Close Call

Michael

Michael

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
1,735
Location
Cape Cod, MA
Display Name
Display name:
CapeCodMichael
So i made it LA and back today without incident untill I entered the pattern at my home field. I called "entering on a 45 for left traffic runway 32". Then another pilot who was rolling called "crosswind departure" The departure procedure for ALL aircraft at Havasu is to remain on runway heading for 1 mile, then a slight left turn (290) untill reaching 2500. It is marked at the threshold of 32. This bozo decides its ok to turn crosswind, imediately after takeoff then start heading accross the downwind path at pattern altitude. I saw him turning towards me as I was turning downwind, couldnt have been more than 2 seconds, and I started to turn to get away from him, within 2 more seconds he was very close and still heading right at me, I had to nosedive and perform a steep turn to avoid him. we would have slammed into eachother, No doubt about it. I never realized how fast an approaching plane can come up on you. From the moment i saw him till the missed impact couldnt have been more than 10 seconds. I dont think he ever saw me, and of course he never made another transmission. I am so angry at this bozo, he could have killed me and my daughter this morning for not following procedures. I dont know his tail number so i dont think there is anything i can do about it. Glad it turned out ok. On a side note, the folks at fullerton airport in LA were as nice as ever. You have a great airport there jeff.
 
Good response time there Michael. Glad it worked out ok!
Does the FBO record the unicom? Some do
 
Same as above: Glad you're ok. RHV gets pretty busy here, even with the tower, there are always people trying to land on top of you or turn into your path. Nice work dodging danger Michael.

It's hind-sight, but maybe a helpful reminder over the CTAF that there are "no crosswind departures"

On another note, KFUL is a nice place. :)
 
You did the right thing--keep your eyes out. Is that procedure a legal requirement? If not, you could at least make a case that he wasn't following AIM "suggestions." Very occasionally, I have done something non-standard such as enter a pattern on crosswind. I've only done it if it was quiet, and I've done two other things: kept my head on a swivel, and announce my position fifty million times.
 
wangmyers said:
You did the right thing--keep your eyes out. Is that procedure a legal requirement? If not, you could at least make a case that he wasn't following AIM "suggestions." Very occasionally, I have done something non-standard such as enter a pattern on crosswind. I've only done it if it was quiet, and I've done two other things: kept my head on a swivel, and announce my position fifty million times.
Click to expand...

Ben Its a city ordinance. Has the ord. numbers right along with the procedure at the runway threshold. There are also no straight ins or intersection takeoffs at havasu. so unless he took an intersection and missed the sign telling him what to do on departure, he was still in the wrong. My only hope is that this guy was not based at havasu and just missed the sign. I hope he wasnt just a jerk who was in a hurry.
 
Michael said:
Ben Its a city ordinance. Has the ord. numbers right along with the procedure at the runway threshold. There are also no straight ins or intersection takeoffs at havasu. so unless he took an intersection and missed the sign telling him what to do on departure, he was still in the wrong. My only hope is that this guy was not based at havasu and just missed the sign. I hope he wasnt just a jerk who was in a hurry.
Click to expand...

I think the real question should be "Is it published in the AFD", because IMO if it's not, it's not a required procedure. That said, at the very least, both of you should have been keeping an eye out for each other instead of just you.
 
First off - great job avoiding the collision Michael. I hate idiots like that. Second, I do not have the AFD, but I do have Airnav's comments, which usually come directly from the AFD: (bold emphasis is mine)

NOISE ABATEMENT - STRAIGHT-IN STRAIGHT-OUT APCH/DEP PROHIBITED. ENTER PATTERN USING 45 DEG ENTRY TO DOWNWIND.
DO NOT OVERFLY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES S/SW OF ARPT. POWER LINES/TOWERS & HIGH TERRAIN N/NE OF ARPT.
- RY 32 DESIGNATED CALM WIND RY.
- SAILPLANE AND ULTRALIGHT ACFT OPER INVOF ARPT FM SURFACE TO 5,000 FT.
- ARFF INDEX C AVAILABLE WITH PPR, CTC AIRPORT MANAGER (928) 764-3330, M-F 0800-1700.
- SCHEDULED AIR CARRIER OPERATIONS INVOLVING ACFT WITH MORE THAN 9 PASSENGER SEATS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED IN EXCESS OF 15 MINUTES BEFORE OR 15 MINUTES AFTER SCHEDULED ARR OR DEP TIMES WITHOUT PRIOR COORDINATION WITH AIRPORT MGT AND CONFIRMATION THAT ARFF SVCS ARE AVBL PRIOR TO LANDING OR TAKEOFF.
 
He should have seen the sign. Glad you watched him.

The AF/D says, 'Noise abatement - straight-in staight-out apch/dep prohibited. Enter pattern using 45 entry to downwind. Do not overfly residential communitties S/SW fo arpt.'
 
yea Nick, thats exactly what the AFD reads. I agree with you Lance, and because I was watching we didnt hit. The fact is that the city ord, isnt published in the AFD but is posted before the runway. does that mean the FAA can bust a pilot for not adhearing to the procedure?? not sure...but the city can.
 
If you know the aircraft type and time of day you might be able to back track fuel receipts at the FBO if you want to pursue it...be hard to prove, though.
 
i dont see how the city has any authority to set regulations or enforce regulations pertaining to aircraft operation, controlled by federal government.
 
I think the big lesson here is never count on anyone else doing the right thing.

Michael, glad you are safe and good job. The lesson that you are teaching us is always keep your head on a swivel, your eyes open, and your mouth shut (except for radio calls) when in the proximety of an airport to get a good view of what is happening so that you can finish your flight safely.
 
Michael, glad you're okay!

The departure procedure for ALL aircraft at Havasu is to remain on runway heading for 1 mile, then a slight left turn (290) untill reaching 2500.
Click to expand...
NOISE ABATEMENT - STRAIGHT-IN STRAIGHT-OUT APCH/DEP PROHIBITED. ENTER PATTERN USING 45 DEG ENTRY TO DOWNWIND.
Click to expand...
How is a pilot supposed to know how to reconcile these? The city's ordinance sounds awfully similar to a straight-out departure. :dunno: a 30* turn at about 500'. Okay, I guess that's closer to a standard 45* turn than to a straight out, and definitely different than a 90* turn to crosswind. I've answered my own question.
 
Last edited:
Michael said:
So i made it LA and back today without incident untill I entered the pattern at my home field. I called "entering on a 45 for left traffic runway 32". Then another pilot who was rolling called "crosswind departure" The departure procedure for ALL aircraft at Havasu is to remain on runway heading for 1 mile, then a slight left turn (290) untill reaching 2500. It is marked at the threshold of 32. This bozo decides its ok to turn crosswind, imediately after takeoff then start heading accross the downwind path at pattern altitude. I saw him turning towards me as I was turning downwind, couldnt have been more than 2 seconds, and I started to turn to get away from him, within 2 more seconds he was very close and still heading right at me, I had to nosedive and perform a steep turn to avoid him. we would have slammed into eachother, No doubt about it. I never realized how fast an approaching plane can come up on you. From the moment i saw him till the missed impact couldnt have been more than 10 seconds. I dont think he ever saw me, and of course he never made another transmission. I am so angry at this bozo, he could have killed me and my daughter this morning for not following procedures. I dont know his tail number so i dont think there is anything i can do about it. Glad it turned out ok. On a side note, the folks at fullerton airport in LA were as nice as ever. You have a great airport there jeff.
Click to expand...


OMG! I'm glad this turned out ok. there HAS to be a way to figure out who that was. maybe he filed a flight plan? anyone at the FBO see him?

I wonder if he saw YOU.
 
I realize you were concentrating on getting out of the way, but would a well timed "well the hell were you doing you stupid SOB" afterwards have made a difference?
 
woodstock said:
I realize you were concentrating on getting out of the way, but would a well timed "well the hell were you doing you stupid SOB" afterwards have made a difference?
Click to expand...

You should hear some of the calls I came up with 30 minutes later Beth. But at the time, I just concentraited on getting on the ground.
I understand how this happened, and i know to keep an eye on all departing aircraft when i am on a 45. this was just dumb luck that we happened to be in the same place at the same time. I have eased up on him a bit (even though he did break procedure), because its not a normal procedure and maybe he just missed the sign. If he were joining the pattern i would still have been looking for him but i wonder if he would have been looking for me a little more closely.

And tony, the city owns the airport. they can make the rules. which they have.
 
Michael said:
You should hear some of the calls I came up with 30 minutes later Beth. But at the time, I just concentraited on getting on the ground.
I understand how this happened, and i know to keep an eye on all departing aircraft when i am on a 45. this was just dumb luck that we happened to be in the same place at the same time. I have eased up on him a bit (even though he did break procedure), because its not a normal procedure and maybe he just missed the sign. If he were joining the pattern i would still have been looking for him but i wonder if he would have been looking for me a little more closely.

And tony, the city owns the airport. they can make the rules. which they have.
Click to expand...

I dunno Michael - it may not be standard, but fwiw, neither is a crosswind departure as far as I know. I think you have every reason to be ****ed. Especially with your daughter on board. Is she shaken up at all?
 
SkyHog said:
I dunno Michael - it may not be standard, but fwiw, neither is a crosswind departure as far as I know. I think you have every reason to be ****ed. Especially with your daughter on board. Is she shaken up at all?
Click to expand...
Not really Nick, she did better than me. course she was listening to kelly clarkson on her Ipod at the time :)
 
Michael said:
And tony, the city owns the airport. they can make the rules. which they have.
Click to expand...

yea, i know how cities like to be nazis about their airports, but they really only have authority while you are on the ground. They can establish recommended departure/arrival procedures, etc. but i dont see how they can enforce them. Once you are in the air, you are out of their jurisdiction. Of course, if the FAA says you cant do straight ins or whatever at Havasu, then thats a different story, and i could see how having that in the AF/D could qualify as that. I just dont see how the city has the authority to enforce that ordinance.
 
tonycondon said:
yea, i know how cities like to be nazis about their airports, but they really only have authority while you are on the ground. They can establish recommended departure/arrival procedures, etc. but i dont see how they can enforce them. Once you are in the air, you are out of their jurisdiction. Of course, if the FAA says you cant do straight ins or whatever at Havasu, then thats a different story, and i could see how having that in the AF/D could qualify as that. I just dont see how the city has the authority to enforce that ordinance.
Click to expand...
you have a point. I dunno.
I do hear unicom sometimes telling pilots who announce straight in that its not allowed.
 
tonycondon said:
I just dont see how the city has the authority to enforce that ordinance.
Click to expand...
Cities can enforce noise ordinances which are completely separate from FAA rules. They usually enforce by means of a monetary fine.
 
If you can ID this pilot, do something about it -- clear violation of the noise abatement procedure resulting in a safety compromise. However, as mentioned by another, a reminder of the procedure on CTAF when he called "crosswind departure" might have prevented this from happening.
 
wouldn't it be a clear violation of the noise ordinance if said ordinance caused a plane crash in midair?
 
Michael said:
she was listening to kelly clarkson on her Ipod at the time :)
Click to expand...

Oh man, that would scare me more than the near mid-air. :hairraise:
 
Michael said:
yea Nick, thats exactly what the AFD reads. I agree with you Lance, and because I was watching we didnt hit. The fact is that the city ord, isnt published in the AFD but is posted before the runway. does that mean the FAA can bust a pilot for not adhearing to the procedure?? not sure...but the city can.
Click to expand...

AFaIK a city ordinance has no effect on the FAA's ability to violate a pilot. I also believe that there are limitations on what a city can control with regard to something committed in the air, but I'm not very clear on that issue. Finally I expect that a city ordinance for actions on the ground (such as operating an an aircraft while intoxicated) would be enforceable.
 
Glad everything turned out OK.

I would encourage you to file a NASA form. Not to protect YOU from enforcement, but because the ASRS is intended to smoke out safety concerns, and departing pilots not following posted (but not published) departure procedures qualifies as a safety concern in my book.
 
tonycondon said:
yea, i know how cities like to be nazis about their airports,
Click to expand...

I would venture that some cities might be authoritarian in control of an airport but as far as I know pilots have not been exterminated for disobeying noise ordinances.

Len
 
lancefisher said:
AFaIK a city ordinance has no effect on the FAA's ability to violate a pilot.
Click to expand...
Correct, but the city can issue a summons to the pilot, and potentially arrest him if he doesn't comply. Note that failure to appear for a summons can result in a warrant for arrest enforceable by any law enforcement anywhere, and in this computer age, every cop car is capable of accessing the database. Get pulled over for speeding in Cleveland, and you could end up in cuffs for a bench warrant from Clovis.

I also believe that there are limitations on what a city can control with regard to something committed in the air, but I'm not very clear on that issue.
Click to expand...
You're thinking of Federal Supremacy. The city cannot impose "arbitrary or capricious" regulations that conflict with FAA regulations. Properly designed noise abatement procedures are allowable.

Finally I expect that a city ordinance for actions on the ground (such as operating an an aircraft while intoxicated) would be enforceable.
Click to expand...
By the city, not the FAA. However, given 14 CFR 91.17(a), the specific example would be enforceable by both -- the pilot could be arrested and jailed by the city for violating the ordinance and have his ticket pulled by the FAA for violating the FAR. Double jeopardy does not apply to the case of violation of separate Federal and local laws, even if it involves the same, single act.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top