If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
What's short final? Aircraft enter runways and takeoff in front of
aircraft on final regularly without mishap. Short enough that he had to do a 360 instead of continuing in for landing. I think the fact that he had to take evasive action means that the Citation wasn't paying attention. Adam |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:47:57 GMT, Robert Coffey
wrote: are radio calls mandatory on uncontrolled fields? Well, you have an obligation not to put people in danger. Radio can't be mandatory because planes are flying that have no radio. It's "see and avoid." Seems to me the Citation pilot fell short of his obligation. Perhaps as the more experienced pilot he figured he knew he had time to take off without jeopardizing the other plane. Of course he should have called. It's never a good idea to spook somebody controlling a heavy object at high speed. -- all the best, Dan Ford email (put Cubdriver in subject line) Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com the blog: www.danford.net |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... A runway incursion is "any occurrence in the airport runway environment involving an aircraft, vehicle, person, or object on the ground that creates a collision hazard or results in a loss of required separation with an aircraft taking off, intending to take off, landing, or intending to land." It's a non-towered field so there's no separation requirement. Was there a genuine collision hazard? Would you have collided had you not done the 360? We would have collided had I not done the 360 or gone around. Obviously, I saw the aircraft and made contigency plans (trying to "stay ahead" of the situation) since I heard no radio transmissions, all in an effort to minimize the probability of colliding. If he/she had held short a few seconds longer and pulled out as I was crossing the threshold, then the chances of a collision would have been substantial. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"BTIZ" wrote in message news:hfwUd.27784$Tt.10253@fed1read05... What was that Form Number? Oh yea.. NASA Form 277. You can get it at www.asa2fly.com and do a search on "NASA Form 277" It does not force an "enforcement action", but if contacted it might put the pilot on notice that he goofed. BT Thanks, BT. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
no doubt the citation pilot was either careless or a jerk, but i don't
think there is much to discuss with the faa. the citation had the runway. Cub Driver wrote: On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:47:57 GMT, Robert Coffey wrote: are radio calls mandatory on uncontrolled fields? Well, you have an obligation not to put people in danger. Radio can't be mandatory because planes are flying that have no radio. It's "see and avoid." Seems to me the Citation pilot fell short of his obligation. Perhaps as the more experienced pilot he figured he knew he had time to take off without jeopardizing the other plane. Of course he should have called. It's never a good idea to spook somebody controlling a heavy object at high speed. -- all the best, Dan Ford email (put Cubdriver in subject line) Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com the blog: www.danford.net |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ps.com... so.. Tell us the N number. Inquiring minds wanting to know and all... I'm glad you won't have to read about it on an NTSB report... |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Michael 182 wrote: It really is irrelevant whether the OP and/or the pilot of the Citation were on the correct frequency. The OP could have been a nordo Cub. The claim that the Citation pilot allegedly entered the runway in front of an aircraft on short final is the issue being discussed here. -- Peter That's correct, Peter. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"mindenpilot" wrote in message ... Short enough that he had to do a 360 instead of continuing in for landing. I think the fact that he had to take evasive action means that the Citation wasn't paying attention. We don't know that it was short enough that he HAD to do a 360 instead of continuing in for landing. We don't know that he HAD to take evasive action. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Seems to me the Citation pilot fell short of his obligation. Perhaps as the more experienced pilot he figured he knew he had time to take off without jeopardizing the other plane. Yup, and he may have figured correctly. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:MivUd.71208$4q6.70081@attbi_s01... Hmmm. Must be a rash of Citation-itis. On Thursday I had a similar thing happen, in Muscatine, IA . The wind was calm, but had recently favored Rwy 24 -- so that's the runway we chose. (I believe it's the calm-wind runway of choice in MUT as well.) I had just finished my run-up, and had announced that I was taking the runway for departure when a Citation pilot announced that HE was departing on the reciprocal runway, Rwy 06! In fact, squinting into the sun I could see that he was already sitting on the runway, facing me, way down at the other end, over a mile away. He had never said "boo" until that point, and his radio transmissions were VERY weak. Dunno if he was having trouble with the radio, or whether he simply hadn't announced, but there we sat on the runway, like opposing cars in a demolition derby. He then somewhat sheepishly asked if I would mind letting him go first, as he had a clearance delivery time he had to meet. Not being in any particular hurry, I rolled back onto the taxiway, but it was a very unusual -- and potentially disastrous -- situation that ended well. All I can say is: I'm glad *I* announced. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" It's possible in your case that the pilot was on clearance delivery frequency as he/she was scrambling to make a time. It's a good thing he switched to CTAF and heard you. "See and avoid" is fine, but not so easy to perform looking into a setting sun. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Please help -- It's down to the wire | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 12 | July 14th 04 06:05 PM |
Please help -- It's down to the wire | Jay Honeck | Owning | 24 | July 14th 04 06:05 PM |
Rules on what can be in a hangar | Brett Justus | Owning | 13 | February 27th 04 05:35 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |