Illegal to back-taxi??!!

bflynn said:
<snip>
So it IS part of a published municipal code. You just didn't know it, but ignorance of the law is no excuse.

DOH!
Click to expand...

Good research, thanks.

Regarding the bolded part above: are you, as a pilot, checking the municipal code of the governing municipality for each airport you land at, even if just a fuel stop on a xc? Because that is what you seem to be advocating.
 
qbynewbie said:
Life is way too short to choose to get angry at someone else's remarks across the frequency. I cannot imagine why I'd choose to let someone else ruin my perfectly good day. It's much simpler to simply choose to ignore them and, of course, it's always a choice. People often say "he made me so mad" but the real translation of that is "I chose to get mad because of what that person did."
Click to expand...

I agree. But this was the airport manager and he deserved a response. My response, however, was not going to be "Roger" without knowing what he was basing that admonition on.
 
alfadog said:
This is the written operating regs from the Miami-Dade Aviation Dept (MDAD). Same Dept that runs MIA. My guess is that it is perfectly OK with the FAA for them to forbid back-taxiing at their non-towered airports. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

You are correct. The airport sponsor can implement operating rules as long as they are not contrary to regulations, don't impede safety and are applied equally to all users.
 
alfadog said:
Regarding the bolded part above: are you, as a pilot, checking the municipal code of the governing municipality for each airport you land at, even if just a fuel stop on a xc? Because that is what you seem to be advocating.
Click to expand...

No, but if you backtaxi and the airport manager tells you not to, it is hard to claim that you didn't know if you do it again.
 
Witmo said:
Is it legal to make a left hand ninety dgree turn two mile from the threshold (published right hand pattern) if you call it a straight-in? I've seen it done.
Click to expand...

Legal? I do not think it is illegal if you are not disrupting the flow of other traffic nor causing another airplane to maneuver to avoid your non-standard approach. I think most things are legal at non-towered airports if you yield to other traffic flying recommended patterns and/or using the preferred runway.
 
Last edited:
alfadog said:
Legal? I do not thing it is illegal if you are not disrupting the flow of other traffic nor causing another airplane to maneuver to avoid your non-standard approach.
Click to expand...
Read the Boardman case cited above -- it may change your opinion of what is legal or not.

I think most things are legal at non-towered airports if you yield to other traffic flying recommended patterns and/or using the preferred runway.
Click to expand...
...and do not make turns opposite the published (explicitly or by default) traffic pattern direction within the traffic pattern area.
 
Ron Levy said:
Read the Boardman case cited above -- it may change your opinion of what is legal or not.

...and do not make turns opposite the published (explicitly or by default) traffic pattern direction within the traffic pattern area.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Yes, I knew I was going to take some hits for saying that. I was coming back to clarify that I do not mean doing things that violate the written A/FD, etc.
 
Ron Levy said:
No. No point in going that far out of my way.

No. Don't like putting the airport behind me like that.

There is no such thing as a "midfield crosswind," since by definition the crosswind leg is out beyond the departure end of the runway. However, I would not make a midfield crossover to join the downwind from the inside -- with three other planes in the pattern and maybe someone else making the 45-downwind, there's too much chance of ending up beak-to-beak with two other planes at the midfield downwind point.

No -- right turns in the pattern are prohibited by regulation on this left-traffic runway.

No. I don't like landing with a tailwind.

So much for the five choices you gave.

Now, what would I do? Either alter course to the east to join the straight-in for 23 at least 3 miles out, or descend to TPA and enter the real crosswind leg for 23 from the NW side at TPA.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ron
Yes, somehow forgot about the real crosswind for 23.
Personally would either do that, or just a straight in on 12.
That being said, main point of the question was that "midfield crossover" (btw heard the "midfield crosswind" used a few dozen times.. go figure) or any other entry where you overfly the airport would put you in conflict with Aunt Betsy on her first ever tandem jump ("continuous skydiving operation during the daylight hours.. do not overfly the airport") and maneuvering East for a lond straight in to 23 could put you in conflict with traffic on VOR 23 approach, of which there is plenty.
 
moonshine said:
...maneuvering East for a lond straight in to 23 could put you in conflict with traffic on VOR 23 approach, of which there is plenty.
Click to expand...
That's why traffic on straight-in approaches (either SIAP or visual) is supposed to be monitoring and making reports on CTAF when inside 10 nm of the airport. If they're out there and talking like they should, I'll hear them and they'll hear me, and we can work it out. Even if they're not on CTAF, I've still got eyes and can spot them and sequence in front or behind them as appropriate. So, not doing a straight-in merely because there's a chance someone else might be doing the same is to me, a superfluous precaution, but if you don't feel comfortable with that, then don't you do it.
 
qbynewbie said:
People often say "he made me so mad" but the real translation of that is "I chose to get mad because of what that person did."
Click to expand...
Well...that kinda depends, doesn't it?

I'd submit that the cropduster who passed not 15' above me and landed opposite direction as I was rolling out, after landing, at LLU "made me mad".
 
timwinters said:
Well...that kinda depends, doesn't it?

I'd submit that the cropduster who passed not 15' above me and landed opposite direction as I was rolling out, after landing, at LLU "made me mad".
Click to expand...

You were rolling out, did you anticipate to spontaneously jump back into the air ? ;)
 
bflynn said:
A little more research is called for here. If you go try to pull them up on "it's not written out", you'd find yourself humbled real fast.

X51 is owned and operated by Miami-Dade county, not the city of Homestead. The 1995 operating agreement is a nice document, but the first line notes that it is authorized by Chapter 25 of the Code of Municipal Dade County.

A slight bit more research would yeild this page, similar to the Homestead link above, but appropriate to the county:
http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=10620&stateId=9&stateName=Florida

Section 25-10.13 is interesting, especially

(d) No person shall turn an aircraft in order to reverse direction on the runway, unless given specific instructions or authorization to do so by the control tower.

So it IS part of a published municipal code. You just didn't know it, but ignorance of the law is no excuse.

DOH!
Click to expand...

Better than my luck with the Homestead muni code which was pretty useless. Every location is a bit different based on the ownership of the land under the air of the airport. In many cases, it's the city, in some cases the county, and in a few cases I guess the state. Quite clearly spelled out, actually. Not that I agree with it.
 
bflynn said:
Section 25-10.13 is interesting, especially

(d) No person shall turn an aircraft in order to reverse direction on the runway, unless given specific instructions or authorization to do so by the control tower.

So it IS part of a published municipal code.
Click to expand...

I think that wording creates some ambiguity, because of the article the in "the control tower". Use of the definite article implies a presumption that there is a control tower. So the restriction arguably does not apply to a nontowered airport.
 
alfadog said:
I agree. But this was the airport manager and he deserved a response. My response, however, was not going to be "Roger" without knowing what he was basing that admonition on.
Click to expand...

Why not? "Roger" does not mean that you agree with what he said; it means "I have received all of your last transmission."
 
Palmpilot said:
Why not? "Roger" does not mean that you agree with what he said; it means "I have received all of your last transmission."
Click to expand...

In the setting of an aircraft on a straight in being admonished by the pattern police:

'roger' ---> I heard you and dont care
'roger, on what basis' ---> I heard you and now I am wondering whether I missed a notam on my preflight preparation.
 
Palmpilot said:
Why not? "Roger" does not mean that you agree with what he said; it means "I have received all of your last transmission."
Click to expand...

Notwithstanding that that is a fine point lost on most folks, that was not what I intended to respond. My intended response was "under what authority are you requiring that?" and if I were sharper, perhaps that is how I would have phrased it. Eventually I got the answer I wanted.
 
darrell said:
It appears you've already bailed form this thread, but I'll mention it anyway. The part of the brain (frontal lobe) that handles impulsivity is not fully developed until the ages of 23-25. Anybody younger than that is going to have difficulty (to varying degrees) with impulse control. You (David) seem to already be aware of this and that's about the best you can hope for at this stage.
Click to expand...

Some article we heard about today on the radio claimed males don't fully mature until 43. To which I looked at my wife and said, "See? That explains it!"
 
denverpilot said:
Some article we heard about today on the radio claimed males don't fully mature until 43. To which I looked at my wife and said, "See? That explains it!"
Click to expand...

I like the marriage advice: "hang in there and grow up." I am glad that my wife was able to hang in there until I turned 43 and grew up. I find it interesting to watch the home shows with my wife. One thing you learn when you turn 43 is to let the wife have her way with the house. The younger guys on the home shows are often seen arguing with the wife on how to select/decorate the house. :nono:
 
Warrior said:
I like the marriage advice: "hang in there and grow up." I am glad that my wife was able to hang in there until I turned 43 and grew up. I find it interesting to watch the home shows with my wife. One thing you learn when you turn 43 is to let the wife have her way with the house. The younger guys on the home shows are often seen arguing with the wife on how to select/decorate the house. :nono:
Click to expand...

I only have three areas that are mine. The garage, the ham shack, and the basement. The new house doesn't have a basement. Therefore I will require a barn. :)
 
Ron Levy said:
Not sure where you're getting this 5-mile limit. The NTSB cases on point suggest you can establish yourself for a straight-in from either side as long as you're outside the "traffic pattern area," which in various cases was 2-3 miles out, depending on size of aircraft (more for a 737 than a C-172). See Administrator v. Boardman and the cases cited therein.
Click to expand...
Five miles came from Captain's description of his flight path. I thought I read that 4 miles out was a "safe haven" for non-standard turns to final but it does make sense that one has to consider the "normal" base leg distance for a given airplane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top