Runway... Closed?

flyingcheesehead

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
24,252
Location
UQACY, WI
Display Name

Display name:
iMooniac
So, let's say, hypothetically, that you go to an airport with two runways. One has been NOTAMed closed with personnel and equipment working adjacent to it.

You get to the airport, the winds are howling straight down the closed runway, there are no yellow X's or any other indication that the runway is closed, and there are no personnel or equipment at all. You inspect the runway (taxiing, walking, driving a ground pounder, doesn't matter) and find it to be in suitable shape.

Do you use that runway for takeoff? Is it truly illegal if the yellow X's aren't present?
 
It's never illegal if airport management allows you permission.
 
> Do you use that runway for takeoff? Is it truly illegal if the yellow X's aren't present?

iamnal - No, I don't use the runway. It's been closed by NOTAM.
 
NOTAMs trump everything but a declared emergency, particularly when you face an administrative law judge.
 
i agree w/ ken. notams closing the runway means... THE RUNWAY'S CLOSED! Xes or not Xes.
 
Use the Henning Maneuver. Land into the wind on the x-wind runway if it is truly blowing that hard. :D
 
Henning has it right.

If you can get the okay from the airport manager, you can use the runway.

He/she trumps the NOTAM.

You can even take off or land on a taxiway.
 
Is there a parallel taxiway? Is there a NOTAM that the taxiway is closed? No. I’m not aware of any regulation that prevents me from departing from the taxiway. Now insurance requirements; that’s another story.
 
Henning has it right.

If you can get the okay from the airport manager, you can use the runway.

He/she trumps the NOTAM.

You can even take off or land on a taxiway.
True. I had to go to an airport a few times this summer where the runway was periodically NOTAMed closed from 0800 to 1800 local for crack sealing. Sometimes it would rain and they couldn't do the crack sealing so the manager opened the runway even though the NOTAM was still in the system. As far as taking off from the taxiway, I saw all sorts of small airplanes use it as well as a Pilatus PC-12 and King Air 90...
 
When I can, I NOTAM the runway closed except by prior permission (15 min) and give the CTAF and phone number. If a short interruption isn't too great an imposition on the contractor, we get the runway clear and accommodate the plane. For some kinds of work, there is only a conflict for a small portion of the day. We just can't predict that well when it is going to be.
 
Unless it has x's at the ends it's fair game. You could have been in the air before the NOTAM was published. If there is equipment on the runway with out X's I think they are in more trouble than you. Of course if you hit something will it matter?

Dan
 
You could have been in the air before the NOTAM was published.
Yet another reason for VFR flight following. I've diverted a couple of times when under flilght following, and pretty much tthe first thing ATC did was read me the NOTAMS for the airport.

Once upon a time, while I was a paramedic, I had to briefly close a runway so I could get an ambulance across it. I looked at the windsock, saw which direction would be in use, and had a police car park on the numbers with his lights running. It worked well enough: nobody hit us as we were working.
 
Yet another reason for VFR flight following. I've diverted a couple of times when under flilght following, and pretty much tthe first thing ATC did was read me the NOTAMS for the airport.

Once upon a time, while I was a paramedic, I had to briefly close a runway so I could get an ambulance across it. I looked at the windsock, saw which direction would be in use, and had a police car park on the numbers with his lights running. It worked well enough: nobody hit us as we were working.

Since only the airport's manager or someone he designates can officially close a runway (or open it, or input a NOTAM to the FAA), you didn't actually close the runway. Had there been an incident with an aircraft, you and the cop would have been toast as far as the FAA is concerned.
 
Since only the airport's manager or someone he designates can officially close a runway (or open it, or input a NOTAM to the FAA), you didn't actually close the runway. Had there been an incident with an aircraft, you and the cop would have been toast as far as the FAA is concerned.
Any pilot who lands on a blocked runway deserves what he gets. At the time, my concern was for my patient and my crew. There was no other way to get him out of where he was safely, and we didn't have time to wait for the airport manager to get a NOTAM in the system (and which would have only been in effect for a short time). I saw no alternative, and did what I needed to to resolve the situation expeditiously and safely.
 
Once upon a time, while I was a paramedic, I had to briefly close a runway so I could get an ambulance across it. I looked at the windsock, saw which direction would be in use, and had a police car park on the numbers with his lights running. It worked well enough: nobody hit us as we were working.

Why would a runway need to be "closed" to drive an ambulance across it?
 
Any pilot who lands on a blocked runway deserves what he gets. At the time, my concern was for my patient and my crew. There was no other way to get him out of where he was safely, and we didn't have time to wait for the airport manager to get a NOTAM in the system (and which would have only been in effect for a short time). I saw no alternative, and did what I needed to to resolve the situation expeditiously and safely.

Why did you feel the runway needed to be blocked?
 
Why did you feel the runway needed to be blocked?
Because we were working right beside it to stabilize a downed skydiver before loading him up and transporting him, and because there was no other place nearby to put the ambulance (the ground was too soft).
 
Any pilot who lands on a blocked runway deserves what he gets. At the time, my concern was for my patient and my crew. There was no other way to get him out of where he was safely, and we didn't have time to wait for the airport manager to get a NOTAM in the system (and which would have only been in effect for a short time). I saw no alternative, and did what I needed to to resolve the situation expeditiously and safely.

Jay,

My point was only that the runway wasn't actually 'closed', only, as you say, 'blocked'.
 
Henning has it right.

If you can get the okay from the airport manager, you can use the runway.

He/she trumps the NOTAM.

You can even take off or land on a taxiway.

It's funny how many "problems" have simple solutions. A quick call on the radio usually gets me permission to land on taxiways or ramps if the conditions call for it. "Hey, y'all mind if I land on that taxiway that's lined up with this 50kt wind?" "All yours".
 
Because we were working right beside it to stabilize a downed skydiver before loading him up and transporting him, and because there was no other place nearby to put the ambulance (the ground was too soft).

The ambulance was on the runway?
 
Because we were working right beside it to stabilize a downed skydiver before loading him up and transporting him, and because there was no other place nearby to put the ambulance (the ground was too soft).
Sounds like you and the cop made the best decision you could under the circumstances. I hope you also had someone on the UNICOM to tell folks with radios what was happening. In any event, if looking to see the landing surface is clear before landing on it isn't an FAR, it ought to be, and if not, I'm sure 91.13 deal with anyone silly enough to land (or attempt to land) on a runway full of emergecy vehicles with their lights on.
 
The ambulance was on the runway?
Yes, it was. As I said, there was no other good place to put it.

Sounds like you and the cop made the best decision you could under the circumstances.
Exactly. I didn't like the idea much, but the alternatives were worse, both for the emergency personnel and the patient.

I hope you also had someone on the UNICOM to tell folks with radios what was happening.
I don't know if the airport manager did that or not; I told him I was going to close the runway, and he said I wasn't going to do that. He left after I told the cop to go park on the numbers. Interestingly enough, he was (or had been; I'm not sure of the sequence of events any more) also a lieutenant in the same police department. By policy, the senior paramedic on a scene in that city had overall command of all responding emergency personnel; that senior paramedic was me.

In any event, if looking to see the landing surface is clear before landing on it isn't an FAR, it ought to be, and if not, I'm sure 91.13 deal with anyone silly enough to land (or attempt to land) on a runway full of emergecy vehicles with their lights on.
Exactly. I can't think of a pilot who'd land on a runway without looking at it, or at the very least at the numbers, before committing to landing. I'd had my ticket for a few years by that time, so I knew how things worked from both the flying and EMS sides of the story.
 
You can even take off or land on a taxiway.

we did this for quite some time while they were resurfacing our only good runway a few years ago....my main concern was what the insurance co would have to say about it.
 
Unless it has x's at the ends it's fair game. You could have been in the air before the NOTAM was published. If there is equipment on the runway with out X's I think they are in more trouble than you. Of course if you hit something will it matter?

Dan

When it is NOTAM'ed closed, it has Xs at the end. If it is CLOSED as in "don't even think about it", the Xs are on the pavement. If it is NOTAMed "Closed except by prior permission", the Xs are in the grass off of the end of the pavement.
 
When it is NOTAM'ed closed, it has Xs at the end. If it is CLOSED as in "don't even think about it", the Xs are on the pavement. If it is NOTAMed "Closed except by prior permission", the Xs are in the grass off of the end of the pavement.

If you have an airport manager like ours that does not know squat, they will NOTAM it closed but not put any X's out.

Dan
 
Here's another interesting aspect of this discussion, from an Aero-News story:

The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating two runway incursion incidents and an aircraft separation incident, all of which occurred in the last two days.

In the first runway incursion incident, <snip>

In the second runway incursion incident, a pilot of a general aviation aircraft landed on a closed runway at the Reading Regional Airport/Carl A. Spaatz Field, in Reading, PA. On August 27, 2008, at about 4:25 pm Eastern Daylight Time, a Cessna 172 landed on runway 18 -- which was closed -- after receiving a clearance to land on the closed runway by the tower controller. The runway had been closed for approximately four weeks due to construction activity. The incident occurred during day with 10 miles visibility.

So, runway is closed, controller CLEARS the pilot to land on the closed runway. Who gets in trouble? Let's assume there was no construction equipment on the runway, as this was a daytime landing and we'll presume the pilot had his eyes open.

If your preflight included NOTAMS indicating that runway 18 was closed, then you get there and the controller clears you to land on it, would you refuse the clearance??
 
So, runway is closed, controller CLEARS the pilot to land on the closed runway. Who gets in trouble? Let's assume there was no construction equipment on the runway, as this was a daytime landing and we'll presume the pilot had his eyes open.
The controller is in trouble plenty.
If your preflight included NOTAMS indicating that runway 18 was closed, then you get there and the controller clears you to land on it, would you refuse the clearance??
I'd more likely question it -- "Hey, Tower, has that runway reopened since the NOTAM this morning?"
 
It's funny how many "problems" have simple solutions. A quick call on the radio usually gets me permission to land on taxiways or ramps if the conditions call for it. "Hey, y'all mind if I land on that taxiway that's lined up with this 50kt wind?" "All yours".
I never thought of landing on a taxiway....except perhaps in a Sioux City "You're going to be picky and make it a runway?" sort of an emergency. It just goes back to the "How would this sound to the NTSB if I screw it up?" adage I was taught by a very wise old pilot.
 
I never thought of landing on a taxiway....except perhaps in a Sioux City "You're going to be picky and make it a runway?" sort of an emergency. It just goes back to the "How would this sound to the NTSB if I screw it up?" adage I was taught by a very wise old pilot.

One man's taxiway is another's runway. Leaders in MN is no wider and more than likely narrower than most taxiways.

At MSP I think I could land on the ramp.:rofl:

Dan
 
I never thought of landing on a taxiway....except perhaps in a Sioux City "You're going to be picky and make it a runway?" sort of an emergency. It just goes back to the "How would this sound to the NTSB if I screw it up?" adage I was taught by a very wise old pilot.

Well, it'd be the same question as if you screwed up that 50 knot crosswind landing, so you might as well pick the option that gives you the greatest chance of success and forget what anyone might think about it after the fact.
 
So, let's say, hypothetically, that you go to an airport with two runways. One has been NOTAMed closed with personnel and equipment working adjacent to it.

You get to the airport, the winds are howling straight down the closed runway, there are no yellow X's or any other indication that the runway is closed, and there are no personnel or equipment at all. You inspect the runway (taxiing, walking, driving a ground pounder, doesn't matter) and find it to be in suitable shape.

Do you use that runway for takeoff? Is it truly illegal if the yellow X's aren't present?
This happened to me once at Rio Vista Airport in California (O88). Before leaving I noticed the long runway was NOTAMed closed. Once we got there, the wind was like 20 knows RIGHT DOWN the closed runway, which did not look closed at all. The other runway was half as long, and perpendicular. It was a great opportunity to brush up on cross wind techniques, but damn. As we were leaving the pattern for home, I remember hearing another plane announce on the CTAF that they are departing from the longer "closed" runway. If I really felt like landing in that cross wind would have affected safety, I would have said "screw it" and went ahead and landed on the longer runway after doing an low-pass inspection or two.
 
This happened to me once at Rio Vista Airport in California (O88). Before leaving I noticed the long runway was NOTAMed closed. Once we got there, the wind was like 20 knows RIGHT DOWN the closed runway, which did not look closed at all. The other runway was half as long, and perpendicular. It was a great opportunity to brush up on cross wind techniques, but damn. As we were leaving the pattern for home, I remember hearing another plane announce on the CTAF that they are departing from the longer "closed" runway. If I really felt like landing in that cross wind would have affected safety, I would have said "screw it" and went ahead and landed on the longer runway after doing an low-pass inspection or two.

Baring any markings, workers, or equipment I'd probably opt for the longer NOTAM'd runway if I felt the cross runway was risky. I could be wrong but IMO the NOTAM simply warns you that the runway might be closed. If it is actually closed there should be markings to that effect. And excepting an emergency, I would not land on a runway that was marked closed (or one that had people working on it that i could see) whether or not it was NOTAM'd closed. That said I actually did land on a runway that was being worked on once. The workers and equipment were at the far end and I didn't seem them until I was already on the ground (there were no 'X's anywhere) and AFaIK there weren't any NOTAMs either, the county public works department simply decided that it would be a good idea to use some left over asphalt to patch the runway one day.
 
One man's taxiway is another's runway. Leaders in MN is no wider and more than likely narrower than most taxiways.

At MSP I think I could land on the ramp.:rofl:

Dan

At MSP you could probably land on the ROOF. And the "runway" at Leaders is plenty wide, it's just mostly not paved. The pavement is about 15 ft wide and fairly short as well compared to the rest.
 
Back
Top