What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Check the runway, then check it again!

nbachert

Well Known Member
Yesterday I was returning from my weekend trip when I almost had a head on collision at my home airport. I received the ASOS and it said winds were calm so I was planning on landing rwy 18. I cancelled my IFR flight with approach when I had the field in sight which was about 8 miles out. They told me to squawk VFR and that no traffic was in the area because I mentioned having trouble seeing because I was flying into the setting sun. I radioed for traffic and advisorys over the airports CTAF and got nothing. I proceeded to make a 5 mile, 3 mile, and short final call with no response to any of them. As I was crossing the threshold I saw a plane about 30-50ft higher flying at me and they continued overtop of me. I keyed the mic and said are you kidding me. I wasn't scared and didn't need to make any crazy aircraft control inputs because he was high enough and I was too low. I landed uneventfully and as I was taxing in he made a call he was turning downwind. I refrained from much conversation but I said I'm glad he is making radio calls now. He swore he was making calls and had a passenger to prove it. After landing I went and talked to the airport fuel operator who sits in a shack that monitors the CTAF. He said that he had left for coffee but he heard my short final call and my are you kidding me comment. I said thanks, and proceeded out to the fella to explain the importance of using the radio. I told him that the monitor heard me and either his radio wasn't on the correct freq or it wasn't on. Him and his passenger were a little shaken but didn't want to except any responsibility. So I then said I will make sure in the future to do an extensive runway check for aircraft and enter midfield downwind which will allow for better visibility with the setting sun. I asked that he double check his radios and left. While he wouldn't acknowledge any problems I hope he eventually understands how close this was and puts his ego aside. My point is that I'm happy to be alive and there are ways to make sure I keep myself out of this scenario again even if someone isn't talking on the radio. I know its not a requirement so like I said above keep a look out for that guy that might inadvertently do some airshow displays with you! I know I learned a valuable lesson I just hope the kid flying the other plane puts it in his tool bag as well! Be safe out there!
 
Me Too

I have learned from similar occurrences that one can't rely solely on the radio. I had developed a rather lax approach to looking for traffic on the runway. No more.

At my home field there is often a bit of a battle between which end of the runway to use. The folks at the North end like to use 16 and the folks at the South end like to use 34. Often, the wind will not really mandate one or the other.

One day as I was departing in my RV-12 (after making the appropriate radio call before taxiing onto the runway), just as I had broken ground and was maybe 20 feet off the ground an RV-4 came blasting right at me from the other end of the runway.

Fortunately, the RV-4 has such a good climb rate that he easily climbed over me, but I got a very close look at his belly. It was the same situation where evasive action was not needed and would have probably been less safe.

A friend had just landed and saw the incident while taxiing back to his hangar and he got on the radio and asked if I saw the RV-4 that just flew over me. I said that I had a very good look at it, thank you very much.

He later confirmed that he heard nothing from the RV-4 and did hear me. The RV-4 left the area at a high rate of speed and I have not seen him again.

After a similar situation when I was landing and another airplane was taking off at me I have developed a habit to monitor BOTH ends of the runway while I'm in the pattern. If there is someone in the run-up area at the opposite end of the runway I will get on the radio and specifically ask his intentions. That should at least help me know if he is monitoring the radio. If I get no response I watch even closer.

This is also why I spend the least amount of time possible on the runway.
 
I will not do a straight in approach to an uncontrolled field. I don't even like a base approach. You did nothing wrong, but you're assuming everyone is talking and listening. There are still NORDO's running around out there exercising their right to not communicate. Some of them even have perfectly good radios.
 
I agree with Steve relying on the radio is in many places a really really bad idea.

One of my airplanes is NORDO. One airport close by has a J-3 flight school which contributes most flight operations -- all NORDO. Two other have glider operations with lots of NORDO ... . In addition to this intentional NORDO radios and headsets break which leads to unintentional NORDO.

Interestingly this seems to generate little issues with other airplanes at those airports even though those airports are in northern NJ -- one of the busiest airspaces in the US. It is generally transient traffic that is "surprised".

So there is lots of traffic out there which won't show up on your ADS-B IN or will talk to you on the radio. As they don't have a transponder it's unlikely a controller would see them either and warn you about them.

Seeing the pattern and the airport is the only way to ensure there is nobody there... .

Oliver
 
I agree with you all. The more I'm thinking about it, I can't believe I haven't learned this lesson before. I fly helicopters for the Army and I normally don't land to or fly to a runway and I think that's where my bad habit of doing a straight in begins. I was also returning home from a long flight and a combination of fatigue and get home on the ground-itis may have assisted in my lack of visual cues. Its really bothering me, but I'll make sure no matter how tired I am that I don't allow for it to happen again.
 
Calm wind runway

At my home field there is often a bit of a battle between which end of the runway to use. The folks at the North end like to use 16 and the folks at the South end like to use 34. Often, the wind will not really mandate one or the other.

Steve, have you thought about asking the airport to designate a calm wind runway and put it in the NOTAMS? We have one at KSGS and it seems to work well.
 
Steve, have you thought about asking the airport to designate a calm wind runway and put it in the NOTAMS? We have one at KSGS and it seems to work well.

The airport has done that. There is now a designated calm wind runway. It is published in all the usual places. It has gotten better since that happened, but there are still people that do what they want regardless of their impact (pun intended) on others.
 
The airport has done that. There is now a designated calm wind runway. It is published in all the usual places. It has gotten better since that happened, but there are still people that do what they want regardless of their impact (pun intended) on others.

First off, Nick, don't beat yourself up. Lesson learned and thanks for sharing. We all need to hear these things.

Steve - I have experienced the same at Scappoose down here. One fine day I landed there for fuel and wondered, "why are folks not using the calm wind runway, it is perfectly calm and has been most of the day". Seems everyone was just continuing to use the other runway listening to the calls and simply following those ahead of them. So, I fueled, then listened all the way through run up, nobody calling except one airplane announcing inbound. I decided that I would lead the change and announced, several times, that the calm wind runway was 15, and it was dead calm, and the Bucker was going to take 15. I announced again that I was rolling, on 15.
The Bucker is blinder than a Bat, way more than any RV, so I make it a habit after rotation to kick into a little side slip just to see what's down the line. In this case, it was another airplane already rotated, taking off from the other way. No radio calls, although he fessed up in the air a short time later that he didn't make any calls, nor did he here me.
I stepped to the side and he went screaming past me on the center line. The poor guy that had announced he was inbound and now on base for 15 asked "What runway are we using!" I simply said "both!" He never landed.
The FBO then got on the Com and in a firm voice stated "Calm wind runway is 15. Wind is calm".
So, now, I think twice about changing the runway, even if it is calm.

There is no perfect solution. We have tried and true procedures that help, but bottom line, keep your eyes out and your head on a swivel.
 
I make a very distinct point to all my primary students that if the wind is less than 10 kts they should NOT be surprised to see someone land or takeoff on ANY runway. Be sure to do a good visual scan as you approach the hold short line, don't wait until you get there.

Jim
 
Steve, have you thought about asking the airport to designate a calm wind runway and put it in the NOTAMS? We have one at KSGS and it seems to work well.

The airport has done that. There is now a designated calm wind runway. It is published in all the usual places. It has gotten better since that happened, but there are still people that do what they want regardless of their impact (pun intended) on others.

Very few people read the NOTAMS for an airport and when you call the FAA, they won't give the no wind runway, at least I have never heard that.

The FAA only recognizes a 45 degree entry to a pattern. Had you made contact with the other plane on your straight in approach, you would have been liable for not following the FAA mandated procedures.

Whenever someone gets on the radio and asks other traffic to "Please advise" I want to say, "Try the burger, they are pretty good." All that does is clog up the frequency and impacts other airports using the same frequency and is NOT recommended by the FAA.

If you haven't been on frequency and listening, then doing a 45 to the downwind gives you more time to monitor and observe.

As pointed out, there are a lot of NORDO's out there, not to mention people tuning the wrong frequencies.

Heck, I took off once on the "runway in use" once with another pilot on board, only to come head-to-head with an inbound airplane who was reporting. Neither of us "heard" the calls until we pealed off to the right to avoid hitting him. Why he came straight in on the opposite runway and why we never heard him is anyone's guess. The good news, is that like you, no contact was made.

Fly safe!
 
To risk being labelled a heretic, I'll mention that, even though the regulations which govern aviation allow for legal operation of aircraft without 2-way communications equipment, and even though you may be legally right to operate NORDO, I often wonder why on earth anybody would.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm all for exercising one's legal rights, and I fully understand the pleasure that comes from "radio silence". But when I see the very obvious safety benefit afforded to us through having two-way radio communications, and I see the very low cost of hand-held VHF COMM radios that are perfectly suitable for use on and near uncontrolled airports, I just can't for the life of me understand why anybody would forego the safety benefit of radio communications.

OK, I'm donning my kevlar flame suit now. *Grin* I'm not saying this to be argumentative, but rather to state that, for very little cost, one can gain a large boost in safety by adding a hand-held radio to even the most basic aircraft. I figure most of us believe our old hides are worth more than the couple hundred bucks a hand-held radio would cost. Just sayin'...
 
Check the runway and check it again

There is an old saying I heard when I was younger. If it is to be its up to me.
Meaning the only person that you can take responsibility for is yourself.
I fly like I am invisible. After all we fly RV's, huge clear canopies, low instrument
Panel, and I very seldom expect to find an aircraft where they say they are.
I like to overfly the field, pattern altitude plus 500, look for other aircraft, look at the windsock, look for deer, or birds on the runway, fly a pattern, land on a crosswind runway( we are trying to be a better pilot) Are we not? Besides great training. This topic has a way of getting pilots dander up. Maybe trigger smoke in the pattern would help.:)
 
But when I see the very obvious safety benefit afforded to us through having two-way radio communications, and I see the very low cost of hand-held VHF COMM radios that are perfectly suitable for use on and near uncontrolled airports, I just can't for the life of me understand why anybody would forego the safety benefit of radio communications.

Your point is well made, however, at my home drome we share a CTAF frequency with at least 6 airports in 2 countries and in the summertime it can be a daunting task, to say the least, to get a word in edgewise. There have been days when I have taken off, landed, or entered the pattern without a radio call simply because there was not a break in the stream. Needless to say (so I'll say it) head on a swivel is a must.
 
You guys crack me up. There is no requirement for radio communications outside of positive control areas. However, it is required to continuously use the moving map display known as a windshield.

Straight Ins Kill....

The AIM (advisory) clearly states straight ins at uncontrolled fields are not recommended. I will go one further and state the blood tested fact that straight ins at uncontrolled fields are deadly. That's why the FAA expects a 45 degree entry to downwind at uncontrolled fields. I never do straight ins at non-towered fields and will verbally protest to a pilot I am riding with if he plans a straight in. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a business jet come blaring into an uncontrolled field on a long straight in. What's worse there is they have usually just canceled an IFR flight plan on final which means in many cases they have not been monitoring the CTAF.

Without any other than normal circumstances, if you had an accident, incident or near miss the FAA would usually side with the aircraft flying the standard pattern vs the straight in guy, with or without a radio. Had you approached me on the tarmac in the same way jabbering about the radio calls and an "Are you kidding me", stuff after you did a long straight into the sun without flying the pattern as per the AIM you might end up with a punch in the nose. And in the other case where one decided to take it upon himself to change runway directions in an effort to police the optional calm wind runway with other aircraft known to have be using the opposite runway, especially in a limited sight biplane, then it would be this pilot's turn to hear "Are you kidding me?" Not following a calm wind runway request in the AFD is not grounds for an FAA enforcement action but taking off against traffic resulting in a safety hazard is.

Remember these are "pilot controlled" airports and as such the number one responsibility of the pilot is visual separation and flying the pattern. Radio calls would be secondary and any calm wind runway request while a nice thing to do is practically irrelevant. The pilot is in control of the landing environment and takes on the responsibility of his actions. Never, ever assume everybody is talking on the radio (optional) or fly straight ins.

I sure wouldn't want RV pilots to get the reputation (or more of) for being the type the first responders find in the smoking crater with their hand around the microphone. That's supposed to be the Cirrus guys (who got the Bonanza guys off the hook). Sheesh.

Jim
 
Yesterday I was returning from my weekend trip when I almost had a head on collision at my home airport. I received the ASOS and it said winds were calm so I was planning on landing rwy 18. I cancelled my IFR flight with approach when I had the field in sight which was about 8 miles out. They told me to squawk VFR and that no traffic was in the area because I mentioned having trouble seeing because I was flying into the setting sun. I radioed for traffic and advisorys over the airports CTAF and got nothing. I proceeded to make a 5 mile, 3 mile, and short final call with no response to any of them. As I was crossing the threshold I saw a plane about 30-50ft higher flying at me and they continued overtop of me. I keyed the mic and said are you kidding me. I wasn't scared and didn't need to make any crazy aircraft control inputs because he was high enough and I was too low. I landed uneventfully and as I was taxing in he made a call he was turning downwind. I refrained from much conversation but I said I'm glad he is making radio calls now. He swore he was making calls and had a passenger to prove it. After landing I went and talked to the airport fuel operator who sits in a shack that monitors the CTAF. He said that he had left for coffee but he heard my short final call and my are you kidding me comment. I said thanks, and proceeded out to the fella to explain the importance of using the radio. I told him that the monitor heard me and either his radio wasn't on the correct freq or it wasn't on. Him and his passenger were a little shaken but didn't want to except any responsibility. So I then said I will make sure in the future to do an extensive runway check for aircraft and enter midfield downwind which will allow for better visibility with the setting sun. I asked that he double check his radios and left. While he wouldn't acknowledge any problems I hope he eventually understands how close this was and puts his ego aside. My point is that I'm happy to be alive and there are ways to make sure I keep myself out of this scenario again even if someone isn't talking on the radio. I know its not a requirement so like I said above keep a look out for that guy that might inadvertently do some airshow displays with you! I know I learned a valuable lesson I just hope the kid flying the other plane puts it in his tool bag as well! Be safe out there!

Jim is spot on, and I probably would have reacted how he suggests had you approached me in the same manner.

He made a mistake, you broke the rules. What if it was someone with no radios? VFR straight-in to an uncontrolled field can be a violation of FAR 91.126/127 and people have been violated for it. 91.13(a) could also be a player, depends on the Fed.

This is why.
 
Last edited:
Look from the ground too, as pointed out. I was doing a long cross cty and stopped for fuel at Mariana Fl. I made the calls, no straight in and got fuel, on the taxi back out, I usually would go to the short connector to the runway and do the runup. This day I looked as it was small connector and for an odd reason decided to do the run up on the parallel pointed 90 deg to the runway. About that time I saw a glider 3 feet off the ground pass between me and the runway - less than 50 feet to his wing tip, landing in the grass. Ground announcements had already taken place. No one on the radio. Did a quick run up and before taxi took a good look for more, sure enough another glider, this time over the runway, not in the grass.

Lucky my decision to err for safety worked in our favor, it has become practice. I can not imagine what the glider pilot was thinking, or would have done.

Lessons are learned from close calls. No outrage needed, but a discussion might take place just to understand what happened.

Do gliders do straight in approaches?
 
There are still a few old-school people at my home airport who fly without using a radio because their aircraft lack electrical systems. This is a pet peeve of mine, because we have two intersecting runways, student traffic, and Young Eagle events (among other activity). One afternoon I was standing outside my hangar and monitoring the radio. Some guy in a highly modified Swift took off, flew the pattern, and made a high speed pass down the runway...all without making a radio call.

I was able to contact that individual and he swore he was on the radio. He subsequently found a wiring problem in his plane, and he realized his transmissions weren't making it out. All of this is an accident waiting to happen.
 
Awos

Went flying yesterday to do some "touch and goes". The awos reported overcast at two hundred feet. The were some very very thin clouds. This happen one other time when I was returning from a flight. Reported overcast but the airfield was visible. Also the went yesterday was directly across the runway. I took off on 17 but landed on 35. Another good reason to announce.
 
No one is perfect

This is a great threat to bring up an issue that will never get solved but needs attention often. All pilots are different in their standards, especially in an uncontrolled environment where someone is not telling them what to do. With that said, our "rule book" is the FAR and we should stick to it even if no one is watching. I don't understand why the complaints about no radio in uncontrolled fields. It is not required and it is not in the FAR, but entering the pattern in a specific manner is required and is in the FAR. I'm blessed to have the opportunity to fly multiple airplanes at our field, some have have radios and some don't. No one wants to take a 1946 Cub and put an electrical system on it. Should you take a hand held with you? Sure, but how often have you heard garble on the coms and find out later that it was either a bi-plane or another type of open canopy plane that made a position call but all you hear on the other end is wind noise or garble. My point is that we can't depend on communications. It's certainly a nice to have and when it works and helps us find traffic in the area, it is certainly invaluable. But we can't get upset that someone didn't make a radio call when in the traffic pattern. So many things can happen during that 5 second call.... Think about listening to 122.8.... you hear pilots making call that may step on someone at your field when they were announcing their intentions.
We must fly the pattern as it's outlined in the FARs and not get complacent because it's our home field. That's really the only way to getting close and solving this ongoing hazard.
 
Your point is well made, however, at my home drome we share a CTAF frequency with at least 6 airports in 2 countries and in the summertime it can be a daunting task, to say the least, to get a word in edgewise.

At least 6 airports on the same CTAF? Man, compared to Texas, that's nothing! It drives me nuts that so many airports in central Texas are on 122.8 while 122.7 and 123.0 are relatively quiet. On a nice weather weekend it seems that 122.8 is one continuous squeal; in the Houston area, sometimes when conditions are right I can hear traffic reports from San Antonio to Dallas as well... it just becomes a bunch of noise. But, overcrowding on .8 is what we get...
 
Reference?

Can someone give me an actual reference on where in the FARs it says its illegal to do a straight in approach to a non-towered airport?
 
Common Sense?

Another good point about overcrowded frequencies.

At our airport we have a crossing runway that is often crossed while taxing to or from the primary or runway in use. Most pilots want to announce "taxi across..." the inactive runway on the way to or from the active runway. When students ask me about it I ask them, "can we make sure it is clear and safe to cross by looking out the windows? Did we already make one call indicating we are somewhere on the surface, moving, and would likely cross on our way to the active runway?" And my biggest comment, "who might we step on making our call, and is there someone in the pattern with more important information to offer?"

Like someone else said here earlier, we won't solve this but it is important to be aware and use your eyes.

Be a good listener.

Jim
 
And in the other case where one decided to take it upon himself to change runway directions in an effort to police the optional calm wind runway with other aircraft known to have be using the opposite runway, especially in a limited sight biplane, then it would be this pilot's turn to hear "Are you kidding me?" Not following a calm wind runway request in the AFD is not grounds for an FAA enforcement action but taking off against traffic resulting in a safety hazard is.

Sheesh.

Jim
Settle down big fella..... I wasn't policing anybody. Traffic was not present in the pattern or on an approach. If I had just rolled out of the hangar and taxied to the calm wind runway, there wouldn't have been any difference in what happened that day.

I think you made some decent points, but try to be a little more civil before attacking folks with your own opinion based on a few sentences in a post. You where not there....and please, don't punch anybody in the nose.
 
Hopefully you have learned something; a straight-in into a blinding sun? Would you be mad about the deer that did not announce his position on the runway? There is NO pilot who has never accidentally been on the wrong frequency. You can't bank your safety on every plane having a working radio on the right frequency.
I agree AND disagree that radio communications make for a safer airport environment. This example strengthens my disagree side.
Even worse are the ADBS-in pilots. Does it aid in safety? YES, But on more than one occasion I have had other traffic trying to find me and saying that they do not see me on their ADBS-in. That means they are not looking out the window. If they would stop talking on the radio and stop looking on their LCD display they would stand a much better chance of actually seeing me. Instead they clog up the radio frequency asking the same question over and over again and giving very detailed and worthless position reports. It prevents other traffic from being able to announce, and it distracts me from flying the airplane. In my limited experience, those are also the pilots that call down-wind at the same time that I do (I don't see them, but am looking). 5 minutes after I am on the ground they actually enter the pattern. We were both distracted looking for a conflict that did not exist. The radio lets you know that there is someone there to lookout for; however, if you assume that there is always someone there to lookout for then what has the radio added? - complacency.
 
antiques

I have posted my feelings before and also brought them up with AOPA to no avail. With 760 channel radios mandated years ago, the FAA and FCC had the opportunity to assign discrete frequencies to small airports. They have not done so.
The second part of the equation still baffles me. For two hundred bucks, we can purchase a small radio that will plug into a headset.
Why we can still fly without radios is a mystery to me. Seatbelts are ubiquitous, ADS-B costs far more than a handheld... yet NORDO is legal.
With medical reform behind us, I would hope the EAA and AOPA might look at some safety issues long overlooked. They have the time and they have the interest.
 
This thread hits home! I was leaving an uncontrolled airport Saturday after a Young Eagle Event. I had just flown 5 Young Eagles and was headed home. The field had been very busy that morning and I noticed a Piper Colt that had a very weak radio transmission but I heard him while I was in the air flying. He had been doing touch and goes most of the morning. My Dynon com radio has the squelch set on the default setting. I finished my run up and looked both ways on runway 35 and didn't see anything. My friend had just taken off and I listened to his radio transmission but didn't hear anyone else in the pattern. I announce that In was taking 35 for a North departure and started rolling toward the threshold. Just before turning onto the runway, I looked back again and saw the Colt on short final! At that very moment, my friend (Airguy) radioed me that the colt was on short final. I acknowledged as I was doing a 180 to get farther away from the threshold. The Colt was probably shouting at me but since his weak radio was not breaking my squelch, and I was on the ground so my radio was not in the best receiving position, I couldn't hear him!........ Close call for sure and my friend could have saved my life if I hadn't seen the Colt the second time and the Colt, for some reason, wouldn't have gone around.......I have adjusted the squelch now and will click the squelch over ride from now on taxiing to the runway. Of coarse, I accept full responsibility for the near miss as it is my responsibility to visually clear any approaching aircraft. :eek:
 
Can someone give me an actual reference on where in the FARs it says its illegal to do a straight in approach to a non-towered airport?

Sec. 91.126 — Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each person operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.
(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without an operating control tower in Class G airspace—
pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right; and

Did you do this? FYI Class E airport governed by 91.127 says "see 91.126".

You drove straight in, to a runway/field you had no SA on, almost caused a midair, then yelled at some poor kid who was well within his rights and simply had the wrong freq dialed in. If I were you I'd go find him and apologize
 
Last edited:
Did you do this? FYI Class E airport governed by 91.127 says "see 91.126".

You drove straight in, to a runway/field you had no SA on, almost caused a midair, then yelled at some poor kid who was well within his rights and simply had the wrong freq dialed in. If I were you I'd go find him and apologize

He already admitted he made a mistake. Pretty soon, nobody is going to post here....
 
Jim is spot on, and I probably would have reacted how he suggests had you approached me in the same manner.

He made a mistake, you broke the rules. What if it was someone with no radios? VFR straight-in to an uncontrolled field can be a violation of FAR 91.126/127 and people have been violated for it. 91.13(a) could also be a player, depends on the Fed.

This is why.

Checked those FARs again. Can't find "the rule" he broke. No mention of VFR straight in being a possible violation. I did research on this before and determined that the 45 degree entry is TECHNIQUE, not procedure. I would venture to guess that the violations you speak of were not ONLY because of the straight-in. It's fine if you want to employ the 45 entry technique 100% of the time, but to tell someone that they are breaking the rules because they don't follow your preferred technique is just wrong.

There are several ways to enter the VFR traffic pattern. No rules were broken here. Unless I'm reading from the below link incorrectly.
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=7de0cf541373e919b32ee33bb153eddb&mc=true&node=pt14.2.91&rgn=div5
 
Did you do this? FYI Class E airport governed by 91.127 says "see 91.126".

You drove straight in, to a runway/field you had no SA on, almost caused a midair, then yelled at some poor kid who was well within his rights and simply had the wrong freq dialed in. If I were you I'd go find him and apologize

On a straight-in, there are no turns. Where does it say you must make a turn?

He already admitted he made a mistake. Pretty soon, nobody is going to post here....

Buuut, he didn't make a mistake.
 
Buuut, he didn't make a mistake.

A mistake doesn't have to be breaking a law or rule. In my opinion, and that is all it is, making a straight in approach is almost always a poor decision, a mistake, in my book, for all the reasons previously stated.

Again, thanks to the OP for posting and opening himself up. All he is trying to do is share his experiences with others so we can all discuss and learn, which is exactly why I visit here, not to call someone out, which I have done in the past and regret.
 
He already admitted he made a mistake. Pretty soon, nobody is going to post here....

Thanks, JonJay! I'll keep posting here, I've been on here long enough to understand how fired up people can get. I find it humorous actually! I worded the original write up poorly. I was flying southwesterly hence the sun, however I then landed on Runway 18, as in, to the south so the sun was no longer in my eyes but may have messed with my vision and that's the point I was trying to make. I called a modified LEFT base at 3 miles because I was between the two legs. So yeah I did comply! As to talking to the other guy as I stated before...I talked to him, I didn't yell, or threaten him....I'm a grown man and understand that education is key. I admitted that I would definitely enter on the downwind from now on and asked that he double check his radios.
 
Thanks, JonJay! I'll keep posting here, I've been on here long enough to understand how fired up people can get. I find it humorous actually!
That is a healthy attitude. It is tough to share an experience accurately in just a few words.

The question still remains; Is it a violation to do a straight in approach? I really doubt it. I refuse to believe all of those I witness doing this, including the worst offenders, commercial and charter operators, are doing it and risking their jobs. It is also well documented in flight programs from the FAA. It is standard practice in formation flying, approved by the FAA, etc....
 
Last edited:
For more info on this topic of preferred techniques to enter the VFR pattern, you can reference pages 7-4 through 7-6 in the below link.

Quotes of note:
"14 CFR part 91, states that 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. When two or
more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of
landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-ofway.
Pilots should not take advantage of this rule to cut in
front of another aircraft that is on final approach to land or
to overtake that aircraft."

"Non towered airports traffic patterns are always entered at
pattern altitude. How you enter the pattern depends upon
the direction of arrival. The preferred method for entering
from the downwind leg side of the pattern is to approach
the pattern on a course 45? to the downwind leg and join the
pattern at midfield."

"Nearly all accidents occur at or near uncontrolled
airports and at altitudes below 1,000 feet."

Still can't find anything about straight-ins, or entries from Initial for that matter.

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/media/09_afh_ch7.pdf
 
The question still remains; Is it a violation to do a straight in approach? I really doubt it. I refuse to believe all of those I witness doing this, including the worst offenders, commercial and charter operators, are doing it and risking their jobs.

Exactly. It is not the "standard" per the FAA, but also not prohibited.
 
. . . I accept full responsibility for the near miss as it is my responsibility to visually clear any approaching aircraft. :eek:
Absolutely cannot agree more not only for your situation but would recommend the original poster take head to such a concept!

I have been having a hard time sympathizing with the original poster about his near miss. All I read from the first post was how angry he was that that "other jerk" just about killed him! He was angry enough to try to get someone else to back him up at the airport. Then, when that did not work he goes and confronts the "offender" with his take on the terrible situation he was forced into because of the offender's behavior. Then, finally when that did not appease his wrath he turns to this forum for affirmation of his wrath.

Just hearing the story recited from this one side I cannot help but think there is just as much "Blame" to be placed on you as on him. I actually consider it irrelevant whether straight in approaches are "allowed" in the FAR or not. legal/not legal, ethical/non-ethical, appropriate/inappropriate, the reality is it is a non-standardized approach that places unnecessary risk on everyone in the pattern whether they are flying standard patterns or non-standard approaches.

Excuse me everyone but if you don't mind I would like to just squeeze in here since I really need to get on the ground. You don't mind if I just cut in line here do you? It will only take a minute for me and I will be out of your way, so, N1234 on 3 mile straight in final.

REALLY??

Then there is:
N1234 7 miles out, any traffic in the area please advise.

100% agree with Bill on this call. Sorry about not being able to post the actual FAA ruling on this. Perhaps I will look it up and post afterwards but I do know that the FAA did release a new statement about this radio call a few years ago stating their stance this is a non-standard radio call that should NOT be used. Again, as above, it is irrelevant what the FAA stance has to say about this. The truth is, what does it gain? If you do get a response to the question the response will only reiterate what the other pilot would have already told you had you spent a little bit of time listening to the frequency. Plus it adds that much more clutter to the airway. Of course it doesn't address the NORDO pilot out there either though, does it?

So in essence "Any traffic in the area please advise" might as well be:
Hey everyone out there, I am going to be coming into this here area real soon. I really don't want to bother with the time it will take to find out what has been going on round here, so if all of you will just pipe in and tell me where you are I will be sure to look out for you when I get there!

REALLY!!!

Oh yes, then there is that issue of coming straight in facing the setting sun. Then thinking that relieves him of the need to SEE AND AVOID!

REALLY!!!!????

That fact alone would prevent me from doing a straight in approach without knowing EVERYTHING that is going on at that airport BEFORE I ever got to the point of this near miss.

As I said, I am having a hard time sympathizing with the original poster. Especially with him blaming the other guy who may very well have not really been doing anything out of the ordinary for that day. Even without hearing the other guys story I can see where if YOU change your behavior in these three areas YOU can proactively minimize your risk of encountering similar incidents in the future.

Live Long and Prosper!
 
Steve, did you even read my original post? It sounds like you didn't. I accepted I was at fault and said I would do things differently from now on!
 
Steve, did you even read my original post? It sounds like you didn't. I accepted I was at fault and said I would do things differently from now on!

He just wants to take his turn rubbing dirt in the wound. I wouldn't worry.
 
Steve, did you even read my original post? It sounds like you didn't. I accepted I was at fault and said I would do things differently from now on!
Yes, nbachert (by the way, how exactly do you pronounce your name) I did read your original post. I also read every other post afterwards, including your follow up posts. I am not stating anywhere that you did not come to terms with what transpired. If you, or Scooby think my motivation is "rubbing dirt in the wound" I am sorry you feel that way. What I am saying is, in reading the words YOU wrote, I can see where, indeed, there are some things you could have altered that would remove you from that risk, if they would be taken.

I know I did not read any of your posts in which you stated you intend to alter your approach procedures or your radio communications practices. What I did read was your requesting to be provided information for where the FAA RULES can be found concerning these procedures and practices.

It is my view that internalizing procedures and practices is the safest way to behave in any situation. That belief transcends this conversation about approach procedures by the way. It is further my belief that this act of internalizing procedures and practices has to be done in spite of what rules or regulations may or may not exist governing those issues. Truly, I have reiterated other's posts but I hope I am also presenting additional perspective on the specific actions being discussed.

If you choose to accept criticism as constructive or simply as negative is a choice you alone can take. I harbor no animosity toward you or anyone and I truly hope you:

Live Long and Prosper!
 
Steve,

So I then said I will make sure in the future to do an extensive runway check for aircraft and enter midfield downwind which will allow for better visibility

Above is a quote from my original post, not sure how YOU missed it. Makes it sound condescending when you capitalize it doesn't it. Not very constructive. I'm eating it all as I knew I would posting on here. However, I also knew there would be comments worth paying attention to and ones that wouldn't be. Since you didn't have correct information I never even got close to finishing yours. As for the reasoning as to why I was asking if it is actually a violation is because I honestly don't think it is. So therefore I said role tape and show me where it says I broke the law. Still waiting on that too....pretty sure it isn't.
 
Steve,

So I then said I will make sure in the future to do an extensive runway check for aircraft and enter midfield downwind which will allow for better visibility

Above is a quote from my original post, not sure how YOU missed it. Makes it sound condescending when you capitalize it doesn't it. Not very constructive. I'm eating it all as I knew I would posting on here. However, I also knew there would be comments worth paying attention to and ones that wouldn't be. Since you didn't have correct information I never even got close to finishing yours. As for the reasoning as to why I was asking if it is actually a violation is because I honestly don't think it is. So therefore I said role tape and show me where it says I broke the law. Still waiting on that too....pretty sure it isn't.
Ok, confirmation. Got it. Just for the record, everything I am stating, condescending tone or not, is that legalities are not the issue in this conversation.

Have a great day and enjoy your flying experiences. They indeed are special experiences to savor.
 
Beware the hun in the sun! I won't land into the sun if the winds are calm. You are blind when you do. The only mid-air we have had in this area (Montreal) was a number of years ago at a busy training airport in the circuit. Both guys were on freq and making calls, but they still flew into each other with multiple fatalities. A guy on final hit a guy on a tighter approach turning base to final. So the lesson is that the radio won't keep you safe. Since the eyeball is the best safety device, I avoid landing into the sun if at all possible.

In this incident I don't think anyone is to blame, but that is an opinion of somebody who wasn't there, so pretty worthless. Nobody knows why you didn't hear the other airplane's calls - it could be a crappy radio, antenna connection, finger trouble. The rule is see and be seen, not hear and be heard. And if you were in the right but get killed you are still dead.
 
Straight in.... loss of grin!

I have always flown out of uncontrolled airports until recently.

Flying straight in made me feel uncomfortable in that I could not:

1/ set up for controlled decent well.

2/ see the aircraft on the runway, many seemed to use any runway they wanted.

So I didn't fly straight in , however, now I fly out of ATC and will fly straight in, but the hair is up on the back of my neck all the time!

Thanks for relating, no one should condemn or negatively respond but all should thank you for relating a very easy to avoid incident. Surprised that the other pilot took it so casually..... some just do I guess. Thanks again!
 
On a straight-in, there are no turns. Where does it say you must make a turn?



Buuut, he didn't make a mistake.

91.126, in concurrence with the guidelines recommended (not regulatory) in the AIM. 91.13 would suppose blatant disregard for all above, and everything is counter to AC 60-22.

Do people do it, yes. Is it advisable? Most definitely no. It's pure laziness. President has been set that it's arguably not legal.

The most damning outcome is the results of the NTSB investigation, which would have most likely read three fatalities, with 90% of the blame being laid on the straight-in offender.


He already admitted he made a mistake. Pretty soon, nobody is going to post here....

Why I haven't posted here in over a year... Reluctance to call a spade a spade in safety and regulatory issues.
 
Did you do this? FYI Class E airport governed by 91.127 says "see 91.126".

You drove straight in, to a runway/field you had no SA on, almost caused a midair, then yelled at some poor kid who was well within his rights and simply had the wrong freq dialed in. If I were you I'd go find him and apologize

You are missing ? 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.
 
91.126, in concurrence with the guidelines recommended (not regulatory) in the AIM. 91.13 would suppose blatant disregard for all above, and everything is counter to AC 60-22.

Do people do it, yes. Is it advisable? Most definitely no. It's pure laziness. President has been set that it's arguably not legal.
.

FAR 91.126 does NOT prohibit straight in approaches. It does prohibit right hand patterns if the airport markings indicate left hand. Furthermore, there are more and more GPS approaches into uncontrolled airports, many of which are straight in, and clearly approved by the FAA.
Does this mean the practice is safe? As with almost every other use of this word, there is not a simple yes no answer. Does it increase the risk? IMHO marginally yes.
 
I was at a calm wind airport. Making radio calls. Doing to proper pattern. Still almost died in a collision on the runway.

I was flying my Pitts on a 13/31 runway in calm winds. I was doing pattern work and this airfield has a right traffic for 13, left traffic for 31 pattern due to skydiving operations.

I called DW/Base/Final and as I was getting ready to round out, I saw a flash of light on the other end of the runway. I didn't think, I cobbed the power and pulled up and banked right. A Cessna 172 blasted past me on the runway going the opposite direction.

He came on the radio and apologized. He said he was making calls, but was on the wrong frequency. I think I know what happened, our AWOS system was out, so if you tried to listen you might not have flipped back when you tried to get the weather since you never heard anything.

And I don't mind people making a radio call asking for an advisory. Takes like a few seconds and I think it prevents issues.
 
To risk being labelled a heretic, I'll mention that, even though the regulations which govern aviation allow for legal operation of aircraft without 2-way communications equipment, and even though you may be legally right to operate NORDO, I often wonder why on earth anybody would.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm all for exercising one's legal rights, and I fully understand the pleasure that comes from "radio silence". But when I see the very obvious safety benefit afforded to us through having two-way radio communications, and I see the very low cost of hand-held VHF COMM radios that are perfectly suitable for use on and near uncontrolled airports, I just can't for the life of me understand why anybody would forego the safety benefit of radio communications.

OK, I'm donning my kevlar flame suit now. *Grin* I'm not saying this to be argumentative, but rather to state that, for very little cost, one can gain a large boost in safety by adding a hand-held radio to even the most basic aircraft. I figure most of us believe our old hides are worth more than the couple hundred bucks a hand-held radio would cost. Just sayin'...

The problem is that the cost is not that low. I actually own a hand held radio and tried to use it in the J3. It seems with a Franklin 4 cylinder engine from the 40s without shielded magnetos or spark plugs or spark plug cables using a radio doesn't really work... . So to make this work I would have to change the mags, which I can't just do myself as it's a certified airplane and there is still no guarantee it would work well after that.

I suspect the flight school I know of is in a similar boat. Also not sure if a flight school really could operate on a hand held. Getting a student and instructor and handheld (which can not be permanently attached) and all the cables into an airplane seems like a problem waiting to happen (cables around controls etc..). If they put a fixed one in they probably need to add an electrical system which adds a whole bunch of other costs and requirements.

Oliver
 
Back
Top