Cleared to land before runway is vacated ?
 

I hope I haven't missed something ;

Twice this week I've been cleared to land before the preceding aircraft has vacated the runway (Zurich and Munich if it matters). In both cases we could see the traffic and both cleared before we reached our DA.

Is this allowed ?

It is allowed.

ICAO Doc 4444, para 7.10.1 and 7.10.2

http://i.imgur.com/TWhzauq.png

Basically, you may be cleared to land even if the runway is engaged, provided that:

- all preceding arrivals have vacated the runway when you cross the threshold

- all preceding departures have either overflown the end of the runway or started a turn when you cross the threshold

I don't know current rules but in the UK one used to be able to say "After the landing XXX (type) cleared to land" and in that situation the #1 could be at least a certain distance down the runway and still on it when #2 landed.

Not "in the UK" as such - only at specific aerodromes!

2 s

I may be wrong but I believe at busier airports in the USA, it's SOP to do this, eg 'cleared to land number X'.

Cleared to land going into CDG at about 7 miles out with one a few miles ahead and another on the runway about to clear. Was a little perplexing the first time it was heard.........

Happens all the time in the States, even in poor weather at night...

Post large flypast over London, returned to Honington where I was told "cleared land, 10 on"

As a Cadet at Manch in the '70s, I was gven a sound ticking off for including the word "cleared" in a Land After. The argument was that it was at the pilot's discretion whether or not to land on a runway not immediately empty and if it had all ended in a pile of smoking aluminium, I (and very importantly, my Mentor) would have been implicated by that word "cleared".

I didn't argue.

GBZ,

As you say "Land After" is at the pilot's discretion.

Strange that at FISO airfields we can say "Take-off at our discretion" or "Land at your discretion", but we cannot use the discretionary phrase "Land After".

I totally agree. There are times when it would be useful to allow this in order to avoid an unnecessary go-around, however when I suggested this to ATSD, their reaction was ' if it gets to that stage, maybe you should be providing ATC rather than FISO'!
So I didn't pursue it.

As mebur_verce says, providing the states in question permit 7.10.2 Reduced Runway Separation, then it's perfectly allowable to receive a straight 'cleared to land' with an occupied runway, without the cop out of the the UK's 'Land After', which nobody outside of UK based pilots seem to understand, and come to that neither do many UK based pilots!

Another CFI:A glance at Rule 14 of the in CAP393 may take the strangeness away.

14 Landing and take-off

(2) Subject to paragraph (5), a flying machine or glider shall not land on a runway at an aerodrome if there are other aircraft on the runway.

(4) Subject to paragraph (5) a flying machine shall move clear of the landing area as soon as it is possible to do so after landing.
(5) Paragraphs (2) and (4) shall not apply if the air traffic control unit at the aerodrome otherwise authorises the flying machine or glider.