Landed on wrong runway at towered airport

millerc2

millerc2

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
6
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Display Name
Display name:
millerc2
So how much trouble is someone in if they land on the wrong parallel runway they were cleared for at a class D airport and it is classified as a runway incursion?

Specifics:
1. Private Pilot with 300 hrs in past 6 years.
2. Class D airport with Left and Right parallels.
3. Cleared for Left, pilot read back clearance for Left, landed on Right.
4. Other aircraft was holding short but was already cleared for takeoff on Right runway.
5. Tower requests landing pilot to contact tower for deviation and tower tells them they are filing the paperwork for it.
6. Pilot has never had any other infractions.

Pilot cannot think of any contributing factors to the mistake other than the clearance came early and with other notice of other aircraft in the area on the same call. It's the pilot's base airport and the Right runway is more commonly used.
 
Probably an investigation by the FSDO, likely a certificate action, most definitely a 709 ride. I agree the pilot file an ASRS report.
 
ATC has no option on filing a Pilot Deviation report with the FSDO when a runway incursion like this occurs, and the FSDO is required to investigate. Something like this can result in an enforcement action for violating 91.123, so the first thing for the pilot to do is file a NASA ASRS report within 10 days of the event explaining what happened and how s/he thinks this sort of thing can be prevented in the future. Since the pilot has a clean records, and this certainly appears to have been an "inadvertant and not deliberate" error, that report will qualify the pilot for waiver of sanction even if an enforcement action is taken. That means the violation would still go on his/her record, but the usually 15-30 day suspension for this sort of thing will be waived.

When the FSDO Inspector gets the PD report, s/he will contact the pilot to get the pilot's side. This is when the pilot has the opportunity to convince the Inspector that s/he doesn't need an enforcement action to fix the problem. Being honest, open, and forthright about what happened counts heavily in this situation, as does letting the Inspector know an ASRS report has been filed, and telling the Inspector what steps the pilot is taking to make sure it doesn't happen again, such as obtaining training with his/her favorite instructor, or visiting the tower to learn the importance of not making this mistake.

If the Inspector believes the pilot has a constructive attitude towards safety and is doing what s/he can to fix this "hole in his/her swing," the Inspector has the option to handle it as an administrative action, such as remedial training with a FSDO-selected instructor, or a warning letter that basically says, "Here's what you did wrong, now don't do it again," or even just informal counseling by the Inspector. This administrative action remains on your record for only two years, then goes away, and you don't have to check the "yes" box for questions about whether you have ever had a violation or enforcement action.

No doubt some will advise you to obtain legal counsel and stonewall the Inspector. You can do that if you wish, but based on your post, the situation is already documented, so it's well nigh impossible to argue either a) it didn't happen, or b) it wasn't you. The Inspector's take on such lack of cooperation is likely to be that you don't want to accept responsibility for your actions and/or that you don't understand the seriousness of the error, and that's when it turns into an enforcement action rather than an administrative action. Enforcement actions remain on your record forever, and you will have to check that aforementioned box "yes" for the rest of your life.

Also, a 709 ride is only appropriate if there is evidence of "lack of competence," which I don't see in this story, since the pilot clearly knows what s/he did wrong and how it should be done correctly. This was just an old fashioned "brain fart," not a problem with procedures or skills, so this sort of thing doesn't usually result in reexamination.
 
Last edited:
Should the pilot preemptively call FSDO first to open up communications before they make any decisions on anything? How much time does one have to file a NASA report?
 
millerc2 said:
Should the pilot preemptively call FSDO first to open up communications before they make any decisions on anything?
Click to expand...
No. Let them come to you. It's always possible it may slip through a crack, and you don't want to be the one to save that from happening.

How much time does one have to file a NASA report?
Click to expand...
10 days from the event.
 
millerc2 said:
Should the pilot preemptively call FSDO first to open up communications before they make any decisions on anything?
Click to expand...

That would only ensure FSDO is aware of the incident, the report by the tower might get lost in the mail.
 
Thank you Cap'Ron. Last question: Since the aircraft used is not registered to the pilot directly, I'm assuming the inspector might have bit of a problem identifying the pilot. If the pilot fills out the NASA report early, will they be able to match that up so they may contact the pilot?

I agree with your suggestion on being forthright. It sounds like the bigest penatly for the pilot will be the up in insurance premiums and embarassment with his co-ownership plane partners.
 
File the ASRS. Be honest in it. When the inspector calls, be honest with him. Runway incursions are a big thing that's being cracked down upon, but it also seems like there's a big push to try to determine the human factors that lead up to them and can improve things.

While you should feel like you screwed up, also realize that this does happen, and the important thing with any mistake is to learn from it. It sounds like you're doing all of those, so you're good. Close to 4 years ago in the Aztec (when I had similar total time to you), I was going into ILG at night VFR with an interesting cloud/haze layer. I'd never landed there before, and ended up lining up with the wrong runway (the airport has 3 runways that form a triangle). Not a difficult thing to do, especially at night when tired (which I was - it had been a long day of flying). Tower pointed out I was lined up with the wrong runway and cleared me to land on it instead of the original runway I was cleared to land on. I apologized profusely for the mistake and admitted fault, they said not to worry about it. No follow-up, but there wasn't another plane there, so technically it wasn't an incursion, just a pilot deviation.

One thing I took away from that was to dial in an ILS if there was one, and alternately put the GPS in OBS mode or select the approach for that runway in vectors-to-final mode. Helps make sure you're lined up. I was looking at my HSI, but the extra tools might have helped. Fatigue was certainly a factor, as well.
 
The pilot screwed the pooch in the cockpit. The last thing the pilot wants to do is start bull****ting.
 
millerc2 said:
Thank you Cap'Ron. Last question: Since the aircraft used is not registered to the pilot directly, I'm assuming the inspector might have bit of a problem identifying the pilot.
Click to expand...
Not at all. There are many ways to ID the pilot via the registered owner.

If the pilot fills out the NASA report early, will they be able to match that up so they may contact the pilot?
Click to expand...
The NASA report is confidential, and all identifying data are stripped before the FAA sees it. In any event, they will have no trouble identifying the pilot without it.
 
millerc2 said:
So how much trouble is someone in if they land on the wrong parallel runway they were cleared for at a class D airport and it is classified as a runway incursion?

Specifics:
1. Private Pilot with 300 hrs in past 6 years.
2. Class D airport with Left and Right parallels.
3. Cleared for Left, pilot read back clearance for Left, landed on Right.
4. Other aircraft was holding short but was already cleared for takeoff on Right runway.
5. Tower requests landing pilot to contact tower for deviation and tower tells them they are filing the paperwork for it.
6. Pilot has never had any other infractions.

Pilot cannot think of any contributing factors to the mistake other than the clearance came early and with other notice of other aircraft in the area on the same call. It's the pilot's base airport and the Right runway is more commonly used.
Click to expand...

Pilot Deviations (PD's) are filed through the ATQA system (Air Traffic Quality Assurance) and given a tracking number then assigned to the FSDO in the district where the deviation took place. An Inspector is assigned the file and must investigate, gather the information and close the file.

The Inspector will contact the pilot to get his/her side of the event, perhaps even get the tower tapes or controller statement plus any other evidence and then determine action.

In your situation the best thing to do is talk it over with the Inspector, let him know your screw up and then both of you come up with a remedial action. In this case 9 times out of 10 it just results in formal counseling which is handled over the phone. The Inspector makes a PTRS entry under the code of formal counseling and then closes out the ATQA which has a questionnaire section, so he'll be asking you about your total time, last medical, last flight review, etc, etc. This goes into a master database to help identify problems in the ATC system.

The chance of this becoming an enforcement or 709 ride are slim to none. Both of those processes take immense time and paperwork and the Inspector has enough other work pending that he's not going to the effort unless there are other circumstances involved which would force the issue.

The Warning letter is done through a system called SNAAP (Streamlined No Action and Administrative Action Process) which generates a warning letter that stays on file for 2 years and then is expunged. To generate a SNAAP requires opening an enforcement PTRS and the associated paperwork in Order 2150.3B, so once again this is only done if you are a repeat offender or there are other problems which would dictate it's use.

I've personally done lots of PD's and they were way down on the list of favorite jobs within the Inspector's duties. Like mentioned by others here if you showed a constructive attitude and willing to learn from the mistake I would get the information required, close the PTRS and ATQA and close the file with formal counseling.
 
millerc2 said:
Thank you Cap'Ron. Last question: Since the aircraft used is not registered to the pilot directly, I'm assuming the inspector might have bit of a problem identifying the pilot. If the pilot fills out the NASA report early, will they be able to match that up so they may contact the pilot?

I agree with your suggestion on being forthright. It sounds like the bigest penatly for the pilot will be the up in insurance premiums and embarassment with his co-ownership plane partners.
Click to expand...

You were asked to contact the tower, I'm sure they got your name and contact information when you called them.
 
Ron, with the new Pilot Bill of Rights, will not the FSDO Rep need the pilot to sign the acknowledgement of rights before he can continue the investigation? This would require a face to face interview and not just a phone call?
 
BillTIZ said:
Ron, with the new Pilot Bill of Rights, will not the FSDO Rep need the pilot to sign the acknowledgement of rights before he can continue the investigation? This would require a face to face interview and not just a phone call?
Click to expand...

It can be mailed to the pilot when he receives his Letter of Investigation (LOI) as an attachment, concerning the event.

An LOI must be generated for a PD.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Pilot Deviations (PD's) are filed through the ATQA system (Air Traffic Quality Assurance) and given a tracking number then assigned to the FSDO in the district where the deviation took place. An Inspector is assigned the file and must investigate, gather the information and close the file.

The Inspector will contact the pilot to get his/her side of the event, perhaps even get the tower tapes or controller statement plus any other evidence and then determine action.

In your situation the best thing to do is talk it over with the Inspector, let him know your screw up and then both of you come up with a remedial action. In this case 9 times out of 10 it just results in formal counseling which is handled over the phone. The Inspector makes a PTRS entry under the code of formal counseling and then closes out the ATQA which has a questionnaire section, so he'll be asking you about your total time, last medical, last flight review, etc, etc. This goes into a master database to help identify problems in the ATC system.

The chance of this becoming an enforcement or 709 ride are slim to none. Both of those processes take immense time and paperwork and the Inspector has enough other work pending that he's not going to the effort unless there are other circumstances involved which would force the issue.

The Warning letter is done through a system called SNAAP (Streamlined No Action and Administrative Action Process) which generates a warning letter that stays on file for 2 years and then is expunged. To generate a SNAAP requires opening an enforcement PTRS and the associated paperwork in Order 2150.3B, so once again this is only done if you are a repeat offender or there are other problems which would dictate it's use.

I've personally done lots of PD's and they were way down on the list of favorite jobs within the Inspector's duties. Like mentioned by others here if you showed a constructive attitude and willing to learn from the mistake I would get the information required, close the PTRS and ATQA and close the file with formal counseling.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for that clear, concise and informative post. I have always wondered about this.
 
Kelvin said:
The pilot screwed the pooch in the cockpit. The last thing the pilot wants to do is start bull****ting.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When the BS'ing and the dodging begins one is only digging the hole deeper. Like I stated earlier, the Inspector wants the file closed and off his desk, if there were no other circumstances or dangers to safety then it's a fairly simple process.
 
One of the psychologically toughest things for a typical pilot to say, and one of the best things to say to an investigating Inspector is "I screwed up." One of the more psychologically typical things for a pilot to say, and one of the worst things to say to an Inspector is "I didn't do it and you can't prove I did." They each set the table for the rest of the discussion, but in entirely different ways. Keep that in mind if an Inspector ever calls.
 
Last edited:
While cooperating with the FAA, one might want to stay within the parameters of the issue and keep the responses well directed and on topic. One can cooperate without giving the story of one's life and maybe opening up a so far unnoticed additional violation. None seems evident in this example so this is simply an observation.
 
Does the pilot in question need or should have legal representation when the FAA comes calling?
 
Ron Levy said:
One of the psychologically toughest things for a typical pilot to say, and one of the best things to say to an investigating Inspector is "I screwed up." One of the more psychologically typical things for a pilot to say, and one of the worst things to say to an Inspector is "I didn't do it and you can't prove I did." They each set the table for the rest of the discussion, but in entirely different ways. Keep that in mind if an Inspector ever calls.
Click to expand...

I screwed up.

There, I've said it. Y'all should be able to, too. We've all screwed up at some point or another.
 
I taxied over a hold short line once in a pouring rain. Really couldn't see it, but knew I was close.
When FSDO called and asked what happened, that's what I explained in a very cooperative fashion. Told him I was trying very hard to do the best I could and just couldn't tell exactly where the darned thing was (and it was a funny situation). The next topic of conversation was what recent training had I taken and hours flown. They really like to know you're actively staying current. Asked about WINGS, flight review and IPC: I had done them all recently and offed to send copies.
When discussing how it could be prevented in the future, I related how the line was very difficult or impossible to see and how the taxi instructions from tower could have been improved.
He asked that I take an on-line course about taxi signage, thanked me for the suggestions and offered they had had an extraordinary number of problems there. Lines were later improved with flashing light on each side.

Good luck. I did file the NASA report as had been suggested.

FSDO said it would not become a matter of record.

Best,

Dave
 
Last edited:
douglas393 said:
Does the pilot in question need or should have legal representation when the FAA comes calling?
Click to expand...

That's the pilots decision. However adding an attorney won't change anything, if anything it may muddy the waters and prolong the event. That's just based upon my experience.

Like previously said, answer the Inspectors questions and stay on topic. No need to add useless information or get into something you shouldn't be discussing.

Remember, the Inspector doesn't get anything "extra" out of prolonging the event nor does he get anything extra turning this into an enforcement. If he can get the info, input it into PTRS and ATQA and close the file it's done and over.

Remember, path of least resistance.
 
A close friend of mine lined up on the wrong runway at his class D home airport for takeoff. He apologized to the controller for lining up with the wrong runway, and the controller apologized for not alerting him to the fact sooner. He then took off (a 7 knot tailwind is not a huge factor for most light aircraft taking off from a 5k asphalt strip).
 
One FAA inspector who used to frequent the forums here once said to me "I chose to work for the government because I don't want to work. If I call someone to chat and they tell me 'I'm not saying anything without my lawyer!', now I have to work. Now you've annoyed me."
 
I remember a day, now outside the statute of limitations, where my flight lead and I took off without a takeoff clearance. Not intentional, more just a moment of poor phraseology from the controller and complacency from the two of us in the flight. Took the runway, switched to departure, lit the blowers, and off we went. Got an angry call on guard shortly thereafter. After we landed, we stood tall in front of the Skipper, and then promptly called the tower sup. We explained, apologized, and he just said **** happens.....no harm no foul. Those guys aren't out to get you, but you need to be upfront and honest with them. Just like no punches are pulled in a debrief, there is no dignity to be saved with ATC when you screw the pooch. Fess up and you can both learn from it. Hide the truth, and nobody wants you in this business.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Exactly. When the BS'ing and the dodging begins one is only digging the hole deeper. Like I stated earlier, the Inspector wants the file closed and off his desk, if there were no other circumstances or dangers to safety then it's a fairly simple process.
Click to expand...


Exactly.:yes:

Be contrite, apologetic, humble, and concerned about the flying public safety. We all make mistakes, it's how you handle them that makes the difference. ;)
 
steingar said:
A close friend of mine lined up on the wrong runway at his class D home airport for takeoff. He apologized to the controller for lining up with the wrong runway, and the controller apologized for not alerting him to the fact sooner. He then took off (a 7 knot tailwind is not a huge factor for most light aircraft taking off from a 5k asphalt strip).
Click to expand...


But it is still bad airmanship.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
One FAA inspector who used to frequent the forums here once said to me "I chose to work for the government because I don't want to work. If I call someone to chat and they tell me 'I'm not saying anything without my lawyer!', now I have to work. Now you've annoyed me."
Click to expand...

35 AoA said:
I remember a day, now outside the statute of limitations, where my flight lead and I took off without a takeoff clearance. Not intentional, more just a moment of poor phraseology from the controller and complacency from the two of us in the flight. Took the runway, switched to departure, lit the blowers, and off we went. Got an angry call on guard shortly thereafter. After we landed, we stood tall in front of the Skipper, and then promptly called the tower sup. We explained, apologized, and he just said **** happens.....no harm no foul. Those guys aren't out to get you, but you need to be upfront and honest with them. Just like no punches are pulled in a debrief, there is no dignity to be saved with ATC when you screw the pooch. Fess up and you can both learn from it. Hide the truth, and nobody wants you in this business.
Click to expand...


This has been my experience also. Be contrite, apologetic, and appreciate the gravity of the situation. Trying to wiggle out of it makes everyone ****y. Own your mistake, learn from it, move on. Hiding is what little kids do, man up or woman up. Own it.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
One FAA inspector who used to frequent the forums here once said to me "I chose to work for the government because I don't want to work. If I call someone to chat and they tell me 'I'm not saying anything without my lawyer!', now I have to work. Now you've annoyed me."
Click to expand...
I would expect that there'd be no harm in consulting an "aviation lawyer" about the event and soliciting his advice but I'd also expect a good one would recommend the same course of action suggested by Ron and R&W (i.e. discuss the event with the inspector and fess up to the improper action in question (probably best to avoid bringing up any other infractions).

If I were the OP I'd also discuss the scenario with my favorite CFI and get his take on how to avoid similar mistakes in the future (make a list). If and when the FSDO calls you can then report this effort and the ideas the two of you came up with. This will not only demonstrate that you recognize the importance of the error but also that you are already working on preventing recurrence.

Ted already gave you one good suggestion but that won't necessarily help with parallel runways. My SOP (which also fails to address parallels) is to set the heading bug on my HSI to the runway numbers before every takeoff and landing (at some airports it's easy to line up on the wrong runway for takeoff) and baring a heading bug, I set something (OBS, ADF etc) to the runway heading so I can at least compare that with the compass easily.

WRT parallels, I think the best defense against your mistake of lining up on the wrong parallel is to study the airport diagram sometime before arriving (having a printout or a tablet with diagrams in the cockpit helps immensely) and make a mental note WRT how you would identify the assigned runway relative to the various strips of pavement.
 
Certainly no harm in consulting an aviation lawyer. What Craig had suggested was more that he was calling in a non-hostile manner and wanted to finish his file so he could close it, realizing mistakes happen and having made enough of his own. The issue to his mind was being met with hostility and a desire to force a confrontation.

WRT parallel runways, sometimes there will be an ILS for each one that may be active as many airlines have the same SOP, so it can still help. But at a class D, probably not. I like the heading bug one as well, and should add that to my SOP.
 
Last edited:
I'm just relating an article I read so don't shoot me. I believe it was AOPA, but someone wrote an article about flying into a TFR b/c he didn't check prior to making a local flight. He said he spoke with someone from the FAA and everything went smooth, but he ended up getting more than a little smack on the wrist. His takeaway message was to get legal advice before talking to any FAA official. I know to take it with a grain of salt b/c AOPA is always pushing membership by touting their legal representation, but I thought I'd mention it.
 
rbridges said:
I'm just relating an article I read so don't shoot me. I believe it was AOPA, but someone wrote an article about flying into a TFR b/c he didn't check prior to making a local flight. He said he spoke with someone from the FAA and everything went smooth, but he ended up getting more than a little smack on the wrist. His takeaway message was to get legal advice before talking to any FAA official. I know to take it with a grain of salt b/c AOPA is always pushing membership by touting their legal representation, but I thought I'd mention it.
Click to expand...
I would but Obama took away my gun.:D
 
What it may come down to is knowing or sensing when the talk with the FAA rep turns adversarial (if it does). I would (and have) called a spoken to the rep and explained. If you clearly screwed up--you did! If the conversation was factual and even toned where the FSDO rep was fact finding and I related facts after filing the NASA form, I could convey those facts. If it becomes an inquisition, there would be a point where I would say I've explained the best I could and need an adviser to continue.

Best,

Dave
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I screwed up.

There, I've said it. Y'all should be able to, too. We've all screwed up at some point or another.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I've even done the above (landed on wrong runway at a towered airport). It was even my home airport which is probably why it happened as I heard what I anticipated.

This was years ago before it was a mandatory PD. After the tower told me I had landed on the wrong runway I apologized. They responded with, "We'll take care of you." And that was all.

I've had other instances where I had to talk to the FAA about errors I made and I have come to the conclusion that it always helps to be humble and cooperative.
 
rbridges said:
I'm just relating an article I read so don't shoot me. I believe it was AOPA, but someone wrote an article about flying into a TFR b/c he didn't check prior to making a local flight. He said he spoke with someone from the FAA and everything went smooth, but he ended up getting more than a little smack on the wrist. His takeaway message was to get legal advice before talking to any FAA official. I know to take it with a grain of salt b/c AOPA is always pushing membership by touting their legal representation, but I thought I'd mention it.
Click to expand...

I think you are refering to this one:
http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/flight-planning/tfr-trouble?page=0,0
 
RotorAndWing said:
That's the pilots decision. However adding an attorney won't change anything, if anything it may muddy the waters and prolong the event.
Click to expand...

It's guaranteed to do one thing: Raise the cost to the pilot being investigated!

As stated multiple times above, talk them, be honest, admit your mistake and show a constructive attitude towards being the best pilot you can be. All will be well.
 
Last edited:
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top