Near Miss With Ground Vehicles at KCRS

[chriscalandro]

14 hours ago, FlyingCanuck said:

Respectfully I disagree. Fly IFR all the time. I would say 50% or more of the time, controllers in many states and sectors all say to me: “do you have the weather and NOTAMs? Advise approach request.”

being asked if you have the Notam is not an unusual question in many places.

i agree with the OP: the sector responsible for that airport should have known about a runway closure at a single runway airport. That’s an ASRS report for sure. 

We’re on the same page here I think. 
 

ATC asked if he had the NOTAMs and he said yes when he did not. 
 

I’m sure if he had said no he would have been told about the closed runway. 

[Hank]

31 minutes ago, chriscalandro said:

We’re on the same page here I think. 
 

ATC asked if he had the NOTAMs and he said yes when he did not. 
 

I’m sure if he had said no he would have been told about the closed runway. 

I seem to recall him stating that NOTAMs were checked on two tablets, each using a different ADS-B connection, and on the panel-mounted GPS [G530? 650? 750? I forget], and while NOTAMs were displayed on all three devices, none of them included the runway closure . . . . .

Go back and reread what the OP wrote, after removing your blinders.

[alextstone]

27 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

Yes let's go back and read what the OP said in the very first post...

In paragraph 6:

"Then, in an effort to understand the NOTAM issue, I searched for NOTAM's on my GTN750 (I have ADSB in via a GDL88) and there it was!  A NOTAM(D) for runway 32 - 14 closure until 7pm local!  "

So the NOTAM of runway closure was broadcast and his GTN750 did receive it as he clearly states.  That means that the runway closure NOTAM was properly reported by the airport, the NOTAM was properly broadcast on FISB, his Garmin GDL-88 properly received it, it was properly communicated to the Garmin GTN750 and the Garmin GTN750 properly displayed it when queried (i.,e, all Garmin hardware and software working properly).  

This conversation seems to be going in circles.  The OP never checked NOTAMs on his GTN750 while on Approach.  He looked for them on the GTN750 after landing and then just prior to taking off.  And it was there.

Garmin does a pretty good job making sure all it's individual components (hardware and software) integrate together seamlessly and flawlessly.   

All these other comments about other devices and tablets and receivers introduce multiple points of integration which raise the question of compatibility, communication and operator error.  Let's not forget that they had been dealing with a clearly visible hypoxia event previously.  They are both on the same oxygen system with the same pulse oxymizer and that has never been explained.  The OP said that they both went to back-up - it is not a case of the copilot having a bad mask. 

There are many potential issues here but, as stated by the OP, the Garmin avionics did display the NOTAM for runway closure.  And yes the Controller could have been more informatively helpful and said "did you read the NOTAM for runway closure".

Just to clarify, my wife had hypoxia, I did not.  Her side of the O2D2 system failed, oddly enough.  I had come to trust Foreflight to display NOTAMS and in this case I it did not display the NOTAM in question. A check of the GTN 750 revealed the NOTAM was active.  

[Hank]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

Yes let's go back and read what the OP said in the very first post...

In paragraph 6:

"Then, in an effort to understand the NOTAM issue, I searched for NOTAM's on my GTN750 (I have ADSB in via a GDL88) and there it was!  A NOTAM(D) for runway 32 - 14 closure until 7pm local!  "

So the NOTAM of runway closure was broadcast and his GTN750 did receive it as he clearly states.  That means that the runway closure NOTAM was properly reported by the airport, the NOTAM was properly broadcast on FISB, his Garmin GDL-88 properly received it, it was properly communicated to the Garmin GTN750 and the Garmin GTN750 properly displayed it when queried (i.,e, all Garmin hardware and software working properly).  

This conversation seems to be going in circles.  The OP never checked NOTAMs on his GTN750 while on Approach.  He looked for them on the GTN750 after landing and then just prior to taking off.  And it was there.

Garmin does a pretty good job making sure all it's individual components (hardware and software) integrate together seamlessly and flawlessly.   

All these other comments about other devices and tablets and receivers introduce multiple points of integration which raise the question of compatibility, communication and operator error.  Let's not forget that they had been dealing with a clearly visible hypoxia event previously.  They are both on the same oxygen system with the same pulse oxymizer and that has never been explained.  The OP said that they both went to back-up - it is not a case of the copilot having a bad mask. 

There are many potential issues here but, as stated by the OP, the Garmin avionics did display the NOTAM for runway closure.  And yes the Controller could have been more informatively helpful and said "did you read the NOTAM for runway closure".

And surprisingly,  none of that has anything to do with a Honda accelerating down the runway head on towards him, and passing his wingtip at high speed . . .

[1980Mooney]

6 hours ago, alextstone said:

Just to clarify, my wife had hypoxia, I did not.  Her side of the O2D2 system failed, oddly enough.  I had come to trust Foreflight to display NOTAMS and in this case I it did not display the NOTAM in question. A check of the GTN 750 revealed the NOTAM was active.  

Thanks for the clarification.  That certainly isn't a good endorsement of the reliability of the O2D2 pulse delivery system.   It sounds like you had come to trust it also but it failed you.  That could creep up as a real killer if it happened to a pilot in hard IFR in the flight levels if the pilot did not have a working oximeter.  I would hope you report this equipment failure so that it can show up in the NTSB "squawk box" reports in Aviation Safety, etc. and warn other pilots that it is potentially not reliable.

Your clarification that the ADS-B FIS-B was actively broadcasting the runway closure NOTAM on the GTN750 puts that question to rest.

Edited February 5, 2022 by 1980Mooney

[EricJ]

6 hours ago, Hank said:

And surprisingly,  none of that has anything to do with a Honda accelerating down the runway head on towards him, and passing his wingtip at high speed . . .

That made me think of this...
 

 

[GeeBee]

After reading all these posts, I can say this. If you cannot say, "There but for the grace of God go I" you are either very low in experience or you approach aviation with the wrong attitude and I don't know how you lasted so long but time and experience will catch up with you.

The NOTAM system is so incredibly broken, it boggles my mind why more pilots do not come to grief. The other day, I printed out a flight plan from FlightPlan.com that had 16 pages of NOTAMs in 10 point type for a 550 mile trip! I can remember before retirement, on a typical transatlantic crossing having 20 pages of NOTAMS for fields capable of handling a wide body. How do you separate the "wheat from the chaff". Is the REILS OTS at a diversion airport a deal breaker in an emergency?

Equally so is the distribution method. FIS only distributes out to 100 nm? I don't know about you but at 100 miles out I'm prepping for an approach, planning descent,  verifying frequencies, minimums etc. Triple that in a jet. Judging by the AIM, the only way you can really cover your butt is to call FSS because even they have news before it hits FIS or ATC for that matter. By the time the FIS works its magic through to your IPAD it could be 50 miles. Think about it, everyone call FSS before descent and approach, how do you think that would work?

Finally in the OP the thing I note is the missing "X". It should be the first thing out, and the last thing removed. There was not good management of the process at this particular airport. 

One thing I like that Garmin Pilot has added is a banner when you pull up an airport that says, "Runway Closures Check Notams" Even if the closure is not that day, the banner appears once the NOTAM is in the system, regardless of date.

[alextstone]

10 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Are you referring to the construction/restriping workers that apparently by contract with the airport operator (City of Corsicana) had the right to have themselves and vehicles on the runway and airport environment by Runway Closure NOTAM effective until 7:00 PM?  The same Runway Closure NOTAM that warned pilots that the Runway was Closed to takeoff and landing operations until 7:00 PM although the OP was taking off at 5:30 PM, 1.5 hours before the NOTAM expired or was cancelled by the airport Operator (the City of Corsicana - Airport Manager)?

The FAA regs. AC No: 150/5200-28F note that only the Airport Operator can cause " issuance/cancellation of NOTAMs with the Air Traffic facility responsible for providing clearance to aircraft at the airport."  That "man in a truck" that said they were reopening "but look out for vehicles when you leave" may or may not have been the Airport Manager.  Regardless, it wasn't communicated to the Air Traffic Facility and broadcast on FIS-B so it was still officially closed.

I looked closely at the FAA regs. and apparently NOTAMs do not force any mandatory action upon pilots.  They are just "Notices".  A pilot can do what he wants when it comes to NOTAMs.   Yes you can land and take off on runways that have been closed by NOTAM.  BUT IT IS AT YOUR OWN RISK.  If anything happens however, I suspect the FAA, NTSB and insurance companies will completely slam the pilot that ignored the NOTAM and place all or most blame upon him/her.  Maybe someone can confirm but I bet Part 121 and 135 pilots would be fired for ignoring an active runway closure NOTAM>

He was driving a PERSONAL vehicle on the runway.  This was not in an official capacity.

[toto]

14 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

One thing I like that Garmin Pilot has added is a banner when you pull up an airport that says, "Runway Closures Check Notams" Even if the closure is not that day, the banner appears once the NOTAM is in the system, regardless of date.

Yep. This is a pretty recent addition to GP, and a nice way to highlight issues that may affect your destination. 

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/newsroom/press-release/aviation/garmin-pilot-app-adds-new-terminal-environment-notam-alerts-and-graphical-runway-closures/

[Marauder]

After reading all these posts, I can say this. If you cannot say, "There but for the grace of God go I" you are either very low in experience or you approach aviation with the wrong attitude and I don't know how you lasted so long but time and experience will catch up with you.
The NOTAM system is so incredibly broken, it boggles my mind why more pilots do not come to grief. The other day, I printed out a flight plan from FlightPlan.com that had 16 pages of NOTAMs in 10 point type for a 550 mile trip! I can remember before retirement, on a typical transatlantic crossing having 20 pages of NOTAMS for fields capable of handling a wide body. How do you separate the "wheat from the chaff". Is the REILS OTS at a diversion airport a deal breaker in an emergency?
Equally so is the distribution method. FIS only distributes out to 100 nm? I don't know about you but at 100 miles out I'm prepping for an approach, planning descent,  verifying frequencies, minimums etc. Triple that in a jet. Judging by the AIM, the only way you can really cover your butt is to call FSS because even they have news before it hits FIS or ATC for that matter. By the time the FIS works its magic through to your IPAD it could be 50 miles. Think about it, everyone call FSS before descent and approach, how do you think that would work?
Finally in the OP the thing I note is the missing "X". It should be the first thing out, and the last thing removed. There was not good management of the process at this particular airport. 
One thing I like that Garmin Pilot has added is a banner when you pull up an airport that says, "Runway Closures Check Notams" Even if the closure is not that day, the banner appears once the NOTAM is in the system, regardless of date.

Your post reminded me in the days of DUATS the constant buzz of my dot matrix printer hammering out page after page of NOTAMs.

One thing that needs to be kept in mind is the origin of the NOTAM itself. The airport authorities managing the airport issue them. When my airport was in for a full repaving, our airport manager was constantly adjusting the “closed runway” NOTAM when expected runway reopening dates would come and go. At a nearby airport, they were repaving a portion of the taxiway and the airport manager there never posted a NOTAM but the AWOS had a warning that “men and machines were working on the taxiway”.

I agree the whole NOTAM system needs to be overhauled. I thought I read somewhere that there was a project underway to do just that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

Finally in the OP the thing I note is the missing "X". It should be the first thing out, and the last thing removed. There was not good management of the process at this particular airport. 

^^This.   If all else fails a closed runway should have an X on each end.   If it doesn't, it's pretty much open.   A Nordo, non-asb aircraft, which exists and operates legally, can wind up at an unplanned airport for a large number of reasons and expect to land if there's no X.

And +1 on the NOTAM system being fubared.   The SNR is very, very low.   I get my briefings on the web from 1800wxbrief.com, and a decent thing that they do that's nice is put a "Closed/Unsafe Airport/Runway" bullet with a red dot if there are any issues or note "None along the route of flight" in the bullet list at the beginning of the briefing, followed immediately by an "Adverse Conditions" box, with TFRs and Closed/Unsafe NOTAMs as the top two items.   That gives you a decent chance of seeing NOTAMs related to such things without having to wade through the usual NOTAM quicksand.

I'd say also that the various briefing sites, including 1800wxbrief, seem to improve incrementally over time on providing information in usable formats.   The combination of text and graphics is starting to get fairly good in come areas and I expect improvement to continue, which will be nice.

[EricJ]

1 minute ago, 1980Mooney said:

I don’t find that particular surprising. This is Texas. Construction is nonunion. Contractors expect their employees to get to the worksite on their own in their personal vehicles. Corsicana is a small town and they are going to hire efficient low cost contractors without a lot of red tape and regulations. The runway was closed To allow everyone to come and go and expedite the repainting

And a very easy thing to happen just before re-opening is, "I wanna take my car out and see what it'll do..."

Years ago I bought a Cadillac CTS-V (LS2 engine, 6-spd manual) from a guy at a hangar at Stellar airpark.   I know that car made a few high-speed runs there before I bought it. 

[DXB]

On 1/30/2022 at 4:16 PM, alextstone said:

 

I have learned the following:  

1.  I should check ALL available data sources in flight for NOTAMS.
2.  I should ask the controller for verification of information.
3.  I cannot depend on a runway to be marked as closed in all instanced when it is.
4.  I should remain vigilant as to any unsafe conditions during flight and upon arrival and departure.

My phone number is:  xxx-xxx-xxxx Please contact me should you wish to discuss these events further.  

 

Thanks for sharing your experience so we all can learn. 

Ignore the inevitable troll or two who surface when you do so - it's better than average here by internet standards.

I would add #5 and #6 to the list (but not necessarily to the NASA report )

5. Despite many controllers being excellent and helpful, I should never assume that ATC has my back, even when I'm in trouble.

6. The FAA should address a NOTAM system that is completely FUBAR and in desperate need of modernization.

[jaylw314]

33 minutes ago, DXB said:

Thanks for sharing your experience so we all can learn. 

Ignore the inevitable troll or two who surface when you do so - it's better than average here by internet standards.

I would add #5 and #6 to the list (but not necessarily to the NASA report )

5. Despite many controllers being excellent and helpful, I should never assume that ATC has my back, even when I'm in trouble.

6. The FAA should address a NOTAM system that is completely FUBAR and in desperate need of modernization.

FAA has made it clear they want an ATC/user partnership.  I learned a couple rules of partnership playing bridge:

• Don't put your partner in a position where he/she can make the wrong decision.  Assume they will make the wrong one and keep them from making it.
• If you know the right thing to say, say it.  If you know the right thing to do, do it.  Don't wait for your partner to say or do it.

[HIghpockets]

23 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

FAA has made it clear they want an ATC/user partnership.  I learned a couple rules of partnership playing bridge:

• Don't put your partner in a position where he/she can make the wrong decision.  Assume they will make the wrong one and keep them from making it.
• If you know the right thing to say, say it.  If you know the right thing to do, do it.  Don't wait for your partner to say or do it.

This is the best advice I have read on this list in a while.  Well done sir.

[LANCECASPER]

On 1/29/2022 at 9:47 AM, alextstone said:

.We were both wearing masks and connected to the O2D2 oxygen delivery system.  She complained of symptoms of hypoxia which were then confirmed with a pulse oximeter (78%).  I, however, was fine (I wear a continuous monitor-94%). 

This is ironic. Two days before this happened to you, on Jan 27 I was flying from TX to FL for the MAPA PPP. I filed for FL230 and had my mic mask plugged into an 02D2 that came with the airplane. I also have another o2d2 that I’ve used for years. The o2d2 that came with the airplane had old AA batteries that had started to leak. I had taken them out back in November and I cleaned up the battery compartment and installed new batteries. It was turning on and appeared to be functioning properly, so I used it on the FL trip. After soon reaching FL230 my o2 saturation wouldn’t  get above 80, so i asked for lower and went to my backup. I sent in both of my o2d2’s to MH Oxygen for service and the one with the battery leakage had to have the circuit board replaced since the leakage had ruined the board. The other o2d2, the one I’ve had for years, was fine. So the point is if you have ever had batteries leak in your o2d2 I would send it in for service. I plan on sending my units in regardless every few years and having them tested and calibrated. They also updated the firmware on both units.

[T. Peterson]

On 1/30/2022 at 7:25 AM, alextstone said:

No one has as of yet addressed my question over why I cannot find the runway closure NOTAM for KCRS on the the FAA's NOTAM website.  Here is my screenshot for the date range of the entire month of January and as you can see, there is no runway closure NOTAM.  Please try for yourself to find the NOTAM.  It should be active for Friday Jan 28th (the day of the trip) until 7 pm...If you can search for it, please let me know how you found it:

Hi Alex,

 I don’t know why the Notam didn’t/doesn’t show.  Possibly a momentary glitch at the time. I very much appreciate you sharing your experience. I have a whole lot of flying experience, but almost none in GA. I just bought my first airplane a couple of months ago and therefore in a very real sense I am a rookie. My takeaway is that if something like that happens to me I will just ask the controller for the Notams. You did your due diligence but came up short. Stuff happens. You learned, I learned and we all have benefited from your candid confession. No one got  hurt or got in trouble with the FAA. PTL!

Ignore the unkind posts. We all need grace from time to time and need to learn to grant it to others. Thanks again,

Torrey