non-towered airport question

As the pilot in command you must determine which runway is best for you at
an uncontrolled airport. You cannot relinquish this responsibility to a vote
from the other pilots. That does not mean that you ignore what everybody
else is doing. You still take that into account and sometimes it is safer to
settle for a less than optimum runway if collision avoidance is more
important. Since you said that traffic conflicts were not a problem in this
case, I think then you are safe in choosing whichever runway you want. If
conditions change and additional traffic warrants a change in runway, then
you should do that.

if collision avoidance is more
important.

When would collision avoidance *not* be more important?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..
if collision avoidance is more
important.

When would collision avoidance *not* be more important?

Hi Cub,

As I said in another post: essentially, when other operational
characteristics of the airplane make a different runway safer
(I assume that's what CJ means).

For example: *longer runway for a twin or HP plane
*runway more aligned with the wind for a plane
with linked rudder/nosewheel
*grass runway for antique taildragger
*longer runway for testing after maintenance
*more I haven't thought of?

JMO, but actually I think the "improved collision avoidance"
of everyone in the same pattern is actually somewhat illusory,
unless everyone can fly the same pattern at the same speed or
unless the pattern is fairly full (more than a couple of planes).
I think if one draws out crossing patterns and tries to visualize
the vectors, it's clear there are only a couple of potential
conflict points. Avoid those and it's a no-brainer. With the
potential for overtaking traffic flying a different pattern, some
people flying 1000 ft pattern when the published altitude is 800
ft etc, when everyone's in the same pattern the entire pattern is
one big potential conflict point.

Cheers,
Sydney

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
As the pilot in command you must determine which runway is best for you at
an uncontrolled airport. You cannot relinquish this responsibility to a vote
from the other pilots. That does not mean that you ignore what everybody
else is doing. You still take that into account and sometimes it is safer to
settle for a less than optimum runway if collision avoidance is more
important. Since you said that traffic conflicts were not a problem in this
case, I think then you are safe in choosing whichever runway you want. If
conditions change and additional traffic warrants a change in runway, then
you should do that.

Thanks, CJ. That's pretty much what I did -- when it was clear both
other planes were doing pattern work, not just "full stop" landing
and taxiing home, and a third plane called in, that's what I did, join
the throng.

What would have been useful, in retrospect, is a way for the other
pilots to indicate their intention to do pattern work. When someone
says "T&G" that intention is clear. When someone says "full stop",
it tells us what they plan to do on the runway but nothing about
their later intentions.

OTOH I grasp from some other responses that there *is* a feeling of
discomfort from other pilots about using crossing runways, so I'll
take this into account.

There are definately airports where I would NOT use a crossing
runway because of terrain or obstructions or the way the patterns
intersect.

Cheers,
Sydney

On 12 Jan 2004 17:59:09 -0800 (Snowbird) wrote:

What's the general viewpoint here?

A non-towered airport near us has two runways, shaped
like an "L". Totally flat, no obstructions to vision--
airplane at the departure end for one can see airplanes
at the other. Left traffic both, so the downwind for the
short runway crosses the longer runway at midfield.
The possible conflict points are simultaneous T/O,
or crosswind for the short runway/downwind for the
long.

Today at that airport, one aircraft was in the pattern for
the shorter runway, which the wind favored. I wanted to use
the longer runway for various reasons, so exercising a sharp
look-out and making my radio calls, I proceded to do so.
Later another plane joined him.

There were no conflicts AFAIK. Everyone was doing a good job
making transmissions and keeping track of each other.
It was a good exercise for me since our new home airport has
a similar setup with both runways frequently in use -- and the
added complication of right traffic in one direction, left in
the other. I'm still getting used to it.

When a fourth aircraft called in, I decided the spatial
relationships were getting complicated and taxied over to
the short run way, did one short field landing which my instructor
would have liked and I didn't (power on), and headed for the
horizon.

Question is: how would most pilots here feel about this?
Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway? In terms of my plane's capabilities
and mine, it's plenty of runway, no reason why not. It just
wasn't what I preferred initially.


I think using the most active runway is the right thing to do.
It's what other pilots would expect and even though you had
things under control and using the other runway was easy for
you to handle for the other pilots it may have been too much
to deal with.

R. Hubbell


I used to be based at that airport and it wasn't uncommon, if
I was in the pattern for the short runway, to have other planes
land on the long. It never bothered me except when someone
came straight-in and obviously had no idea where the rest of
the traffic was. But one of the planes in the pattern seemed
to indicate, um, let's say displeasure with me. That doesn't
concern me -- people have to say whatever they feel improves
safety and presents them in a professional light, *hee* *hee*,
and I kept my rule of "don't argue on freq. just don't and
say you didn't"

However I figure I should ask for a sanity-check on whether
what's SOP at home is regarded as inappropriate or rude
elsewhere.

Cheers,
Sydney

I think that you did great. You have every right to use any runway you
choose but it is also prudent to work with everyone else to make the best,
safest use of a public resource. At Minden we have four runways (two are
generally for glider use only). The tow planes almost always use 30 and the
powered planes 34 and landing gliders use 30, 30R or 21 but do not cross 34.
The powered planes get to use the longest runway with a VASI, the towplanes
get a runway where nobody is rushed to attach the gliders and the gliders
get a choice of three runways, one of which is almost certain to be
unoccupied. When there is a forest fire, the tankers land on 34 and takeoff
on 16. All this happens regardless of the wind unless it is really howling
and then very few are flying anyway.

Mike
MU-2


"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
What's the general viewpoint here?

A non-towered airport near us has two runways, shaped
like an "L". Totally flat, no obstructions to vision--
airplane at the departure end for one can see airplanes
at the other. Left traffic both, so the downwind for the
short runway crosses the longer runway at midfield.
The possible conflict points are simultaneous T/O,
or crosswind for the short runway/downwind for the
long.

Today at that airport, one aircraft was in the pattern for
the shorter runway, which the wind favored. I wanted to use
the longer runway for various reasons, so exercising a sharp
look-out and making my radio calls, I proceded to do so.
Later another plane joined him.

There were no conflicts AFAIK. Everyone was doing a good job
making transmissions and keeping track of each other.
It was a good exercise for me since our new home airport has
a similar setup with both runways frequently in use -- and the
added complication of right traffic in one direction, left in
the other. I'm still getting used to it.

When a fourth aircraft called in, I decided the spatial
relationships were getting complicated and taxied over to
the short run way, did one short field landing which my instructor
would have liked and I didn't (power on), and headed for the
horizon.

Question is: how would most pilots here feel about this?
Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway? In terms of my plane's capabilities
and mine, it's plenty of runway, no reason why not. It just
wasn't what I preferred initially.

I used to be based at that airport and it wasn't uncommon, if
I was in the pattern for the short runway, to have other planes
land on the long. It never bothered me except when someone
came straight-in and obviously had no idea where the rest of
the traffic was. But one of the planes in the pattern seemed
to indicate, um, let's say displeasure with me. That doesn't
concern me -- people have to say whatever they feel improves
safety and presents them in a professional light, *hee* *hee*,
and I kept my rule of "don't argue on freq. just don't and
say you didn't"

However I figure I should ask for a sanity-check on whether
what's SOP at home is regarded as inappropriate or rude
elsewhere.

Cheers,
Sydney

Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway?

I would have been very unhappy with the situation you describe. I stay
away from two-runway airports for just that reason!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..
Would you feel I should have just joined with traffic
for the shorter runway?

I would have been very unhappy with the situation you describe. I stay
away from two-runway airports for just that reason!

Thanks for your feedback, Dan. That's exactly why I posted.

Um -- but actually, isn't every airport a two-runway airport?

My personal nightmare scenario is an airport with left
traffic for one runway, right traffic for another. The
wind is calm or almost directly across, or else one pilot
decides to land or takeoff downwind for personal reasons.

That's not too bad if his plan is to take off and "get out
of Dodge Cowboy" but then for whatever reason he decides
to go around the patch.

Yipers!
Sydney

My personal nightmare scenario is an airport with left
traffic for one runway, right traffic for another. The
wind is calm or almost directly across, or else one pilot
decides to land or takeoff downwind for personal reasons..

Yipers!
Sydney

Happens here (00V) a lot. Glider activity to the west so 15 has left
traffic and 33 right traffic. Not to mention all sorts of different
approaches, different or no radio callout and this airport is
potentially dangerous.

Ron Lee

My worst complaint is the pilot (not from the area) who insists on doing
a left pattern when the AF/D and the sectionals all explicitly state
right pattern. Why? Because FTG is cozy in the SE corner of DEN's
class B. A mile west or a mile north, and you're violating the
Class B surfact airspace.

And when the pilot is reminded about the right traffic, he (why is
it *always* a man?) responds "not in my book!"

We get one of these every month or so.