Always get flight following

I took my daughter up today for a little fun flight. We took off VFR from my home airport (non towered) and flew over our house - about 10 miles away. We then called approach and flew an approach to the local class D airport for some fuel and popcorn. We left there VFR to the practice area and did a few stalls and positive/negative G pulls, then headed back towards home.

I let my daughter take the controls and head us “towards that water tower” at 3000 feet. I was concentrating on talking her through the controls and what to look out for. I soon noticed a target on my map at my same altitude headed across my path at the same altitude and at about 3 miles. I couldn’t find the plane, so I took the controls, gave it full power and went into a climbing right turn. I started getting the traffic warnings when I was within one mile of the other craft. I got to about 3500 when I spotted the plane. Sure enough, straight ahead and climbing to my altitude. I was still in a climbing right turn so I just continued. He finally saw me and cut his plane to his right and we stared at each other’s eyeballs as we passed entirely too close to each other.

First of all, the FAR’s say to avoid traffic to the right. Apparently this guy was still turning left. I don’t know if he saw me until right at the end or not. If it hadn’t been for him having adsb out, and for my having adsb in, and paying attention to it, we would have been much closer. It appears he was in a climb, so he SHOULD have had better visibility of me than I did him, but that wouldn’t help if we were both hurdling toward the ground after a mid- air.

I entered the pattern at my home airport still reeling from this event. I landed and rolled out down the runway. Turned off at the end and stopped when I noticed a cub taking off on the parallel grass strip next to the runway I had just landed on. He was passing right over my head as I stopped rolling. There was barely enough room for me to clear the runway before I was in front of the grass strip. I got on the radio and asked if the traffic was hearing my radio calls and he answered “Shore did, I came in right behind you”. He never made a peep. He stayed in the pattern for a few touch and goes and never made the first radio call.

I was glad to be parking it after those two interactions.

Lesson learned, always get flight following even if you are just hoping 10 miles between local airports. I would hope that they would have been able to give me some warning about both of these yahoos.

Agreed. One time I had center ask if I was flying in formation. I replied "negative". They reported an airplane "same altitude same direction same location"

It took about 30 seconds for me to find him. He was less than 100 feet above me. We were both tracking to a VOR, he wasnt on frequency. Fortunately the 172 I was in had a sky roof, if not I wouldn't have seen him.

With that said, I dont even know if center would give you flight following for a 10 mile flight. I've never tried it, but they usually terminate my flight following about 10 miles from my destination.

Latech15 said:

First of all, the FAR’s say to avoid traffic to the right.

I would hope that they would have been able to give me some warning about both of these yahoos.

Click to expand...

1. Can you steer me to the FAR? I know it says when overtaking, pass to the right. But otherwise, I think it's left to your best judgement.

2. Yahoo seems a bit strong for a guy who was three miles away, and would have easily passed 500' over you if you hadn't initiated a climb.

3. Once you're on the ground and taxiing, it's your responsibility to not enter another active runway. If they're so close together that you can't exit one without entering another, maybe someone should take a look at that airport layout.

Bob -

It appears you want to play devils advocate. Ok. I?ll play along with you.

In the first instance, you see a target on the map at your same altitude on a converging course, at 3 miles. You have about 35 seconds before convergence. I had no evidence that he was climbing until i finally made visual contact at 3500. You see him coming at you at your altitude and you do what? Only turn? No sir. I know I can out climb most aircraft so I did both of the things that I thought would get me away from him. Climb and turn. I would make that same decision again.

As for the landing traffic, are you actually taking the side of the guy who landed parallel to other traffic at an uncontrolled airport, who made zero radio calls in three laps in the pattern? Not to mention, the only exit off the runway I was using was into the grass runway path. If you are taking from this situation that the airport needs to be examined, then I will just have to discount you as a guy who wants to argue. First of all, if he had been making radio calls, we could have coordinated approaches where there would be no possible interferences. Secondly, what if I had been doing a touch and go with normal left hand traffic? We would have surely had issues.

As much as I HATE people who have a radio and won't use it to advise their take off and landing intentions, It is hard to blame the guy who landed on a parallel runway to yours for a touch and go. I am with Bob, you are the one that must give way to other traffic before crossing their runway. Just because you landed first, doesn't necessarily give you priority for taxiing across other runways. Before turning off your runway, you are obligated to insure that you yield to aircraft on other active runways, if that turn off will cause you to cross another active runway. I guess I am too accustomerd to towered airports, where you quickly learn that you don't turn off a runway until cleared onto a taxiway. At least not past the hold short line. Either way, you are expected to stay on the runway until taxiing area is clear and they make it VERY clear you don't cross active runways without their approval; Meaning someone is insuring that their is not another aircraft using that runway. This makes it second nature for me that this is MY obligation at non-towered airports. Years ago this clearance was not required and now it is. Likely because lots of accidents happen due to taxiing across active runways.

Intersecting runways at untowered airports scare me, because there is always some #%$%@ who won't announce his intentions and landing traffic on the intersecting runway can be much harder to spot than traffic in my pattern;

Personally I have learned my lesson and wouldn't have done what the cub did, as I would have assumed the guy on the parallel would turn right into my runway at the end of his roll out without first looking. Doesn't mean I think he would have been right, only that it was likely for him to do it.

Larry

Latech15 said:

Bob -

It appears you want to play devils advocate. Ok. I?ll play along with you.

In the first instance, you see a target on the map at your same altitude on a converging course, at 3 miles. You have about 35 seconds before convergence. I had no evidence that he was climbing until i finally made visual contact at 3500. You see him coming at you at your altitude and you do what? Only turn? No sir. I know I can out climb most aircraft so I did both of the things that I thought would get me away from him. Climb and turn. I would make that same decision again.

As for the landing traffic, are you actually taking the side of the guy who landed parallel to other traffic at an uncontrolled airport, who made zero radio calls in three laps in the pattern? Not to mention, the only exit off the runway I was using was into the grass runway path. If you are taking from this situation that the airport needs to be examined, then I will just have to discount you as a guy who wants to argue. First of all, if he had been making radio calls, we could have coordinated approaches where there would be no possible interferences. Secondly, what if I had been doing a touch and go with normal left hand traffic? We would have surely had issues.

Click to expand...

For the first case, I have no issue with your actions: you did what was necessary to avoid a collision. I only objected to your calling the other pilot a "yahoo". From his perspective, he might think you were the issue. It is unfortunate that this sort of thing (both pilots decide to climb) happens enough that the heavy metal guys have a black box that tells one guy to climb, the other to descend. We just have to use our best judgement, which you did (except for the name calling).

As to the runway incursion, I see someone else has already responded. Yes, the Cub should have been making radio calls, that's just common sense. But not everyone has common sense (or a radio), and the FARs are on their side.

Just to make sure there is no confusion from this thread. At a controlled airport you are required to exit the runway and insure your aircraft is clear of the runway if no other instruction is received by ATC. You do not require permission to exit onto a taxiway.
G

BobTurner said:

1. Can you steer me to the FAR? I know it says when overtaking, pass to the right. But otherwise, I think it's left to your best judgement.

2. Yahoo seems a bit strong for a guy who was three miles away, and would have easily passed 500' over you if you hadn't initiated a climb.

3. Once you're on the ground and taxiing, it's your responsibility to not enter another active runway. If they're so close together that you can't exit one without entering another, maybe someone should take a look at that airport layout.

Click to expand...

91.113 part e

Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.

Jeff, thanks for the report, but I am not sure FF would have helped.

I too have adsb in/out and was doing a visual RNAV approach to a local field. I saw and heard a plane in the pattern. I was 18 he was 36. I announced 2 times, had on the Baja lights and offset a mile to enter the left downwind. Suddenly, I see him climbing and heading right for me with a left turn from the takeoff. A mile away, but still, I started to go left as he apparently did not hear my calls, then he turned back right so did I. Precious seconds went by before it was clear he really saw us. We cleared by 1/4 mile, but then he is on the radio razzing me. It was a training flight and the instructor was not looking. It was the instructor who took issue. I went back and looked at the flight aware tracks to ensure what I remembered was correct. Confirmed.

Thanks for the reminder, we have to be careful out there, even if someone is talking on the radio, it does not mean they are listening. Or apparently, looking.

Edit: C airspace was only 400 feet above me so did not use the typical RV climb to escape the situation.

sailvi767 said:

Just to make sure there is no confusion from this thread. At a controlled airport you are required to exit the runway and insure your aircraft is clear of the runway if no other instruction is received by ATC. You do not require permission to exit onto a taxiway.
G

Click to expand...

I am sure that is correct and makes sense, as uncommon as it is. Only sharing the stinging of a nasty slap on the wrist that I received from a ground controller years ago. Was told by tower where to turn off and switch to grd. Switched to ground and heard the barking. The grd controller made it VERY clear that I was not allowed on an active taxiway without instructions/clearance from her. In that case, and what I understand now as protocol, I was expected to hold on the rwy side of the hold short line (technically still the active rwy) until given instructions by grd. This was a somewhat typical case, where the turnoffs are all short connectors to the main parallel taxiway.

This rule, as I understand it makes sense, as it is not uncommon at larger airports for there to be active taxiing during landing ops and cannot simply jump off the runway without some form or traffic management. I can't remember the last time I was not given instructions for turning off the runway. Just advising folks that an instruction of "turn off at B4 instersection (small connector to parallel taxiway) and contact ground" is NOT a clearance to enter onto taxiway Bravo (parallel taxiway). "exit at B4 and proceed south on Bravo" would be a clearance to proceed onto Bravo taxiway.

Larry

taxi

For clarification, you are expected to taxi clear of the runway after landing. "Clear" is when the aircraft's tail is on the taxiway side of the hold short line. At busier airports, there is actually an enhanced centerline marking that is used for reference. These dashed lines, located next to the centerline, mark 150 feet from the hold short line.

It is important that the aircraft completely clear the hold short line after landing, especially for IFR operations. If you are not completely clear, it can cause loss of separation with the next arrival.

rocketman1988 said:

For clarification, you are expected to taxi clear of the runway after landing. "Clear" is when the aircraft's tail is on the taxiway side of the hold short line. At busier airports, there is actually an enhanced centerline marking that is used for reference. These dashed lines, located next to the centerline, mark 150 feet from the hold short line.

It is important that the aircraft completely clear the hold short line after landing, especially for IFR operations. If you are not completely clear, it can cause loss of separation with the next arrival.

Click to expand...

This makes more sense. Maybe that controller in my case was trying to make a point. Nose of aircraft clear of taxiway and tail clear of hold short line. Not sure how that would work at COU where there are relatively short connectors and 737's moving down the taxiway. I suspect in those cases the twr controllers need to be more involved in coordination. At several class D airports I use, the connectors are not long enough for me to clear the hold short line and still be clear of wing spans of aircraft on the parallel taxiway.

https://imgur.com/gallery/DQVbCNI

So this is the airport where the incident happened. I was landing 36 from the bottom of the pic to the top. The grass strip is on the left side. The other runways on the right are closed. As you can see, we are in need of better markings. There is a line there but you have to be right on it before you can find it.

Your safest bet when at a non-towered airport is to just assume nobody is making radio calls. Head on a swivel. And one should always slow down/stop and look both ways carefully before crossing any runway or taxiway for that matter...

According the FAA, that grass is not considered a distinct runway and therefore the cub should not have landed there until you cleared runway environment. That said, the first rule of defensive driving is don't be "dead" right. If this is the first stupid pilot trick you have experienced, consider yourself lucky.

Larry

Latech15 said:

I know I can out climb most aircraft so I did both of the things that I thought would get me away from him. Climb and turn. I would make that same decision again.

Click to expand...

If I may make a suggestion: Climb, but don't turn. When two aircraft are approaching one another head on, with wings level, they only need to have the fuselages separated by a few (single-digit) feet to avoid a collision. If you turn your aircraft so the wings are now above and below your fuselage, and the guy coming the other way doesn't see you, now you have to move the fuselage up or down by a good portion of your wingspan to ensure there's no overlap. An RV can go vertical from cruise and be up 500' in seconds. Use that.

As for the guy doing circuits with a functioning radio but a defective larynx, this annoys me as well. In Canada at least, it is a requirement that if you are equipped with a radio, you make radio calls... Even when at an uncontrolled airport.

Latech15 said:

https://imgur.com/gallery/DQVbCNI

So this is the airport where the incident happened. I was landing 36 from the bottom of the pic to the top. The grass strip is on the left side. The other runways on the right are closed. As you can see, we are in need of better markings. There is a line there but you have to be right on it before you can find it.

Click to expand...

That's interesting because according to Airnav, there is only one runway there (18/36) and it's asphalt.

-Marc

Umm...

"...If I may make a suggestion: Climb, but don't turn..."

The whole point of having a STANDARD method of collision avoidance is, obviously, to prevent a collision. It is also a STANDARD so that everyone knows what the other guy is supposed to do, assuming he sees you. Even if he doesn't see you, the standard procedure will turn you away from his projected course.

Not following the standard just makes it more difficult because you never know what the other guy is going to do.

Case in point, I was giving a BFR last month and returning from the practice area we encountered a newly minted Private pilot heading to the practice area. My student, complied with the standard procedure and turned to the right. There should have been no issue. Unfortunately, the other guy turned LEFT, and again was heading for us. Every time we would turn right, he turned left. We finally ended up paralleling his course! Needless to say, when he returned to the FBO we had a debrief...

Again, the standard is there to try and remove the unknown. Disregarding that standard makes things more complicated and potentially more dangerous. Now if you are getting close enough to see the guys RayBans, do what you gotta do!

Rocketman is correct. Clear the runway as soon as you can. That is what tower expects. But do not go any further (onto another taxiway) without clearance. Just make sure the tail of your aircraft is past the hold short line and get further instructions from ground before proceeding

I was flying yesterday at 5,500' and saw a target pop up on my iPad. He was off to my left, crossing in front of me left to right, 1,500' below and climbing. I was also with ATL Center, and the controller called him out to me "altitude unverified and type unknown". He eventually passed less than a mile in front of me and 900' below, still climbing. I never did see the other aircraft, but it was very comforting to be able to watch his progress on my iPad. Yes, Foreflight gave me a Traffic Alert. Oh, my iPad gave me his tail number, too

Yeah. That grass strip isn?t official and officially the other two runways are closed, but they told me with a wink, that they are fine to use if you need them. This airport is just above landing in your buddies back yard, but there simply isn?t hanger space available around here.

I had a near midair several years back.... closet I've EVER come to death! Aircraft noticed about 800-1000 feet dead ahead same alt coming straight at me. I was in a 152 and he was an aqua type plane with engine above the fuse. I only had time to react, no regs came to mind NOTHING. I remember saying "Uh oh!" and banked full control deflection hard left. My passenger said "What was that!!!" as the other guy passed no more than 30 feet off my right rear quarter with in second or two after I began the turn. I had just taken off from home airport and made the calls. He apparently wasn't talking OR listening. I felt no fear at the time, just like a in a car it was reflexive not cognitive. I did get pretty shook up after we landed. Several months later I saw that aircraft again and spoke with the pilot. He said he was flying that day, (easy to remember as there was a local festival going on), and admitted he never saw me. We were both happy that we were still there to shake hands.

As for the OP situation. So irritating that people don't make the calls they should. I feel like they're making a conscious choice to be a little less safe... and that can affect us all.

A landing light turned on during any flight would be noticed in events like this. Lights on during all flights should be common sense....

I guess it will take a law to get pilots to do it.

Paul 5r4 said:

As for the OP situation. So irritating that people don't make the calls they should. I feel like they're making a conscious choice to be a little less safe... and that can affect us all.

Click to expand...

Its unfortunate that the FAA won't address this issue. It would not be hard to make certain radio calls required by FARs, if equipped; Not looking to force equippage. I can't imagine there is a strong lobby group opposed to this and I simply cannot imagine how this wouldn't positively impact safety. They do this with transponders, so not foreign to the FAA.

Larry

A landing light turned on during any flight would be noticed in events like this. Lights on during all flights should be common sense....


AGREE! I now am equipped with Baja Designs Spots. I turn them on in Wig Wag mode just before takeoff.

Also agree with you Larry!

requirements

"...It would not be hard to make certain radio calls required by FARs, if equipped..."

...and those requirements will be completely unenforceable.

Don't get me wrong, people SHOULD be making the calls, if they are so equipped.

Making a new "Law" isn't going to make the people who don't talk, talk...and there is no practical way to police the new "Law".

The best we can do is what we are doing...talk about the experience and put it out in the open. Maybe it will get people THINKING.

Then we have to get them TALKING...and then we have to get them LISTENING, as well.

You would think this would be..."common sense"...but apparently not.

BobTurner said:

Yes, the Cub should have been making radio calls, that's just common sense.

Click to expand...

Where I fly, if I saw a Cub and a grass strip I would expect not to hear him on the radio.

I'm only responding to this topic because I had the same knee-jerk reaction as Bob. Whenever I have an upsetting encounter in the air and blame it on the other person, I inevitably dwell on it until I warm up to the fact that it takes two to have created that situation. Maybe he saw you too and had the same thought...to climb.

Personally, I am a little leery of adding the new ADSB-In that I just bought. Any modest traffic reporting I've been exposed to in the past has simply been more of a distraction or source of confusion. I'd much rather have my eyes outside the cockpit.

Just some thoughts.

Traffic

I agree, If it's a Cub or similar, they may NOT be able to communicate.

As far as the traffic function goes, it is a real help (there are studies to prove it) in visually locating the target. In fact, once you get used to using it, you feel blind without it...

Our flight school put the Lynx system in all the C-172s...works great. Just takes a quick look to narrow the amount of sky you need to look at...

AndyRV7 said:

Maybe he saw you too and had the same thought...to climb.

Click to expand...

And turn left?? That?s where he was wrong.

Latech15 said:

And turn left?? That?s where he was wrong.

Click to expand...

You can make a lot of arguments here but none of them matter. For example, if you were crossing and he turned left and you turned right and that put you both head to head, he was coming from the right. That means he had the right of way. Or, if you ended up head to head from it and you kept turning right into a left turning target, you were wrong. etc. What's the point though!? You're both going to die if one of you doesn't correct the problem. Clinging to the "he was wrong" mindset is what is dangerous.

Incidentally, and it has been a while since I was studying for my check-ride or written test, but aircraft are recommended to avoid a head-on by each turning right. A great suggestion if you are both aware and agree that you are head-on. What if he thought he was already angling left!? Are you going to argue on the way to the ground? The rule about avoiding traffic right is for overtaking another aircraft (well clear to the right).

You may not believe this but I am not trying to criticize you. Just reacting to the discussion before me. Look how quickly you characterized one of the first posters as someone that wanted a confrontation simply because they offered a counterpoint. Not trying to be a parent but that mentality seems to me to be the danger.

The nice thing about the skyview andvits traffic feature is that it not only gives you the aircraft?s position, but also it?s trajectory. I knew exactly which way he was headed.