report runway incursion non-towered airport?

"Tony Cox" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:HJFUd.12332$r55.8014@attbi_s52...
You really should be scared of class D airports.

Totally agree. I'll take uncontrolled over non-radar Class Delta, any
day.

Really? All that money spent on controllers is wasted?

In some cases, yes.

At least in class D, everyone is *supposed* to be on the radio, although
of course vigilance is always necessary. I think what you are really
saying is that danger goes up as the traffic density increases, and class
D
tends to be busier than uncontrolled fields. I'd take a class D early in
the
morning when no one is around any day!

The non towered airport I fly out of (home base for 350 + aircraft)is busier
than most Class D airports, has 6 runways with 3 frequently in use at one
time, has a ton of NORDO aircraft and is much better behaved than a lot of
class D airports I have been to. Most close call or worse horror stories I
have experienced and heard involved someone in a tower with a radio and no
radar.

Tony (not the same person as Avweb reported today as facing the clink
for falsifying his pilot certificate application!)

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. com...

"Tony Cox" wrote in message
ink.net...

At least in class D, everyone is *supposed* to be on the radio, although
of course vigilance is always necessary. I think what you are really
saying is that danger goes up as the traffic density increases, and
class
D
tends to be busier than uncontrolled fields. I'd take a class D early in
the
morning when no one is around any day!

The non towered airport I fly out of (home base for 350 + aircraft)is
busier
than most Class D airports, has 6 runways with 3 frequently in use at one
time, has a ton of NORDO aircraft and is much better behaved than a lot of
class D airports I have been to. Most close call or worse horror stories
I
have experienced and heard involved someone in a tower with a radio and no
radar.

Interesting, isn't it? On the one hand, being "uncontrolled"
will hopefully put the fear of God into pilots so they are more
vigilant (yes, I know that being "controlled" shouldn't make a
difference). On the other, I *suspect* that uncontrolled fields
tend to attract the less active pilots, more intimidated by radio
work, who might not be as "on the ball" as they should be.

It'd be interesting to see a comparison of mid-airs, corrected
for traffic density. I suspect the correction for traffic density
would be non-trivial.

I *suspect* that uncontrolled fields
tend to attract the less active pilots, more intimidated by radio
work, who might not be as "on the ball" as they should be.

I'm not convinced that uncontrolled means "less active" pilots. Betcha
it's just more rural, and there is the same mix of active and inactive
pilots.

Jose
--
Nothing is more powerful than a commercial interest.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Tony Cox" wrote in message
k.net...
"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. com...

"Tony Cox" wrote in message
ink.net...

At least in class D, everyone is *supposed* to be on the radio,
although
of course vigilance is always necessary. I think what you are really
saying is that danger goes up as the traffic density increases, and
class
D
tends to be busier than uncontrolled fields. I'd take a class D early
in
the
morning when no one is around any day!

The non towered airport I fly out of (home base for 350 + aircraft)is
busier
than most Class D airports, has 6 runways with 3 frequently in use at
one
time, has a ton of NORDO aircraft and is much better behaved than a lot
of
class D airports I have been to. Most close call or worse horror
stories
I
have experienced and heard involved someone in a tower with a radio and
no
radar.

Interesting, isn't it? On the one hand, being "uncontrolled"
will hopefully put the fear of God into pilots so they are more
vigilant (yes, I know that being "controlled" shouldn't make a
difference). On the other, I *suspect* that uncontrolled fields
tend to attract the less active pilots, more intimidated by radio
work, who might not be as "on the ball" as they should be.

I suspect what you suspect is totally wrong.