Little Rant

Well, subsequent to the original post, he went on to describe fatalities, FAR violations, and other dire stuff. Seems like it got bigger as the thread grew.
 
docmirror said:
Well, subsequent to the original post, he went on to describe fatalities, FAR violations, and other dire stuff. Seems like it got bigger as the thread grew.
Click to expand...

That happens when we put people on the defensive. Funny how that works.
 
Building a mountain out of an ant hill. Uncontolled airport, pilot who thinks he is the only one in the area gets to pick his runway short of airport rules or safety issues. You saw the problem unfolding and did something about it. The post landing confrontation was uncalled for and childish.
I've been flying for 20 + years and positively never screwed up a radio once. Let's review... volume, wrong frequency, fouled up the comma panel, full electrical failure. But never ONCE!
Lighten up and keep flying safe.
 
Unit74 said:
Nice try at discrediting me, but it's clear I executed the proper actions. I went around and announced, reestablished myself and completed the landing when he exited the runway.
Click to expand...
No one has suggested otherwise. If your account of the day is accurate, then you did everything correctly. You should have left it at that.

On a related note, as I was driving into work today, I was going around a roundabout, passing an exit with my inside blinker on. The car approaching the roundabout entered it about 3 car lengths in front of me even though my blinker was on. Despite the fact that my car was already configured to continue at my previous speed, I was forced to lightly tap my brakes to make room for him. I clearly had the right of way, and the other driver was clearly in violation of tasmanian driving regulations. Sure, this may not seem like much now, but just wait until it happens again and we are both killed. Australian police see this all the time. Come to think of it, my neighbor is a policeman, I'm going to go see him tonight and make a formal complaint.
 
Unit74 said:
Rant On

I'm inbound and descending 15 miles out and announce. I hear traffic at the uncontrolled airport but no clue what runway they are using. At 10 miles I call out to traffic and ask what runway he's using. No reply.

5 miles out I hear him call upwind 26... Great. I know what entry to make and call out intentions. I enter the 45 as he is turning base. I call all my legs out.

I fly my pattern and as I'm on a 1 mile final, numb nuts announces he is now back-taxing 8 and will stay in the pattern. I see him roll past the taxiway turn out and spin a U-turn. Now I'm on a short final and jack wad finally sees me. As I am going around, he finally comes on the radio and say I can hold here if you want to come in. HE's STILL ON THE ACTIVE RUN WAY!!!

I said, "I'll bring it back around and try this again." He taxis off by the gas pumps. I bring it in and he says this to me....

"Sorry, we are a student pilot and had the radio turned down." I said, "well I called for you several times from 15 miles out and heard nothing." Him: "yea, we had the radio down."

I said, "Well at least your not being asked to copy a number down." He laughs.

There were 2 other planes inbound when this was all going down. But the worst part is this guy is a CFI at the field. He knows there is traffic all day long on a Sat, especially today as it was a great day to fly. Not to mention his complete lack of situational awareness and poor demonstration of safety.

I know its an uncontrolled field and he doesn't need to talk to anyone, but this field is active and just an absolute poor demonstration of professionalism.

I speculate that what happened was since we are on unicom and no less than 4 other fields can be heard on the radio at pattern alt., he turned the radio down to talk and instruct since there were a lot of aircraft in the sky today. I say deal with it numb nuts, it's good training.

His see and avoid skills are also rather lacking as I could see him as I passed the numbers and he was on final. I was all lit up just for him as well.

Rant Off
Click to expand...

Worthwhile rant...but as you said there is no requirement for a radio, which I find astounding considering all the hard rules for safety in other areas of flight, like Mode C xpndr and the coming ADS-B mandate.

Unicom is a zoo..on weekends I always expect the worst at my home field. It's just part of the territory.
 
CTLSi said:
Worthwhile rant...but as you said there is no requirement for a radio, which I find astounding considering all the hard rules for safety in other areas of flight, like Mode C xpndr and the coming ADS-B mandate.

Unicom is a zoo..on weekends I always expect the worst at my home field. It's just part of the territory.
Click to expand...


It's about budget vs reward, just like anything else in life. Uncontrolled means uncontrolled. Expect stupid pilot tricks. :)
 
Unit74 said:
No, I didn't see him back taxi. He annoucced it on my short final as he passed the taxiway turn out and spun around. That's when I realized what he was doing. If he had not turn up his radio and continued his take off, we would had been head to head....
Click to expand...

In one sentence you say you didn't see him and then you did. How can you NOT see what's on the runway on short final? If he had continued his take-off roll are you saying you would have had no option outside of a head-on collision? For cripe sakes man, you're in a fully functioning aircraft with CONTROLS. You don't have to collide with anything if you don't want to.

I suggest you just move on, put this behind you and forget it. It's not a big deal.
 
Unit74 said:
91.113 is pretty clear though. He was taxiing to take off, not on a roll out. Add on he was now reversing the pattern with other aircraft established in the pattern and it's a disaster waiting to happen. The runway was mine and he knew it. Tack on that he actually suggested he remain on the runway while I land was incredibly irresponsible for a "professional".

AIM 4-1-9 also says he has an obligation to monitor the CTAF and announce. The CFI only announced and was clueless as to what he was doing.

I don't really care about having to go around. What I care about is a careless pilot not following established procedure creating a hazard to other people. If he want to lawn dart himself, go right ahead. When he forces other people to be one subjected to his irresponsible operations, I take issue with that.
Click to expand...

Anyone on a runway OWNS that runway.

The AIM is not regulatory. Radios are not required, hence, using one is also not required.

Unless you have an emergency, like running out of fuel...you cannot land while the guy is on the runway, no matter how much you think it wrong...
 
Stuff like this happens all the time at uncontrolled airports. I was up doing some touch goes with my son, and there was an instructor with a student who kept asking where we were in the pattern, even though we were self announcing at the usual points. Once we were on short final (and I'm in a somewhat challenging taildragger due to lack of visibility and relatively high landing speed (90k on final)), and he kept asking on the radio where we were.

I finally suggested that he do less talking on the radio and spend more time looking out the window.
 
Let's throw a monkey wrench in these works. I call base to final, Then (as there's traffic taxiing) I call short final. Then traffic calls back taxi, and pulls out on the runway. I executed a go-around, and left a tire mark on the windshield of the RV that pulled out in front of me. The RV was in radio contact, And ignored the calls made by me, and pulled out to the runway as I was in the flare.
So much for radios.
I just see and avoid as best I can at uncontrolled fields anymore.
 
Jim Logajan said:
The guy on the runway may not have been behaving legally, since he didn't exit the runway at the taxiway turnout and then made no attempt to get off the runway to make way for a landing aircraft:

14 CFR 91.113
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach
Click to expand...

If you read it again, you'll notice that 91.113 says the opposite of what you appear to be implying and that it's OP who "shall not take advantage". The guy should've taken an exit though. In some such cases, when exit was not available, I rolled to the run-up pocket before back-taxiing, because you know, what if someone is behind me in a glider?
 
CTLSi said:
Anyone on a runway OWNS that runway.

The AIM is not regulatory. Radios are not required, hence, using one is also not required.

Unless you have an emergency, like running out of fuel...you cannot land while the guy is on the runway, no matter how much you think it wrong...
Click to expand...

From a regulatory standpoint, rather than a pragmatic standpoint, an aircraft on a runway does not "own" the runway. The right-of-way regulations say:
"Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach."
​
The right of way rule does not mention any qualifiers regarding the intentions of the pilot in the aircraft already on the runway - he or she must give way to the aircraft on final approach regardless of what they plan to do next. They don't "own" the runway.
 
zaitcev said:
If you read it again, you'll notice that 91.113 says the opposite of what you appear to be implying and that it's OP who "shall not take advantage".
Click to expand...

The story by OP didn't show him to be taking advantage of his right-of-way; rather, he indicated the guy on the runway knew he was at fault and offered a mea culpa.

I've landed at a bunch of back country airports where you have to back taxi and there is often no way to get off the runway except for one end. In those cases the airplanes landing just have to wait and the planes back-taxiing have no other option. A plane on final can't continue to land and expect that the regs will support him forcing the taxiing guy off the runway into the trees or brush along the side.

The thread seems to have had an interesting result - some posters seem to believe they can take their time on the runway regardless of who else is out there.
 
bluerooster said:
Let's throw a monkey wrench in these works. I call base to final, Then (as there's traffic taxiing) I call short final. Then traffic calls back taxi, and pulls out on the runway. I executed a go-around, and left a tire mark on the windshield of the RV that pulled out in front of me. The RV was in radio contact, And ignored the calls made by me, and pulled out to the runway as I was in the flare.
So much for radios.
I just see and avoid as best I can at uncontrolled fields anymore.
Click to expand...

Send your flight plans to me before you go out. I wanna make sure I am not around...
 
Jim Logajan said:
From a regulatory standpoint, rather than a pragmatic standpoint, an aircraft on a runway does not "own" the runway. The right-of-way regulations say:
"Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach."
​
The right of way rule does not mention any qualifiers regarding the intentions of the pilot in the aircraft already on the runway - he or she must give way to the aircraft on final approach regardless of what they plan to do next. They don't "own" the runway.
Click to expand...


That is ABSOLUTELY wrong. If you land on a runway with another aircraft on it you can be turned into the FAA and lose your ticket. The ONLY time an aircraft can violate that rule is in an emergency.

If someone hogs the runway turn them into the airfield office...but the FAA is clear about runway incursions. And there is NO QUESTION that if you see someone on a runway and you land anyway, YOU have violated and made and incursion.
 
Well, define "while landing". Does a back taxi on the runway fit the description of "while landing"? When is the "landing" completed? Full stopped? Clear of the runway surface? There's an old saw about landing a TW plane that says you aren't completed until you are sitting in the barcalounger with a cold beer in hand. Of course, the exaggeration is what makes it funny, but we have no definition of "while landing". Maybe in this case, the pilot on the runway wasn't done yet. Does it make sense to us? No, but unless or until we get a definition that all reasonable people can agree on, the runway still is in use.
 
CTLSi said:
That is ABSOLUTELY wrong. If you land on a runway with another aircraft on it you can be turned into the FAA and lose your ticket. The ONLY time an aircraft can violate that rule is in an emergency.
Click to expand...

This has me curious...

My EAA group arranges "fly-outs".

With prior arrangements, two aircraft often take off at the same time, in formation.

And on arrival, only one plane broadcasts as a "flight of two" and we both land on the same runway - staggered and a safe distance apart but definitely rolling out at the same time on the same runway. I've seen lots of other club members do the same thing pretty regularly.

Is there, in fact, any reg that makes this illegal?
 
I'd say that if you are ON the runway then you pretty much own it whether or not anyone else sees it as rightful or not. I don't see anyone else as being in a position to argue about it. You might be a jerk who owns the runway but you still own it, possession being nine-tenths of the law and all...
 
I don't ever back taxi on a strip with taxi-ways. Even if it's deserted.

I can see teaching a student what a back taxi is, but not with traffic. And I'd want to announce it loudly to the world on unicom.

OP's whole scenario sounds like a cluster ****. But you have to expect those at uncontrolled fields. Try the Reklaw fly in some year. :loco:
 
FastEddieB said:
This has me curious...

My EAA group arranges "fly-outs".

With prior arrangements, two aircraft often take off at the same time, in formation.

And on arrival, only one plane broadcasts as a "flight of two" and we both land on the same runway - staggered and a safe distance apart but definitely rolling out at the same time on the same runway. I've seen lots of other club members do the same thing pretty regularly.

Is there, in fact, any reg that makes this illegal?
Click to expand...

Formation and group flying by prearrangement is in the FAR.
 
txflyer said:
Try the Reklaw fly in some year. :loco:
Click to expand...

Heh, couple of years ago I was leaving Reklaw on Sun about noon when it gets busy. There were planes lined up to take off to the SE and I was parked down by the east end. the wind was actually favoring 2 by the afternoon, so I announced, waited for the plane taking off on 20 to clear, then I started my roll. Since you can't see the other end, there was a flag guy on that white stand waving furiously toward the plane sitting at 20. I'm sure I made some folks mad that day, but I looked at the flag and it was definitely favoring 2 by about 30deg. The other planes were taking off downwind. After I left, I heard a few other planes announce 2 as well. :redface:
 
CTLSi said:
That is ABSOLUTELY wrong. If you land on a runway with another aircraft on it you can be turned into the FAA and lose your ticket. The ONLY time an aircraft can violate that rule is in an emergency.
Click to expand...

This can't possibly be right. Gliders do this all the time and nobody comes to take their tickets. Of course the front one ought to roll forward as far as possible and each next one tries to land as early as possible.
 
zaitcev said:
This can't possibly be right. Gliders do this all the time and nobody comes to take their tickets. Of course the front one ought to roll forward as far as possible and each next one tries to land as early as possible.
Click to expand...

Try it, see how quickly you get turned in.

Gliders are a different animal. They often sit on a runway with a tow plane for long period getting ready, no powered aircraft are usually allowed to share those runways. Or at least they shouldn't. Also, a glider can't do a touch and go, or go around. Once they come in, they are in. Gliders have to plan their runway usage carefully.
 
CTLSi said:
Try it, see how quickly you get turned in.

Gliders are a different animal. They often sit on a runway with a tow plane for long period getting ready, no powered aircraft are usually allowed to share those runways. Or at least they shouldn't. Also, a glider can't do a touch and go, or go around. Once they come in, they are in. Gliders have to plan their runway usage carefully.
Click to expand...

Do it all the time. Landing traffic will offer to wait at the end. Next plane lands then they both back-taxi. It's just common courtesy.
 
bluerooster said:
Let's throw a monkey wrench in these works. I call base to final, Then (as there's traffic taxiing) I call short final. Then traffic calls back taxi, and pulls out on the runway. I executed a go-around, and left a tire mark on the windshield of the RV that pulled out in front of me. The RV was in radio contact, And ignored the calls made by me, and pulled out to the runway as I was in the flare.
So much for radios.
I just see and avoid as best I can at uncontrolled fields anymore.
Click to expand...

Just because you transmit, you have no assurances that it was received.
The taxiing aircraft might transmit and not recieve, he may not hear your calls, and may not have seen your pattern or location on final.

Hopefully that tread mark you left on his canopy did not damage your gear.
Expect the unexpected.
 
docmirror said:
Heh, couple of years ago I was leaving Reklaw on Sun about noon when it gets busy. There were planes lined up to take off to the SE and I was parked down by the east end. the wind was actually favoring 2 by the afternoon, so I announced, waited for the plane taking off on 20 to clear, then I started my roll. Since you can't see the other end, there was a flag guy on that white stand waving furiously toward the plane sitting at 20. I'm sure I made some folks mad that day, but I looked at the flag and it was definitely favoring 2 by about 30deg. The other planes were taking off downwind. After I left, I heard a few other planes announce 2 as well. :redface:
Click to expand...



It can get CURazY! when it get's busy.

"skywagon is number six or seven, turning base." Reklaw" :goofy:
 
CTLSi said:
That is ABSOLUTELY wrong. If you land on a runway with another aircraft on it you can be turned into the FAA and lose your ticket. The ONLY time an aircraft can violate that rule is in an emergency.

If someone hogs the runway turn them into the airfield office...but the FAA is clear about runway incursions. And there is NO QUESTION that if you see someone on a runway and you land anyway, YOU have violated and made and incursion.
Click to expand...

Got a FAR for that?

14 CFR 91.129(I) requires a tower to apply.

What kinds of incursions can you have at nontowered airports?

Two airplanes on the runway is not necessarily reckless.
 
So if one plane is turning onto the taxiway 3500 feet down the runway as a 172 is touching down on the numbers, is it reckless Mr. Sport Pilot?
 
CTLSi said:
Formation and group flying by prearrangement is in the FAR.
Click to expand...

I assumed so.

Your...

"That is ABSOLUTELY wrong. If you land on a runway with another aircraft on it you can be turned into the FAA and lose your ticket. The ONLY time an aircraft can violate that rule is in an emergency."

...seemed pretty absolute, is all. What with "ONLY" in all caps, for instance.

Just wanted to be sure all the guys taking off and landing at the same time were not in violation of some FAR I was not aware of.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top