Strange G.A. Practices!

[sharpshot]

I flew into a small airfield (anonymous for now) not that long ago, having departed from one controlled by NATS.

The destination strip has a metalled runway, with a single taxiway exit at the easterly end leading to the ramp.

Whilst on short finals another aircraft flew at 90 deg across the runway at < 50.ft

I landed in a westerly direction with backtracking to vacate being the only option. I called G-***** backtracking and was then taken aback - putting it mildly, to see this other aircraft on a very tight base leg and calling telling me not to backtrack as he was landing

Now what would you do

Tell you what I did later

d_b - hope to hear your learned opinion

[FlyingForFun]

That's incredible!

Let's ignore his breaking the 500' rule for his low pass across the runway. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that you misjudged his height, since that's a fairly standard defense when accused of low flying. (Note that I'm not suggested for one second that you did mis-judge his height - I'm just giving him the benefit of what tiny amount of doubt there may be!)

Did he offer any alternatives to your suggestion that you backtrack? Maybe you should have just stayed where you were? Or pulled off of the manoeuvring area while he landed?

Since you were on final approach before he was, you had right of way, and you maintain that right of way until you vacate the runway. Common sense clearly says you were right, and it seems that the law agrees with common sense on this occassion, too.

I'm curious - what did you do???

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

(I was once landing at an uncontrolled airfield in America, called final, only to hear, about 30 seconds later, an aircraft call that he was "crossing the runway". I called "very short final" for the same runway, and the other pilot - if we can call him that - replied "Yeah, don't worry, I'll be well clear. And how long have you been practicing the English accent for?" This was followed by one of the fastest runway-crossings I've ever seen! My hand was on the throttle ready to go around - it wasn't necessary, but it was close!)

[sharpshot]

FFF
Let's just say I've been around awhile - <50 ft - well I was at about 250ft and although no APAPI on runway, I was making a reasonable app. And I was looking down on him.

Tell you what I did when a few more (maybe) post. Wondering if I dare ever mention the airfield by ICAO code......

[Select Zone Five]

I guess it's all down to judgement on rwy length and how tight, tight base was...I would probably have taxied onto the grass and rejoined the rwy once 'crazy man' had passed.

[knobbygb]

Not enough experience to have ever been in a similar situation, but I suppose it depends how far you were form the landing end of the runway and what type of aircraft it was on approach, but I'd be looking to get off the runway onto the grass as soon as possible. I'd assume the other guy MUST have some kind of emergency and therefore may not be able to make the best of landings or be able to stop in time or steer to avoid me.

Another option would be to contimue to the far end of the runway, if there was room left, but this would involve turning your back on the other a/c.

By the way, why not name the airfield? Not their fault and you're not accusing them of anything. Or was it their CFI who was misbehaving?

[Aussie Andy]

I would have:

a) replied on R/T "G-XX Negative: suggest you go around as I am still occupying the runway"; whilst

b) simultaneously exiting onto the grass ASAP because being right is not enough... I want to be right and alive!; and finally

c) file an airprox (assuming he did continue to land).

What a t*sser!

Go on then, where was it?

[Hooligan Bill]

After making sure that the other aircraft did not hit you, I hope that you took the reg and reported the facts to the CAA. Unless the person was in an emergency situation, in which case they should have used either a mayday or pan call, they appear to be in contravention of at least two parts of rule 17, plus possible certain other rules and articles.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Was he suffering an emergency, it seems the only reasonable explanation for the behaviour?

G

[GroundBound]

Its a lot easier to sit, think and write about it, than decide in the few seconds you had available.

However, I think I would immedialtely hold postion, and be ready to escape off the runway in case he fouled up.

It also depends a bit on the runway length (and maybe its width?), but I guess if you had just landed (normally) and were backtracking, you must have been within his proposed landing area. Given that, I think I would move to the side and would have made another call repeating the runway was occupied and that there was no space to land.

I'd still keep plan B to escape off the runway though.

A quick (make that long!) word on the ground would seem highly appropriate, as well as the "reg" and a call to the safety people - maybe. Given the low fly over as a precedent, it doesn't sound like you would be talking to a responsible person, does it?

[sharpshot]

Well, there was nowhere to go - the grass was taller than I am used to seeing on an airfield with a long grass policy (i.e. to deter birds) in fact it was tall enough to conceal a Pelican!

I could not take refuge up at the far "stop end" as I had already done a 180 and was not going to turn my back on this n*****r. I have learned never to turn my back on an aeroplane in motion or racing car - do so at your peril.

His only distress seemed to be the one he was trying to inflict upon me basically the type of aviator one is best keeping well clear of.

I am well used to hearing "land after" clearances either directed at me or following aircraft - no problem. ATC MATS Pt. 1 clearly defines when this may be used in U.K. - for an a/c to assume a land after does not, however, work with an a/c backtracking the "active! - oh no!

[EastMids]

Bottom line - unless he was effected by an emergency in which case I'd go easy on him, unless the airfield is ATC controlled he can't do a "land after" - in fact he's not allowed to land whilst you're still occupying the runway, which you are if you are backtracking and that's the only realistic exit option. Now I'll admit that there's a world of difference between the law and practical reality when faced with this situation, but I'd have certainly not done anything that would have risked my aeroplane (like taxiing off into the grass) and would have probably said "G-XXXX still occupying the runway suggest you go-around". And if he still landed, a report would have been in order.

Andy

[knobbygb]

So come on, sharpshot, what did you do (and where was it)?

With the restrictions you mention above, I suppose I'd seriously consider shutting down the a/c and getting out leaving it where it was. Reason being it'd be the only way to ensure my own safety in a dangerous situation.

My only other thought, when you called back-tracking, is it possible he thought you were about to start backtracking from, say, a point somewhere off the runway at the other end, but had not yet started? i.e. did he know you were actually sat on the runway? What was the vis like?

EastMids, is there actually a rule forbidding a pilot to land when the runway is occupied? I thought it was left to the discression of the second pilot as to how much room was available/required etc. I've certainley seen it happen several times, usually on wide grass runways where the first a/c can pull well over to one side before the other lands.

[sharpshot]

Just to give you a clue where to be very wary - he's still bound to be there - I'm talking east of Cambridge and north of the home counties.

I did speak to our CAA aerodrome inspector latterly and you can guess what he said!

Now having memories of another um ...aviator who I nearly did MOR
- oh well another thread in the making.

I must admit, its a novelty looking at the hits on this - everyone who has looked has actually responded

P.S. I don't go out of my way filing MOR's, although I do get a little concerned watching fellow aviators going over built up areas too darn low - if I can read the reg, I'm sure Joe Bloggs can too.

Hey knobbygb,

I do believe that if you are beyond the declared runway LDA and stopway etc, another aircraft may land on the area declared usable for landing - but how many airfields in our little land have all this space. Don't take above as gospel - I have a feeling that East Mids could be an ATCO and correct me - please do!

And knobbygb - I assure you I was on the runway
I tried vacating a bush strip in Aussie Andy's former home once - what a mistake and then I had to land back in "civilisation" (Oz ?)
with a right grubby C.177RG- not cool!!

[jayemm]

Being a pilot with little experience (nearly 200 hours), I would want to get out of the way as safely and quickly as possible. I would assume either of:

1. He's got a problem and needs to land quickly so I need to take avoiding action. OK so he should PAN or MAYDAY in this case, but who knows what's going on in the cockpit. or

2. He's an arrogant S.O.B. so I need to take avoiding action.

For me, the priority is not to prove a point but to avoid physical contact. I don't know how long or wide the runway is or how far you had back-tracked, but my first inclination would be to stop immediately, preferably as far to one side as possible, then radio my position (so he can choose to go round). If possible, I'd turn round and give him as much runway as possible.

Once on the ground, I'd want to talk to the pilot, find out what he was doing and then sympathise or protest in the strongest possible terms.

What did you do?

[EastMids]

Knobblygb

"A flying machine or glider must not land on a runway which is not clear of other aircraft, unless an aerodrome ATC unit otherwise authorises"

No ATC, no authorisation. Interestingly though:

"Aircraft on the ground must give way to those taking off or landing..."

Sharpshot,

Interesting comment about being beyond the LDA - not sure. And no, I'm not ATC.

Andy

[Aussie Andy]

But, jayemm, our friend says that the grass was too long for him to be able to safely vacate!

[knobbygb]

Point taken EastMids - I should know that. I think what is happening at the grass strip I fly from is that the runways are physically very wide (about 45M, I think), but only the centre 18M is oficially runway - off to eaither side and you're on the taxiway. This would explain the 'multipule landings' I described.

Having said that, I now realise that many of my early attempts at landing were probably on taxiways

As for the right of way, I'd stick my neck out and say that since he was still on the runway he was technically still landing and so had right of way as the lower of the 2 aircraft. Quite happy to be proved wrong again though.

Sharpshot, didn't mean to imply you weren't on the runway, just that the other guy may have thought you weren't.

[Hooligan Bill]

sharpshot,

The definition of the 'land after' procedure does not preclude its use with backtracking aircraft. As long as the specified criteria are met then then the direction of travel is irrelevant. However, because of this anomaly, some units do have extra procedures published in their Mats PT2 which outlaw its use in such circumstances.

With regard to the LDA, technically you are required to be beyond the 'runway strip' before being considered clear of the active runway. The strip dimensions depend on the length of the runway and wether or not it is an instrument runway.

[EastMids]

Yup, the priority to landing a/c rule is really related to taxiing a/c not entering the runway whilst something's on approach. If you're already on it, different story.

Number one priority in any sitation like this must be protection of firstly lives and a close second aeroplanes. However, based on what we've been told I fundamentally believe that the guy landing was in the wrong (assuming no ATC and no land after) and in those circumstances my secondary objective would be to make him realise that he was wrong and for him to take the proventative action - not leave it to me.

Andy

[knobbygb]

Unless it's a trick question. Was the other aircraft a helecopter?