Aiming for the numbers

[Pilot DAR]

Okay, it's cool to aim for the numbers and kiss it on right where you planned, graceful and short... well done! And well done to the fellow in the nice newish looking PA-18 type in front of me today. I was coming to mid downwind, as I watched a really nicely executed landing. It was only he and I in the pattern, and we were both on the radio, so zero conflict risk. So, he's down and slowed to a walking pace, and I'm coming to the base turn, so I stretch it out a little... Mine is a shoulder wing plane, so I loose my view of him on extended downwind, but he must be well down to clear at the end (no mid length taxiway exit). So I turn base, and he comes into view - still puttering along the runway. I call my base turn, no reaction. So I start thinking that a final turn is going to be too soon. My circuit speed is hardly faster than his, so everything should fit, but it's not, it's getting backed up. So I listen and look around, no traffic. So I orbit my base to final turn.... Each time around, assessing his progress - it is only a 2300 foot long runway! On my third orbit, I figured I could make it fit, without an overshoot, so I called turning final. I flew a mile mile long final, during which I hear him on the radio (as now, he's finally cleared, and is taxiing back, so he can see me), and he says: "Wow, you're high!". Surprised, I replied: " 'Just waiting around up here, in case I needed to overshoot...". I landed happily, and rolled out to the end to clear, as he was still taxiing in.

So, fellow pilots, if you know that someone is behind you, try to keep your runway time brief. If you can, maybe not land right on the numbers, if you think you'd like to/have to taxi the entire runway length at a walking pace. Or... Just let the pilot behind you know that you need to tie up the runway, and as long as I'm not compelled to land, I could fly another circuit. It's a quiet airport, so no big deal. But, planning your runway use can become pretty important at a bigger or busier airport. Certainly, putting your PA-18 on the numbers on a large busy runway is not going to entitle you to roll out the length of the runway. While flying a Caravan at Ottawa two weeks ago, I had 10,000 feet or so of runway, and my destination on the airport was off the far end of that runway. I did tell the tower that I would land long, and keep the speed up, and they were fine with that. For my last landing of the day, they requested minimum 150 knots on final, I complied with no problem. Decelerating over the runway was not a problem, and overshoot if I muff it. Tidy touchdown, cleared as directed.

It's just traffic courtesy.... (Thanks for letting me vent a little!)

[MrAverage]

Just for comparison and clarity for any Brits reading your post (that is in no way criticising your actions whatsoever), in the UK, orbits anywhere inside an ATZ are a big no no, unless the airfield has full ATC and then, only when instructed or approved by the tower controller and also only on the downwind leg turning away from the airfield. There was a fatal accident some years ago at Southend when a student was instructed to orbit on final and spun in...................

[chevvron]

Just for comparison and clarity for any Brits reading your post (that is in no way criticising your actions whatsoever), in the UK, orbits anywhere inside an ATZ are a big no no, unless the airfield has full ATC and then, only when instructed or approved by the tower controller and also only on the downwind leg turning away from the airfield. There was a fatal accident some years ago at Southend when a student was instructed to orbit on final and spun in...................
Each to their own (different airfields need different actions) but I disagree; working as a FISO I've known pilots to voluntarily orbit for spacing; of course I cannot instruct them to do so but if the pilot decides that's what is needed to maintain spacing I can't stop them.
Of course when I was an ATCO I frequently instructed pilots of light VFR traffic to orbit if there was IFR jet traffic 'inside 4' giving them direction of turn too.
Once at Farnborough with its 1800m LDA I had 2 light aircraft landing and I simply instructed the first one to aim to touch down at the intersection with the north/south runway and the second to aim for the numbers; unconventional I know but having worked a similar system at several PFA Rallys I was positive it was 'safe'.
NB: CAP 493 (Manual of Air Traffic Services) covers this at Section 1, Chapter 1, para 1.2, second sentence. (which in my opinion is too rarely invoked by controllers nowadays).
A similar proviso is included in CAP 797 (Flight Information Service Officer Manual).

[Kemble Pitts]

Good call Pilot DAR.

I'd call it 'airmanship', or lack there-of.
Without going into a rant it is apparent on lots of UK aerodromes too. How often do you see pilots pulling their aircraft out of the hangar and then going into the club-house for a 30 minute chat or briefing, leaving the aircraft in the way of everybody, or leaving the aircraft at the fuel pumps, or starting the aircraft tail-on to the open hangar doors.

I could go on...

I don't think it is usually deliberate but simply reflects lack of thought, lack of airmanship training when they were learning to fly.

Be considerate and aware of the needs of others; not a bad motto for life really.

[double_barrel]

I'm always acutely aware of the need to vacate the runway in our very busy, full ATC, environment. Sometimes after landing, ATC does not have a spare second to talk to me and I am left wondering what to do. I have in the past taken an apparently vacant taxiway without being asked and then stopped past the hold-short line waiting for instructions. No-one complained, but I don't know if that was the right thing to do; I certainly don't want to stop on the runway. A couple of times, after missing the 1st exit I have found myself hesitating at the intersection with the crossing runway, obviously I cannot backtrack on that without permission, but it's a much faster way to get clear, than trundling another 2500' to the last taxiway, so I have paused. So far they have always told me to backtrack. I suppose if they didn't I would have no choice but to taxi as fast as possible all the way to the end.

[TheOddOne]

I'm with Mr. Average. I recall the Southend accident very well, although the circumstances (fully ATC tower, a/c on final, student 1st solo etc) are a little different, but the principals are the same.
At our air/ground (sometimes no ground at all) airfield we teach 'extend downwind leg' or 'go around at circuit height/altitude'. NEVER orbit ANYWHERE in the circuit. You might meet someone coming the other way!
I learned to fly at Denham and later did my FI course there. It was a very strict policy for the baulked landing of 'go around at circuit altitude'. There was the 'option' of an early crosswind turn provided there was no traffic already downwind.
Interesting to watch the arrivals on you tube at Oshkosh, where there are different coloured spots down the runway. However, I don't think anyone would be amused if you chose to do an orbit on final. In fact, I think the instruction is to go-around and go back to the beginning of the procedure.

Going back to Pilot DAR's main point...
How sure were you of the experience of the pilot who was in your way? I'd also say it's better if you're not completely sure to land with space to spare, rather than go off the end. There's another you tube posting form a guy called Juan Browns featuring a Cirrus that landed long, went off the end and slightly bent the aircraft (including shock loading the engine). Slightly worse, I'd say, than slightly inconveniencing another aircraft behind you by landing early and strolling down the runway.

At the other end of the scale, I used to work at the World's busiest single-runway airport. We had a system that measured runway occupancy times to the nearest second. Any operator/airline that spent more runway occupancy time than was considered normal was 'written to'. We spent millions on building fast turnoffs that could be safely taken at 60kt and featured countdown marks and lights (RETILS) to encourage proper planning of runway exit. The worst anyone can do is to brake hard for an early exit, then miss it and dawdle down to the next one.

TOO

[Pilot DAR]

I have in the past taken an apparently vacant taxiway without being asked and then stopped past the hold-short line waiting for instructions.

Probably the best thing to do, though being in the rhythm of the airport is good too. It is unlikely that you would ever be criticized for vacating the runway safely at the first opportunity - unless... you have been given a specific instruction to clear, or, for those airports which you could clear to either side, you clear to the wrong side, the then ask to cross the active runway again. Never backtrack on a runway without permission from the tower, but if they ask/offer, it's obviously okay, get it done without delay.

in the UK, orbits anywhere inside an ATZ are a big no no, unless the airfield has full ATC and then, only when instructed or approved by the tower controller and also only on the downwind leg turning away from the airfield.

Again, knowing the rules. The only reason I was content to orbit as I described, was that I was certain that I was the only airplane in the circuit, and had excellent visibility. In hindsight, had I thought that three orbits would have been needed, I should have just flown another circuit. A very small reason that I chose to orbit, rather than announce on the radio, another circuit, is that I, and my plane, are very well known at that airport, and if the people listening on the radio heard that I had chosen to overshoot because of an airplane which had not cleared, it reflects poorly on that pilot. A longer interval between my base and final calls would be less apparent on the radio. In hind sight, during my aforementioned Caravan flying in Ottawa a few weeks back, I was once asked to orbit for spacing as I intercepted the localizer, though I was miles back from the airport.

There was a fatal accident some years ago at Southend when a student was instructed to orbit on final and spun in...................

Hmmm, that's somewhat a different consideration. I expect that anyone released to solo flying should be able to orbit safely, there could be many reasons to orbit, certainly including checking your position relative to features on the ground [when lost] during a cross country. Yes, I can imagine that accident occurring, but being asked to, or choosing to, orbit, should not be a cause for a stall spin. But... another good reason to not delay traffic behind you! Can you imagine being the pilot who caused that fatal orbit to be required?!

[Pilot DAR]

How sure were you of the experience of the pilot who was in your way? I'd also say it's better if you're not completely sure to land with space to spare, rather than go off the end.

Certainly, if in doubt, land with lots of runway ahead to spare, I have no problem with that. What caught my attention, was that knowing I was behind him in the circuit, he landed very well, and short, and then lingered on the runway at a walking pace for it's full remaining length (1500' plus). A faster taxi was safely possible, or, he's entitled to call me on the radio, saying he'll be delayed on the runway. If I have time to complete my downwind, extend it a little, fly base, and orbit three times on my turn to final, he took unusually long to taxi 1500 feet!

This is totally a courtesy discussion. I can certainly overshoot and refly the circuit, and probably should have in this case, but its a matter of my having information to know that I should expect to!

[Jan Olieslagers]

Isn't the basic principle (sic! Mr. TOO!) to use all available runway, because one never knows what happens next? Of course it is more important on take-off than on landing, but still it is what I expect from everybody. If I were to see a plane hovering over a good part of the runway instead of landing as short as possible, I'd be at red alert immediately.

Then again it will depend on the type or category of plane. My 450 kg ultralight can be pushed into the grass at short notice, if I hear someone in distress coming in behind me. Even if a Caravan is meant to be a bushplane, it might appreciate more considerate handling.

And to contradict myself, here is a little story of how I looked like a bit of a fool: flying this modest 80 HP 450 kg two-seater, I was, as stated, trained to always use every inch of runway available. On those runways carrying numbers, it was and is always a fun exercise to touch down before them! Then one day our federation had managed an invitation to use the long hard runway at EBFN Koksijde Airbase, to train power-fail landings with the engine really switched off, from downwind. On arrival I didn't think beyond the length of my nose, as we say here, and landed spot on the big numbers on that big runway - which left me with close on 2 km of taxiing... I did consider taking off again but that would have been even more ridiculous, I thought. I'll remember this story in a couple of months, when we have a similar practice week-end at EBBE Beauvechain - blessed be our military!

[Jim59]

At a commercial airport why would you land on the numbers when commercial aircraft land in the marked touchdown zone further up the runway?

Landing at a commercial airport in a Robin, with jet traffic behind, I asked the tower which exit whilst on long final (there were only two), he said second so I aimed to touch down nearly 3/4 of the way along the 5500' runway so I was at taxi speed well before the exit with about 1000' left 'in case' but minimised my runway occupancy time to a sensible amount. Seemed reasonable to me.

[DeeCee]

In the UK it is not uncommon for an orbit in the circuit. I am a little surprised by the comments above. OF COURSE take extreme care but if it aids spacing then I can't see what's wrong as long as you make your intentions very clear. I have also been instructed by ATC on occasions. Please leave the Southend incident out of this. We all know it shouldn't have happened and was very unfortunate.

Pilot DAR. Thank you for your very informative posts and sorry for the thread drift. Now I'm retired I can't afford to fly very much but have good memories. Keep it going!

[MrAverage]

DeeCee

The point is, it's ok at a full ATC airfield, but not at one with AFIS or air/ground, because they are not permitted to give instructions to aircraft in the air. To do so at an airfield in the UK (at least one with an ATZ = busy) is an airmanship problem and definitely not good TEM. We had a visitor just last weekend who did one after starting a base turn, he created havoc but the FISOs were pretty helpless due to their restrictions.

[Sam Rutherford]

If I know which exit I'll be taking, I'll land long or short as required to be at the right speed to take it in the flow of things - long taxis (slow or fast) are better avoided when possible.

[Jan Olieslagers]

as long as you make your intentions very clear And how are you going to make absolutely sure, knowing there may always be NORDO planes around? Being instructed by ATC is the only possible justification.

[Sam Rutherford]

Hi Jan,

I had to look that up!

Cheers, Sam.

[Maoraigh1]

For those who say to always land on the numbers: what would you do at a "no runways" airfield? (I don't know if any are still left, but Solas beach would be similar.)
(Barra beach has marked runways.)
When I learned to fly, no radio, no tower lights, at Thruxton in 1964, the Jackeroos landed on the grass, according to the Signals T, but not on a runway. Land to the right of the preceeding aircraft, until near the hard runway, then a big jump to the left edge. A busy training airfield, with visiting traffic.

[Jan Olieslagers]

At a "no runways" aerodrome, I should guess there are no numbers to land on, either... :) So I would land on the most likely spot - if really determined to trust such an unlikely place... Then again, if there still were a landing T in these times, I'd be happy to take guidance from it... As I understand things, my little queer BE country is one of the last to still impose them. As uncouth as the country may be, though, it hasn't had "no runways" fields for the last fifty years or so. I did still have to study them though, and their rules, for my "air law" exams, perhaps 15 years ago.

BTW I did some research into the Jackeroo you mentioned, to little avail. Could it be you meant a Thruxton Jackaroo?

[Maoraigh1]

Thanks for the spelling correction Jan. You are correct.

[Russell Gulch]

Hi Jan,
I had to look that up!
Cheers, Sam.
What did you have to look up, Sam: NORDO (?) Just asking.

This link is the UK AAIB report into the fatal accident at Southend, (referred to above by Mr Average), for non UK readers.
(the kid was just 16 years old, with 15 hrs total time). It is an indictment of failing an inexperienced youngster.
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/542304d140f0b61342000ba3/Cessna_F150L__G-BABB_07-07.pdf
Since then the "Student" prefix has been added to call signs in the UK.

Russ

[Jan Olieslagers]

What did you have to look up

It is not impossible this was a gentle tongue-in-cheek poke at my repeated complaints about non-explained codes, acronyms, abbreviations, and then applying one myself. If it were, I would sadly have to admit a hit, smilingly though. So here goes, for the uninitiated: NORDO is aviators' short for "No Radio".

And while we're at it, there's a surprising number of PPL'ers who take the presence and active use of radio as self-evident - while in truth it is only mandatory in controlled airspace, and at certain fields who publish the requirement, in France for example.

[Pilot DAR]

Well... we're drifting the thread, but... When I learned to fly, radios were less common in GA planes. Most of the planes I started flying did not have a radio at all, or if they did, it was close to useless, so one did not plan to need it. NORDO was the norm. We would never assume that another airplane heard us in the circuit, if we were broadcasting. I have flown a number of 1000 plus mile trips, in NORDO planes, with no difficulty, just avoid the occasional controlled airspace. My most recent trip to the arctic a few years back could have been NORDO if it needed to be, though I did use the radio for a little night flying. When flying floats in Canada, there are few places to go into which even have ground bases radio. The most use of a radio in your plane would be to talk to a buddy.

While we're here; RONLY is "receive only". I have never flown a plane which could receive but not transmit, though the odd time, your mic doesn't work, and you're technically RONLY, though I wouldn't file that way, it sounds silly!

[double_barrel]

While we're here; RONLY is "receive only". I have never flown a plane which could receive but not transmit, though the odd time, your mic doesn't work, and you're technically RONLY, though I wouldn't file that way, it sounds silly!

In my experience in boats, that is a fairly common failure mode. Since transmit pulls many times the current of receive, it happens that a dodgy power connection allows the radio to receive, but as soon as you press the PTT the whole thing cuts out. And I have seen it in aviation handhelds with dodgy batteries.

[Jan Olieslagers]

It has certainly been seen in yours truly, the day he forgot to swing the microphone before his lips :( And decided to take off nonetheless, consciously NORDO, or more exactly RONLY; and occasionally clicking the Tx button to confirm receipt of messages. All that worked very very well.

[Maoraigh1]

Night circuits, raining, in a DR1050, with nav lights, beacon, and, on final, landing light, the battery was losing charge. When I reported downwind, I was told " Report final".
The Edo-Air had a switch, biassed to "transmit", which was held on "receive" when the transmit button was not pushed. It remained on "Transmit".
After several "Final, request touch and go" calls were unanswered, I started saying " Final, full stop, transmitting blind". The landing light was useless, and I landed, cleared runway, and taxied to hangar, reporting my position "blind".
When I phoned the Tower, they'd heard all my transmissions, and had given me a "green", which I didn't see, concentrating on landing. In the circumstance of "Report final, number one", ATC approved my decision to land and clear runway.

[Piper.Classique]

I once had an interesting radio problem in Poland which meant husband and me flying home to France NORDO.
The radio would transmit and receive most of the time on a ground test, maybe even just after takeoff, but at some point in the flight would decide to only receive. Usually it would work again after landing. At that time we didn't have a transponder or working handheld, so when we and a team of Polish engineers failed to diagnose the problem decided to return home at a weekend, which reduced the amount of controlled airspace in our path. In a cub it's a two day trip even if the weather is perfect, so we planned to nightstop at the German border on Friday night, then with reasonable luck get home on Saturday. As no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy, that didn't quite happen. Bautzen were happy to take us for a fuel stop, and file flight plan by phone as far as the French border, stopping at a small airfield that had a campsite. So we wove a path between any zones that required radio contact, duly fell down on the western side of Germany, and set up the tent. Nice sunny day, forecast same again until early evening next day. Saturday morning dawned foggy. Hmmm. Phone Nancy Essey and explain our problem, and that was fine, just phone when leaving, but the front is now expected late afternoon. OK, we can do that as long as the fog clears in time. Which it did, so file by phone and off across thé endless pine forests from the border, crossing into France somewhere or other. Flat terrain, and a flat looking sky. Until the flat sky threw a lot of water onto our not entirely leak proof aircraft. By now we are getting a little concerned, having passed our diversion airfields with another forty minutes or so to run. Ok, lots of nice big fields if necessary, and if the cloudbase got much lower it might become an option. Obviously we were going to be later than we thought, as now the traffic on the minor roads was going faster than we were. Also the front had got a bit of a move on, and met us half way. Still plenty of fuel and daylight, which was good. Listen out on airfield frequency, visual navigation in the still good visibility.
Just as I was starting to seriously consider the possible merits of a field landing next to a pub, Nancy info call us. They would like one click for yes, two for no...
That we can do, as carrier wave was working. We were actually pretty well on track, surprising really considering the wind which bore no relation at all to the forecast. And no wé didn't have a GPS, this was back in the dark ages when they cost very serious money. So three clicks every time we wanted a QDM, and they were turning on all the lights as bright as they would go.
Another good thing, as it was getting pretty dark five hours before sunset. The lightning in the distance was another clue that we should be landing ASAP.
After about ten years a runway appeared in front of us, cleared to land number one. Three bounces later we stopped, still on the runway, a good thing. Not my best ever landing, I admit. At least if I'd chosen a field I wouldn't have had an audience.
ah well. We were given taxi instructions that put us just outside a door to the admin buildings and invited to run, not walk, inside. Still got soaked.
By the time we had got an updated met briefing ( which used to happen face to face in an office, given by a human being) the cub had been pushed into a heated hangar next to a beech staggerwing . Improvement expected by Thursday, and would we like a lift to a hotel? Yes please. Do you have a train timetable for tomorrow, and how much do we owe you? Train timetable found, and you can pay when you collect. Next weekend with decent weather, which was three weeks later, we turned up in a club DR 400 and paid the staggering cost of about six euros for the DR 400 landing, plus whatever the fuel cost was to fill up the cub. Returned NORDO to Chauvigny with the cub, husband flying. I got back rather faster in the DR 400. The radio problem turned out to be some rubbed insulation in a wire in the rear stick that was shorting intermittently to the metal stick. The truly sad part of this rambling tale is that the retrieve was the longest flight that anyone did that year in the club aircraft.

[jmmoric]

Never thought about complaining about another pilot.... But then some of the airports I use only have one taxiway, and would require backtracking.... so it requires some attention to the preceding aircraft, and space/time as well.

As an ATCO though, I like circling VFR traffic on the downwind, especially if I need to keep them close to be able to swoop them in behind IFR traffic when holes occur. Circling on short final.... don't like instructing that, mostly because of the speed of the aircraft there (it's not illegal though).

[scifi]

I know what the OP is thinking, that you should not land on an occupied runway, but this hardly ever applies in the Gliding scenario.
Gliders run out of lift at times regulated by nature, and it could be that two or three gliders may need to land almost simultaneously. Fortunately most gliding fields are a big wide open space, so the first one lands, then the second lands to the right of him, and if there was a third, he would have to land long, over the top of the first two.
Then comes the problem that Gliders don't taxi, so they could be waiting for 10-15 minutes for the tow-crew to pull them back to the start location. If a fourth glider then needs to land, he then has to find a spot clear of the other three and the tow-crew, and the cables and winch.
.

[BillieBob]

Oh, for the good old days of "Land after"

[Piper.Classique]

Then comes the problem that Gliders don't taxi, so they could be waiting for 10-15 minutes for the tow-crew to pull them back to the start location. If a fourth glider then needs to land, he then has to find a spot clear of the other three and the tow-crew, and the cables and winch.
.
not to mention the tug.....
.

[cats_five]

Then comes the problem that Gliders don't taxi, so they could be waiting for 10-15 minutes for the tow-crew to pull them back to the start location. If a fourth glider then needs to land, he then has to find a spot clear of the other three and the tow-crew, and the cables and winch.
.
not to mention the tug.....
.

I had to land one time among a dozen other gliders... Not where the winch was though, and the tug wasn't out. A Junior is a great glider for short landings :)

[Jan Olieslagers]

We all know that gliders and their pilots have an exemption from most laws - those of physics included... [[ ducks for cover ]]

[Jim59]

We all know that gliders and their pilots have an exemption from most laws - those of physics included... [[ ducks for cover ]]

But not the one on landing on an occupied runway without ATC permission. I raised it with the CAA once - pointing out that gliders don't have the option of going around in most cases and that compliance could result in riskier off airfield landings - but was firmly told there was no exemption and they would not consider one.

It's not such a big issue at gliding sites with large areas of grass and no marked runways - you cannot be guilty of landing on an occupied runway if there isn't one - in that case one should land keeping the other gliders on the left (in theory). With actual runways it can be a real issue and site rules may require you to land long enough to roll to the end so as to leave room for other gliders behind you. If the winch is parked at the upwind end of the runway it requires some precision to have enough energy reach the end of the runway but not overshoot into the winch. Thus violating one of the three most useless things in aviation rules - runway behind you.

If caught I would state 'correctly' that I had violated because it was an emergency. However, at one time (I don't know if it still applies) there was a requirement to notify the CAA in writing if you broke a rule for such a reason, which I don't - so they could get me anyway.