16-Aug-96 14:16 studa…@shell.one.net (John Studarus) writes
> I was hoping someone could comment on this and
>perhaps go over the different types of VFR landings. Is it
>there a better way to differentiate over the radio between
>’touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’?
"Touch and go" and "Stop and go" are fairly common terms John.
A Touch and go is when you land, and quickly take off again, usually
without slowing down much. Your time on the active runway is
minimal.
A Stop and go is when you land, and almost come to a complete stop,
(or in fact come to a complete stop) and then immediatly take off.
Both are designed so that you don’t have to taxi back and get in
line for takeoff again.
If I know that the aircraft in front of me is doing a touch and go,
I’ll follow him a little closer, as I expect him to be clear of the
active by the time I touch down. If he’s doing a stop and go, I
don’t follow him as close, as I expect him to be on the active
a longer while. As with life, expectations are not always
realized….
Hope this helps
Regards
Mark S. Bell 412-268-7925 (Voice)
Software Engineering Institute 412-268-5758 (Fax)
Carnegie Mellon University ** These are my opinions,
4500 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh PA.,15213 not those of the SEI or CMU **
John,
To paraphrase the AIM:
Stop and Go: the aircraft will land, come to a complete stop on the
runway, and begin a takeoff from that point.
Touch and Go: the aircraft lands and takes off on the runway without
stopping or exiting the runway.
In my limited experience as a private pilot, these two calls are
standard ATC comm. While the difference (i.e. whether you’re stopping on
the runway or immediately transitioning to a takeoff roll) may seem
trivial, it’s good airmanship to be very clear about your exact
intentions. Other pilots are (or should be) adjusting their patterns
based on what others are doing (e.g. extending downwind when the guy/gal
in front calls for a stop and go versus a T&G).
This situation also points out the importance of periodically reviewing
the FARs and AIM.
Clear skies to you,
James
In article <4v2duh$…@news.one.net>,
John Studarus <studa…@shell.one.net> wrote:
> I was hoping someone could comment on this and
>perhaps go over the different types of VFR landings. Is it
>there a better way to differentiate over the radio between
>’touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’?
Request "the option." You are then cleared for a full stop, touch and go,
stop and go, or a go around.
______________________________________________ _____
| Keith S. Barr AeroSys Engineering, Inc. | \ \__ ____
| kb…@sni.net Westminster, Colorado, USA | \ \/____\__\___________
| GO BUFFS! http://www.sni.net/~kbarr |}–< /_/ COMM-AS&MEL-A&IGI `-.
| EAA/AOPA/NAFI RV-6 S/N 23855 in progress | `———,—,———–’
|______________________________________________| _/___/0
I caught the tail end of a conversation between
ATC and a pilot requesting a ‘stop and go’ (i.e. a short
field landing/take off). I think the pilot requested
a ‘full stop and go’ which sounds very similar to ‘full stop’,
‘touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’ confusing ATC but I didn’t
catch his request, only ATCs response.
I was hoping someone could comment on this and
perhaps go over the different types of VFR landings. Is it
there a better way to differentiate over the radio between
‘touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’?
Thanks,
-John
In article <4v2duh$…@news.one.net>, studa…@shell.one.net (John
Studarus) wrote:
> I caught the tail end of a conversation between
> ATC and a pilot requesting a ‘stop and go’ (i.e. a short
> field landing/take off). I think the pilot requested
> a ‘full stop and go’ which sounds very similar to ‘full stop’,
> ‘touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’ confusing ATC but I didn’t
> catch his request, only ATCs response.
"Full stop and go" would be confusing to me, too. If I were a controller,
I’d have confirmed what he wanted. (Or, if traffic were light, cleared
for "the option" and not have to ask. ;-)
> I was hoping someone could comment on this and
> perhaps go over the different types of VFR landings. Is it
> there a better way to differentiate over the radio between
> ‘touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’?
Absolutely. Ask for exactly what you want; that’s always good policy with
ATC. If another runway would be preferable, ask. The worst they can do
is say "no," and if they do, there’s usually a good reason for it. (e.g.,
there’s another airplane using that runway, it would screw up their
traffic flow, or whatever.)
The basic landings are, in my own words, as follows:
Full Stop: You touch down, slow down, and get off the runway.
Touch-and-go: You touch down, and then begin a takeoff while you’re still
rolling, and depart again.
Stop-and-go: You touch down, bring the aircraft to a complete stop, then
take off from that point. (This is useful to meet the requirement for
"three landings to a complete stop" for night passenger-carrying
currency.)
Full-Stop, Taxi-Back: You land, get off the runway, and get yourself back
to the approach end of the runway using the taxiways. Many controlled
airports have you switch to ground control for the taxi segment, but
they’ll tell you what to do once you clear the runway.
Low Approach: Usually used by folks practicing instrument approaches, you
simply go around before ever reaching the pavement.
The Option: When ATC says "Cleared for the option," you can do any of the
above. It’s a flight instructor’s dream. :-)
–
Garner R. Miller, Flight Instructor
Hawthorne Aviation – Ocala, Florida
*WARNING* — NO JUNK MAIL. Spam will be returned hundredfold.
studa…@shell.one.net (John Studarus) wrote:
> I was hoping someone could comment on this and
>perhaps go over the different types of VFR landings. Is it
>there a better way to differentiate over the radio between
>’touch and go’ and ‘stop and go’?
John,
It probably depends on who taught you to fly and where you learned. I
was taught that there were five different ways my landings could
terminate while I was being instructed: full stop, touch and go,
stop and go, go around and "the option" ( any of the previous four,
to be decided on by the instructor at the last minute). "The Option"
must be requested from towered airports in advance, usually on
downwind to insure there is no traffic conflict with any of the above.
Before take off or when entering the Class D airspace, we would advise
the tower we would be doing "close pattern work". After we entered
the pattern, the statement to the tower was just as written. "Van
Nuys tower, Skyhawk XXXXX downwind abeam, stop and go". Or "Van Nuys
tower, Skyhawk XXXXX downwind abeam, touch and go". There has not
been any problem with understanding here that I know of. The biggest
problem I’ve heard is pilots who talk too fast or don’t know what they
are going to say before they key the mike, and start a rambling
dissertation on what they intend to do with the aircraft for the
foreseeable future.
Maybe at some time the tower supervisor got together with the local
FSDO and the flight instructors and set up a standard phraseology.
But anywhere I’ve gone in Southern California the phrases have always
been the same…"full stop" "touch and go" "stop and go" "go
around" (sometimes called "missed approach") and "the option".
Ron Kelley
In article <4v69nr$…@ecuador.earthlink.net>, ronkel…@earthlink.net
(Ron Kelley) writes:
> I
>was taught that there were five different ways my landings could
>terminate while I was being instructed: full stop, touch and go,
>stop and go, go around and "the option" ( any of the previous four,
>to be decided on by the instructor at the last minute). "The Option"
>must be requested from towered airports in advance, usually on
>downwind to insure there is no traffic conflict with any of the above.
"The option" is not an option. The missing one is "short approach" for
practice engine-out. The idea in distinguishing between these is that
it lets the controller separate landing aircraft more accurately. –Bill
_________________________________________________________________________
Wm W. Plummer, 7 Country Club Dr., Chelmsford MA 01824
508-256-9570 PP-ASEL,G SP-ASES,LB