2 Aircraft on 1 Runway
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 Aircraft on 1 Runway
We all know that unless there is ATC, an aircraft may not land while another aircraft on the runway (ANO).
However, what about this;
Aircraft (A) is on final approach and another aircraft (B) is lined up to depart.
Nice long runway but no ATC.
Aircraft B rolls and gets airbourne in nice time and aircraft A sees that the runway is clear and landing is assured.
However, just as aircraft A is in the flare, the instructor in aircraft B calls "simulated" and lands back onto the runway.
There is no danger of collision in this case however, had the aircraft been closer things may have been different.
However, we have two aircraft landing on the same runway at the same time..........opinions from anyone?
Regards,
DFC
However, what about this;
Aircraft (A) is on final approach and another aircraft (B) is lined up to depart.
Nice long runway but no ATC.
Aircraft B rolls and gets airbourne in nice time and aircraft A sees that the runway is clear and landing is assured.
However, just as aircraft A is in the flare, the instructor in aircraft B calls "simulated" and lands back onto the runway.
There is no danger of collision in this case however, had the aircraft been closer things may have been different.
However, we have two aircraft landing on the same runway at the same time..........opinions from anyone?
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that aircraft B is in the wrong. A has the right of way since he is landing traffic. If we consider that B is landing as well he might claim that he was at a lower altitude than A, but is effectively cutting in front of A. If B's landing was a real emergency then A would have to go around.
Rule 17 Paragraph (6).
Rule 17 Paragraph (6).
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West UK
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft carrying out the EFATO isn't confirming with the circuit pattern, therefore IMHO that aircraft would be in the wrong.
However what would happen if this were a real emergency and the departing traffic had to land? I would guess that the non emergency landing traffic could be critisised for not applying adequate spacing on final
However what would happen if this were a real emergency and the departing traffic had to land? I would guess that the non emergency landing traffic could be critisised for not applying adequate spacing on final
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The instructor in B should have made a call to traffic informing them of the intended PFL after takeoff. Most of the time the student is not paying enough attention to what you say to realize what is going on. You can also pull out the student's headset plug to do this.
If I owned a flight training aircraft I would have the intercom pilot isolate switch wired backwards for this purpose.
If I owned a flight training aircraft I would have the intercom pilot isolate switch wired backwards for this purpose.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no such call as "simulated" CAP 413 gives FANSTOP as the correct call for a practice engine failure. As B does not have an emergency, he is in breach of the rules of the air. It begs the question that for A to continue the approach from 200 ft or above whilst B is still over the runway, it must be very Loooong indeed.
There are no calls to "TRAFFIC" in the UK, all calls should be addressed to the ground station to whom the frequency is allocated, or prefixed with "Transmitting Blind"
There are no calls to "TRAFFIC" in the UK, all calls should be addressed to the ground station to whom the frequency is allocated, or prefixed with "Transmitting Blind"
