From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Charlie's pet peeve
To: lml
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:42:36 -0500
Message-ID: <web-1025237@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <8984A39879F2F5418251CBEEC9C689B33641@lucky.dts.local>
References: <8984A39879F2F5418251CBEEC9C689B33641@lucky.dts.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>:

  It strikes me as the radio calls may be inversely proportional to the
  volume of traffic at the airport.  Counter intuitive, but consider that
  at an airport that's pretty busy, the adherence to pattern flying is a
  bit better. One, perhaps two calls establishes where you're at and who
  you're behind.  At the busy airport, everyone has their head on a swivel
  and more radios calls are not needed or appreciated.
  
  Sometimes the most dangerous airport is the low volume airport where
  pilots don't pay much attention because 'nobody is around' anyhow and
  more of the flying seems to be non-standard.  In that instance, calls
  for downwind, base and final won't add to the radio congestion (there
  isn't much to begin with) and it'll alert the dude that hopped in his
  go-fast (or go-slow as the case may be) without a preflight and hops
  right out onto the runway.  If he's listening, multi-calls are more
  likely to catch his attention.
  
  Just a different way to look at it.
  
  Chuck