[jhb] Re: Not too hot
- From: "bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
- To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:02:46 -0000
Sounds good.
bones
-----Original Message-----
From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Fred Stopforth
Sent: 28 January 2008 12:44
To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb] Re: Not too hot
Just been in touch with Mike,he can manage tomorrow Tues afternoon.OK? Fred
----- Original Message -----
From: "bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:27 AM
Subject: [jhb] Re: Not too hot
> Alas no, as SWMBO has the day off and is threatening to drag me out to
> look
> at cutlery (believe it or not).
>
> The chances of escaping this are less than those of a snowball in
> hell.
>
> Tuesday to Thursday look good..
>
> bones
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Fred Stopforth
> Sent: 27 January 2008 20:24
> To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [jhb] Re: Not too hot
>
>
> Bones, Just been on the phone to Mike to see when he can come on line.
> His best chance at the moment is 14:30 tomorrow Monday.Would that be
> OK with you? Fred
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 8:08 PM
> Subject: [jhb] Re: Not too hot
>
>
>>A very good point Kevin as it highlights the absolutely essential need
>>for clearances to be read back by the pilot (and ATC to listen to
>>this) so that errors are trapped.
>>
>> Any clearance involving a height or heading should be repeated by the
>> aircraft so both parties are clear about what is going to happen.
>>
>> bones
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of 175@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: 27 January 2008 19:55
>> To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [jhb] Re: Not too hot
>>
>>
>> Just online at Farnborough, delighted to see Jerry on the apron as I
>> logged on. Flightplan to EGNS (home). Winds calm, he was heading for
>> runway 06.
>>
>> He called up.
>>
>> Herein I have to apologise, my performance was poor, I suggested a
>> heading from 06 which should have routed him direct to NORRY, his
>> first waypoint. Traffic was light but mostly using 27 at Heathrow.
>>
>> Diamond 068 took off and turned on a heading which kept him out of
>> EGLL airspace but on a Northerly heading. I should have asked, but as
>> I didn't confirm any clearance, I watched as he climbed, still
>> Northbound for another 10 miles, at which point I wondered if my 300
>> degrees had been heard as 360 degrees and asked.
>>
>> Jerry accepted "own navigation" and spent some time travelling West
>> to regain his original flightplan......Sorry.
>>
>> This only serves to highlight the need for clearance so that both
>> parties are aware and can follow the flight progress. I'm still
>> trying to avoid the pregnant pauses over clearances as I look up the
>> lesser used ISEC's and Fix's...
>>
>> Once again apologies offered.
>>
>>
>> G'day
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.12/1245 - Release Date:
>> 26/01/2008 15:45
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.12/1245 - Release Date:
> 26/01/2008 15:45
>
Other related posts:
