Crossing a runway in my car
- Thread starter Groundpounder
- Start date
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
I believe if you check NH statutes driving on a runway is illegal..
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
You all are looking in the wrong rule book. Operations of motor vehicles are regulated by state, county, and city laws. Google your location and you will probably find something like this:
Municode Library
MunicodeNEXT, the industry's leading search application with over 3,300 codes and growing!
library.municode.com
Sec. 2-22. - Ground vehicle operations on movement and non movement area.
...
(c)Right-of-Way. All surface vehicles shall yield the right-of-way to any and all aircraft in motion.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Which car/airplane accident do you mean? The only one I remember is when a police car ran into an F-15. Since you know which one it is, would you please provide a link?
Please explain why the FAR 14 CFR 139.329 cited earlier isn't a regulation? And why aren't automobiles considered "vehicles"? As they still need a driver, why doesn't it apply to car drivers?
Note this part of the cited regulation FAR 139 applies to untowered fields:
"When an air traffic control tower is not in operation, or there is no air traffic control tower, provide adequate procedures to control pedestrians and ground vehicles in movement areas or safety areas through two-way radio communications or prearranged signs or signals;"
Those are honest admissions, but given your lack of knowledge, why do you think they don't follow the guidance from the FAA?
Lindberg
Final Approach
Why do you demand I defend strawmen? Part 139 is applicable only to air-carrier airports.
I don't care what they do, and what they do is irrelevant to the assertion I responded to as is FAA "guidance." Where's the generally applicable regulation that says airplanes have the right of way over cars at uncontrolled airports?
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Because it isn’t a strawman? Some of those airports are pretty small. You just need scheduled air service of a plane with more than 9 seats. Martha’s Vineyard comes to mind. Also Provincetown. Cape Air flies to these places using 9 seat airplanes.
If you don’t care, why are you in this thread? It is relevant because airport managers take their guidance from FAA guidance and 139. We did post a citation. Isn’t an airport without a control tower “uncontrolled”? Provincetown is one example of an uncontrolled airport with scheduled air service, so 139 does apply. Havre County Airport (Montana) is another example. Wolf Point, also in Montana, is still another example. There are probably many more examples in Alaska. Even though you don’t know how 14 CFR 139 works, it does affect you.
@Ed Haywood provided some state law examples. Those are regulations too, aren’t they?
Also, please provide a link to the “well known car vs. airplane accident” that you alluded to.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I'll let you reread the thread for yourself.
Velocity173
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 16,369
- Display Name
- Velocity173
I would check the city ordinance for the particular airport. Where I’m based, they use a format like this example.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
That's pretty interesting. So a private property owner can establish an ordinance enforceable by LEO?
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 5,142
- Display Name
- Jack Fleetwood
Last year we had a Bonanza pilot who landed gear-up. The airport manager put up a NOTAM closing the runway. She drove the city truck with flashing LED light bar out to the plane and parked it to make it more visible since we all know a lot of pilots don't check NOTAMs. I picked her up to bring her back to the terminal. When she got in, I smiled and told her to hang on because I'd never been on the runway in my Corvette before. She laughed and said, "Shut up, Jack. I have cameras!"
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 5,142
- Display Name
- Jack Fleetwood
I think it depends on the state. In Texas, my company has a lot of property and there's a road that cuts through it. It's not a public road, so most of us don't stop at the stop signs if nobody else is at the intersection (you can clearly see all directions and we're not going that fast). Once I got pulled over by the Austin Police. He asked if I saw the stop sign and I said yes, my company owns that stop sign and that he was trespassing! We both laughed and I told him we appreciate them driving through, but it's not really a public road. I let him off with a warning!
Part 139 only applies to airport that are "certified" for operation of air carrier operations.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
See again post #46. There are many airports that are non-towered yet are have air carrier operations. I was surprised at those airports that have air carrier operations. I only listed a few. Also, the regulation is still good guidance, as well as the FAA guidance posted.
Lindberg
Final Approach
As you note, Cape Air flies 9-seat airplanes, and Part 139 applies where there are operations of aircraft with >9 seats. And Part 139 is still not germane because I was responding to a claim that there's a general rule for uncontrolled airports, and Part 139 would only apply at a very small number of them.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Here's your post questioning the whether there were any rules about this. Emphasis mine.
FAR 14 CFR 139.329 is indeed a rule or regulation. Other people linked state laws in this thread. "Any rule" allows the possibility of "some rules" or even "one rule" that applies in some places..
Cape Air also flies 12 seat Tecnam P2012s. I also noted that Cape Air is only one example of an airline that flies to various smaller uncontrolled airports, and I only listed a few airports. There are many more uncontrolled fields with scheduled air service.
I'm still waiting on the information about this incident:
I'm aware of that. I've dodged EAS regionals at a number of uncontrolled airports over the years. There's also a few of the "if you build it, they will come" types around that don't (currently) have scheduled service but are hopeful. HKY for example (it does have a tower) lost their service decades ago. From time to time an Allegiant A320 shows up on a charter however.
Lindberg
Final Approach
Your density has to be intentional. I never questioned whether there were any rules anywhere about cars at airports. It should be apparent to anyone with enough intelligence to operate this website, let alone an airplane, that I was referring to a specific assertion when I wrote "this claim." So what was the assertion I responded to?
As a categorical statement, this claim is false. Yes, there are some uncontrolled airports where 14 CFR 139.329 applies, but as you even acknowledge, it is a very small minority. Vanishingly small. Tiny. Less than 1%.* Not only that, but even 14 CFR 139.329 doesn't actually say that aircraft have the right of way over surface vehicles.
And if you're going to claim that rockyfatcat's statement is true because there is some set of facts that make it true, 1) that's like saying it's true that steel is softer than butter, and b) the thread topic is specifically an uncontrolled field that has no local rule or regulation.
*According to the FAA, there are 130 Part 139 airports with no control tower. That's less than .7% of all US airports and 1% of uncontrolled airports.
flyingcheesehead
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 28,184
- Location
- UQACY, WI
- Display Name
- iMooniac
- Home Airfield
- KUES/KMKE
Cap'n, I do think @Lindberg could be a bit more diplomatic here and I really don't WANT to agree with him here as a result, but...
§ 139.1 Applicability.
(a) This part prescribes rules governing the certification and operation of airports in any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any territory or possession of the United States serving any—
(1) Scheduled passenger-carrying operations of an air carrier operating aircraft configured for more than 9 passenger seats, as determined by the regulations under which the operation is conducted or the aircraft type certificate issued by a competent civil aviation authority; and
(2) Unscheduled passenger-carrying operations of an air carrier operating aircraft configured for at least 31 passenger seats, as determined by the regulations under which the operation is conducted or the aircraft type certificate issued by a competent civil aviation authority.
139.329 does not apply to non-towered airports that do not have scheduled air carriers with >9 pax seats or unscheduled carriers with >31 pax seats, because Part 139 does not apply to those airports at all. "Untowered" in that context means "Part 139 airports that are untowered", not just any untowered airports.
That said, while there may not be any specific regulation that says so, there's plenty of guidance saying that aircraft have right of way over vehicles.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Again, I'll quote your statement where you have questioned this claim:
I understand what you are saying. But don't those airports still need to show compliance with the regs before the scheduled service begins?
Do you have a citation for this? While you are calling people "dense" because they question you, you throw out "facts" without anything to back them up. You were asked twice for a citation about this one:
Yes, I always understood that to be the case and provided some examples, along with airlines that have regular service to those airports.
The airport rules provided to us by airport managers are probably an abstraction layer over the regulation and guidance provided by the FAA. Our EHS manager has me take Hazmat certification every 3 years- very much overkill for my job, but it lets me see the source of many rules I've seen in labs over the years. Those rules were derived from the IATA and DOT regulations.
Last edited:
Lindberg
Final Approach
You're again intentionally eliding the claim that I questioned.
Yes. I cited the FAA.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Those aren't citations. The FAA link just goes to a portal that merely has an input for an airport name (attached screenshot).You're again intentionally eliding the claim that I questioned.
Yes. I cited the FAA.
The other two lead to dead web pages. So, no support for your claims.
I'm not eliding (sic) anything. This is what you wrote:
Other people in this thread provided citations and examples of state and federal regulations about vehicles in airports.
Lindberg
Final Approach
That's the FAA's "Airport Data and Information Portal." It's where I got the information I wrote here. So can you.
I've given you all the info, despite the fact that you keep deliberately misconstruing what I wrote and asking that I respond to your red herrings and strawmen. I said what I said; I stand by it; and you haven't shown it to be wrong. I'm out.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
That's not how citations work. Show the query that provided that data. You didn't acknowledge the dead links, either.
You've provided unverifiable information. I've quoted your statement. I didn't paraphrase it. The statement was in plain English. I didn't provide any herrings of any color nor strawmen- but I did cite my statements and explained why they applied.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I'm not doing any more of your homework assignments. If you want to prove the assertion that I questioned is true, have it. You haven't even come close yet.
flyingcheesehead
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 28,184
- Location
- UQACY, WI
- Display Name
- iMooniac
- Home Airfield
- KUES/KMKE
For what it's worth, that was NOT a car driving on an airport. The car was on Kelly DR, just north of the field. So, kinda irrelevant.You're again intentionally eliding the claim that I questioned.
Yes. I cited the FAA.
Probably for the best.
Ummm...
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Groundpounder
En-Route
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 3,254
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Display Name
- Emerson Bigguns
- Home Airfield
- CON
Man, who knew my dumb question would lead to such an intense argument
Lindberg
Final Approach
I can't imagine why the same argument came up in that thread then.
You should also feel free to provide a general rule that airplanes have the right of way over cars at uncontrolled fields. We would all learn something.
Albany Tom
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 5,703
- Display Name
- Albany Tom
I don't think it was a dumb question. But as to the second part, you know what site you're on, right?
Groundpounder
En-Route
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 3,254
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Display Name
- Emerson Bigguns
- Home Airfield
- CON
Pedantsofamerica.comI don't think it was a dumb question. But as to the second part, you know what site you're on, right?