B airport with similar gaps in landing traffic. At non-towered airports, I think that "line up and wait" which used to be "position and hold" is not a standard phrase. That's something a control tower can state, but at a non-towered field, it's not something standard to self announce. Rule: Only once aircraft can make use of the runway (wheels on pavement) at any given period of time (except formation take off/landings - still one "flight."). Scenario 1: There are many planes in the pattern, someone on downwind, someone just turned downwind to base, and five aircraft are lined up for takeoff. No one is really extending downwind for spacing to allow for takeoff (but also no one has requested the pattern traffic to do so). The aircraft on final has just passed the threshold and is in the flare or has already touched down and is wheels down on the runway. I have seen people announce their own "line up and wait" type announcement, get in position, and add power as soon as the landing aircraft is clear of the runway, thus having launched prior to the base aircraft reaching final or short final. This would have not been possible without lining up for takeoff with the runway occupied with the the landing aircraft on rollout. Technically though the runway now has two separate aircraft not on the same "flight" with wheels on pavement and no control tower ensuring separation. Dangerous as an engine out could cause the aircraft on base or downwind to turn immediately for the pavement, if waiting too long, you no longer have eyes on the base traffic, etc . . . but perfectly reasonable in order to make use of the gap between landing and arriving traffic to get an aircraft out in a busy atmosphere. Thoughts? Is this legal? Is it reasonable? Thanks! Scenario 2: When flying into a local airport that had some taxiway work (or airports that have partial taxiways) backtaxing down runways are sometimes needed. During busy times, I have witnessed the following: When an aircraft is in flare or ground roll after landing, traffic waiting at a midfield taxiway will taxi out immediately on to the runway behind the moving aircraft travelling in the opposite direction to the main ramp - they'll announce they are back taxing to the ramp, but again, technically you have two aircraft not in the same flight now taxing opposite directions down the same runway. If seen the same scenario with a train of three aircraft backtaxing together down the runway from the midfield taxi way turn off to the main ramp. If each aircraft had waited until the landing aircraft was clear of the runway, it may have been another 15-20 seconds, and the difference between an aircraft in the pattern turning base vs turning final. Or, if each of the three backtaxi aircraft waited for a one at a time taxi back, it would have taken 3 more laps in the pattern for each airplane to get to the main ramp. I do not feel any of these are unsafe, but is it legal? Thanks for your feedback! -Seth
  8. Seth

    Anyone hurt by Michael?

    Tyndall ATC Tower. Every structure at Tyndall received significant damage.
  9. Seth

    Tyndall Damage

    Wow. Curious if he’ll replace it.
  10. It was a Belgium technician and F-16. Also two people were injured. Extent of injuries unknown. Scroll through the article - the pics were quite descriptive. Big fireball. At least it wasn’t as bad as the USS Forestall - when a carrier had a Rocket go off and start a massive fire on the flight deck. But that was 50 years ago! -Seth
  11. Seth

    Tyndall Damage

    Our friends at Tyndall got slammed by Hurricane Michael. Every structure received significant damage. Here are some pics of the contorl Tower:
  12. And fueling/armed for a mission while conducting maintenance? Isn’t there some sort of you don’t work on armed airplanes rule? Unless there was an issue and they had to fix it for the mission. -Seth
  13. I know. It makes no financial sense to do it, it I could own the least expensive, lowest time airframe, flying B-17 in the world. Man - I wish my finances were where I could just drop $120k (i’d negotiate it down) on something like this. One day - yes - now with two kids and college education to save up for - no. But I do drool over it. It fits in a T-Hanger!! -Seth
  14. https://jalopnik.com/technician-accidentally-sets-off-an-f-16-cannon-blows-1829732241 In the believe it or not category, a technician while servicing an F-16 accidently activated the cannon thus blowing up another F-16. -Seth