Short Final - would you take it?

Abeam the numbers on 29L with traffic on 5 mile final, would you...

  • accept a short final approach

    Votes: 42 89.4%

  • step over to 29R

    Votes: 5 10.6%
  • Total voters
    47
  • Poll closed .
gkainz

gkainz

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
8,401
Location
Arvada, CO
Display Name
Display name:
Greg Kainz
Yesterday morning at KBJC - midfield downwind for 29R in a Dakota, tower gets a callup from a bizjet (don't recall what variant) "7 mile final for straight in RWY 29R" or similar.

Tower calls me and says "Would you like a short final for 29R or move over to 29L?"

I'm abeam the numbers at this point and accept a short final. A quick and easy power off arc to the numbers and one of my nicer landings (why do all the good ones happen when nobody's there to see?) :D well ahead of the bizjet.

Easily make the first turnoff and tower thanks me for the approach.

After some discussion, I'll reveal the conversation that prompted me to post the question - would you a) take the short final, or b) move to 29L?

edit - crap - can't edit the poll and I typo'ed the runways - 2nd choice should read 29L

2nd edit - I was returning to home base (just me in the plane). We leave the planes fueled to the tabs, and gassing up in LMO I add 3 gallons to one tank, which brings me to the hangar with fuel right at the tab. Not an excuse to do something foolish, but I didn't see anything wrong with taking a short final approach.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if my answer should count ;)

I mostly fly gyroplanes and my gyro can make a zero-roll landing right at the taxi intersection and I can be off the runway in a heart beat. I can even fly sideways to watch to make sure the jet is not about to plow into me.

If I were flying my wifes slow fixed wing I would have given it a miss. More time in the air is good for me, flying is fun!

.
 
Tower didn't put the jet on 29L because....?
 
As with everything, "it depends." If I had passengers, I would want the smoother approach for them, and I might ask for 29L.

If it's just me or the only passengers were pilot folk, I'd take the short approach. I typically do short approaches anyway when I don't have to worry about passenger comfort.
 
It would depend on the plane. I had the same thing happen at COS once with a MD80. I asked how long before he got to the runway. Too soon to go from where I was to the runway. I'm in no hurry. The sky is fun. Delays mean more time in the sky.
 
gkainz said:
29R is closer to the terminal?
29R/11L is 9000' x 100' while 29L/11R is 7002' x 75' ?
I'm just a little guy and don't burn kerosene?
Click to expand...

Option 2 is probably the most.

But Option 3 does exist. I've been given delay vectors to give preference to turbine aircraft. I usually cancel IFR if I can at that point and just go in VFR faster.

Once I was surprised to hear NY Center give the Dash 8 delay vectors to come in behind me. I canceled IFR so that we could all get in faster at that point.
 
I voted step over, only because you didn't give me any reason not to.
But my real answer it it depends. I would have been monitoring the tower and tried to select the option that seemed to help him out the most.

If both the jet and I want to go to the same side of the runway I would have made the short approach. If i was just doing touch and goes I would have switched.

Brian
 
I would have picked the other runway so I wouldn't have to worry about the jet breathing down my neck while I roll to the turnoff.
 
All my approaches are short final. If I fly for more than 8 seconds on final, I made my turn to base too far from the runway.
 
It would depend on my familiarity with both the airplane and the field.

If I regularly frequented the airport and was in a plane I was comfortable with, sure, I'd take the short approach.

If I wasn't super comfortable in the plane or familiar with the field, I would take side-step.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Tower didn't put the jet on 29L because....?
Click to expand...
Because jets never get put on 29L at BJC. All FBOs and the terminal are north of the E-W runways. Helos and single engine pistons get 29R or at least stay out of the way. Obviously the controllers had confidence in Greg that he would be out of the way. That's a good sign.
 
Either works for me but I'm just surprised the bizjet couldn't have or wasn't offered 29L 7k should be more than adequate for him too.
 
Clark1961 said:
Because jets never get put on 29L at BJC. All FBOs and the terminal are north of the E-W runways. Helos and single engine pistons get 29R or at least stay out of the way. Obviously the controllers had confidence in Greg that he would be out of the way. That's a good sign.
Click to expand...

Typically I find they ask you unless you sound like an idiot, and then it's up to you to state whether or not you can do it. If you can't, then they switch things up for the jet and get angry at you.

silver-eagle said:
Either works for me but I'm just surprised the bizjet couldn't have or wasn't offered 29L 7k should be more than adequate for him too.
Click to expand...

See above reasons for why. 7k may be plenty adequate, but time preference is typically given to turbines. After seeing just what their fuel burn is at low altitudes, I agree with the reasons.
 
gkainz said:
29R is closer to the terminal?
29R/11L is 9000' x 100' while 29L/11R is 7002' x 75' ?
I'm just a little guy and don't burn kerosene?
Click to expand...
That never stopped the controllers at KAPA. :rofl:

Just FYI, I wouldn't consider 7,000' "short" for landing for almost any business jet. It could possibly be short for takeoff for some airplanes on a hot day at KBJC.
 
Everskyward said:
That never stopped the controllers at KAPA. :rofl:

Just FYI, I wouldn't consider 7,000' "short" for landing for almost any business jet. It could possibly be short for takeoff for some airplanes on a hot day at KBJC.
Click to expand...

So here's a question - in my experience, the most expensive airplane to operate typically gets priority, even if the less expensive aircraft is a bit closer time wise. But that's from my seat of flying relatively inexpensive aircraft. When I go into FRG and there are 20 Cherokees coming in, they give me priority in the Aztec/310. When I go into Montreal, they give the jets priority over me, but still fit me in pretty well.

Do you find it the same on the other side of the fence?
 
I was heading home from MWC and was in the goo, and GRR vectored a 121er so so I could fly direct the VOR for the approach into Hastings. So once in a while us cheapies don't get moved around.
 
I think there is a weight limit on 29L. Tower may not want to figure out if the jet is light enough.
 
If I'm familar with the airplane and the airport and I know I could do it, sure I'd take the short final. Especially if I'm paying attention and hear the bizjet callup. More than once at my home field I've accepted a short final or extend downwind when I'm in my own airplane and already knew it was coming because of paying attention to the other radio traffic.
 
I would take a short final, if I was proficient in the airplane and KNEW it wouldnt be a factor.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
So here's a question - in my experience, the most expensive airplane to operate typically gets priority, even if the less expensive aircraft is a bit closer time wise. But that's from my seat of flying relatively inexpensive aircraft. When I go into FRG and there are 20 Cherokees coming in, they give me priority in the Aztec/310. When I go into Montreal, they give the jets priority over me, but still fit me in pretty well.

Do you find it the same on the other side of the fence?
Click to expand...

I always offer to give way to the kerosene burners as they consume massive amouts of fuel down low,, that and I get more flight time... Well, there is that one time when the tower called me when a Lear 55 called a 5 mile final and I was mid field.... Keep in mind the tower guys and gals have all ridden in my toy and know its potential,,,, So in this case I say , I can accept the short approach. There was about a 2 second pause and then the Lear comes on the radio with a simple comment .. "oh boy" . Tower clears me for the landing with instructions to be off by Alpha 2,,, Crank and bank time, rolled out right on centerline , hit softly on the left wheel first followed by the right wheel setting down, lowered the nose and stood on the double puck disc brakes and exited at A-2. Cleared the active, taxied to my hangar and just as I was shutting down and removing my headphones ground called and says 'thanks for making that happen" . The Lear touched down at that same moment.:yes:.. As I walked back to the lobby for some lemonade the pilots exited their bizjet and we chatted. I mentioned I had already shut down at my hangar when they touched down.... Long story short,,, they had a 3 hour layover before having the launch again for their next mission so both of them asked and got a ride in the " STOL plane from hell". They both now have a new appreaciation for short approaches.... YMMV. :yikes::yikes:

Ben.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
So here's a question - in my experience, the most expensive airplane to operate typically gets priority, even if the less expensive aircraft is a bit closer time wise. But that's from my seat of flying relatively inexpensive aircraft. When I go into FRG and there are 20 Cherokees coming in, they give me priority in the Aztec/310. When I go into Montreal, they give the jets priority over me, but still fit me in pretty well.

Do you find it the same on the other side of the fence?
Click to expand...
From my observation, cost of operation doesn't have anything to do with priority. I don't think the controllers consider it and neither do I. After all, the cost of flying or taxiing a little further is proportional to the cost of operation whether it's a Cessna 152 or a Citation. I guess the exception would be the old straight turbojets which burned a lot of fuel on the ground proportionally, but there are not many of those around any more. I think that ATC segregates IFR and VFR traffic when they are ready for takeoff. They will sometimes let an IFR departure go first in order to not miss the release time from departure. However, if you have jets and pistons waiting for their release they don't let the jets go first. If you are a slower airplane trying to operate into a mostly airline airport they might hold you back because they are trying to find a hole big enough in the incoming traffic. They are usually pretty particular about your airspeed because they are trying to get minimum separation between airplanes for efficiency.
 
If a few extra minutes didn't matter, I'd probably take 29R to avoid any pressure knowing I had a jet breathing down my neck.
 
I was on the downwind today at ESN and offered a close in base by the tower ahead of a Baron on a 2.5 mile final. Took it, did my touch and go, and was on crosswind before the Baron was over the threshold.
 
I fly out of BJC, its fairly common to get told to step over to 29L on short notice, Never really a big deal.
 
It depends, what aircraft am I flying and how comfortable, proficient am I in it?
In any case, tower approves the short final, the jet gets too close and elects not to land behind you because you have not cleared the runway, it's the towers screw up, not yours.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
If it's just me or the only passengers were pilot folk, I'd take the short approach. I typically do short approaches anyway when I don't have to worry about passenger comfort.
Click to expand...

What he said.
With a 7000' runway I could probably turn base at midfield and still only use half the runway.

That said, if there was any reason not to, or if I even had a second's concern about it, then no.
 
A short approach ahead of somebody on a 7 mile final? Sure, why not? You'd be parked before he even crossed the fence.
 
PilotAlan said:
With a 7000' runway I could probably turn base at midfield and still only use half the runway.
Click to expand...

I was just about to type that, but luckily read all the way to the bottom of the thread.

What's "short" about the approach to
a 9000' runway even if you turned base midfield? ;)

The trick here would seem more to be an issue of knowing how much runway you need to make the turn-off, and aiming for that point so you don't overshoot and have to taxi fast up to the next exit.

Heck, even at that, stuff happens. You could have touched down and blown a tire or otherwise become disabled on the runway and then the jet jocks could either accept a last-minute side-step to land, or go around.

This talk of "worrying" about the jet "breathing up your neck" is silly. Yeah, be aware of the jet and his "issues", try to be a good little spamcan and let the jet get priority, whatever. But in reality, once you've heard the magic words, "Cleared to land", it's your runway...

And the jet is now the controller's time/speed/distance problem. Jets can make S-turns and 360's too. ;)

I had an interesting one recently at KAPA. I was in the 17R T&G pattern and announced I wanted a full-stop. The guy in front of me was a full-stop also.

I had set up a tight/slow pattern behind him playing with our lovely 40 degrees of flap, and then watched as he missed B8 and B12 in a Skyhawk?!

I guess he needed 3000'+ to get that wild untamable beast of an airplane down and stopped. :D (Student, I'm sure.)

I was reaching for the throttle to go around when the controller (who probably knew our STOL capabilities and that my landings are usually pretty short) said, "N1279M there is adequate distance between you and the other aircraft still on the runway, continue. Cleared to land, runway 29R."

Hadn't had that call before.

I touched down a bit long for me and then just let her roll. I was still off by B12 (lazy... could'a done B8) and I pulled off there just in time to watch the Skyhawk taxi by northbound on Bravo to get to the crossing at B8.

Good controller. Knew that a go-around wasn't needed. One of the trainees up there would have bounced me out and up.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I've been given delay vectors to give preference to turbine aircraft. I usually cancel IFR if I can at that point and just go in VFR faster.

Once I was surprised to hear NY Center give the Dash 8 delay vectors to come in behind me. I canceled IFR so that we could all get in faster at that point.
Click to expand...

One day, I was flying a Warrior when I got vectored out of the way of a Baron.

It was Lance. :rofl:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
One day, I was flying a Warrior when I got vectored out of the way of a Baron.

It was Lance. :rofl:
Click to expand...

I'd get out of the way just to see Lance's pretty airplane. ;)

Once when I was going through instrument training, I was in a Warrior and got to the airport a few minutes ahead of my (now) friend flying his Aztec with his wife. Ironically, NY Center put me in first, and made him hold until I completed the approach. It was a 35 kt over the ground ILS with bumpy skies. His wife was not happy.

Meanwhile, my instructor was wondering why they didn't just vector us around or make us hold to let the Aztec in - especially since it was a training flight and such things are good training.

Fortunately, these people have since forgiven me for that. ;)
 
Ted DuPuis said:
As with everything, "it depends." If I had passengers, I would want the smoother approach for them, and I might ask for 29L.

If it's just me or the only passengers were pilot folk, I'd take the short approach. I typically do short approaches anyway when I don't have to worry about passenger comfort.
Click to expand...
What Ted said.
 
"it depends" is always a good answer for flying questions (kind of like "Jesus" and "God" as the answer to any question in Sunday School), but this thread proffered Greg's specific situation.

So my answer remains, "Yep"
 
I was chatting with another member (my neighbor) on our way to the club meeting about the short final offered by tower, talked through the setup, my approach and landing and that it was a "grin" landing - felt really good.

I was rather surprised by his response "Oh boy - Jeffco's 'short approach to 29R' again. Watch yourself very carefully on these."

He's a retired ATP, last flew 747s, and I respect and value his opinion. He shared that our flying club is especially sensitive to the "short final to 29R", based on this: http://www.planecrashmap.com/plane/co/N3015L

If the accident pilot, with his experience, had problems, and my neighbor, with his experience, cautions me - I'm listening.
 
denverpilot said:
This talk of "worrying" about the jet "breathing up your neck" is silly. Yeah, be aware of the jet and his "issues", try to be a good little spamcan and let the jet get priority, whatever. But in reality, once you've heard the magic words, "Cleared to land", it's your runway...
Click to expand...

That exactly.
 
silver-eagle said:
7k should be more than adequate for him too.
Click to expand...
It isn't the length, it is the width that is more of an issue.

75' is a pretty narrow runway for a jet. Not impossible, but you don't see too many jets landing on runways that narrow.
 
If I'm reading the AF/D correctly the 29L is limited to 12,500 pounds single wheel.
 
gkainz said:
I was chatting with another member (my neighbor) on our way to the club meeting about the short final offered by tower, talked through the setup, my approach and landing and that it was a "grin" landing - felt really good.

I was rather surprised by his response "Oh boy - Jeffco's 'short approach to 29R' again. Watch yourself very carefully on these."

He's a retired ATP, last flew 747s, and I respect and value his opinion. He shared that our flying club is especially sensitive to the "short final to 29R", based on this: http://www.planecrashmap.com/plane/co/N3015L

If the accident pilot, with his experience, had problems, and my neighbor, with his experience, cautions me - I'm listening.
Click to expand...

Reading that report, I must admit that I am suprised that someone with that experience would have an accident like that. I can't help but think that age may have had something to do with it.

Sounds like he was trying to force it in with squirly winds. I'm willing to be that he got too slow and started loosing elevator effectiveness. Problem with the T-tail Lance is that if you are light (only one or two people in the front seats), you CANNOT let it get below 95 KIAS or the wing starts to blank out the tail and you can have real issues.

I think the winds and age of the pilot were the biggest factors in that crash. If I was getting thrown all over the place by the winds in the pattern, I don't think I would try the short approach, but if things were fairly smooth, I still do not see a problem with accepting a short approach.

Another interesting tidbit is the previous 2001 accident for that airplane involved a gear-up off airport landing. Probably had nothing to do with the later crash, but I am suprised that they were able to return it to airworthy status.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top