On final at an uncontrolled field

Old Geek

Old Geek

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
1,888
Location
Northern California
Display Name
Display name:
Old Geek
I've been taught that when you are on final at an uncontrolled field you always go around if the runway isn't cleared before you touch down. Is there an FAR that requires this?
 
ATC reg but even that has allowances or waivers for two aircraft on the runway at the same time.

Uncontrolled airfield???
 
see and avoid
 
I believe that no reg requires the runway to be clear.

Out here in the land of long runways, it might not be a big deal to land before someone clears the runway.

On my second supervised solo an aircraft descended into the downwind leg about a 1/4 mile in front of me. I slowed and landed just after he cleared the runway. Talked it over with instructor afterwards and he assured me that I would have been okay to land even if the other guy wasn't off the runway yet. That night I looked in the AIM and didn't find anything on runway spacing at uncontrolled fields. On controlled fields there is a minimum separation distance for two aircraft on the runway and of course tower is responsible for that separation.
 
i landed side by side with another aircraft last week. a third had just landed ahead of us and was still on the runway but he went long. at the club we routinely land short of a line of gliders in line waiting for their tows. generally gliders use the left half and the towplane use the right.
 
So, as I was rolling out on the runway after landing, it was okay for that crop duster to land opposite direction behind me after passing about 15' over the top of me in the process?

Just kidding on the question.

But the event actually happened.
 
There are two applicable regs (well, maybe three). 91.111 says you may not operate so close to another airplane so as to cause a collision hazard. 91.113 says you may not force an aircraft which just landed off the runway to make way for your landing. Beyond that, it's common senses and 91.13 (careless/reckless). Basically, if you don't scare the other pilot enough that s/he complains for the FAA, it's not a problem at a nontowered airport.
 
I missed 91.113. I wonder how that would work in practice. You usually can't see a plane on final as you are taxiing on the runway. I suppose if the plane on final announced on CTAF, "Get the fsk off the runway, I'm landing on top of you if you don't" would do it...
 
you taxi toward final...?
 
Old Geek said:
I missed 91.113. I wonder how that would work in practice. You usually can't see a plane on final as you are taxiing on the runway. I suppose if the plane on final announced on CTAF, "Get the fsk off the runway, I'm landing on top of you if you don't" would do it...
Click to expand...

If you just landed and another aircraft is heading straight for you landing on the opposite runway , that might force you into the grass.
 
as yoda would say, "use the windshield". but I know what you're saying.
 
Old Geek said:
I missed 91.113. I wonder how that would work in practice. You usually can't see a plane on final as you are taxiing on the runway. I suppose if the plane on final announced on CTAF, "Get the fsk off the runway, I'm landing on top of you if you don't" would do it...
Click to expand...

I commonly do a 360 before departure. Some folks will fly a their own patterns and wil not communicate their intentions. I expect it and act accordingly. I do not want to be a part of the snow ball effect.
 
Old Geek said:
How? Open the door and put my head out? I can't see the tail of my plane from inside the cabin.
Click to expand...

Don't you do a clearing turn on ground to check final before taxiing out? (assuming you're flying a high wing)
 
Sac Arrow said:
Don't you do a clearing turn on ground to check final before taxiing out? (assuming you're flying a high wing)
Click to expand...

We're talking about two different things. The scenario was that I had just landed and another plane behind me on short final was forcing me off the runway so that he could land.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Don't you do a clearing turn on ground to check final before taxiing out? (assuming you're flying a high wing)
Click to expand...
He's talking about the situation when you're rolling out after landing and someone else is too close behind you. By rule, the second plane is required to yield to the plane rolling out, which is an exception to the usual rule that the plane on final has right of way.
 
A big annoyance of mine is the use of phrases such as "any inbound traffic, please advise." It's not so much the phrase, as the mentality that one could actually use the radio to look for traffic. We have eyeballs for that.

On the runway, it's not a good practice to land while someone ahead of you is rolling out or clearing. If for some reason they are unable to clear, or get stuck, and you're unable to land and must go, the potential exists for a problem.

A lot time ago at an ag training operation in the midwest, using a private airfield, we flew multiple aircraft both directions on a small gravel strip. One aircraft would do right traffic, while the other did opposite direction left traffic. The traffic pattern altitude was 200', and as one airplane was taking off, the other would be landing opposite direction over or past the one taking off. It was a matter of timing. Several airplanes could be in the pattern doing that at once; none had radios. It was a constant dance which encouraged the use of various skills that are common on any agricultural flight. When flying, it wasn't at all uncommon to be entering a field as someone was coming out. Staying under the descending traffic was a practical way to allow each aircraft to work off the other for spacing in the field; very critical when getting even application of chemical.

One day a young lady flight instructor arrived overhead and wanted to land. She had a student. She made seven attempts to fit into the pattern, and was unable. Ultimately she ran out of fuel and had to land. She made it. I ran into her near the fuel pump. She was hot under the collar and did a lot of communicating with a raised voice. She berated me in various uncivil tones, and faulted me for setting a poor instruction for my student, and for others. I politely listened until she was done, noted that I was a student pilot, not instructor, and asked if she might have a better example to set for her student.

I was seventeen at the time, and it was very clear to me then, as it is now, that finding traffic is our responsibility, not that of others. The young lady was upset that we didn't answer her calls. We had no electrical systems in the aircraft. She was upset that we were landing both ways and taking off both ways. It was a private airfield, it was an agricultural operation, and it was quite safe for us. The most dangerous component of that pattern that day was her.

When you're taxiing to the runway, you should be looking for aircraft in the pattern, especially on base and final. This is particularly important as you taxi onto the runway; you should check to ensure the runway is clear, and that the final approach is clear. Don't spend any more time sitting on that runway than you must. The longer you sit there, the more opportunity for someone to land on top of you.

Doing a circle at the end of the runway to look for traffic isn't a bad practice, but it's also not very practical in most locations, and certainly not with many kinds of aircraft. Especially on a crowded taxiway or ramp area.

You do have an obligation to see and avoid other traffic, though there is no obligation or practice to listen and avoid. Never the less, pay attention to radio transmissions then operate as though you're looking for the ones you can't hear. It's not that uncommon for people to not be where they say they are when doing position broadcasts, and it's very possible to have other aircraft up there that aren't talking at all. No electrical systems, failed systems, radios on the wrong frequency, selector switch issues, and so on mean that you may not be hearing everyone; look for them as though your life depends on it, because it does.

If someone is on the runway, you're generally best served waiting for them t clear before you depart or land, regardless of what regulatory prohibitions or discouragement may, nor may not exist.

Where someone is trying to "force" you off the runway, it's best not to create a safety hazard to make a point, but it's not appropriate to let them do that, anyway. At a minimum, a radio call advising them that you're not clear of the runway is not out of order. If they're being bullish about it and you're still in the process of clearing the line, then after you're clear make the call "XXXX is NOW clear of the runway, thanks."

Don't let someone force you off, however, where it will make a safety concern.

I landed a Seneca one hot afternoon, ahead of a B757. The controller demanded that I make the first turn off, which wasn't possible. While I was slowing, he reiterated two more times that I had to get clear, for the 757. I couldn't go any faster, even with extra braking. The 757 went around and the controller said "I hope you know you just cost XXX several thousand dollars."

I replied "you just cost them that. Who assigned the spacing?" The controller gave me a number and demanded I call the tower, which I did. The controller began to chew me out, told me he'd see I had my pilot certificate revoked, and generally spoke in an unfriendly manner. I told him that he was the one who assigned the landing clearance, and the spacing was an ATC issue, and that I wasn't going to damage the airplane to accommodate him. Apparently he was a trainee, because a supervisor came on the line and apologized profusely, and rang off.

On another occasion in a Piaggio Avanti, a weak copilot was flying from the right seat. I told him not to take the first exit, despite the controller reminding us to vacate as soon as possible, and that a B757 was to follow. The copilot tried to make the exit anyway, and locked up the brakes. The Avanti has no antiskid, and very effective carbon-fiber brakes. He ground down both tires in very short order, finally sliding to one side and coming to a stop in reverberated rubber hydroplaning. I had to physically pry him off the controls. That was the result of trying to get off the runway too soon, or allowing one's self to be forced from the runway. We were the lower aircraft and the aircraft landing; it was our right of way and our runway. No need to rush.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
By rule, the second plane is required to yield to the plane rolling out, which is an exception to the usual rule that the plane on final has right of way.
Click to expand...

Not an exception at all, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way.
 
Old Geek said:
We're talking about two different things. The scenario was that I had just landed and another plane behind me on short final was forcing me off the runway so that he could land.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
He's talking about the situation when you're rolling out after landing and someone else is too close behind you. By rule, the second plane is required to yield to the plane rolling out, which is an exception to the usual rule that the plane on final has right of way.
Click to expand...

Understood. Misread the post. My bad.
 
Clark1961 said:
Not an exception at all, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way.
Click to expand...
Only while they're flying. Aircraft on the ground do not get the benefit of that rule, and that is why that exception is codified in the regulation. Otherwise, aircraft taking the runway for departure could force aircraft on final to go around.
 
Old Geek said:
We're talking about two different things. The scenario was that I had just landed and another plane behind me on short final was forcing me off the runway so that he could land.
Click to expand...
How did he force you off the runway?
 
Clark1961 said:
Not an exception at all, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way.
Click to expand...

Looks like an exception to me.
91.113
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
Click to expand...
 
If there are, let us say, 4 aircraft in a traffic pattern, and a fifth aircrafts elects to conduct a straight in approach, does that fifth aircraft have the right of way over other aircraft in the pattern?
 
DouglasBader said:
A big annoyance of mine is the use of phrases such as "any inbound traffic, please advise." It's not so much the phrase, as the mentality that one could actually use the radio to look for traffic. We have eyeballs for that.

On the runway, it's not a good practice to land while someone ahead of you is rolling out or clearing. If for some reason they are unable to clear, or get stuck, and you're unable to land and must go, the potential exists for a problem.

A lot time ago at an ag training operation in the midwest, using a private airfield, we flew multiple aircraft both directions on a small gravel strip. One aircraft would do right traffic, while the other did opposite direction left traffic. The traffic pattern altitude was 200', and as one airplane was taking off, the other would be landing opposite direction over or past the one taking off. It was a matter of timing. Several airplanes could be in the pattern doing that at once; none had radios. It was a constant dance which encouraged the use of various skills that are common on any agricultural flight. When flying, it wasn't at all uncommon to be entering a field as someone was coming out. Staying under the descending traffic was a practical way to allow each aircraft to work off the other for spacing in the field; very critical when getting even application of chemical.

One day a young lady flight instructor arrived overhead and wanted to land. She had a student. She made seven attempts to fit into the pattern, and was unable. Ultimately she ran out of fuel and had to land. She made it. I ran into her near the fuel pump. She was hot under the collar and did a lot of communicating with a raised voice. She berated me in various uncivil tones, and faulted me for setting a poor instruction for my student, and for others. I politely listened until she was done, noted that I was a student pilot, not instructor, and asked if she might have a better example to set for her student.

I was seventeen at the time, and it was very clear to me then, as it is now, that finding traffic is our responsibility, not that of others. The young lady was upset that we didn't answer her calls. We had no electrical systems in the aircraft. She was upset that we were landing both ways and taking off both ways. It was a private airfield, it was an agricultural operation, and it was quite safe for us. The most dangerous component of that pattern that day was her.

When you're taxiing to the runway, you should be looking for aircraft in the pattern, especially on base and final. This is particularly important as you taxi onto the runway; you should check to ensure the runway is clear, and that the final approach is clear. Don't spend any more time sitting on that runway than you must. The longer you sit there, the more opportunity for someone to land on top of you.

Doing a circle at the end of the runway to look for traffic isn't a bad practice, but it's also not very practical in most locations, and certainly not with many kinds of aircraft. Especially on a crowded taxiway or ramp area.

You do have an obligation to see and avoid other traffic, though there is no obligation or practice to listen and avoid. Never the less, pay attention to radio transmissions then operate as though you're looking for the ones you can't hear. It's not that uncommon for people to not be where they say they are when doing position broadcasts, and it's very possible to have other aircraft up there that aren't talking at all. No electrical systems, failed systems, radios on the wrong frequency, selector switch issues, and so on mean that you may not be hearing everyone; look for them as though your life depends on it, because it does.

If someone is on the runway, you're generally best served waiting for them t clear before you depart or land, regardless of what regulatory prohibitions or discouragement may, nor may not exist.

Where someone is trying to "force" you off the runway, it's best not to create a safety hazard to make a point, but it's not appropriate to let them do that, anyway. At a minimum, a radio call advising them that you're not clear of the runway is not out of order. If they're being bullish about it and you're still in the process of clearing the line, then after you're clear make the call "XXXX is NOW clear of the runway, thanks."

Don't let someone force you off, however, where it will make a safety concern.

I landed a Seneca one hot afternoon, ahead of a B757. The controller demanded that I make the first turn off, which wasn't possible. While I was slowing, he reiterated two more times that I had to get clear, for the 757. I couldn't go any faster, even with extra braking. The 757 went around and the controller said "I hope you know you just cost XXX several thousand dollars."

I replied "you just cost them that. Who assigned the spacing?" The controller gave me a number and demanded I call the tower, which I did. The controller began to chew me out, told me he'd see I had my pilot certificate revoked, and generally spoke in an unfriendly manner. I told him that he was the one who assigned the landing clearance, and the spacing was an ATC issue, and that I wasn't going to damage the airplane to accommodate him. Apparently he was a trainee, because a supervisor came on the line and apologized profusely, and rang off.

On another occasion in a Piaggio Avanti, a weak copilot was flying from the right seat. I told him not to take the first exit, despite the controller reminding us to vacate as soon as possible, and that a B757 was to follow. The copilot tried to make the exit anyway, and locked up the brakes. The Avanti has no antiskid, and very effective carbon-fiber brakes. He ground down both tires in very short order, finally sliding to one side and coming to a stop in reverberated rubber hydroplaning. I had to physically pry him off the controls. That was the result of trying to get off the runway too soon, or allowing one's self to be forced from the runway. We were the lower aircraft and the aircraft landing; it was our right of way and our runway. No need to rush.
Click to expand...

1st: a radio is a tool that can be used to 'look' for (be made aware of) traffic.

2nd: nice story about the 75. I call BS.
 
vintage cessna said:
If there are, let us say, 4 aircraft in a traffic pattern, and a fifth aircrafts elects to conduct a straight in approach, does that fifth aircraft have the right of way over other aircraft in the pattern?
Click to expand...

If they are on final or landing yes (91.113). Still they shouldn't distrupt the flow of traffic while executing that straight-in (AC90-66A). I never do a straight-in if someone else is in the pattern. You're always going to have someone say "you cut me off."
 
I always thought it was funny that the lower aircraft has the right of way but not to abuse this to overtake or cut in front of an aircraft that's on final approach to land. What are the odds that I would be lower than the aircraft on final approach to land? I guess if I was a helicopter doing right traffic but that's about it.:dunno:
 
1st: a radio is a tool that can be used to 'look' for (be made aware of) traffic.
Click to expand...

You're exactly the type of pilot for whom I made my comments.

Looking for traffic with your radio is a poor habit, borne of weakness and bad habit. Between TCAS and your radio, you might as well be blind. It wouldn't hurt you a bit, would it?
 
DouglasBader said:
You're exactly the type of pilot for whom I made my comments.

Looking for traffic with your radio is a poor habit, borne of weakness and bad habit. Between TCAS and your radio, you might as well be blind. It wouldn't hurt you a bit, would it?
Click to expand...

I believe he said a tool, not a crutch.
 
Velocity173 said:
I always thought it was funny that the lower aircraft has the right of way but not to abuse this to overtake or cut in front of an aircraft that's on final approach to land. What are the odds that I would be lower than the aircraft on final approach to land? I guess if I was a helicopter doing right traffic but that's about it.:dunno:
Click to expand...

One time when I was on a practice ILS at Salinas, my safety pilot pointed out that a faster plane passed underneath us on final approach. (I think I did a 360 for spacing.) That's the one example I have seen of someone at a lower altitude cutting in front of me.
 
I believe he said a tool, not a crutch.
Click to expand...

Same thing.

It's one thing to listen to the radio attentively, understanding that it gives a partial, often incorrect picture of what's out there.

It's another thing to use the radio to look for traffic.

We listen to the radio.

We look for traffic.
 
Palmpilot said:
One time when I was on a practice ILS at Salinas, my safety pilot pointed out that a faster plane passed underneath us on final approach. (I think I did a 360 for spacing.) That's the one example I have seen of someone at a lower altitude cutting in front of me.
Click to expand...

Yeah I suppose if a VFR guy doing a long straight in could be under aircraft doing an instrument approach.
 
Velocity173 said:
If they are on final or landing yes (91.113). Still they shouldn't distrupt the flow of traffic while executing that straight-in (AC90-66A).
Click to expand...
If push comes to legal shove between what it says in 91.113(g) and what it says in AC 90-66A, 91.113(g) wins every time. See Administrator v. Fekete for the gory details.
 
DouglasBader said:
One aircraft would do right traffic, while the other did opposite direction left traffic. The traffic pattern altitude was 200', and as one airplane was taking off, the other would be landing opposite direction over or past the one taking off. It was a matter of timing.
Click to expand...
A matter of timing? No doubt. Then, they'd get a fun chance to dodge each other again on downwind too--at 200'. So, this is where you learned your traffic pattern behavior!
...
DouglasBader said:
I was seventeen at the time, and it was very clear to me then, as it is now, that finding traffic is our responsibility, not that of others.
Click to expand...
Then there's no need of a traffic pattern at all in your free-for-all world I guess?

dtuuri
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top