Question for the Controllers....

[Kritchlow]

What is the purpose of “cleared to land”?
I mean, I completely understand “cleared for takeoff”, as you may not have a release for IFR, or there is another aircraft in the way.
But on landing, does that mean don’t touch wheels to pavement? Or don’t fly past the threshold?? I mean, if there’s a traffic on the runway and I don’t get a landing clearance, can I literally do a low pass at five feet? If so, I may hit that traffic on the runway. I understand I may get a “go around” command prior to that, but that doesn’t explain the landing clearance.
Of course common sense dictates if no landing clearance one should query before the threshold, but what exactly does the lack of a clearance mean?

thanks

 

[N1120A]

When you call tower, you're going to either 1) get cleared to land, 2) told to continue your approach, 3) make a certain kind of traffic. If you aren't cleared to land, you are expected to overfly at a safe altitude, but the tower isn't going to NOT tell you what to do.

 

[Kritchlow]

When you call tower, you're going to either 1) get cleared to land, 2) told to continue your approach, 3) make a certain kind of traffic. If you aren't cleared to land, you are expected to overfly at a safe altitude, but the tower isn't going to NOT tell you what to do.

Thank you. You prove my point. There really is no exact meaning to the term.

 

[denverpilot]

Thank you. You prove my point. There really is no exact meaning to the term.

Well... it does mean that certain criteria were met that are outlined in the 7110 that the controller must confirm, prior to saying those words. Clear runway or enough separation, etc etc etc.

To us it means they supposedly did their job and we are relatively assured those items are true, but better watch the crossing runway like a hawk anyway...

 

[Larry in TN]

The meaning of the clearance, in addition to what denverpilot mentioned, is that it restricts you to a full-stop landing or go-around. You can't stop-and-go, touch-and-go, or low-approach.

14 CFR 91.129 (i) Takeoff, landing, taxi clearance. No person may, at any airport with an operating control tower, operate an aircraft on a runway or taxiway, or take off or land an aircraft, unless an appropriate clearance is received from ATC.

AIM 4-3-22 Option Approach - The “Cleared for the Option” procedure will permit an instructor, flight examiner or pilot the option to make a touch-and-go, low approach, missed approach, stop-and-go, or full stop landing.

Pilot/Controller Glossary, CLEARED TO LAND− ATC authorization for an aircraft to land. It is predicated on known traffic and known physical airport conditions.​

 

[Kritchlow]

The meaning of the clearance, in addition to what denverpilot mentioned, is that it restricts you to a full-stop landing or go-around. You can't stop-and-go, touch-and-go, or low-approach.

14 CFR 91.129 (i) Takeoff, landing, taxi clearance. No person may, at any airport with an operating control tower, operate an aircraft on a runway or taxiway, or take off or land an aircraft, unless an appropriate clearance is received from ATC.

AIM 4-3-22 Option Approach - The “Cleared for the Option” procedure will permit an instructor, flight examiner or pilot the option to make a touch-and-go, low approach, missed approach, stop-and-go, or full stop landing.

Pilot/Controller Glossary, CLEARED TO LAND− ATC authorization for an aircraft to land. It is predicated on known traffic and known physical airport conditions.​

Perhaps I was not clear... The question should be, what does the “lack of a clearance” mean?

 

[denverpilot]

Perhaps I was not clear... The question should be, what does the “lack of a clearance” mean?

If you land, you’ve busted 91.129 and better have a good reason?

Still not quite sure what you’re hunting for but I can tell your brain is churning on something.

 

[Palmpilot]

Perhaps I was not clear... The question should be, what does the “lack of a clearance” mean?

In addition to what Nate wrote, I assume that the expectation would be to initiate a climb to pattern altitude and overfly the runway (offsetting if necessary to avoid traffic).

If you were operating under IFR, then I guess you would have to fly the missed approach unless the weather were good enough to cancel IFR and join the pattern.

 

[Larry in TN]

Perhaps I was not clear... The question should be, what does the “lack of a clearance” mean?

Per 14 CFR 91.129 (i), you can't "land an aircraft". So, I think what you're getting at is what does 'land an aircraft' mean.

The P/CG says, "CLEARED TO LAND− ATC authorization for an aircraft to land. It is predicated on known traffic and known physical airport conditions." That doesn't help much.

14 CFR 91.1 does not include a definitions section, as some XX.1 sections do, so that's no help.

Unless someone else can find an FAA sanctioned definition for 'land an aircraft', I think we have to go with general usage of the words. A technical interpretation might conclude that the combination of these sources would support a low-pass down the runway, as long as you don't touchdown. I would lean on the following from AIM 4-3-5.

Unexpected Maneuvers in the Airport Traffic Pattern -- There have been several incidents in the vicinity of controlled airports that were caused primarily by aircraft executing unexpected maneuvers. ATC service is based upon observed or known traffic and airport conditions. Controllers establish the sequence of arriving and departing aircraft by requiring them to adjust flight as necessary to achieve proper spacing. These adjustments can only be based on observed traffic, accurate pilot reports, and anticipated aircraft maneuvers. Pilots are expected to cooperate so as to preclude disrupting traffic flows or creating conflicting patterns.​

I don't think this situation was exactly what the authors were thinking of when they wrote 4-3-5 but the concept applies--Don't surprise the controller. When a controller has withheld a landing clearance, the pilot must assume that the required conditions for issuing the clearance have not been met. 14 CFR 91.129(i) only requires the clearance prior to landing. It places no requirements, other than NOT landing, on pilots who haven't received the clearance.

So, what is the controller going to expect from a pilot who reaches the runway without a landing clearance? I think he's going to expect a go-around, not an extended low-approach. In fact, an extended low-approach could create the threat of a collision if the reason why the clearance had not been granted was that the runway was not clear.

This is all an academic exercise, of course, as a controller isn't going to withhold a landing clearance then wait to see what the airplane does when it reaches the runway. In practice, the controller is going to clear you to land, tell you to expect landing clearance at [some point later than normal], or tell you to go-around. If you are approaching the runway without a clearance, chances are he already did issue the clearance or thinks he already issued the clearance and forgot to come back to it when the condition which prevented it from being issued earlier was resolved. In such a case, I'd recommend phraseology along the lines of,

"[Facility] tower, [Callsign], Request landing clearance.", or
"[Facility] tower, [Callsign], Confirm landing clearance."
​

 

[Kritchlow]

If you land, you’ve busted 91.129 and better have a good reason?

Still not quite sure what you’re hunting for but I can tell your brain is churning on something.

In addition to what Nate wrote, I assume that the expectation would be to initiate a climb to pattern altitude and overfly the runway (offsetting if necessary to avoid traffic).

If you were operating under IFR, then I guess you would have to fly the missed approach unless the weather were good enough to cancel IFR and join the pattern.

Per 14 CFR 91.129 (i), you can't "land an aircraft". So, I think what you're getting at is what does 'land an aircraft' mean.

The P/CG says, "CLEARED TO LAND− ATC authorization for an aircraft to land. It is predicated on known traffic and known physical airport conditions." That doesn't help much.

14 CFR 91.1 does not include a definitions section, as some XX.1 sections do, so that's no help.

Unless someone else can find an FAA sanctioned definition for 'land an aircraft', I think we have to go with general usage of the words. A technical interpretation might conclude that the combination of these sources would support a low-pass down the runway, as long as you don't touchdown. I would lean on the following from AIM 4-3-5.

Unexpected Maneuvers in the Airport Traffic Pattern -- There have been several incidents in the vicinity of controlled airports that were caused primarily by aircraft executing unexpected maneuvers. ATC service is based upon observed or known traffic and airport conditions. Controllers establish the sequence of arriving and departing aircraft by requiring them to adjust flight as necessary to achieve proper spacing. These adjustments can only be based on observed traffic, accurate pilot reports, and anticipated aircraft maneuvers. Pilots are expected to cooperate so as to preclude disrupting traffic flows or creating conflicting patterns.​

I don't think this situation was exactly what the authors were thinking of when they wrote 4-3-5 but the concept applies--Don't surprise the controller. When a controller has withheld a landing clearance, the pilot must assume that the required conditions for issuing the clearance have not been met. 14 CFR 91.129(i) only requires the clearance prior to landing. It places no requirements, other than NOT landing, on pilots who haven't received the clearance.

So, what is the controller going to expect from a pilot who reaches the runway without a landing clearance? I think he's going to expect a go-around, not an extended low-approach. In fact, an extended low-approach could create the threat of a collision if the reason why the clearance had not been granted was that the runway was not clear.

This is all an academic exercise, of course, as a controller isn't going to withhold a landing clearance then wait to see what the airplane does when it reaches the runway. In practice, the controller is going to clear you to land, tell you to expect landing clearance at [some point later than normal], or tell you to go-around. If you are approaching the runway without a clearance, chances are he already did issue the clearance or thinks he already issued the clearance and forgot to come back to it when the condition which prevented it from being issued earlier was resolved. In such a case, I'd recommend phraseology along the lines of,

"[Facility] tower, [Callsign], Request landing clearance.", or
"[Facility] tower, [Callsign], Confirm landing clearance."
​

I do not disagree with any of your statements.
That said, there is just no clear rule (reg) that defines it.

Personally I take it as a warning something is amiss, and get ready for a go around.
Was doing a Cat II autoland in KISP a few months back, and tower said “expect landing clearance further in, vehicle on the runway removing FOD”.
About 200 feet AGL I queried the tower. After a pregnant pause I was told to go around. Of course with the weather that low I could not see the runway, and I was out of visual sight from the tower. But.... not sure how far I could have taken the approach. Of course judgement won the day and I asked.

 

[Kritchlow]

Yea, some sort of rule (reg?) like “don’t cross the threshold”, or “don’t descend below 100 feet” would be a good thing IMO.

 

[smv]

if there’s a traffic on the runway and I don’t get a landing clearance, can I literally do a low pass at five feet?

Technically, a "Low Pass" means no lower than 500' AGL.

 

[denverpilot]

Technically, a "Low Pass" means no lower than 500' AGL.

Technically.

Our tower doesn’t seem to care as long as it’s a vintage warbird or F-18s. LOL.

 

[Kritchlow]

Technically, a "Low Pass" means no lower than 500' AGL.

Still does not satisfy the question of what can or cannot be done without a landing clearance.
The only thing I know for certain is that wheels cannot touch the pavement.

 

[Arnold]

Not a controller, but . . . Don't land. The other stuff matters not.

 

[Seanaldinho]

Still does not satisfy the question of what can or cannot be done without a landing clearance.
The only thing I know for certain is that wheels cannot touch the pavement.

To the letter of the law, that would be true. I think it is left at that since the expectation on the controller is that another instruction would be issued to clarify. You should also be given a reason for vectors off your flight plan. Does that mean it always gets done? YMMV

For example, if a cancel landing clearance is given it should be followed by an instruction or an advisory to expect clearance again shortly.

The pilot of course has the ability to say going around at whatever time they feel is necessary for the safety of the flight. I think the issue here is that pilots without a defined SOP or company minimums will fly down to 10 feet and above the touchdown zone waiting for the clearance rather than setting a personal minimum based on their experience and their aircraft. 10 feet won't work in a 747 but it might in a 182.

 

[Timbeck2]

Would you rather controllers say nothing and let you prang into something on the runway?

I guess I really don't understand your question.

 

[Lindberg]

Don't land. Continue to fly the aircraft. Unless it's an emergency; in which case, do what you need to.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

If I’m on an instrument approach I would probably call the go around and initiate the published missed. For a visual it would be runway heading up to pattern. Just my best guess. No guarantees on being correct.

what I have found interesting is what happens when the crew and tower both forget the clearance. It happened to me in Atlanta one day. On roll out the tower called and verified we had seen the light gun signal clearing us to land. He called right about the time we realized we had never gotten the call. Yep. You betcha tower. Totally saw those lights. Lol Solid dude in the cab that day.

 

[kayoh190]

what I have found interesting is what happens when the crew and tower both forget the clearance.

We talk about this sometimes with respect to landing at La Guardia. As I'm sure you know the spacing there can get really tight, and there have been more than a few times when a controller has us continue but then forgets to clear us to land during subsequent LGA mayhem. But sometimes you can't get a word in edgewise to 'gently' remind them. I haven't actually had to go around for it, but I *have* gotten the "Yeah yeah, cleared to land xxx" inside of 100 feet before. Sometimes I wonder if it'd be better to just land the plane when it's clear they forgot, rather than execute a super late go-around and add to the bedlam that can be LGA and the surrounding NYC airspace.

Sigh...with COVID, I'm starting to really miss those crazy LGA days!

 

[Kritchlow]

Would you rather controllers say nothing and let you prang into something on the runway?

I guess I really don't understand your question.

Ahhh.... I’m agreeing with you. I’m just think there should be more defined rules. as I always say, “judgment rules the day”.

 

[Kritchlow]

Technically, a "Low Pass" means no lower than 500' AGL.

But we are not cleared for a “low pass”. We are not cleared for anything. That’s the crux.

 

[Arnold]

But we are not cleared for a “low pass”. We are not cleared for anything. That’s the crux.

You are in class D airspace, you were cleared for something.

 

[Lindberg]

You are in class D airspace, you were cleared for something.

You don't need to be cleared for anything in Class D airspace. But you need to be cleared to land at a towered field.

 

[Arnold]

You don't need to be cleared for anything in Class D airspace. But you need to be cleared to land at a towered field.

Hmm. No time to look up regs, but this is what I am thinking: Tower controlled airports without overlaying C or B all have class D airspace. Entry to class D airspace without permission is unlawful. Permission = clearance when issued by a controller. Therefore you need to be cleared for something and the statement "you don't need to be cleared for anything in Class D airspace" is FALSE absent an emergency. But if you doubt me you could certainly try this. Fly to a class D airport. Enter their airspace without a clearance, fly the pattern and make a low approach be sure to fly by the tower so they get a good look at your registration number. Go around. Depart the airspace. My belief is that you will soon be hearing from an FAA Ops Inspector who would like to determine why you did that. Absent an emergency my guess is that you will be doing some face time with an FAA inspector.

 

[Seanaldinho]

Hmm. No time to look up regs, but this is what I am thinking: Tower controlled airports without overlaying C or B all have class D airspace. Entry to class D airspace without permission is unlawful. Permission = clearance when issued by a controller. Therefore you need to be cleared for something and the statement "you don't need to be cleared for anything in Class D airspace" is FALSE absent an emergency. But if you doubt me you could certainly try this. Fly to a class D airport. Enter their airspace without a clearance, fly the pattern and make a low approach be sure to fly by the tower so they get a good look at your registration number. Go around. Depart the airspace. My belief is that you will soon be hearing from an FAA Ops Inspector who would like to determine why you did that. Absent an emergency my guess is that you will be doing some face time with an FAA inspector.

The entry requirement for Class D airspace is two-way communication. If a controller uses your callsign in response to you, you have established two-way communication. Barring an instruction that tells you to remain clear or do otherwise, you can then enter the Class D without an explicit "clearance".

We pilots do love semantics...

 

[Lindberg]

Hmm. No time to look up regs, but this is what I am thinking: Tower controlled airports without overlaying C or B all have class D airspace. Entry to class D airspace without permission is unlawful.

I would suggest you take the time to look up the regs.

 

[Arnold]

I would suggest you take the time to look up the regs.

Or one of you could cite the reg and actually support the assertions you make with fact and/or law.

 

[Seanaldinho]

Or one of you could cite the reg and actually support the assertions you make with fact and/or law.

91.129

I'll save you the google too.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-i...7da89486&mc=true&node=se14.2.91_1129&rgn=div8

 

[Lindberg]

Or one of you could cite the reg and actually support the assertions you make with fact and/or law.

I told you the rule, you didn't believe me. I'm sure you'll never believe it until you see it yourself. And this is petty basic. "I don't have time to know the rules" is a dangerous attitude for a pilot or an attorney.

 

[midwestpa24]

To rephrase the OP's question, if you are on final and never receive a landing clearance, when are you expected to go around? One foot off the runway? At the threshold? 500 ft agl? At what point does it become a deviation?

 

[Lindberg]

At what point does it become a deviation?

When you land without a clearance or fail to follow an instruction.

I'm sure you could also figure out how to violate some other reg, like doing something careless and reckless (e.g., deliberately buzz an aircraft stuck on the runway).

 

[midwestpa24]

When you land without a clearance or fail to follow an instruction.

I'm sure you could also figure out how to violate some other reg, like doing something careless and reckless (e.g., deliberately buzz an aircraft stuck on the runway).

So back to my question, if you remain 1 foot off the runway, you have not landed, so no deviation (other than as you pointed out the careless/reckless gotchas). Tower forgets you, doesn't issue clearance, maybe you can't get a word in edge wise on frequency, how far do you take it?

A real world example I encountered with a student on a dual xc, we were going into a Class D right at closing time for the tower. Approach control warned us tower was closing in 5 minutes when they switched us. Tower told us to continue on final but didn't give us landing clearance. We were probably 1/4 mile final and were wondering how it was going to work when the clock on the GPS clicked over 1900 and the tower controller made his announcement tower closed use CTAF procedures, goodnight. Another 10 seconds we would have needed clearance or gone around.

 

[Larry in TN]

But we are not cleared for a “low pass”. We are not cleared for anything. That’s the crux.

There are only three things which require a specific clearance at airports with operating control towers. They are listed in 14 CFR 91.129 (i).

91.129 (i) Takeoff, landing, taxi clearance. No person may, at any airport with an operating control tower, operate an aircraft on a runway or taxiway, or take off or land an aircraft, unless an appropriate clearance is received from ATC.​

You don't have to be "cleared for anything" as long as you don't taxi (on a movement area), takeoff, or land.

What you must do is comply with any ATC instructions that you have received per 14 CFR 91.123(b).

91.123 (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.​

That's it. Those are the rules.

As I previously posted, the AIM provides additional guidance regarding unexpected maneuvers in the traffic pattern so, lacking other instructions, don't do something that wouldn't be reasonably expected.

If there is something more specific that the controller wants you to do it is up to him to provide those instructions.

 

[Lindberg]

So back to my question, if you remain 1 foot off the runway, you have not landed, so no deviation (other than as you pointed out the careless/reckless gotchas). Tower forgets you, doesn't issue clearance, maybe you can't get a word in edge wise on frequency, how far do you take it?

A real world example I encountered with a student on a dual xc, we were going into a Class D right at closing time for the tower. Approach control warned us tower was closing in 5 minutes when they switched us. Tower told us to continue on final but didn't give us landing clearance. We were probably 1/4 mile final and were wondering how it was going to work when the clock on the GPS clicked over 1900 and the tower controller made his announcement tower closed use CTAF procedures, goodnight. Another 10 seconds we would have needed clearance or gone around.

You answered your own question. You need a clearance to land. You don't need a clearance to go around, to fly down final, to fly downwind, or to do anything else in the air. You must follow instructions, like "make left traffic," "extend your downwind," etc. All the rules that apply to flying apply.

I did 23 laps at a controlled field. I never received a single clearance other than "cleared for the option" once per loop. I received a single instruction, "make left traffic for runway nn left." That leaves a lot to pilot discretion, but it's also not permission to do anything you wouldn't otherwise be permitted to do like crashing into an aircraft on the runway.

 

[Kritchlow]

There are only three things which require a specific clearance at airports with operating control towers. They are listed in 14 CFR 91.129 (i).

91.129 (i) Takeoff, landing, taxi clearance. No person may, at any airport with an operating control tower, operate an aircraft on a runway or taxiway, or take off or land an aircraft, unless an appropriate clearance is received from ATC.​

You don't have to be "cleared for anything" as long as you don't taxi (on a movement area), takeoff, or land.

What you must do is comply with any ATC instructions that you have received per 14 CFR 91.123(b).

91.123 (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.​

That's it. Those are the rules.

As I previously posted, the AIM provides additional guidance regarding unexpected maneuvers in the traffic pattern so, lacking other instructions, don't do something that wouldn't be reasonably expected.

If there is something more specific that the controller wants you to do it is up to him to provide those instructions.

I appreciate your work and time on this, but it really does not get to my point.
Perhaps I’m not explaining myself clearly.

 

[smv]

So back to my question, if you remain 1 foot off the runway, you have not landed, so no deviation (other than as you pointed out the careless/reckless gotchas). Tower forgets you, doesn't issue clearance, maybe you can't get a word in edge wise on frequency, how far do you take it?

A real world example I encountered with a student on a dual xc, we were going into a Class D right at closing time for the tower. Approach control warned us tower was closing in 5 minutes when they switched us. Tower told us to continue on final but didn't give us landing clearance. We were probably 1/4 mile final and were wondering how it was going to work when the clock on the GPS clicked over 1900 and the tower controller made his announcement tower closed use CTAF procedures, goodnight. Another 10 seconds we would have needed clearance or gone around.

Had that happen flying into PHHI in a C-182. Not only did they say G'day!, they also turned off all of the airport lighting while we were on a right base for RWY 6.

 

[Kritchlow]

You answered your own question. You need a clearance to land. You don't need a clearance to go around, to fly down final, to fly downwind, or to do anything else in the air. You must follow instructions, like "make left traffic," "extend your downwind," etc. All the rules that apply to flying apply.

I did 23 laps at a controlled field. I never received a single clearance other than "cleared for the option" once per loop. I received a single instruction, "make left traffic for runway nn left." That leaves a lot to pilot discretion, but it's also not permission to do anything you wouldn't otherwise be permitted to do like crashing into an aircraft on the runway.

My point is what good is it to “not land”, but fly a foot off the pavement and smack the truck on the runway? I was asking if the LACK of a landing clearance had a specific meaning, such as “do not cross the threshold”. Or at least what the controller might be expecting.

As I said a few times. for me it’s just a huge clue that something is is not kosher (such as vehicle on the runway).

 

[Larry in TN]

Perhaps I’m not explaining myself clearly.

Sometimes it helps to take a few steps back and look at the bigger picture.

 

[Lindberg]

My point is what good is it to “not land”, but fly a foot off the pavement and smack the truck on the runway? I was asking if the LACK of a landing clearance had a specific meaning, such as “do not cross the threshold”. Or at least what the controller might be expecting.

So you're asking if the absence of a landing clearance is equivalent to permission to act recklessly? There's no such thing as a landing clearance at a non-towered field. Does that mean it's OK to fly into a truck on the runway at a non-towered field? I am really trying to follow the logic of your question. But if your question wasn't answered by Larry's post, I really have no idea what you are asking.

You need a clearance to land at a towered airport. Not having a clearance means you may not land (emergencies notwithstanding). But the lack of a landing clearance is not a permission or prohibition on anything else you might or might not do (other than land).

And oh, BTW, a landing clearance isn't permission to smack the truck on the runway either. You're still the PIC and you're still responsible for where the aircraft goes and what it hits, even after you're cleared to land.