Read the Damned NOTAMS, People!

F

FlyingElvii

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jun 24, 2016
Messages
804
Display Name
Display name:
flyingElvii
How do I explain, this?
Happened this morning, and I'm still angry about it.
I'm on final, concentrating on my speed and touchdown point, dealing with some thermal sink, when all of the sudden, a retract turns in front of me 200 feet off the ground. Less than 50 feet away. I jam the the throttle and turn away, saying a couple choice things on the radio as I turn up and away.

Not only did the guy not see me, but he came in low, fast, and never said a thing on the radio. Another plane that was abeam the numbers said that he came in fast 500 feet below him and made a banking left turn to a very short final. Turns out that it was an "emergency" bathroom stop for his passenger.

In his defense, there is a glitch in foreflight that could be dangerous.

4 weeks ago, the CTAF at this field changed to a less busy freq. The change is notam'd and when you go to full screen for the airport on foreflight, it shows the correct freq. But, if you just glance at the chart, it still shows the old freq. Apparently, this does not get updated until the official chart is.

Due to a combination of his stupidity, arrogance, and this possible foreflight glitch, I could have ended my day in a smoking hole at the end of the runway. The Fbo desk apparently lit into him, and he was starting when I got to parking and shut down. He got out of there pretty quick, and did not even apologize.

Thoughts? This is my first real close call since I got back into flying last year. I'm not shook up about it, just PO'd that he didn't even have the decency to apologize.
 
Sorry to read this. And you have every right to PO'd. He should have known that he was not on the correct frequency if he wasn't hearing other traffic.

Thank goodness nothing came of the close call.

I fly with a Stratus 2 and Foreflight now after my close call. I WANT to see all traffic out there. I won't see it all, but it sure as heck will let me know about more that I can physically see. While most other pilots are courteous, I can't count on those "some" to see and avoid.

Again, sorry to read of the encounter. Hopefully that pilot has learned not only a lesson, but flies safer from the experience.
 
what does this have to do with notams? and wth is thermal sink??
 
Sorry for your experience, but I wouldn't call that a bug.

Foreflight published the official sectional data downloaded from the FAA, on cycle, as they should. Not sure I want someone at each private software provider reading through every NOTAM and hand changing those documents, at their discretion. Too much room for error, interpretation, and loss of data integrity.
 
MichiPilot said:
what does this have to do with notams? and wth is thermal sink??
Click to expand...
FlyingElvii said:
4 weeks ago, the CTAF at this field changed to a less busy freq. The change is notam'd and when you go to full screen for the airport on foreflight, it shows the correct freq. But, if you just glance at the chart, it still shows the old freq. Apparently, this does not get updated until the official chart is.
Click to expand...
It's about notams because the pilot didn't read them. But I'm not sure I would expect a pilot doing an unplanned deviation to see it. I would expect him to double check the frequency, even if it were a familiar airport.

OTOH, I'm not sure what is meant by a FF "glitch." Unless I misunderstand, Elvii says F2F has the information if you look at ForeFlight's airport page. It's just not on the FAA's chart until the FAA updates it on the 6 month cycle. Of course, I might be misunderstanding. What airport is this?
 
He had zero requirement to even have a radio in the plane.

It was more a failure to see other aircraft in VMC and follow right of way.

Also if he was under you on final, he had the right of way.
 
kgruber said:
That' the trouble with all the laptops, Ipads, Foreflights, and other bogus computer screens restricting the view.
The rule is still "see and be seen!!!"
Time to spend more time LOOKING out the windshield, rather than Foreflight.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, brother! As most every post I make referring to iJunk and fartoids will attest.
 
....and we have moved to a new breed of pilot that doesn't understand chart cycles.

This is a step past "children of the magenta" so perhaps a new name is appropriate?
Proposals please:
Digital children?
Head down, stay down?
iPad puppies?
<enter more proposals here>
 
Yeah, the guy should have been at proper pattern altitude and looking for other planes. And that guy on downwind, who had you both in sight, why didn't he say something?

But how do you even know theguy was using Foreflight? The situation would have been the same if he was using "old fashioned" charts. And with an unplanned diversion, I'm not really sure how he would check NOTAMs. I guess he could get them from FSS, maybe? But I wouldn't expect him to.

The issue here is a good old-fashioned failure of see and avoid, and I'm glad everything turned out ok. Also, since folks at the airport know of the frequency issue, why not monitor the old frequency until the charts are updated?
 
General rule of thumb I have seen, is if an airport is busy enough to get a change in frequency, then Unicom is monitored by one or more FBOs. Twice local airports I used to frequent changed frequencies, in both cases, the FBOs monitored the old frequency until a few weeks after the charts are updated.
Oh, a friend on mine still uses paper charts. He would have been on the wrong frequency.

Lastly, for those espousing see and avoid, eyes out the window, who does this apply too? The OP or the NORDO aircraft? I personally do not expect a pilot to look above and behind himself/herself.

Tim
 
This is the weak point of NOTAMs. You have to actively go seeking the NOTAM for an airport, and its not the easiest thing to do. I can't tell you how many times we issue NOTAMs at our airport for things like runway closures, etc., and still have to be on high alert for pilots that didn't get them.
 
Lindberg said:
Yeah, the guy should have been at proper pattern altitude and looking for other planes. And that guy on downwind, who had you both in sight, why didn't he say something?

But how do you even know theguy was using Foreflight? The situation would have been the same if he was using "old fashioned" charts. And with an unplanned diversion, I'm not really sure how he would check NOTAMs. I guess he could get them from FSS, maybe? But I wouldn't expect him to.

The issue here is a good old-fashioned failure of see and avoid, and I'm glad everything turned out ok. Also, since folks at the airport know of the frequency issue, why not monitor the old frequency until the charts are updated?
Click to expand...
I would also question the decision to NOTAM a CTAF freq. change out of cycle with the charts. Why not wait to change it till the new chart comes out. I would expect more problems at this airport.
 
They may have changed it to coincide with the Chart Supplement release, which isn't liked to the charts. But I'd have gone with the Chart, knowing that most folks won't look at the Chart Supplement in this situation.
 
tspear said:
Lastly, for those espousing see and avoid, eyes out the window, who does this apply too? The OP or the NORDO aircraft? I personally do not expect a pilot to look above and behind himself/herself.
Click to expand...
Both. The retract turned final in front of the OP, so he was on base or downwind while the OP was on final. He might have been visible there, and the OP should have been looking. And the OP says the retract had an "emergency," but what if it was an emergency? Or he was flying a glider? See and avoid is everyone's responsibility.
 
Agree, I don't think failure to check NOTAMs is necessarily the issue. We don't even know whether the retract announced his intentions on the old frequency, or at all. He could (legally) have been NORDO, as it was apparently an untowered field. The bottom line is the retract had no business coming in way below pattern altitude (if I read the witness account correctly) and cutting off an aircraft on final. So it was both a failure of see and avoid, and a 91.113 violation assuming the facts were as given.
 
azure said:
Agree, I don't think failure to check NOTAMs is necessarily the issue. We don't even know whether the retract announced his intentions on the old frequency, or at all. He could (legally) have been NORDO, as it was apparently an untowered field. The bottom line is the retract had no business coming in way below pattern altitude (if I read the witness account correctly) and cutting off an aircraft on final. So it was both a failure of see and avoid, and a 91.113 violation assuming the facts were as given.
Click to expand...
I thought it was normal for aircraft on base to be below pattern altitude. Also, he might have been making a short approach. I agree that it was a failure of see-and-avoid and a violation of the right-of-way rule.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
I thought it was normal for aircraft on base to be below pattern altitude. Also, he might have been making a short approach. I agree that it was a failure of see-and-avoid.
Click to expand...
I was going by the sentence: "Another plane that was abeam the numbers said that he came in fast 500 feet below him and made a banking left turn to a very short final." To me that sounds as if the retract just bulled his way onto the base leg with no regard for traffic in the pattern, turned final, and landed. Assuming it was not a true emergency (not a bathroom one), how is that not a 91.113 violation?
 
My local airport changed frequencies a few years ago. I was not uncommon for someone to forget the new frequency, even had the local police helicopter and a national guard heli use the old frequency months after the change. I learned to monitor the old frequency when using the airport to remain safe.
 
Paper charts wouldn't have been any better for an unplanned stop like this. At least with FF you'd have an opportunity to get the current information which is better than the old way of not having it at all.

I bet this guy was acting reasonably for an unplanned stop, probably announcing on the old freq and just not seeing/ hearing the other traffic. Not an excuse, but a likely reason.

Suggestion for this airport- can they announce the new CTAF to their weather broadcast until it gets updated on the paper chart? Most pilots would get the message that way I think.
 
You had the right of way because you were on final when he turned in front of you, and you are justified in being ticked off, but you need to get over it. Sounds harsh I know, but it happened, it will happen again, you may even be "that guy" at some point in the future. Take it in stride, and move on. You did what you were supposed to do, "see and avoid other aircraft". Pat yourself on the back for that. Venting is fine, and a forum like this is a good place to do it. Sounds like he became aware of the situation on the ground, and probably should have apologized to you, but he may have been ashamed/embarrassed.

The takeaway is that you have to be ever vigilant for other traffic, ESPECIALLY around an airport. NORDO, incorrect frequency, wrong pattern, or someone being an idiot or even an a-hole -- it happens.
 
kgruber said:
What???????????
Click to expand...

Think about it. How often do you see ANY pilot look up and behind them in a plane? Especially a high wing?
I personally, mostly fly low wing airplanes, and even then I know I am not always the best at looking up and behind myself. Part of the reason why, if I am not under radar control with ATC, I generally perform a gentle S turn to look below the nose of the plane before descending; because I know someone below me is not going to see me.

Tim
 
I agree the aircraft was wrong to cut you off on final.

I've been on the other side of this. Bad hotel eggs for breakfast caused problems for myself and passengers flying in a new aircraft with the 'new plane smell'. It was a short flight and everyone agreed they could hold it. After shooting the approach and going missed, I was desperately looking for alternates. I found another airport and we were starting our descent again when I smelled what occurred in the back. Passengers were screaming that they can't hold it any longer and I was in pain myself. Our diversion went below minimums, so I diverted to a nearby field and shot the approach there, had to go missed. I had the heater on full blast (in the summer) because I was freezing. I decided enough wasting time, go to the nearest VFR field which was 25 minutes away. I thought there's no way I could ever make it. That was the longest 25 minute diversion I've ever experienced. I was very tunnel visioned on flying the plane and getting on the ground. I had cramps so bad I was leaning one way and barely able to see out.

With the kids screaming, dog barking, and the awful smell, combined with my own pain of trying to hold it in, I can tell you I probably wouldn't have thought to check for an alternate CTAF frequency. I did look for notams through the G1000 but it doesn't always show everything. I pulled up the CTAF in the G1000 and luckily it was the right one.

All I remember from that point on was how much pain I was in. I was tunneled vision on 2 things: lower the gear and don't screw up the landing. Traffic pattern entry? Direct to the numbers

2 out of 5 made it to the bathroom, the dog was the only one who didn't get sick. The new plane smell never came back.

Point I'm trying to make is given the situation I was in, the person in your scenario easily could have been me. Not sure what kind of emergency he had, but I have a whole new respect for bathroom emergencies.

He was wrong to cut you off on final. 50 feet in front of you is way too close. But I can understand how that tunnel vision could lead to a situation like that.
 
azure said:
I was going by the sentence: "Another plane that was abeam the numbers said that he came in fast 500 feet below him and made a banking left turn to a very short final." To me that sounds as if the retract just bulled his way onto the base leg with no regard for traffic in the pattern, turned final, and landed. Assuming it was not a true emergency (not a bathroom one), how is that not a 91.113 violation?
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to imply that it wasn't. I will clarify my post.
 
James331 said:
He had zero requirement to even have a radio in the plane.

It was more a failure to see other aircraft in VMC and follow right of way.

Also if he was under you on final, he had the right of way.
Click to expand...

If it happened the way the OP described it, the guy "cut in line" to put himself in the right of way position.

91.113, which has already been quoted, section g

(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.

Again, if it happened as described, this does go against 91.113. Having to pee doesn't qualify as an emergency.
 
cowman said:
Paper charts wouldn't have been any better for an unplanned stop like this. At least with FF you'd have an opportunity to get the current information which is better than the old way of not having it at all.

I bet this guy was acting reasonably for an unplanned stop, probably announcing on the old freq and just not seeing/ hearing the other traffic. Not an excuse, but a likely reason.

Suggestion for this airport- can they announce the new CTAF to their weather broadcast until it gets updated on the paper chart? Most pilots would get the message that way I think.
Click to expand...
That was actually a suggested solution when discussing it afterward.
 
Caramon13 said:
If it happened the way the OP described it, the guy "cut in line" to put himself in the right of way position.

91.113, which has already been quoted, section g

(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.

Again, if it happened as described, this does go against 91.113. Having to pee doesn't qualify as an emergency.
Click to expand...
Needing to pee may not constitute an emergency. Then again it might if a pilot needs to pee so badly it is interfering with his ability to control the plane. Passengers can also have "bathroom issues" that would constitute an emergency. We can only speculate what the issue was here. If it was an emergency, the pilot may ignore the FARs if necessary, but he is not relieved of his responsibility to end the flight safely. That said, we're talking to the OP. If the retract pilot had posted his story here, we might give him different advice.

But I don't think the real issue here is what the regs say, but how we can make sure everyone gets on the ground safely.
 
pburger said:
Sounds like he became aware of the situation on the ground, and probably should have apologized to you, but he may have been ashamed/embarrassed.
Click to expand...
This. Or since the OP had already been hostile on the radio, he may have felt quietly avoiding any interaction was the best course of action to avoid any further beligerence or worse.
 
Lindberg said:
If the field has AWOS and isn't announcing the frequency change, I think I'd bop the airport manager on the head.
Click to expand...
Or better yet, suggest that it be added!
 
Caramon13 said:
If it happened the way the OP described it, the guy "cut in line" to put himself in the right of way position.

91.113, which has already been quoted, section g

(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.

Again, if it happened as described, this does go against 91.113. Having to pee doesn't qualify as an emergency.
Click to expand...


This depends on the type of pattern the OP was flying, if he was doing the B2 bomber sized pattern in his GA bug smasher, people aren't going to wait all day for your 8 mile final at 60kts.

Plus as the aircraft higher in the sky, he had a more advantageous position with more options.
 
James331 said:
This depends on the type of pattern the OP was flying, if he was doing the B2 bomber sized pattern in his GA bug smasher, people aren't going to wait all day for your 8 mile final at 60kts.

Plus as the aircraft higher in the sky, he had a more advantageous position with more options.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but it doesn't matter if you fly a B2 bomber sized pattern or not, when you are on final, you have the right of way. Too bad about anyone else. You don't get to cut in line because you're impatient. Doesn't work that way. I've had to do 360's or S turns due to a SLOW mover on final. I didn't just cut in line and land.

That said, if the guy that cut in line was actually on the CTAF and had asked, I'm sure the OP would have had no problem, especially if he could get down and clear before him. I've done it before, let people either cut in line or takeoff ahead of me on final because I knew I was slow.

But not doing that and putting yourself in front of someone who clearly has the right of way is just bad manners, not to mention dangerous.
 
Caramon13 said:
Maybe, but it doesn't matter if you fly a B2 bomber sized pattern or not, when you are on final, you have the right of way. Too bad about anyone else. You don't get to cut in line because you're impatient. Doesn't work that way. I've had to do 360's or S turns due to a SLOW mover on final. I didn't just cut in line and land.

That said, if the guy that cut in line was actually on the CTAF and had asked, I'm sure the OP would have had no problem, especially if he could get down and clear before him. I've done it before, let people either cut in line or takeoff ahead of me on final because I knew I was slow.

But not doing that and putting yourself in front of someone who clearly has the right of way is just bad manners, not to mention dangerous.
Click to expand...

Actually it does, go to any busy towered airport, fly a huge pattern or drag it in, they'll have you break off and get the 4 guys behind you in before they give you another chance.

My opinion and practice on right of way is to hold the person in the most advantageous position to the higher standard, since he has more options.
 
James331 said:
Actually it does, go to any busy towered airport, fly a huge pattern or drag it in, they'll have you break off and get the 4 guys behind you in before they give you another chance.

My opinion and practice on right of way is to hold the person in the most advantageous position to the higher standard, since he has more options.
Click to expand...

I was responding under the context of a pilot-controlled field. If you are in a tower-controlled airspace, of course there's a difference. Thought that was obvious.

So, your opinion in this case is that if a plane is higher and slower on approach then you'd like, but clearly on final, it's ok to go ahead and cut in front because he has more options? Again, in the context of a pilot-controlled field, not towered.

Aren't you in your actions removing those options and giving him ONE option? It's not like he's going to continue the approach with you out in front of him now...the option is to go around. What else is there?

The plane that cuts in front has more options...MANY more in fact.
 
James331 said:
He had zero requirement to even have a radio in the plane.

It was more a failure to see other aircraft in VMC and follow right of way.

Also if he was under you on final, he had the right of way.
Click to expand...
Cutting someone off doesn't grant right of way.
 
Sounds like see and avoid worked at preventing a potential serious accident from occurring due to a communication failure related to the incomplete planning of managing a freq change by the airport management. Perfectly? No, but it worked. Like others said, why wouldn't the freq change by on the weather info?
 
James331 said:
This depends on the type of pattern the OP was flying, if he was doing the B2 bomber sized pattern in his GA bug smasher, people aren't going to wait all day for your 8 mile final at 60kts.

Plus as the aircraft higher in the sky, he had a more advantageous position with more options.
Click to expand...

Non-towered airports have a procedure you're supposed to follow when in the traffic pattern...it's supposed to prevent this kind of thing. You don't just cut someone off because you feel like it...you get in line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top