Exiting a Runway with a greater than 90 degree turn

Everskyward said:
I wonder if another one of his names is "Captain", although that wasn't a Captain-style post.
Click to expand...
Came r on now skyward, yer being paranoid.

(See what I did there?)
 
timwinters said:
@Timbeck2 All I was trying to convey is that I don't think there's ever any harm in confirming. Whether is my scenario or the OP's. Sometimes chit happens.
Click to expand...

I know where you're coming from and I can appreciate it. On the other hand, I also know where controllers are coming from and can certainly appreciate that. If you don't confirm after you have already been cleared to cross the runway and when you get there you look and see that nobody is on final (as you should anyway) then you proceed across, do you know what will happen? Nothing.

I can't possibly speak for the controllers in your scenario. Perhaps they're just grumpy but also perhaps they clear you to cross a runway and then get busy doing something else because they already think they took care of you, then they have to stop the phone conversation or the other ATC related duty to confirm that you are cleared across the runway..

I can see where you're coming from, can you see where I'm coming from?
 
Clark1961 said:
Came r on now skyward, yer being paranoid.

(See what I did there?)
Click to expand...
Yeah, him. But I wasn't the one who outed him. ;)

Funny, though. I found out we have a mutual acquaintance. Maybe a couple.
 
don__t_feed_the_troll___by_blag001-d5r7e47.png
 
timwinters said:
Yeah, I'm ready to taxi when I call...here's but one example of WHY:

I land at KSGF on 14. I clear the runway at Hotel, stop, contact ground and ask for permission to taxi to the self serve pumps. (which are at the extreme NE corner of the field at the end of Papa, at least they were, they're no longer there)

I'm cleared by Ground to to the pumps via Delta, Uniform, November, Papa, and cleared to cross 02/20. It can easily take quite some time to get to 02/20, especially if I'm instructed to yield to other taxiing traffic at various intersections along the way.

Note: This is not a hypothetical, this exact scenario has happened.

View attachment 59712
sgf_airport_diagram.pdf
Click to expand...
Bolivar has better prices (and less taxiing).
 
Timbeck2 said:
I can see where you're coming from, can you see where I'm coming from?
Click to expand...
Sure, but...as the old adage goes...

If I make a mistake, you're not the one who dies.

Cooter said:
Bolivar has better prices (and less taxiing).
Click to expand...
There's no arguing that! I used to be based at SGF though and my hanger was immediately adjacent to the SS island.

One thing I recently found out about SGF, and I don't think it's published anywhere, is that every weekend, all day long on Sat and Sun, fuel is discounted $0.40 from the published price. Right now that puts them just a dime higher than Bolivar (if the AOPA listed price is correct). Don't know why this isn't published anywhere, or if it is, I certainly haven't seen it. But I'm a man, I can't find milk in the frig either.
 
timwinters said:
One thing I recently found out about SGF, and I don't think it's published anywhere, is that every weekend, all day long on Sat and Sun, fuel is discounted $0.40 from the published price. Right now that puts them just a dime higher than Bolivar (if the AOPA listed price is correct). Don't know why this isn't published anywhere, or if it is, I certainly haven't seen it. But I'm a man, I can't find milk in the frig either.
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard about that, not sure if it’s commonly known. Good to know though, thanks.
 
timwinters said:
Sure, but...as the old adage goes...

If I make a mistake, you're not the one who dies...
Click to expand...

Yes, I could make a mistake. I could make the mistake of not hearing the guy who's plane just burst into flames asking me to roll the fire trucks because I was assuring some guy for the second time that he could cross the runway.

Why don't we just agree to disagree on this one?
 
luvflyin said:
You could do a 'reverse high speed' exit without passing through 90 degrees worth of turn until the edge of the runway. You do have to continue on past the hold lines before stopping, but you are 'clear of the runway' at the runway edge
Click to expand...

Well yeah, but legally, you are not clear of the runway until you pass the hold short lines.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well yeah, but legally, you are not clear of the runway until you pass the hold short lines.
Click to expand...
Yeah. You're 'considered' clear once passing the edge of the runway as long as the Tower gave you no instructions that stop you from continuing on past the hold lines. They can then use the runway for landings and takeoffs. But like @Timbeck2 said above, bottom line is you ain't 'Clear' until you pass the lines. If you stop for some reason before crossing the line, it's your bad
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. You're 'considered' clear once passing the edge of the runway as long as the Tower gave you no instructions that stop you from continuing on past the hold lines. They can then use the runway for landings and takeoffs. But like @Timbeck2 said above, bottom line is you ain't 'Clear' until you pass the lines. If you stop for some reason before crossing the line, it's your bad
Click to expand...
Really? I was under the impression that they really couldn't use the runway until the preceding aircraft crossed the hold short line. If the preceding aircraft has not crossed the hold short line when the landing aircraft touches down, is that a deal?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Really? I was under the impression that they really couldn't use the runway until the preceding aircraft crossed the hold short line. If the preceding aircraft has not crossed the hold short line when the landing aircraft touches down, is that a deal?
Click to expand...

Greg, I'm going to disagree with Tim on this one. In the FAA (or at other facilities that use the 7110.65 for all their separation standards) it is not a deal. That's a good thing or I would have sent a lot of your companies planes around at ORD.

From the PCG in the 7110.65:
A pilot or controller may consider an aircraft,
which is exiting or crossing a runway, to be clear of
the runway when all parts of the aircraft are beyond
the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its
continued movement beyond the applicable runway
holding position marking.
 
Cooter said:
I haven’t heard about that, not sure if it’s commonly known. Good to know though, thanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I asked them recently how long they've been been doing it and they said for at least 15 years. I was based there for about four years (04...08) and if they did it then, I didn't know. Of course, they had self-serve back then so I never used the fuel truck and/or FBO.
 
Radar Contact said:
Greg, I'm going to disagree with Tim on this one. In the FAA (or at other facilities that use the 7110.65 for all their separation standards) it is not a deal. That's a good thing or I would have sent a lot of your companies planes around at ORD.

From the PCG in the 7110.65:
A pilot or controller may consider an aircraft,
which is exiting or crossing a runway, to be clear of
the runway when all parts of the aircraft are beyond
the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its
continued movement beyond the applicable runway
holding position marking.
Click to expand...

And then there's the next paragraph also in the 7110.65, which by the way every air traffic control facility, FAA or otherwise, uses in the United States.

c. Pilots and controllers shall exercise good judgment to ensure that adequate separation exists between all aircraft on runways and taxiways at airports with inadequate runway edge lines or holding position markings.

Although I don't know what "inadequate" relates to but I can tell you that from the tower, I cannot see the hold short lines and the edge lines on several taxiways. We get several aircraft with a large wingspan, some of which will extend beyond the white lines when the aircraft is lined up on the centerline. As I said before with my anticipated separation comment, controllers can clear an aircraft to land or take off when aircraft are exiting the runway and in doing so are anticipating that the aircraft will continue past the hold short line before stopping. So I don't think that you are disagreeing with me. Greg asked if an aircraft "can use the runway" which to me means that they are on the runway either landing or taking off. Maybe at ORD it isn't a deal but I know for a fact that its a deal at my air patch and I've seen it close up and in person that it is a deal at KTUS. Tower sent a Southwest 737 around because a non English proficient pilot did not have his aircraft past the hold short line.
 
Last edited:
I couldn't remember if there was a AF reg that was more restrictive than the .65 (which is allowed). That was all I meant by my reference of it.

Obviously we wouldn't allow an aircraft to land or depart if there was a collision hazard but we for sure didn't wait for all parts of the preceding arrival to clear the hold short bars. I have seen other controllers at other facilities send planes around because all parts weren't past the bar. It's the controllers prerogative but not a deal as long as the a/c has turned off the runway prior to the next crossing the threshold. Different facilities have different levels of comfort with things. Safety first, efficiency a very close second.
 
I'm pretty sure we are in agreement Kevin. But to satisfy my curiosity, finish your sentence above:
"...we for sure didn't wait for all parts of the preceding arrival to clear the hold short bars." before what? If your answer is "clear to land/take off" while anticipating the aircraft crossing the hold short line, then we are in agreement. But if it is to allow an aircraft on the runway to physically pass another that is not past the hold short line, we are not. With little aircraft, not a big deal and I have no problem with it. But when a larger aircraft is involved where the distance between the wing tip and the tail of the exiting aircraft is in question, its best to err on the side of safety. If something ever happened where those two aircraft scraped paint, it would fall on the controller.
 
This is at my home airport (Kccr) while reading this I was thinking “don’t those yellow lines start in the runway and make more than 90 degree turns to the taxiway? So I checked on google maps. What do you know, I’m right.
The second one is at Oakland. Landing at Oakland I would assume a turn on that taxiway is not invited as there isn’t a yellow line directing me.
Those lead off lines are there for a reason and not following them Is naturally going against the way the airport was designed. Saying no turns “over 90 degrees” is wrong. If there isn’t a lead off line, ask. It’s that simple
6cd5a8caac859d5022fb21370bb308c0.jpg
51097b95db6754c249bd3d702e35478f.jpg


Edit: also checked the worst paved towered airport I have ever been to. Billard in Topeka Kansas. Guess what, they have those lines too

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Timbeck2 said:
I'm pretty sure we are in agreement Kevin. But to satisfy my curiosity, finish your sentence above:
"...we for sure didn't wait for all parts of the preceding arrival to clear the hold short bars." before what? If your answer is "clear to land/take off" while anticipating the aircraft crossing the hold short line, then we are in agreement. But if it is to allow an aircraft on the runway to physically pass another that is not past the hold short line, we are not. With little aircraft, not a big deal and I have no problem with it. But when a larger aircraft is involved where the distance between the wing tip and the tail of the exiting aircraft is in question, its best to err on the side of safety. If something ever happened where those two aircraft scraped paint, it would fall on the controller.
Click to expand...

I think we are generally in agreement. There is a difference between training type aircraft/weekend pilots and airliners. If the preceding airliner is visually starting to commit to a turn at the high-speed I assigned and the following airliner is on short final about to cross the threshold then he gets to land. His wheels may be touching down and the preceding plane isn't completely across the hold bars but he has been instructed to keep moving and is off the runway. All is legal and safe. I am anticipating that if the second guy lands hot and rolls past that taxiway then the preceding guy will be clear. If in the 0.001% chance the first guy locks up the brakes and stops with part of his plane hanging over the hold bars I can't go back and send the guy rolling out around. I will tell him and he will have to alter a bit to the left. There is enough safety margin built in this all to stay efficient.

I have had an international 747 cross the runway in front of an arrival and stop as soon as his cockpit crossed the hold bar, in that case it was a late go-around at the numbers but couldn't be avoided as 1/4 of his plane was still over the runway. Funny thing is that on the asde it showed he was off. Good thing it wasn't WOXOF!
 
Timbeck2 said:
But when a larger aircraft is involved where the distance between the wing tip and the tail of the exiting aircraft is in question, its best to err on the side of safety. If something ever happened where those two aircraft scraped paint, it would fall on the controller.
Click to expand...

That happened at ATL at night years ago. A King Air wasn't clear and an Eastern 727 wing took the top off the KA, and killing one of the pilots.

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-01-19/news/mn-255_1_small-plane
 
Radar Contact said:
Greg, I'm going to disagree with Tim on this one. In the FAA (or at other facilities that use the 7110.65 for all their separation standards) it is not a deal. That's a good thing or I would have sent a lot of your companies planes around at ORD.

From the PCG in the 7110.65:
A pilot or controller may consider an aircraft,
which is exiting or crossing a runway, to be clear of
the runway when all parts of the aircraft are beyond
the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its
continued movement beyond the applicable runway
holding position marking.
Click to expand...
Ok, so what do you do if the preceding aircraft stops prior to crossing the hold short line?

In the U.S. I have been number three on final and given a clearance to land. SOP. But I suspect if the previous airplane has not cleared the hold short line I would be sent around.

Having said that, what is the point of the reg quoted above.
 
Timbeck2 said:
As a controller I really don't see what the issue is here. OP you are asking permission to exit the runway on a taxiway that is greater than 90 degrees? Why? Just do it. That's what they were probably "agitated" about.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I have never asked ATC that. They usually tell me where to get off, before I'd get a chance to ask. But if I wanted something else, I would just say unable, I will take A5 (or whatever it is)

I fly out of a busy airport, and when a GA plane lands on RWY 32, they like us to exit at A5 (if we can slow down by then) which is a high speed for the opposite runway 14.

https://i1.wp.com/aireform.com/wp-content/uploads/KFRG.apdg_.jpg
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Ok, so what do you do if the preceding aircraft stops prior to crossing the hold short line?

In the U.S. I have been number three on final and given a clearance to land. SOP. But I suspect if the previous airplane has not cleared the hold short line I would be sent around.

Having said that, what is the point of the reg quoted above.
Click to expand...
I think the point is efficiency. Having to wait until the aircraft has cleared the hold lines before issuing landing/takeoff clearances would slow things down. Is it 'betting on the come,' yes. The whole system has a lot of 'betting on the come' in it. Whats being bet on here is that pilots will follow the rules and continue past the hold lines without stopping after clearing the runway edge. If they do that, then by the time the next airplane using the runway gets to that point, the preceding airplane will be clear. Provided of course the Tower had standard separation to begin with.
 
luvflyin said:
I think the point is efficiency. Having to wait until the aircraft has cleared the hold lines before issuing landing/takeoff clearances would slow things down. Is it 'betting on the come,' yes. The whole system has a lot of 'betting on the come' in it. Whats being bet on here is that pilots will follow the rules and continue past the hold lines without stopping after clearing the runway edge. If they do that, then by the time the next airplane using the runway gets to that point, the preceding airplane will be clear. Provided of course the Tower had standard separation to begin with.
Click to expand...

@Timbeck2 touched on this earlier. It's called 'anticipating separation', meaning the controller clears a plane to land/takeoff and expects the preceding plane to be cleared of the runway, in a departure turn, etc. It is legal and in the ATC manual 7110,65.
 
I once was unable to make the turnoff (because of snow causing poor visibility of the runway caused me to lengthen my approach and I landed LONG) and the plane behind me (an airliner) had to go around. Technically, those are the rules. No violations by anyone. But, I was told later (by an airliner pilot friend) that because of "brotherhood protocol", it would have been better for ME To go around. I didn't even know he was back there. I wasn't listening to HIS radio calls, just mine. The tower should have had the runway lights on.
 
coloradobluesky said:
I once was unable to make the turnoff (because of snow causing poor visibility of the runway caused me to lengthen my approach and I landed LONG) and the plane behind me (an airliner) had to go around. Technically, those are the rules. No violations by anyone. But, I was told later (by an airliner pilot friend) that because of "brotherhood protocol", it would have been better for ME To go around. I didn't even know he was back there. I wasn't listening to HIS radio calls, just mine. The tower should have had the runway lights on.
Click to expand...

Your airline friend is wrong. You did nothing wrong. Runway lighting should have been on? Was it night and/or low visibility?
 
coloradobluesky said:
I once was unable to make the turnoff (because of snow causing poor visibility of the runway caused me to lengthen my approach and I landed LONG) and the plane behind me (an airliner) had to go around. Technically, those are the rules. No violations by anyone. But, I was told later (by an airliner pilot friend) that because of "brotherhood protocol", it would have been better for ME To go around. I didn't even know he was back there. I wasn't listening to HIS radio calls, just mine. The tower should have had the runway lights on.
Click to expand...

What was the visibility reported on the ATIS? The tower may have not been required to turn on the lights due to reported visibility. Having said that, you could have told them the flight visibility and asked them to turn on the lights.

Plus, "I wasn't listening to HIS radio calls, just mine." :sosp:
 
Last edited:
Greg Bockelman said:
Having said that, what is the point of the reg quoted above.
Click to expand...

The point is what @luvflyin said in #67. To re-summarize, if the controller has given the first aircraft exit instructions and there are no restrictions to it's continued movement (i.e. via instruction from the controller or another aircraft blocking their movement) then that aircraft doesn't need to be across the hold short line prior to the second aircraft being allowed to legally land. All that is required to happen is the first aircraft is clear of the runway...not hold bars.
 
Radar Contact said:
The point is what @luvflyin said in #67. To re-summarize, if the controller has given the first aircraft exit instructions and there are no restrictions to it's continued movement (i.e. via instruction from the controller or another aircraft blocking their movement) then that aircraft doesn't need to be across the hold short line prior to the second aircraft being allowed to legally land. All that is required to happen is the first aircraft is clear of the runway...not hold bars.
Click to expand...

I think it important for me to be sure I understand. That last sentence is conditional though isn't it? That the aircraft is clear of the runway but is continuing on (not anticipating stopping) and no impediment to it continuing on past the hold bars? If a pilot taxied slowly and had a motor stop before reaching the hold bars, that pilot would have to inform tower immediately of the situation?

Also, I tried searching but wasn't finding the definition for reverse high speed taxi or exit. I see the one drawing of it and wondered if someone could explain what it is? I'd never heard of it until here.
 
A reverse high speed taxiway is actually the high speed taxiway for the opposite runway. Take a look at any taxi diagram for a larger commercial airport.
 
But I am still having problems understanding part of this. Is it allowable to have a landing aircraft physically on the runway if the preceding aircraft is clear of the runway but not past the hold short line?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
But I am still having problems understanding part of this. Is it allowable to have a landing aircraft physically on the runway if the preceding aircraft is clear of the runway but not past the hold short line?
Click to expand...
Dunno bout you big tube drivers but they can have two aircraft on the runway (one landing, one rolling out) with us spam cans. They only need some minimum separation which I think is 3,000 feet or so. Prolly the or so. Anyway I’ve heard a controller instruct a plane to continue as cleared because he had enough separation on the runway.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
But I am still having problems understanding part of this. Is it allowable to have a landing aircraft physically on the runway if the preceding aircraft is clear of the runway but not past the hold short line?
Click to expand...
There are places where it is standard practice because an aircraft clear of the hold short line would have its nose (at least) in the parallel taxiway. As I recall, at KPTK you stop AT the hold short line but do not cross it before calling ground. Whether that's strictly according to Hoyle I don't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top