Landing without clearance on checkride.

Ron Levy said:
You are PIC throughout the checkride. Even if you fail, or the ride is otherwise discontinued, you remain PIC unless/until the examiner relieves you of that duty. Ref: 61.47.
Click to expand...

Yep, when I busted the Class D, he relieved me of that duty:yes:. and he landed.

Even though I felt like ****, it was a great learning experience! I never allowed myself to get that close to busting airspace again.
 
douglas393 said:
How? The communications between him and the DPE will not be on tape, and he has already stated he did not think he had clearance to land, and evidently from what the tower has done he did not have clearance to land. According to my reading of his description of the events all that it will show is that he asked for clearance to land but never received it, and landed anyhow. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

correct. I was thinking a recording will only confirm his story and his honesty. Obviously the intercom communication is not available. At least the tower tape will have his request for clearance and the lack of any response. Again, this isn't to argue he did nothing wrong, rather to give support to his story. Nothing more
 
I know the concerns you have. If you fly long enough, the odds are you will find yourself knowingly or unknowingly in a situation as you describe. I say it this way, because to understand fully every possible regulation, how you must comply and to stay current on them can be a full time job and then some. Layer in the variables (TFRs) and you can find yourself being a paranoid flyer.

I think you are getting some great advice here, including that of someone who works in the system. Go through the process, learn from it and move on.
 
flyboy595 said:
I was nervous and let it get the best of me. I was at an unfamiliar airport doing a pattern i'd never done before on a runway half the width i was used to. It all added up and effected my landings big time. thats beside the point.
Click to expand...

I know it's beside the point, but I'm getting ready to take my checkride, and I want to make sure I've got everything covered. Was it the slip part that he failed you for, or did you make a poor landing? If you missed centerline or hit too hard, that would make sense. I mean--the slip itself is really just left aileron right rudder or vice versa and I can't see how someone could fail you for something you do on the slip (unless you went too far or didn't get down quickly enough). Sorry if my first post came off as harsh--I'm really just trying to learn.
 
Maybe the tower controller was confused and trying to sort things out. Hence the reason no response and no "call this number" at the time. ATC are humans and make mistakes just like us. They don't make them as often, but they are not at 1000' agl either. No matter what, fly the plane! I have found that if you are questioning something in your head, you had best be asking ATC for clarification. I have had them get testy with me before because they often like pilots forget what it was like starting out. Provide your DPE with this letter, tell the truth and get flying. You have tons still to learn and there are plenty of us that are willing to help you. Just ask.
 
Last edited:
flyboy595 said:
So i was on my first checkride for my PPL. I had failed the slip to a landing so i was already going to have to retest. Everything else i had passed. As we approached my home airport, i was given pattern entry instructions. I entered on base as usual, and turned final. Realizing i had not been cleared to land, i radioed the tower and asked for clearance, assuming they just forgot since the airport was super busy. They didn't respond, as it was extremely busy. I radioed again, no response. I asked my DPE what i should do, as we were already on very short final. He told me just to go ahead and land. As the wheels touched, tower called for another aircraft to go around. I was handed over to ground as normal and parked, never given a number to call or anything. This was back towards the end of november. A week later, i passed my checkride, neither me nor my DPE thinking anything of the incident. Today, my old instructor called and stated that the rental company recieved a letter from the FAA about an incident on that day, and i was the only one who had flown the plane all day. Whats gonna happen with the FAA? Im terrified. :mad2:
Click to expand...

I think you were collateral damage. I cannot imagine a situation in which the go-around of the other aircraft was required because you touched down instead of initiating a go-around yourself. That nothing was said to you at the time suggests the tower staff had a bigger issue on their hands. An investigation of that other issue would have made your landing without clearance known to the investigators even without a specific report by the tower.

As for what you should tell the FAA now, I'd say something like this:

"I was on my Private Pilot checkride. As we approached the Class D airspace, I was given pattern entry instructions by the control tower. I entered the pattern as instructed, on base, and turned final. Realizing I had not been cleared to land, I radioed the tower and asked for landing clearance. They didn't respond. I radioed again, no response. I asked the Examiner what I should do, as we were already on very short final. He told me just to go ahead and land, so I landed."
 
flyboy595 said:
So I should tell them that I asked the DPE, even though he probably will tell them that that's not what happened? I doubt he'd throw himself under the bus like that, and it'd make me out to look like a liar.
Click to expand...

What makes you think the examiner would fib?
 
douglas393 said:
How? The communications between him and the DPE will not be on tape, and he has already stated he did not think he had clearance to land, and evidently from what the tower has done he did not have clearance to land. According to my reading of his description of the events all that it will show is that he asked for clearance to land but never received it, and landed anyhow. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

I'm confident the recording has already been thoroughly reviewed. Probably not a tape, BTW, most likely on a hard drive. That there was no recording of the cockpit conversation doesn't mean the examiner is clean. He's got a hand in this even though he wasn't, by rule, the PIC.
 
Just out of curiosity, what would be the next proper step after a go-around if the tower still didn't reply? Fly the same pattern as the last time? Continue on the runway heading until clear of class D? Is there any point where you can assume the tower is closed and the airport has reverted to uncontrolled?

EDIT: Checking the ATIS would be my next step.
 
Last edited:
cocolos said:
I thought you are only PIC if you passed your checkride.
Click to expand...

I could've sworn this was the case. Before my check ride our chief examiner went over this with my CFI and me. He said that who is PIC is more of a gray area during a checkride but the generally accepted thing is that if you pass you were PIC, if you fail you were not. This is because you do not have your private pilots license and thus are a student pilot, and as a student pilot you cannot be PIC with another person... unless you pass.
 
Old Geek said:
Just out of curiosity, what would be the next proper step after a go-around if the tower still didn't reply? Fly the same pattern as the last time? Continue on the runway heading until clear of class D?
Click to expand...

There is no established procedure for that. When a pilot initiates a go-around at a towered field the next step is to contact the tower for instructions.

Is there any point where you can assume the tower is closed and the airport has reverted to uncontrolled?
Click to expand...

Yes, when it has reached the published time of closing. In this case the tower did not respond to two calls from the OP but it was still communicating with other aircraft.
 
Old Geek said:
Just out of curiosity, what would be the next proper step after a go-around if the tower still didn't reply? Fly the same pattern as the last time? Continue on the runway heading until clear of class D? Is there any point where you can assume the tower is closed and the airport has reverted to uncontrolled?

EDIT: Checking the ATIS would be my next step.
Click to expand...

Check tower hours(hopefully before the flight), switch radios, try reaching ground or clearance, look for signal lights, sqwauk 7600. If all else fails, go somewhere else, call on the phone and find out what is going on.
 
Best to just wait until you get the letter. I'll bet they just swat you on the wrists. You were on a checkride with a designee.
 
While I agree that the pilot has the final responsibility here, the tower did create a dangerous situation. It's not like the OP was never in contact with the tower, he was instructed to enter the pattern and did so. Then failing to clear him to land creates a go around situation also without communication. Now what if someone was taking off, or crossing over, and had no idea the OP was going around because the frequency was too busy? That could have been bad, just as landing without clearance could have been bad. Either way the tower should be able to manage traffic better IMO.
 
Alexb2000 said:
While I agree that the pilot has the final responsibility here, the tower did create a dangerous situation. It's not like the OP was never in contact with the tower, he was instructed to enter the pattern and did so. Then failing to clear him to land creates a go around situation also without communication. Now what if someone was taking off, or crossing over, and had no idea the OP was going around because the frequency was too busy? That could have been bad, just as landing without clearance could have been bad. Either way the tower should be able to manage traffic better IMO.
Click to expand...
We do not know why the tower did not repsond. I can think of hundred of reasons why they did not, but for me and how I have been trained, unless it is an emergency situation, when I land at a towered field, I cannot land until I hear those magical words "cleared to land." Until then I am still in the air. So for me even if it is of the tower's creation, I did not get clearance to land, and I cannot land.
 
douglas393 said:
We do not know why the tower did not repsond. I can think of hundred of reasons why they did not, but for me and how I have been trained, unless it is an emergency situation, when I land at a towered field, I cannot land until I hear those magical words "cleared to land." Until then I am still in the air. So for me even if it is of the tower's creation, I did not get clearance to land, and I cannot land.
Click to expand...

What's not clear to me is the airspace of the landing airport. Not sure if it matters but the tower cleared him to base leg then forgot about him. Is the clearance to land implied at a Delta (for example)? What is the pilot then authorized to do? Remain on base indefinately? Sounds unlikely.

Earlier in the thread someone cited 91.3:dunno:
 
douglas393 said:
We do not know why the tower did not repsond. I can think of hundred of reasons why they did not, but for me and how I have been trained, unless it is an emergency situation, when I land at a towered field, I cannot land until I hear those magical words "cleared to land." Until then I am still in the air. So for me even if it is of the tower's creation, I did not get clearance to land, and I cannot land.
Click to expand...

Doug is Spot on!
 
Jaybird180 said:
What's not clear to me is the airspace of the landing airport. Not sure if it matters but the tower cleared him to base leg then forgot about him. Is the clearance to land implied at a Delta (for example)? What is the pilot then authorized to do? Remain on base indefinately? Sounds unlikely.

Earlier in the thread someone cited 91.3:dunno:
Click to expand...
If this happened to me I would remain on base if I was cleared to base and inform tower of the issue and wait for them to respond. If I ended up out of their airspace and still did not here from them, I would try ATC on my alternate radio and if still got no response would do failed radio procedures. If on final I would do a go around and continue in the same fashion. I could be wrong in how I would deal with it but I see no other way in my limited experience. 91.3 if I interpret it correctly says I cannot land if I do not have a clearance to land from the tower controlling the field, unless it is an emergency.
 
CT Arrow said:
Doug is Spot on!
Click to expand...

You guys are missing my point. Of course he was not supposed to land and he knows it. That certainly isn't up for debate after several pages. When a tower issues instructions, the pilot is under positive control. Once you have aircraft in that position you need to tell them something.. go around, extend base, circle, land, whatever, the guy can't hover in the pattern waiting. It sounds like the tower was over whelmed and did a poor job of managing their workload otherwise the OP would have been told to do something.

My point was simply that it creates a dangerous situation to put aircraft in that position.
 
Last edited:
douglas393 said:
If this happened to me I would remain on base if I was cleared to base and inform tower of the issue and wait for them to respond. If I ended up out of their airspace and still did not here from them, I would try ATC on my alternate radio and if still got no response would do failed radio procedures. If on final I would do a go around and continue in the same fashion. I could be wrong in how I would deal with it but I see no other way in my limited experience. 91.3 if I interpret it correctly says I cannot land if I do not have a clearance to land from the tower controlling the field, unless it is an emergency.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what good talking to ATC would do. They can't clear you to land, and if the tower is too busy dealing with other traffic, they are too busy to answer a phone call from ATC letting them know there is a pilot in the pattern trying to contact them. That's not going to happen within the time you would need to go around anyway.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I'm not sure what good talking to ATC would do. They can't clear you to land, and if the tower is too busy dealing with other traffic, they are too busy to answer a phone call from ATC letting them know there is a pilot in the pattern trying to contact them. That's not going to happen within the time you would need to go around anyway.
Click to expand...
Assuming I am transmitting on the correct tower frequency and did not inadvertantly change it it would be to make sure I have a working radio than anything else to tell you the truth. I guess my other option would be to find a nearby nontowered field and land there, but in any case I would like to know I am transmitting on my radio.
 
Last edited:
If the DPE wants to lie to potentially not get in trouble, then he has no business being a DPE, and will lose business accordingly.

Were I the DPE, I'd tell the truth. Were I you, I'd tell the truth. See the pattern?
 
bbchien said:
Best to just wait until you get the letter. I'll bet they just swat you on the wrists. You were on a checkride with a designee.
Click to expand...

I'll bet the check ride pilot catches most scat than the student.

too bad it is too late to get the tower tapes to see what really happened.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I'm not sure what good talking to ATC would do. They can't clear you to land, and if the tower is too busy dealing with other traffic, they are too busy to answer a phone call from ATC letting them know there is a pilot in the pattern trying to contact them. That's not going to happen within the time you would need to go around anyway.
Click to expand...

The tower is ATC.
 
Tom-D said:
too bad it is too late to get the tower tapes to see what really happened.
Click to expand...

Only if they were still using analog tapes, which must be retained for 15 days. Digital Audio Tapes are retained for 45 days, Digital Audio Legal Recorders retain data for 45 days.
 
roncachamp said:
Only if they were still using analog tapes, which must be retained for 15 days. Digital Audio Tapes are retained for 45 days, Digital Audio Legal Recorders retain data for 45 days.
Click to expand...

I would assume the tapes were pulled and kept on record as soon as ATC filed the notice. Isn't that exactly what the tapes are for?
 
Since the pilot tried twice to communicate with the tower, could we not say there was a communications failure "emergency" and the pilot decided the safest course of action was to land without the clearance under his "emergency authority "?

Maybe it's stretching, but how did he know that perhaps his transmitter has not failed? If it HAD failed, then landing would certainly have been safer than going around and trying to figure something out (and avoid other traffic) without comms...
 
If you really think that your radio failed, Squak 7600, and fly the pattern waiting for light gun signals. Since you already were cleared into the airspace, no need to get permission to enter.

In this case, there is no indication that the radios failed. Just fly circuits in the pattern until further instructed. I would anounce my position in the patten on each leg as though it were uncontrolled, waiting for clearance to land or further instructions where to go.
 
Sounds like the OP did the safest thing really. The OP had the view of the runway, and could visually ascertain that conditions were safe for landing. His view of conflicting traffic on a go around was likely far less clear. Pilots need to be thinking beings, and not just quoters of regulations.

The dangerous thing was created by the tower. They sit in a little cubicle. It's the pilot who's six is on the line. Says me way to go OP, glad you passed the ride a second time. I wouldn't sweat the FAA. you weren't a pilot when you committed the infraction. Just tell the truth and cooperate as best you can. And remember, you can request access to anything they have, and should probably do so. At least James Inhofe won't have landed on a closed runway for nothing.
 
Jaybird180 said:
What's not clear to me is the airspace of the landing airport. Not sure if it matters but the tower cleared him to base leg then forgot about him. Is the clearance to land implied at a Delta (for example)? What is the pilot then authorized to do? Remain on base indefinately? Sounds unlikely.

Earlier in the thread someone cited 91.3:dunno:
Click to expand...

The tower does not clear to the base leg in Class D. The tower clears the runway and issues advisories in the air.

14 CFR 91.129(c)(1) requires establishing and maintaining two way communications with the tower within Class D.

This doesn't appear to be an on-board radio failure, so 14 CFR 91.129(d)(2) doesn't appear to apply. So, all you can do is go around, and leave the airspace. If you can reestablish communications on the way out, you can try again.

This is NOT an emergency on its own. 14 CFR 91.3(b) does not apply. 14 CFR 91.3(a) does not authorize the PIC to violate other regulations.
 
MAKG1 said:
The tower does not clear to the base leg in Class D. The tower clears the runway and issues advisories in the air.

14 CFR 91.129(c)(1) requires establishing and maintaining two way communications with the tower within Class D.

This doesn't appear to be an on-board radio failure, so 14 CFR 91.129(d)(2) doesn't appear to apply. So, all you can do is go around, and leave the airspace. If you can reestablish communications on the way out, you can try again.

This is NOT an emergency on its own. 14 CFR 91.3(b) does not apply. 14 CFR 91.3(a) does not authorize the PIC to violate other regulations.
Click to expand...

*Ahem*

steingar said:
Sounds like the OP did the safest thing really. The OP had the view of the runway, and could visually ascertain that conditions were safe for landing. His view of conflicting traffic on a go around was likely far less clear. Pilots need to be thinking beings, and not just quoters of regulations.
Click to expand...
 
steingar said:
Sounds like the OP did the safest thing really. The OP had the view of the runway, and could visually ascertain that conditions were safe for landing. His view of conflicting traffic on a go around was likely far less clear. Pilots need to be thinking beings, and not just quoters of regulations.

The dangerous thing was created by the tower. They sit in a little cubicle. It's the pilot who's six is on the line. Says me way to go OP, glad you passed the ride a second time. I wouldn't sweat the FAA. you weren't a pilot when you committed the infraction. Just tell the truth and cooperate as best you can. And remember, you can request access to anything they have, and should probably do so. At least James Inhofe won't have landed on a closed runway for nothing.
Click to expand...

Nope. A go-around would have been safer. It's much more likely that he would compromise safety for an aircraft he can't see (behind him), if he slows and lands.

Tower may have screwed up, but so did everyone else in this narrative. The BIG screw up for the OP was ceding PIC. Looking to a "more experienced" (and wrong) pilot for a decision indicates he wasn't ready.
 
dans2992 said:
Since the pilot tried twice to communicate with the tower, could we not say there was a communications failure "emergency" and the pilot decided the safest course of action was to land without the clearance under his "emergency authority"?

Maybe it's stretching, but how did he know that perhaps his transmitter has not failed? If it HAD failed, then landing would certainly have been safer than going around and trying to figure something out (and avoid other traffic) without comms...
Click to expand...

Hmmm, loss of a transmitter under VFR constitutes an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action? I agree, it's stretching.
 
Alexb2000 said:
You guys are missing my point. Of course he was not supposed to land and he knows it. That certainly isn't up for debate after several pages. When a tower issues instructions, the pilot is under positive control. Once you have aircraft in that position you need to tell them something.. go around, extend base, circle, land, whatever, the guy can't hover in the pattern waiting. It sounds like the tower was over whelmed and did a poor job of managing their workload otherwise the OP would have been told to do something.

My point was simply that it creates a dangerous situation to put aircraft in that position.
Click to expand...

Alex, I think we got your point. Again, no one knows why the tower did not communicate; Too busy, radio failure, Drinking coffee, texting,> Pick an answer. The bottom line is the PIC had to make a decision, he asked a DE for advice and the DE said to land. Okay, they both made errors. No one died and hopefully we have all learned from this experience. It was a good FAR review for me.

Your mileage may vary....:yesnod:
 
Last edited:
CT Arrow said:
Alex, I think we got your point. Again, no one knows why the tower did not communicate; Too busy, radio failure, Drinking coffee, texting,> Pick an answer. The bottom line is the PIC had to make a decision and landing was not the best choice......:nono:
Click to expand...

It wasn't a coms failure, i dont think. They were just super busy and forgot about me, is what im assuming happened. They were still talking, and my coms worked just fine for taxi clearance on the ground.
 
MAKG1 said:
The BIG screw up for the OP was ceding PIC. Looking to a "more experienced" (and wrong) pilot for a decision indicates he wasn't ready.
Click to expand...
However, it was a very natural reaction, especially when you are talking about someone on a private pilot checkride and an examiner.
 
steingar said:
Sounds like the OP did the safest thing really. The OP had the view of the runway, and could visually ascertain that conditions were safe for landing. His view of conflicting traffic on a go around was likely far less clear. Pilots need to be thinking beings, and not just quoters of regulations.

The dangerous thing was created by the tower. They sit in a little cubicle. It's the pilot who's six is on the line. Says me way to go OP, glad you passed the ride a second time. I wouldn't sweat the FAA. you weren't a pilot when you committed the infraction. Just tell the truth and cooperate as best you can. And remember, you can request access to anything they have, and should probably do so. At least James Inhofe won't have landed on a closed runway for nothing.
Click to expand...
You are probably right that and the proof of that is that he landed safely, however, I am still not comfortable landing in a towered environment if I do not have the tower telling me I am "cleared to land." None of us know why the tower did not clear him, and there may have been extenuating circumstances he did not know about that were preventing the tower from giving him clearance, and communicating with him, and his act of landing could have had adverse affects on that situation. Using your logic(and I realize it is stretching it a little bit) would be similar to saying that after coming to an intersection of runways and holding and after not getting communication from the tower to cross despite calling them a number of times to go ahead and cross it anyway. I am sorry but for me even if I am on a short final if I do not hear those magic words "cleared to land" I am not landing unless I have an emergency that requires me to land.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top