Intersection departures
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: QLD
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think an intersection is perfectly safe. In the Torres Strait we Cherokee Sixes and C182's are operated on 450m strips on a regular basis, at MTOW and occasions (eugh) with minimal wind.
It can be done safely. Depends on the aircraft, pilot and conditions, but I see nothing wrong with it as a general rule.
It can be done safely. Depends on the aircraft, pilot and conditions, but I see nothing wrong with it as a general rule.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
intersection departures being banned by the airport owner. Enforcing that would be the next step.
Last edited by dubbleyew eight; 2nd Oct 2013 at 11:08.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sympathise with VH-XXX. For example, the chief pilot of a Derby based operator interviewed a new (but experienced) pilot for a job then took him flying in a Cessna 310 to see if he could fly. At 50-100 ft after take off, the chief pilot cut a mixture control and told the new pilot to land ahead single engine on the remaining length. They just made it. A few days later same bloke did same act using an Islander. A visiting RPT aircraft saw it and also saw the Islander go into the over-run. The same chief pilot later joined CASA as an FOI.
Similar thing happened to a Duchess at Camden when the ATO cut a mixture on lift off during on a night touch and go. The aircraft clipped tree tops, lost airspeed and finished up on its guts through a wire fence where it hit an iron girder in long grass. The Duchess caught fire and both pilots suffered extensive burns. The ATO died of burns shortly after.
There used to be an old saying about flying. "There are old pilots and there are bold pilots - but not many old, bold pilots."
Similar thing happened to a Duchess at Camden when the ATO cut a mixture on lift off during on a night touch and go. The aircraft clipped tree tops, lost airspeed and finished up on its guts through a wire fence where it hit an iron girder in long grass. The Duchess caught fire and both pilots suffered extensive burns. The ATO died of burns shortly after.
There used to be an old saying about flying. "There are old pilots and there are bold pilots - but not many old, bold pilots."
I believe the quote is actually:
"Three most useless things in aviation - Sky above you, Runway behind you and hours in a navigators logbook".
I don't agree with the 'fuel in bowser' being useless one. When you are in a large aircraft on 1.3% climb gradient on 3 engines on departure, you wish you had left more fuel back in the tanker.
"Three most useless things in aviation - Sky above you, Runway behind you and hours in a navigators logbook".
I don't agree with the 'fuel in bowser' being useless one. When you are in a large aircraft on 1.3% climb gradient on 3 engines on departure, you wish you had left more fuel back in the tanker.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite common to see Juliet intersection departures at YMML's runway 34 when there's a strong northerly blowing and I think Qlink's Dash8's even use the highspeed taxiway intersection (Foxtrot) as well.
I remember back when I used to fly at YMMB, some requests for intersection departures were so that you can jump ahead of the queue whilst number 1 and 2 ahead were still taxing for the full length.
As others have said, as long as you're within the performance limitations of your aircraft, then I don't see why not. Can anyone ever recall an incident where there's been an engine failure after take-off and the aircraft has successfully landed back on the remaining available runway?
I remember back when I used to fly at YMMB, some requests for intersection departures were so that you can jump ahead of the queue whilst number 1 and 2 ahead were still taxing for the full length.
As others have said, as long as you're within the performance limitations of your aircraft, then I don't see why not. Can anyone ever recall an incident where there's been an engine failure after take-off and the aircraft has successfully landed back on the remaining available runway?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne
Age: 60
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training Wheels,
Good point.
Foxtrot or Golf for RWY 16/34 is common in the Dash's and Saabs that operate out of Melbourne. Also common for 737's (sometimes 767's) to use Echo for a 16 take-off.
With a light load and strong headwinds, I've even used an Echo departure for RWY34 at Melbourne in the Dash
Allowing aircraft at Melbourne or Sydney to use intersection departures reduces congestion and taxi times.
Of course this is at an airline level, and (I'm guessing) not the intent of the OP. However, any pilot should have a very good idea of the TODR for a given take-off, given the ambient conditions, a/c weight, etc. If an intersection departure allows for a safe departure, I can't see the problem.
DIVOSH!
Good point.
Foxtrot or Golf for RWY 16/34 is common in the Dash's and Saabs that operate out of Melbourne. Also common for 737's (sometimes 767's) to use Echo for a 16 take-off.
With a light load and strong headwinds, I've even used an Echo departure for RWY34 at Melbourne in the Dash
Allowing aircraft at Melbourne or Sydney to use intersection departures reduces congestion and taxi times.
Of course this is at an airline level, and (I'm guessing) not the intent of the OP. However, any pilot should have a very good idea of the TODR for a given take-off, given the ambient conditions, a/c weight, etc. If an intersection departure allows for a safe departure, I can't see the problem.
DIVOSH!
This is a pointless thread IMO - well meaning but pointless, none-the-less!
I think the intention of the OP was GA, not airline ops, so lets stick to that.
You cannot make rules for every possible aspects of GA ops. As I see it, safe flying involves a mix of good training, piloting skills, risk management and decision making. That's what makes a pilot rather than a "plane driver".
I generally use the full runway length when available (risk management), but have no hesitation making an intersection departure when it suits and the parameters are OK. Heck, I have even been known to TO or land downwind on occasions as well.
Its a bit hard for me to justify knocking back an intersection departure from a major runway with X000+ M still available and then flying off to land and depart from a 600M grass strip.
I once knocked back an intersection departure from the holding point at Mackay which was offered to me because a Dash 8 was backtracking to the end of the runway. The controller pointed out that I still had X000M available and waiting for the Dash 8 to depart would trigger a mandatory hold due wake turbulence. I quickly did a risk management reassessment and off I went.
You can ban one way that pilots get themselves and their pax into trouble - that only leave 1,426,315 minus 1 otherways.
Dr
I think the intention of the OP was GA, not airline ops, so lets stick to that.
You cannot make rules for every possible aspects of GA ops. As I see it, safe flying involves a mix of good training, piloting skills, risk management and decision making. That's what makes a pilot rather than a "plane driver".
I generally use the full runway length when available (risk management), but have no hesitation making an intersection departure when it suits and the parameters are OK. Heck, I have even been known to TO or land downwind on occasions as well.
Its a bit hard for me to justify knocking back an intersection departure from a major runway with X000+ M still available and then flying off to land and depart from a 600M grass strip.
I once knocked back an intersection departure from the holding point at Mackay which was offered to me because a Dash 8 was backtracking to the end of the runway. The controller pointed out that I still had X000M available and waiting for the Dash 8 to depart would trigger a mandatory hold due wake turbulence. I quickly did a risk management reassessment and off I went.
You can ban one way that pilots get themselves and their pax into trouble - that only leave 1,426,315 minus 1 otherways.
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 3rd Oct 2013 at 01:42.
Now come on 'Forky' nothing is 'pointless' when it comes to aviation & the operating of an A/C of any type. There's a saying......there are no dumb questions about flying when your airborne!
Sure as usual the thread has drifted off somewhat with some now ref to larger safer airframes etc but that's the very nature on any forum people are curious, interested & at times get a little excited so if just one aviator out there stops & thinks just a little about his judgement of taking off from less than full rwy length for whatever reason then great I'm all for diversification on any subject, Mods excluded of course
Wmk2
There's a saying......there are no dumb questions about flying when your airborne!Sure as usual the thread has drifted off somewhat with some now ref to larger safer airframes etc but that's the very nature on any forum people are curious, interested & at times get a little excited so if just one aviator out there stops & thinks just a little about his judgement of taking off from less than full rwy length for whatever reason then great I'm all for diversification on any subject, Mods excluded of course
Wmk2
...an ambassador of natural selection...
Wally Mk2 has got it covered...
...was told back in the early days by a few instructors that think about the terrain ahead immediately after leaving the confines of the airfield when deciding how much rwy to use. Plenty of open flattish area's take off with adequate rwy on the day to suit the conditions, built up area ahead & zero places to land after T/off go right down to the end of the rwy...
.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
seams everyone has forgotten the magic A word.... Airmanship..
and Situational awareness.
a 3000mtr runway, and i only need 100, no problem with intersections, a 1000mtr runway surrounded by suburbia, no intersection. 700 mtr surrounded by open fields and floodplains, again, no problem with an intersection departure. and the same with the situation described by forkie.
and Situational awareness.
a 3000mtr runway, and i only need 100, no problem with intersections, a 1000mtr runway surrounded by suburbia, no intersection. 700 mtr surrounded by open fields and floodplains, again, no problem with an intersection departure. and the same with the situation described by forkie.
Last edited by Ultralights; 3rd Oct 2013 at 04:41.
Belmontboy,
I'll bite, whats an AAM ???
I've got an AFM and a AIM, and an AIP, but AAM??
Well, well!! The good old Australian answer to everything --- think up another seriously dumb "rule", and enforce it.
I wonder just what rule making and enforcement powers the airport operator thinks they have, unless it is a privately owned (not a public airport) and the owner bans anybody they don't like --- which is not "enforcing a rule".
Wake up, folks, we have enough rules already, let's leave it to the pilot in command (who has the legal power) to make a decision, based on the aircraft on the day, the conditions and the circumstances. That you, under (assumed) identical circumstances, think you would have made a different decision, does not make your decision right.
One of the biggest problems with the Australian "rules" is that they try to make, to a ridiculous extent, one size fits all --- unlike relevant elsewheres, with aviation "rules" graded to the circumstances---- and to great degree this thread shows where the ideas come from!! After all, people who work fro CASA largely come out of the aviation community.
Ultrlights has got the right/Wright idea, use you brains.
Tootle pip!!
I'll bite, whats an AAM ???
I've got an AFM and a AIM, and an AIP, but AAM??
Subsequent discussions have now resulted in intersection departures being banned by the airport owner. Enforcing that would be the next step.
I wonder just what rule making and enforcement powers the airport operator thinks they have, unless it is a privately owned (not a public airport) and the owner bans anybody they don't like --- which is not "enforcing a rule".
Wake up, folks, we have enough rules already, let's leave it to the pilot in command (who has the legal power) to make a decision, based on the aircraft on the day, the conditions and the circumstances. That you, under (assumed) identical circumstances, think you would have made a different decision, does not make your decision right.
One of the biggest problems with the Australian "rules" is that they try to make, to a ridiculous extent, one size fits all --- unlike relevant elsewheres, with aviation "rules" graded to the circumstances---- and to great degree this thread shows where the ideas come from!! After all, people who work fro CASA largely come out of the aviation community.
Ultrlights has got the right/Wright idea, use you brains.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 3rd Oct 2013 at 05:25.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, well!! The good old Australian answer to everything --- think up another seriously dumb "rule", and enforce it.
If the owner of an airport says that no yellow or red aircraft are allowed to land there, then so be it, he can do what he wants.
If he's sick of people running off the end of his runway and attracting attention to his airport, then so be it.
The thread was started about someone being a tool and what to say to him about it... not Australia being a nanny state.
I might add that there are associated noise issues in regards to intersection departures at some airports and this is also a contributing factor here.
If the owner of an airport says that no yellow or red aircraft are allowed to land there, then so be it, he can do what he wants.
If he's sick of people running off the end of his runway and attracting attention to his airport, then so be it.
If he's sick of people running off the end of his runway and attracting attention to his airport, then so be it.
Not if it is a public use airport.
As I said in a previous post, only if it is a privately owned airfield/airport that is, effectively, PPO, can an owner discriminate. on who uses the facility --- there are quite a few of those.
This comes up all the time with "enforceable" noise limitations that have no legal basis, unfortunately they are seldom challenged by airport users.
An example of the above is purported limitations on night circuits at YSBK, those who have defied BAL edicts have no been proceeded against by BAL, because BAL has no head of power (under the terms of the lease from the Commonwealth) to enforce such limitations (discrimination) that are otherwise legal operations.
If the DoIT (or whatever it is called now) promulgate restrictions under one of the various pieces of legislation they have to work with, that's a different matter.
I am aware (and, before you ask, no, I am not going to go into detail) of several cases of airport leaseholders (both ALOP and Cth Lease) who have approached DoIT to promulgate "additional limitations" ( as do various anti-airport groups, ad nauseum ad infinitum) but I know of no case where DoIT have done so.
We have had council owned airports that are not ALOP, just council owned, who have banned categories of aircraft, usually "Ultralights", where this has been challenged, the challenge has been upheld.
What would be the reaction if a local council decided to ban, say, all V8 powered cars from its council roads?? Why is the local aerodrome any different ---- in law ---- which is where it all ends.
Last edited by LeadSled; 3rd Oct 2013 at 12:26.
Hey Leadie, what do you think about an aerodrome operator at a major capital city secondary airport who charges a 'penalty fee per circuit' of $20 for aircraft who do circuits after 6 pm local on weekends, under the guise of enforcing 'good neighbourhood' policy?
With our 'normal summer' and Last Light, there is a period of almost 2 hours of good flying time around December....
Opinion please...?
With our 'normal summer' and Last Light, there is a period of almost 2 hours of good flying time around December....
Opinion please...?
Last edited by Ex FSO GRIFFO; 3rd Oct 2013 at 16:32.