What constitutes a "Clear Runway"

[fireflybob]

In the UK at an aerodrome with NO Air Traffic Control Unit the Rules of the Air does not permit one to land unless the runway is "clear".

Obviously common sense says that if you can see that the runway is clear (and likely to remain so) and there is no other airmanship reason which precludes a safe landing then it is safe to continue and land.

However, if an aircraft (or part of it!) is encroaching on the holding point line is the runway technically "clear"?

Thanks for any input.

[Mark 1]

I would interpret Rule 17 to mean that all other aircraft are beyond the holding points, as the purpose of holding points is to give a safe separation from the runway. I never call "runway vacated" until well clear or beyond the hold.

When vacating onto an intersecting runway, or "across the grass" it ought to be an equivalent distance. I guess it would be down to the court to decide.

At unlicensed fields it must really come down to good airmanship.

[StrateandLevel]

It raises an interesting question at those unliscensed aerodromes where other activities take place; for example rally cars on part of what was once a longer runway.

The question also arrises as to whether Rule 17 applies at unliscensed aerodromes or just at licensed aerodromes where runways are clearly defined.

[Julian]

S&L,

Have exactly that at an airfield I use, except its Ferraris!
Runway is apprently owned by 3 different orgnanisations.

[fireflybob]

Thanks for all the replies.

From a legal point of view, here is my take on this:-

Rule 17 (7) (b) states:-

A flying machine or glider may not land on a runway at an aerodrome if the runway is not clear of other aircraft unless, in the case of an aerodrome having an ATCU, that unit otherwise authorises.

Rule 1 (1):-

"runway" means an area, whether or not paved, which is provided for the take-off or landing run of aircraft;

Runway dimensions are defined in the AIP, so if the runway is physically clear of "other aircraft" then one "may" land.

Now I am aware that Rule 43 (2) (a) "Markings for paved runways and taxiways" states...

two yellow broken lines and two continuous lines, as illustrated...., signify the holding position closest to the runway beyond which no part of a flying machine or vehicle shall project in the direction of the runway without permission from the ATCU..... .....where there is no ATCU at the aerodrome the markings signify the position closest to the runway beyond which no part of a flying machine or vehicle shall project in the direction of the runway when the flying machine or vehicle is required by virtue of Rule 37 (3) (a) of these Rules to give way to aircraft which are taking off from or landing on that runway.

End of legal epistle!

I am not advocating a campaign to land (or take off from) a runway where it is not safe to do so but, for example, in the case where I am landing at an aerodrome (with no ATCU) behind another aircraft and I can see that the preceding aircraft has physically cleared the runway (albeit but has yet to clear the holding point lines) then I see no (legal) reason why I should not proceed and land. Indeed to lend more weight to this it is highly probable at an aerodrome at an aerodrome with an ATCU that I would have received a "Land After" subject to the usual conditions, daylight etc.

[FormationFlyer]

I wish one pilot arriving at old buckenham sunday as we were all departing had read this.....despite no calls until 'final vis 2 on' he failed to go around - instead we got to 50' just 500m up the runway as he got to 20'. Now that is cutting it close - downright stupid - if we or the a/c before had performed an RTO he would have hit us - or would he have finally thought about it enough to go around - a real prat..

Interestingly....suppose the airfield is one such as upavon(?) where there are no designated runways (not even grass delinated ones)...how does one evalute 'clear' in this case?

Otherwise nice posting flyflybob!

[FlyingForFun]

FF,

Rule 17 (7):

(c) Where take-offs and landings are not confined to a runway:
(i) a flying machine or glider when landing shall leave clear on its left any aircraft which has landed or is already landing or about to take off;if such a flying machine or glider is about to turn it shall turn to the left after the commander of the aircraft has satisfied himself that such action will not interfere with other traffic movements;and
(ii) a flying machine about to take off shall take up position and manoeuvre in such a way as to leave clear on its left any aircraft which has already taken off or is about to take off.

FFF
-----------

[DFC]

The idea of marking the position of the holding point is to keep a safe distance between an aircraft at the holding point and the extremities of the largest aircraft that the aerodrome is planned to accomodate.

As an example if say, some time in the future, a large RAF base at Bedford was opened as a licensed airfield complete with full markings but no ATC.......the runway and holding points are capable for catering for very large aircraft indeed.

Thus, with regard to aircraft who have passed beyond the holding point while awaiting departure or aircraft who have yet to cross the holding line after landing, IMHO, provided that the landing surface is clear then it is up to the personal judgement of the pilot landing or taking off to decide taking into account at least the following factors:

1. With regard to the size of my aircraft....will the proximity of the aircraft and my ability to make a "near centerline arrival or departure" cause any danger.

2. With regard to the aircraft awaiting departure.....is it stationary? or is it moving further forward?....can I be sure that the pilot is aware (assume non radio) of my approach or is it simply a temporary pause in a process of lining up?

3. With the previous arriving aircraft having vacated the runway surface....are they continuing in the right direction or (as happened to me) have they simply ran off the edge and are about to re-appear back on again?

I could go on but like 99.99% of aviation it is judgement on the pilot's part that is required.

Formation Flyer,

judging by your statement, the landing pilot may have been operating just as safely as you;

1. The arriving pilot reported final "2 on"...only one aircraft at a time allowed on the runway...possible exemption for formation departure?

2. IMHO that arriving pilot judged it perfectly...unless their landing run passed under your aircraft as it climbed away

3. Radios are not required and landing aircraft have priority. Thus departing aircraft should not line up until they are ready to depart and should give way to aircraft on final approach. Thus twisting your argument slightly, would it not have been safer and more within the rules if you had waited at the hold for the aircraft ahead to depart safely and then having checked no aircraft on final, departed your self? Just an idea.....but I expect that if you had done so, you would have been required to hold for the landing aircraft?

Perhaps it is a bit of the old Pot and Kettle argument? :)

IMHO, too much reliance is given to radio and not enough to simple lookout and common sense.

Regards,

DFC