Strange G.A. Practices!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
My understanding is that they are informal and not mentioned in either Pooleys or the CAA publications. So of little comfort to anyone new to the airfield (however if used they do increase the safety factor a little hence my posting them here). I'm not sure but I think the current litigation environment has caused some operators of unlicenced fields (or limited time licenced - as in this case) to have as few published procedures as possible so as to reduce the legal risk where the procedure causes some sort of incident.
One example I can think of at this airfield is that the 'taxiway' from the 'C' hold which avoids back tracking is also the public access to the club house. You might avoid being hit by 50ft circuit traffic but collide with a car!.
My understanding is that they are informal and not mentioned in either Pooleys or the CAA publications. So of little comfort to anyone new to the airfield (however if used they do increase the safety factor a little hence my posting them here). I'm not sure but I think the current litigation environment has caused some operators of unlicenced fields (or limited time licenced - as in this case) to have as few published procedures as possible so as to reduce the legal risk where the procedure causes some sort of incident.
One example I can think of at this airfield is that the 'taxiway' from the 'C' hold which avoids back tracking is also the public access to the club house. You might avoid being hit by 50ft circuit traffic but collide with a car!.
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it seems then that the only way to have avoided the problem might have been to get a good briefing on local procedures over the phone before departing... However, lack of published information on such procedures sounds like an accident waiting to happen - unless local traffic are more diligent in realising that the other guy is not a local and so adopting more standard procedures!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
Never said the world was perfect!
How many of us ring in advance for an extended briefing?. And when told "just give us a call on 111.1" then push for further information?. Let me put my hands up - not me.
I tend to regard airfields without air traffic units as possible centres of unusual or od hoc activity and expect everyone else to be an idiot (not that I think they are) so when on finals in a non radio aircraft following another aircraft which has just landed I assume that he is going to 180 and back track without looking rather than continue to the holding point and pull off. About half the time I am right and have to execute a go round. Half the time I am able to continue. Can't get too bothered about it because I was ready for the danger. Probably think that the guy ahead could have had his eyes out of the cockpit a bit more and been more considerate but that passes reasonably quickly.
On one incident similar to the above I did have someone tell me that I shouldn't be flying without a ***** radio and that he had more right to be there than I had but he had probably come from an environment where he expected to be passed all traffic information by someone else.
The best aviators are those who are able to assess different actions required for different situations and this takes both total experience and exposure to different circumstances. I remember once watching someone land a PA28 downwind and thinking that he must have been quite inexperienced only to find that he was a training captain on a particular jet airliner which only the best get to fly. In his day job he hardly ever had to think about the wind direction.
Never said the world was perfect!
How many of us ring in advance for an extended briefing?. And when told "just give us a call on 111.1" then push for further information?. Let me put my hands up - not me.
I tend to regard airfields without air traffic units as possible centres of unusual or od hoc activity and expect everyone else to be an idiot (not that I think they are) so when on finals in a non radio aircraft following another aircraft which has just landed I assume that he is going to 180 and back track without looking rather than continue to the holding point and pull off. About half the time I am right and have to execute a go round. Half the time I am able to continue. Can't get too bothered about it because I was ready for the danger. Probably think that the guy ahead could have had his eyes out of the cockpit a bit more and been more considerate but that passes reasonably quickly.
On one incident similar to the above I did have someone tell me that I shouldn't be flying without a ***** radio and that he had more right to be there than I had but he had probably come from an environment where he expected to be passed all traffic information by someone else.
The best aviators are those who are able to assess different actions required for different situations and this takes both total experience and exposure to different circumstances. I remember once watching someone land a PA28 downwind and thinking that he must have been quite inexperienced only to find that he was a training captain on a particular jet airliner which only the best get to fly. In his day job he hardly ever had to think about the wind direction.
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with your comments... Maybe we're talking at crossed purposes: I thought you were saying that the local procedures at the airfield concerned are such that its to be expected that someone might tell the back-tracker that he is landing and expect to be able to continue anyway... sadly it seems this guy didn't go around, as you would have... So my point was just that it was proably a bit tough for ss to have armed himself with this information - i.e. not in plate, only "an informal local practice" etc.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
Not used to getting to getting agreement!
Trying to be careful with this because the precise facts are unclear. If the a/c was already back tracking before the landing a/c had turned finals I would have expected the landing a/c to extend the downwind or base leg or go round. If the landed a/c simply turned and bac tracked without looking for possible conflicting (not just listening for a call) then he could have been in the wrong.
Don't really want to be drawn on the particular case because individual perspectives might differ in important respects from the facts (a natural typical human response), and I don't want to suggest that SS could have acted differently - I don't know.
I do know that if SS had continued ahead to the 'C' hold and pulled off before seeking to back track (rather than landing short and immediately back tracking) he would probably have seen the approaching a/c and avoided any possible conflict (this common sense approach does not require published procedures).
He would have been inconvenienced a little. The other guy might have felt that he had somehow 'won' but the level of induced 'air rage' might have been reduced a little.
For the avoidance of doubt I am not suggesting that SS was in any way wrong in his actions nor that he should follow the procedure I suggest in my post in the future to avoid possible conflict. Others, however, when visiting an airfield such as this for the first time might benefit from taxying to a safe place (ie the 'C' hold in this case - which is identified in Pooleys and the CAA publications and a part of a 'disused' runway but still a 'used' taxiway / hold) before re-entering to back track.
Not used to getting to getting agreement!
Trying to be careful with this because the precise facts are unclear. If the a/c was already back tracking before the landing a/c had turned finals I would have expected the landing a/c to extend the downwind or base leg or go round. If the landed a/c simply turned and bac tracked without looking for possible conflicting (not just listening for a call) then he could have been in the wrong.
Don't really want to be drawn on the particular case because individual perspectives might differ in important respects from the facts (a natural typical human response), and I don't want to suggest that SS could have acted differently - I don't know.
I do know that if SS had continued ahead to the 'C' hold and pulled off before seeking to back track (rather than landing short and immediately back tracking) he would probably have seen the approaching a/c and avoided any possible conflict (this common sense approach does not require published procedures).
He would have been inconvenienced a little. The other guy might have felt that he had somehow 'won' but the level of induced 'air rage' might have been reduced a little.
For the avoidance of doubt I am not suggesting that SS was in any way wrong in his actions nor that he should follow the procedure I suggest in my post in the future to avoid possible conflict. Others, however, when visiting an airfield such as this for the first time might benefit from taxying to a safe place (ie the 'C' hold in this case - which is identified in Pooleys and the CAA publications and a part of a 'disused' runway but still a 'used' taxiway / hold) before re-entering to back track.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange...
Well, you can examine every situation up to it's tiniest thing, but, walking backward and looking at it from a distance, you've got to live with "Joe Average" also in Aviation, just imagine the idiot driving his sportscar a few feet behind you on the highway got the money for a mooney...
I remember watching a scene where a brandnew Robin landed close (about 400 m) behind the leading plane on a 500m strip, telling the first plane to go to the end of the runway and wait...
Not enough, after backtracking (similar situation, but concrete in a "wet" setting) the Robin was taxied with high speed and flaps extended over a sign and got it's right flap damaged...no need to tell that it was flown again later...
...you better watch out...
I remember watching a scene where a brandnew Robin landed close (about 400 m) behind the leading plane on a 500m strip, telling the first plane to go to the end of the runway and wait...
Not enough, after backtracking (similar situation, but concrete in a "wet" setting) the Robin was taxied with high speed and flaps extended over a sign and got it's right flap damaged...no need to tell that it was flown again later...
...you better watch out...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have caught up with your last posts on this topic and would comment as follows;
I can see that FFF is perhaps a little put out that a slur might be inferred towards the field that he perhaps does his flying from. Good of you to defend it, I would mine.......most of the time.
However, the inference that I was perhaps not anticipating the local antics does not hold much sway with me. If I'm prepared to get in a plane on any given day, I make sure I'm up to it.
This chap was in possession of VHF, yet chose not to Tx until it suited him - i.e. when he informed me not to backtrack as he WAS landing. I may have been a little more aware of his location and intentions had he bothered to press the Tx switch downwind or frankly at any time prior to when he did.
I have been to aerodrome in question before. I was carrying an uptodate plate of the field and I do read the remarks entries carefully. I do check notams.
I have the AIP loaded on this P.C. and have just looked at EGS! a few minutes ago.
You're not wrong FFF - didn't anyone have time to provide any more pertinent information...
In support of my initial comment about vacating the runway due length of grass - N.B. UK AIP entry states that airfield maybe difficult to locate from certain directions "due to crops".
A question for you FFF, just in case I return in a plane with the Sharpshot logo on the tail
if departing runway 06, what is the local taxy procedure to get to the thr. for departure?
Non Radio
YES and if you don't believe it.........
Most accidents happen during the landing or T/O phase. Do you recall the Pan Am 707 that tried landing on a fishing fleet at Pago Pago. Irrelevant you might say, but how often do pilots get disorientated even approaching their base airfield - I can recall several incidents that were potentially disastrous, but I would never air them on a public forum.
I can see that FFF is perhaps a little put out that a slur might be inferred towards the field that he perhaps does his flying from. Good of you to defend it, I would mine.......most of the time.
However, the inference that I was perhaps not anticipating the local antics does not hold much sway with me. If I'm prepared to get in a plane on any given day, I make sure I'm up to it.
This chap was in possession of VHF, yet chose not to Tx until it suited him - i.e. when he informed me not to backtrack as he WAS landing. I may have been a little more aware of his location and intentions had he bothered to press the Tx switch downwind or frankly at any time prior to when he did.
I have been to aerodrome in question before. I was carrying an uptodate plate of the field and I do read the remarks entries carefully. I do check notams.
I have the AIP loaded on this P.C. and have just looked at EGS! a few minutes ago.
You're not wrong FFF - didn't anyone have time to provide any more pertinent information...
In support of my initial comment about vacating the runway due length of grass - N.B. UK AIP entry states that airfield maybe difficult to locate from certain directions "due to crops".
A question for you FFF, just in case I return in a plane with the Sharpshot logo on the tail
if departing runway 06, what is the local taxy procedure to get to the thr. for departure?Non Radio
YES and if you don't believe it.........
Most accidents happen during the landing or T/O phase. Do you recall the Pan Am 707 that tried landing on a fishing fleet at Pago Pago. Irrelevant you might say, but how often do pilots get disorientated even approaching their base airfield - I can recall several incidents that were potentially disastrous, but I would never air them on a public forum.
Last edited by sharpshot; 15th Oct 2002 at 09:25.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
I can't believe you just worked this out - I diplomatically gave you all the clues.
Mind you, if we had a chat about a field called Mooroduc, the folk from this side of the hemisphere might have a problem
Anyway Andy - get the GPS out and pay it a visit -
P.S. Take a witness and you'll learn new elements of the "envelope" you never even knew existed
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I missed all the clues - I have been a bit busy 
formationfoto I might surprise you Saturday-week in the lovely G-ODAK (Dakota)... we've planned a trip to Cambdridge, but might persuade my cohort(s) to extend the trip over to Seething: if we do, are you around for air-to-air photos?
... but I'll have to be careful of who's in the circuit by the sound of it! And no, I won't be impressed if same thing as happened to SS happens to us!
formationfoto I might surprise you Saturday-week in the lovely G-ODAK (Dakota)... we've planned a trip to Cambdridge, but might persuade my cohort(s) to extend the trip over to Seething: if we do, are you around for air-to-air photos?
... but I'll have to be careful of who's in the circuit by the sound of it! And no, I won't be impressed if same thing as happened to SS happens to us!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Behave yourself at CBG, I have a friend who will no doubt have to come into work on a Saturday if you take a DC-3 in there
Marshalls do the handling now.
If you pop down the motorway a few miles you reach another airport and that was the closest I have ever come to submitting an MOR voluntarily - i.e. not compulsorily at work.
There I was doing my power checks at the holding point - just check AIP after I write this - methinks!! Was in a PA-32RT - you know the T-tailed one. Well I always felt the tail on these to be a little vulnerable. Ever seen anyone do a walk round with a bloody great step ladder to check all the hinges
I digress. Anyway the Lance can be a heavy beast and I don't like grass runways when there is a metalled option. If memory serves me right the hold for the tarmac rwy is in the undershoot of the grass one. My lucky day - two show offs in a Harvard formation were out. Most would know who the "lead" pilot was
and sure enough they decided to do a low fly by right over my T tail with the smoke on. Impressed not.
Oh the joy and safety that regulated airspace can sometimes bring, but you do get fed up with radar headings
Marshalls do the handling now.
If you pop down the motorway a few miles you reach another airport and that was the closest I have ever come to submitting an MOR voluntarily - i.e. not compulsorily at work.
There I was doing my power checks at the holding point - just check AIP after I write this - methinks!! Was in a PA-32RT - you know the T-tailed one. Well I always felt the tail on these to be a little vulnerable. Ever seen anyone do a walk round with a bloody great step ladder to check all the hinges
I digress. Anyway the Lance can be a heavy beast and I don't like grass runways when there is a metalled option. If memory serves me right the hold for the tarmac rwy is in the undershoot of the grass one. My lucky day - two show offs in a Harvard formation were out. Most would know who the "lead" pilot was
and sure enough they decided to do a low fly by right over my T tail with the smoke on. Impressed not.
Oh the joy and safety that regulated airspace can sometimes bring, but you do get fed up with radar headings
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
Mostly there on Sundays (I do hope it wasn't on a Sunday that SS experienced his 'incident') but if nothing else to conflict might be able to get there on a Saturday along with the camera ship etc. I can provide my phone and mobile details if you want to contact me off line (they exist elsewhere on the private forum but don't want to be accused of promoting free photo session).
SS
If departing 06 you can see the approach quite clearly from the 'A' hold and if clear backtrack to 'C' for power checks then further to threshold for departure. If busy you can taxi all the way round the peri track to the 'C' hold but normally not required. Generally best not to block the 'A' hold for power checks because this stops aircraft from continuing taxi after landing to the club house. Can also be helpful to cross to 'B' hold if someone on approach. This then allows them to taxi back clearing the runway for you to back track. This is an uncontrolled airfield which relies on people being sensible and most of the time it works. Some people try and consider how best not to inconvenience other users (or indeed make it easier for them) some say sod it and do just what they want despite other users (and from my experience - trying to be unbiassed - this is more frequently visitors who simply don't think rather than based aircraft but as I have said before none of us are perfect).
I hope this hasn't put you off going there again because from personal experience there are some very helpful and friendly people at the airfield and I know of many who have benefitted from lots of freely given assistance from members who have put themselves out to aid other aviators with a problem. I certainly wouldn't want a controlled airfield environment as a replacement for this facility. Already perfectly safe activities which i have been practicing for years, and which I need to practice to satisfy the CAA, have been restricted. I don't want to find further restriction. In my book safe and considerate are the key requirements and as long as we have those we should be happy. I guess you had a bad day but come again and I will try and show you a different side of this rarity - a member owned airfield with limited restriction.
Mostly there on Sundays (I do hope it wasn't on a Sunday that SS experienced his 'incident') but if nothing else to conflict might be able to get there on a Saturday along with the camera ship etc. I can provide my phone and mobile details if you want to contact me off line (they exist elsewhere on the private forum but don't want to be accused of promoting free photo session).
SS
If departing 06 you can see the approach quite clearly from the 'A' hold and if clear backtrack to 'C' for power checks then further to threshold for departure. If busy you can taxi all the way round the peri track to the 'C' hold but normally not required. Generally best not to block the 'A' hold for power checks because this stops aircraft from continuing taxi after landing to the club house. Can also be helpful to cross to 'B' hold if someone on approach. This then allows them to taxi back clearing the runway for you to back track. This is an uncontrolled airfield which relies on people being sensible and most of the time it works. Some people try and consider how best not to inconvenience other users (or indeed make it easier for them) some say sod it and do just what they want despite other users (and from my experience - trying to be unbiassed - this is more frequently visitors who simply don't think rather than based aircraft but as I have said before none of us are perfect).
I hope this hasn't put you off going there again because from personal experience there are some very helpful and friendly people at the airfield and I know of many who have benefitted from lots of freely given assistance from members who have put themselves out to aid other aviators with a problem. I certainly wouldn't want a controlled airfield environment as a replacement for this facility. Already perfectly safe activities which i have been practicing for years, and which I need to practice to satisfy the CAA, have been restricted. I don't want to find further restriction. In my book safe and considerate are the key requirements and as long as we have those we should be happy. I guess you had a bad day but come again and I will try and show you a different side of this rarity - a member owned airfield with limited restriction.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
Sorry but have I lost the plot on this one?
OK, so we can talk all we want about holds part way down the runway, and whether or not a visiting pilot should know about them or indeed use them, and whether or not such a procedure is mentioned in the AIP or during a telephone brief. But surely the bottom line is that the guy on approach is simply not allowed to land on an occupied runway at an uncontrolled airfield - its illegal. And if the guy on the runway does not vacate, an approaching airplane HAS to go-around.
I visit uncontrolled (read radio) airfields fairly often, and on some occasions I sequence myself fairly close behind the airplane in front. However, NEVER when I do that do I expect to land come what may. If I'm fairly close in behind someone else at such airfields (totally different at East Mids where I may be given a land after), I prepare myself for the possibility of needing to do a go-around if the guy in front mucks around a bit and does not vacate before I need to put my wheels on the ground.
Based on what we're told, the guy on approach may, if he was local, have (a) expected the one ahead to vacate and wait for back-track or even (b) he may have even suggested such on the radio. But just to say he was landing, and indeed do so in contravention of established rules, just points the finger at an ignorant a**hole, who deserves to be reported in a MOR.
Andy
Sorry but have I lost the plot on this one?
OK, so we can talk all we want about holds part way down the runway, and whether or not a visiting pilot should know about them or indeed use them, and whether or not such a procedure is mentioned in the AIP or during a telephone brief. But surely the bottom line is that the guy on approach is simply not allowed to land on an occupied runway at an uncontrolled airfield - its illegal. And if the guy on the runway does not vacate, an approaching airplane HAS to go-around.
I visit uncontrolled (read radio) airfields fairly often, and on some occasions I sequence myself fairly close behind the airplane in front. However, NEVER when I do that do I expect to land come what may. If I'm fairly close in behind someone else at such airfields (totally different at East Mids where I may be given a land after), I prepare myself for the possibility of needing to do a go-around if the guy in front mucks around a bit and does not vacate before I need to put my wheels on the ground.
Based on what we're told, the guy on approach may, if he was local, have (a) expected the one ahead to vacate and wait for back-track or even (b) he may have even suggested such on the radio. But just to say he was landing, and indeed do so in contravention of established rules, just points the finger at an ignorant a**hole, who deserves to be reported in a MOR.
Andy
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: South Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the give way to landing aircraft rule is in the context of an aircraft on the ground not entering the runway if another is landing - it doesn't apply to one already there! After all, that aircraft has just landed and whilst still occupying the runway is (IMHO) still 'landing'.
So far as getting to one side of the runway to let him land is concerned, whilst this might be the only practical proposition, would you trust this nutter to land bang on the centreline (and stay there)?
So far as getting to one side of the runway to let him land is concerned, whilst this might be the only practical proposition, would you trust this nutter to land bang on the centreline (and stay there)?
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amazingly, there's a similar thread on the Dunnunda & Godzone GA forum here: can u land on a rnwy with another aircraft on it