I think I used up one of my lives today.....

[Kaye]

It was forecasted to be a beautiful day, so I scheduled a hooky day to go fly. The wx didn’t disappoint me, and I’m looking forward to a fun flight.

A little background about JYO. JYO backs up against Dulles airspace on the northwest corner with a 17-35 rwy. Instrument approaches usually get 17 with a circle to land on 35 if necessary due to the proximity to Dulles airspace.

Back to the story…..I’m ready to go. Couple of planes working the pattern, couple that just left the area, and me ready for TO on 17. Just as I rotate, I hear someone new call in, “Leesburg traffic, Leesburg traffic, Flightcheck 77…..blah blah blah….. (okay, we have someone coming in on the approach, but that’s behind me)…..VOR alpha…blah blah blah (hmmmm, what approach is that?)…..anyone in the area, please advise, anyone in the area, please advise!” The planes in the pattern gave their position, but I’ve just taken off, establishing my climb and cleaning up the plane.... the airplane is behind me, I’m not talking…..but it’s nagging me about the VOR A approach. I’m about 350 agl when I raised my flaps. I always look to confirm they’re up, and what do I see…..a King Air 50-75 feet passing below me, opposite direction. Now, the VOR A clicks…..it’s the VOR A rwy 35 that comes off the Armel VOR sitting at Dulles. No one gets that approach unless the LOC is out and there’s wx, and no one gets that approach for practice. It also registers that someone upstairs was looking out for me, as a midair was just missed.

Shortly after we pass, the King calls a miss (he’s below the MAP and I’m still dumbfounded…just fly the airplane), and once again I’m thanking my lucky stars that he didn’t call it a few seconds earlier. I found out later that when he went back to approach, his only comment was that there was too much traffic at Leesburg (one of the planes in the pattern was on final for 17). I don’t think he ever saw me, and I think it’s pretty obvious that he wasn’t monitoring the CTAF prior to talking.

Me…..I’m beating myself up. Complacency at home airport…..approaches are always for 17, so I tuned out the guy when he called. I can’t tell you if he gave his position, I can’t tell you if he said VOR alpha “for rwy 35”, because I tuned him out with the assumption he was approaching 17 and I was departing same. Yes, the VOR A nagged at me, but I still remained oblivious.

Another big concern, as an after thought, are the students training at this airport. They have a clue that airplanes will do straight-in approaches to 17, so beware, but not for 35. And they’d have no reason to understand a VOR A approach, even tho I should.

So I got lucky today, but it did kind of ruin my lunch. It was definitely a wake-up call. Hope I have a few more lives left.

Kaye

 

[TMetzinger]

I'm glad you're ok, Kaye.

I'm also concerned that an FAA airplane driver (Flight Check is the call sign used by folks who validate instrument approach procedures and navaid performance) would operate contrary to the AIM by making that "any traffic please advise" BS call, as well as not give a better position report (X miles south, on approach for 35).

You might want to file an ASRS report, outlining the incident and the lessons learned. You can use the attached form and submit it online now.

 

[Kaye]

I'm glad you're ok, Kaye.

I'm also concerned that an FAA airplane driver (Flight Check is the call sign used by folks who validate instrument approach procedures and navaid performance) would operate contrary to the AIM by making that "any traffic please advise" BS call, as well as not give a better position report (X miles south, on approach for 35).

You might want to file an ASRS report, outlining the incident and the lessons learned. You can use the attached form and submit it online now.

Thanks, Tim. Can't say if he gave a position report or not because I tuned him out. But I'm really ****y about the "any traffic" BS, especially since it was an FAA flight. And yes, I plan to file the ASRS.

Kaye

 

[terzap]

Glad you're OK! It's good when someone's wake up call wakes them up without damages to anything or anyone--and now you can spread the word so others can be informed.

 

[woodstock]

holy **** Kaye, wow! glad you are ok too! Did you tell anyone out at the school yet?

 

[wsuffa]

Wow, Kaye, glad everything worked out OK.

As Metz pointed out, Flight Check is an FAA aircraft - they are required to check or certify each approach into an airport periodically. They will fly the approach to minimums and look for anomolies in the navaid signals.

Not to excuse what they were doing, but the approach is labeled "VOR or GPS-A", without any runway indication (which would be typical since it's a circling approach). Since they weren't landing, they may not have looked at the runway configuration, and TRACON may not have known (or told 'em) which runway was in use at the airport.

The lesson, obviously, is that we all need to keep heads on a swivel at all times.

I had the chance years ago to fly with a couple of flight check teams up at ISP (they had a DC-3 and several Saberliners at the time). The teams were quite safety concious.

I would file the NASA form.

 

[Unregistered]

If I understand correctly what you have written..

You were on the upwind and didn't communicate your position and your intentions.. That's good ! And you criticize the King Air pilot for saying " anyone in the area please advise" which at the very least could have reminded you to talk on the radio and then at least he would have known you were out there. Flying is not about teaching the other guy if he is right or wrong it is more about doing the very best job you can and working together to have a safe, successful outcome irregardless of whether the other guy is using the legal terminology.


Kaye Wrote :

…..anyone in the area, please advise, anyone in the area, please advise!” The planes in the pattern gave their position, but I’ve just taken off, establishing my climb and cleaning up the plane.... the airplane is behind me, I’m not talking…..

 

[TMetzinger]

If I understand correctly what you have written..

You were on the upwind and didn't communicate your position and your intentions.. That's good ! And you criticize the King Air pilot for saying " anyone in the area please advise" which at the very least could have reminded you to talk on the radio and then at least he would have known you were out there. Flying is not about teaching the other guy if he is right or wrong it is more about doing the very best job you can and working together to have a safe, successful outcome irregardless of whether the other guy is using the legal terminology.

Now why do you assume Kaye didn't make a departure call when she started rolling? She didn't say about that one way or another, but I know enough about how she operates that I'll bet she made the call. I don't know anybody who makes a call after takeoff until they turn crosswind - they're busy flying the airplane and configuring it for the climb. As I read this, she was climbing out after departure, and looked up and saw the opposite traffic below her.

If the airborne traffic had made a clearer call making it obvious that he was south of the field heading north, then traffic about to take off to the south would be more concerned. This is almost a classic example of how calling your position on an IFR approach is useless information to folks who don't have the approach plate in front of them.

Now, since we only have Kaye's story, and it's not as complete as a post-accident interview would be, we don't know exactly what happened. And if Kaye says she didn't make any calls, then I'll say shame on her. But since JYO is inside the ADIZ, ATC had to know someone was departing as a pilot has to get a squawk code before departure.

 

[alaskaflyer]

If I understand correctly what you have written..

You were on the upwind and didn't communicate your position and your intentions.. That's good ! And you criticize the King Air pilot for saying " anyone in the area please advise" which at the very least could have reminded you to talk on the radio and then at least he would have known you were out there. Flying is not about teaching the other guy if he is right or wrong it is more about doing the very best job you can and working together to have a safe, successful outcome irregardless of whether the other guy is using the legal terminology.


Kaye Wrote :

…..anyone in the area, please advise, anyone in the area, please advise!” The planes in the pattern gave their position, but I’ve just taken off, establishing my climb and cleaning up the plane.... the airplane is behind me, I’m not talking…..

Who the hell communicates on the upwind just after announcing their departure on the active runway? If the guy had made a timely switch from approach/Center to CTAF he would have heard her depart long before they crossed paths. Besides I'm pretty sure most King Airs have dual navcomms I think its pretty $#$% clear who was in the wrong here, and it is just another example (they are legion) of why asking about any traffic in the area is a bad idea, designed to bail you out of your responsibility to hear and avoid way in advance of short final.

 

[Kaye]

If I understand correctly what you have written..

You were on the upwind and didn't communicate your position and your intentions.. That's good ! And you criticize the King Air pilot for saying " anyone in the area please advise" which at the very least could have reminded you to talk on the radio and then at least he would have known you were out there. Flying is not about teaching the other guy if he is right or wrong it is more about doing the very best job you can and working together to have a safe, successful outcome irregardless of whether the other guy is using the legal terminology.


Kaye Wrote :

…..anyone in the area, please advise, anyone in the area, please advise!” The planes in the pattern gave their position, but I’ve just taken off, establishing my climb and cleaning up the plane.... the airplane is behind me, I’m not talking…..

Let's see......one of the first mantras I learned was aviate, navigate, and communicate. Yes, I announced my departure on 17. I had just rotated when this call came in. I'm not saying I was right in my assumption that the plane was behind me, but my first order of business was to aviate. Announcing my position when I've just rotated and was establishing a climb, etc did not seem to take priority.

 

[Unregistered]

I the hell do.. And this is exactly the wrong attitude I feel every time I read the " anyone in the area please advise" threads. Unless you tell me that we are talking about a very crowded frequency were everyone is trying to get there calls out. Why wouldn't I report " Cessna on the upwind, out of 300' going to be a left downwind departure ( or whatever departure you will use ).

Your statement "If the guy had made a timely switch from approach/Center to CTAF he would have heard her depart long before they crossed paths" Sounds like would rather be right and in danger than just try your best to make sure everyone knows were everyone is in and around the pattern. So again you would rather criticize the guy who might have been turned over to unicom late or had some other issue rather that just make sure that the guy knows you are out there.

I am happy to report that out here in the very busy new england airspace we don't criticize to much how people communicate as long as they DO..

By the way my original post was not a personal attack on Kaye or her piloting technique. It was prompted by all the other posts were everyone jumps on the " anyone please advise " is a big danger bandwagon
.

Who the hell communicates on the upwind just after announcing their departure on the active runway? If the guy had made a timely switch from approach/Center to CTAF he would have heard her depart long before they crossed paths. Besides I'm pretty sure most King Airs have dual navcomms I think its pretty $#$% clear who was in the wrong here, and it is just another example (they are legion) of why asking about any traffic in the area is a bad idea, designed to bail you out of your responsibility to hear and avoid way in advance of short final.

 

[TMetzinger]

That's what I figured, Kaye. Once you get the electrons going (wink) you're a proficient pilot!

Best wishes,

 

[woodstock]

you are supposed to call departure - upwind is rather rare from what I've seen (admittedly not as much as some).

why not come out in the open if you are going to criticize?

 

[TMetzinger]

And Leesburg IS a busy CTAF, and making calls like:

Departing 17
300 feet
600 feet
900 feet
Left Crosswind

Is a waste of bandwidth.

 

[Unregistered]

Oh and one more thing..

Is it true that this many people have to choose between flying an airplane and talking on the radio ? I thought this skill is pretty much necessary for all phases of flight including the climb phase. No ?

 

[Unregistered]

It only is a waste of bandwidth if bandwidth is limited.

And did you not take it a little far to prove a point when you posted

300 feet
600 feet
900 feet

And Leesburg IS a busy CTAF, and making calls like:

Departing 17
300 feet
600 feet
900 feet
Left Crosswind

Is a waste of bandwidth.

 

[Areeda]

One of the big mistakes IFR pilots make is to make a position call on CTAF that says I'm inbound on the XXX approach. There is no information there for a VFR only pilot let alone a student pilot. If instead he would have said "I'm 4 miles southeast on the VOR-A which is almost straight in to 35" he would have gotten her attention I'd bet.

Poor radio technique IMHO. "Any traffic..." was the least of the problems with his call.

Joe

 

[Unregistered]

I agree that if someone were to come on the air and just say " king air is inbound to Kxxx anybody in the area please advise " this would not be a useful call on CTAF. On the other hand I think when someone ends a proper position report with the "anybody in the area please advice" statement he is basically saying
Hey I just reported I am out here now how about you letting me know you just heard me and let me know were you are.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t it a part of the procedure for certain formation flights for each plane to check in with each other to establish that the radio is transmitting and receiving..

 

[TMetzinger]

It only is a waste of bandwidth if bandwidth is limited.

And did you not take it a little far to prove a point when you posted

300 feet
600 feet
900 feet

Heck I figured if you'd call 300 feet, you'd call 600, and 900.

And, to my way of thinking, the anonymous feature of this forum is so that the confessor can have anonymity, not for the critics.

 

[mikea]

One of the big mistakes IFR pilots make is to make a position call on CTAF that says I'm inbound on the XXX approach. There is no information there for a VFR only pilot let alone a student pilot. If instead he would have said "I'm 4 miles southeast on the VOR-A which is almost straight in to 35" he would have gotten her attention I'd bet.

Poor radio technique IMHO. "Any traffic..." was the least of the problems with his call.

Joe

Yeah! If you can't figure out what VEE Oh ARE AL FA means then I'll just hit you because hey, I gave you your chance when I said ANY TRAFFIC PLEASE ADVISE!

 

[mikea]

I agree that if someone were to come on the air and just say " king air is inbound to Kxxx anybody in the area please advise " this would not be a useful call on CTAF. On the other hand I think when someone ends a proper position report with the "anybody in the area please advice" statement he is basically saying
Hey I just reported I am out here now how about you letting me know you just heard me and let me know were you are.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t it a part of the procedure for certain formation flights for each plane to check in with each other to establish that the radio is transmitting and receiving..

If you're right Mr. Unregistered, WHY IS IT IN THE CURRENT AIM NOT TO USE THE STOOPID PHRASE? You know something the FAA doesn't?

 

[Unregistered]

You are so concerned about the anonymous feature ?

Can you point to one thing that have said that you think I would not have posted if I posted under my username ? One thing ?

The only reason this started anonymously is that I found the post looking at the Today's Posts shortcut and read the post from there I clicked Reply it went directly to the new post entry screen so I typed and hit post. I was not prompted for a logon just to read the posts.

Heck I figured if you'd call 300 feet, you'd call 600, and 900.

And, to my way of thinking, the anonymous feature of this forum is so that the confessor can have anonymity, not for the critics.

 

[woodstock]

You are so concerned about the anonymous feature ?

Can you point to one thing that have said that you think I would not have posted if I posted under my username ? One thing ?

er, then why not just post under your name?

 

[Unregistered]

Please see below from the AIM and note carefully the part about monitor/communicate :

Pilots of departing aircraft should monitor/communicate on the appropriate frequency from start-up, during taxi, and until 10 miles from the airport unless the CFRs or local procedures require otherwise.

c. Recommended Traffic Advisory Practices

1. Pilots of inbound traffic should monitor and communicate as appropriate on the designated CTAF from 10 miles to landing. Pilots of departing aircraft should monitor/communicate on the appropriate frequency from start-up, during taxi, and until 10 miles from the airport unless the CFRs or local procedures require otherwise.

2. Pilots of aircraft conducting other than arriving or departing operations at altitudes normally used by arriving and departing aircraft should monitor/communicate on the appropriate frequency while within 10 miles of the airport unless required to do otherwise by the CFRs or local procedures. Such operations include parachute jumping/dropping, en route, practicing maneuvers, etc.

REFERENCE-
AIM, Parachute Jump Aircraft Operations, Paragraph 3-5-4.

**
And below is the AIM reference to not using the ATITAPA statment.
My take on it is that is was just recently added because people were using it as a blanket question and that if nobody responded they was no need to make additional position announcements. Which would defeat the purpose of self announce position reports. Again I will say if used correctly ATITAPA simply means everyone please speak up so we all will know who is out there and can keep track of all the inbounds or outbounds..


1. General. Self-announce is a procedure whereby pilots broadcast their position or intended flight activity or ground operation on the designated CTAF. This procedure is used primarily at airports which do not have an FSS on the airport. The self-announce procedure should also be used if a pilot is unable to communicate with the FSS on the designated CTAF. Pilots stating, "Traffic in the area, please advise" is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition.

If you're right Mr. Unregistered, WHY IS IT IN THE CURRENT AIM NOT TO USE THE STOOPID PHRASE? You know something the FAA doesn't?

 

[Unregistered]

One last time..

After re reading this part of the AIM can anybody tell me that it was not written for the exact reason that I have said !

Note: "Traffic in the area, please advise" is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase

So even though it does not say specifically that it should not be USED IN PLACE of "a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase" I don't think you can tell me that was not the intent of this NEW AIM statement.
To prevent people from ONLY using "Traffic in the area, please advise" rather than a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase

AIM:

Pilots stating, "Traffic in the area, please advise" is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition.

 

[mikea]

Right. And where do you read where Kaye was wrong not to make another annoucement to a plane that failed to monitor the CTAF to hear her announce her Departure?

When I hear the stoopid phrase I know the idjit will hear my position when I give it at my next reporting point - which also won't be heard because he switched from the CTAF right after he made the pointless call.

I had a case where I gave my position THREE TIMES, 5 miles & 3 miles out on the 45, turning downwind, while two buddies chatted to each other as they turned downwind...only to hear "Where did that guy come from? He snuck in." A pilot on the ground told me he heard every call I made and said they were idiots.

SHUT UP AND LISTEN!

 

[TMetzinger]

What part of "should not be used under any condition" is difficult to understand?

 

[mikea]

One last time..

After re reading this part of the AIM can anybody tell me that it was not written for the exact reason that I have said !

Note: "Traffic in the area, please advise" is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase

So even though it does not say specifically that it should not be USED IN PLACE of "a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase" I don't think you can tell me that was not the intent of this NEW AIM statement.
To prevent people from ONLY using "Traffic in the area, please advise" rather than a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase

AIM:

Pilots stating, "Traffic in the area, please advise" is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition.

and should not be used under any condition.

I guess including that part tends to tighten up the wiggle room you found, huh?

 

[Areeda]

Hey I just reported I am out here now how about you letting me know you just heard me and let me know were you are.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t it a part of the procedure for certain formation flights for each plane to check in with each other to establish that the radio is transmitting and receiving..

OK after a couple of martini's

• Formation flight radio protocol is something like "Trojan leader up on 123.75" "Trojan 2", "Trojan 3"
• Any traffic in the area please advise is like "Wilco, I recieved and understood your entire transmission and will comply with your request", it's reduntanly repeating yourself.
• Posting as unregistered when you have a username and not posting something that could come back and bite you is ..ugh.. <deleted>

Joe

 

[Unregistered]

I sorry you are so right.. Who wants be FORCED to make another announcement to someone who probably failed to hear the original departure announcement. After all he probably was just an idiot who wasn't listening.. No use making sure everyone talks to each other and is sure of the position of everyone.

Just to repeat my posts are not directed at Kaye or her incident they are directed at all of the posts that came after that want to prove their point so badly rather than just do whatever is necessary to not crash into each other even if that means a few more radio calls.


Good night all ..

Right. And where do you read where Kaye was wrong not to make another annoucement to a plane that failed to monitor the CTAF to hear her announce her Departure?

When I hear the stoopid phrase I know the idjit will hear my position when I give it at my next reporting point - which also won't be heard because he switched from the CTAF right after he made the pointless call.

I had a case where I gave my position THREE TIMES, 5 miles & 3 miles out on the 45, turning downwind, while two buddies chatted to each other as they turned downwind...only to hear "Where did that guy come from? He snuck in." A pilot on the ground told me he heard every call I made and said they were idiots.

SHUT UP AND LISTEN!

 

[TMetzinger]

One thing I just thought of that we DON'T know is whether the King Air saw Kaye. It's possible that they did in fact hear her call, or acquired her in another way (ATC, TCAS, ADS-B, TIS) and manuevered beneath her while maintaing visual separation.

One way to find out would be for Kaye to contact the Washington FSDO and relate her story, and ask them to get in touch with the flight check crew, just to find out if they ever saw her.

 

[wsuffa]

Folks, please don't feed the troll.

The anon feature is not intended as a means to be critical of others or launch personal attacks. The admins do have the capability to identify the internet address of anon users.

Just a reminder that personal attacks are against the terms of the Rules of Conduct.

I think there's enough valuable information in this thread to continue the discussion, and I'd ask the anon poster to "out" him/herself.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Why "Flight Check" could not take the time to over fly the airport well above pattern altitude and check out the wind direction, the operational runway, activity on CTAF, and aircraft in the pattern is beyond me.

Mike,

"Flight Check" is an FAA aircraft whose job it is to test-fly instrument approach procedures, which must be done in VMC for visual verification of proper navigation and obstacle clearance. Since most instrument approaches begin several miles or more from the airport, if Flight Check overflew the field before starting each approach the traffic conditions would likely change by the time they made it back to the field anyway.

BTW, Flight Check rarely actually lands. They sit there and fly approaches and go missed nearly every time. In fact, I saw them once at ~200 AGL on final with their landing gear up...

BTW, how many new VFR pilots would have any clue as to which direction anyone on a "VOR - A" approach would be coming from?

Exactly the problem. Flight Check should have given a VFR-friendly position report and then there wouldn't have been an issue.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You are so concerned about the anonymous feature ?

Can you point to one thing that have said that you think I would not have posted if I posted under my username ? One thing ?

Um, yeah. All of it. It's much easier to criticize without a name attached. If you'd have posted it under your username... Well... I believe that you should do so.

The only reason this started anonymously is that I found the post looking at the Today's Posts shortcut and read the post from there I clicked Reply it went directly to the new post entry screen so I typed and hit post. I was not prompted for a logon just to read the posts.

In that case, I concur with Tim and Bill. Re-post while logged in so we can see your name. This is, IMHO, a major misuse of the anon feature. I would even suggest that the management council delete these posts to discourage further abuse of the anon feature in the future by all parties.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You were on the upwind and didn't communicate your position and your intentions.. That's good !

I can say with absolute certainty that I've never reported "on the upwind" unless I am entering the pattern that way. I have also never heard anyone else reporting "on the upwind" just after departing. I'll bet you don't do it either. So why are you being critical of Kaye? Do you honestly think that 50' AGL is a good time to be making radio calls?

 

[Kaye]

Yesterday morning was calm, so technically either rwy could have been in use. The preferred rwy is 17 due to the close proximity of residential areas, but that's not noted in the AFD. The Dulles VOR is only 9 miles from the JYO rwy.

What would I have done had I realized I was on a possible collision course. By the time I would've noted his position, I would have been out of usable rwy for aborting. Yes, I would've been talking fast with some serious pucker factor. My climb rate would probably be less as I'd be trying to see over my nose looking for the other plane. With the pucker factor, distractions, low to the ground......this scenario wouldn't have been pretty either.

Even tho I'm annoyed that the other guy apparently wasn't monitoring CTAF so he knew what was going on, it was still my familiarity with the home environment that let me assume the guy was behind me. It never crossed my mind that he was heading in my direction.

Kaye

 

[Bill]

One of the big mistakes IFR pilots make is to make a position call on CTAF that says I'm inbound on the XXX approach. There is no information there for a VFR only pilot let alone a student pilot. If instead he would have said "I'm 4 miles southeast on the VOR-A which is almost straight in to 35" he would have gotten her attention I'd bet.

Concur. Most of my approach practices are straight in VOR, NDB, or ILS approaches, and once I'm inbound on the approach course I make my first call, "Bugsmasher 12345 on a x miles straight in final to runway xx". I then make the same calls again at 5, 3, 2, and short final.

 

[Greebo]

And, to my way of thinking, the anonymous feature of this forum is so that the confessor can have anonymity, not for the critics.

Correct - The intention behind the ability to post anonymously in this forum is for the person making the mistake to use if they wish to protect their identity.

"Unregistered" - log in please before posting again.

The only reason this started anonymously is that I found the post looking at the Today's Posts shortcut and read the post from there I clicked Reply it went directly to the new post entry screen so I typed and hit post. I was not prompted for a logon just to read the posts.

One reply as unregistered is an accident. Nine is not.

 

[Missa]

#1 Kay, I'm glad you're ok and will learn from this. I'm also glad to hear you fill out the saftey form and share what you've learned. I would also like to see you call the FISDO. The other pilots should learn too, they need to moniter CTAF sooner and as Check pilots should be the ones setting the example of what's right to do.

#2 For those who have not made or heard an 'upwind' call. You now know someone who has. It was a much diffrent situation. I doing touch and goes in the pattern at an uncontrolled field. There was in bound traffic making calls and neither of us has a visual on each other. We made several calls back and forth trying to get a visual. Finally, He called "XXX where are you now?" my call back was quick and simple "already on upwind", He then called turning base. First time I saw him was rolling out on the runway as I was on downwind agian.

Missa

 

[555Juliet]

Thanks for sharing that, Kaye. As you know, here at FDK we get a ton of traffic, much of it King Airs and such flying instrument approaches. Sometimes I can visualize where they are in relation to the airport, sometimes not. I'm glad you flew the airplane and didn't come to grief.