Mooney doesn’t clear runway fast enough

[201er]

 

[ArtVandelay]

Normally the tower will give you a heads up if they need you to expedite exiting the runway. They cut off the initial calls, so don’t know what was said, but they started with how do you hear, makes me think the pilot was distracted or overwhelmed and not responding to the tower. Tower never told the Mooney to exit or maybe that was cut out. And then there’s the Cessna pilot….

[midlifeflyer]

I don’t know what if anything was edited, but all I saw was a pilot stopping in the middle of a runway for no reason instead of exiting the runway without delay (AIM 4-3-21.). With another airplane in short final, I can understand the controller’s annoyance (without condoning the harshness). 

Apparently, the pilot incorrectly thought they had to stop for a crossing runway or receive a clearance to cross it. If it goes beyond the phone discussion with Tower, looks like a good Compliance Program candidate.

[Danb]

If nothing was edited it appears to be a nonevent. I’d file a report call the number, the Bonanza pilot needs to take a chill pill along with the controller. Could have been a student pilot who had don’t cross runway’s without specific instructions to do so. This should be a nonevent. 

[cbarry]

I’d be curious to know if at least 3000 feet of separation was being provided between  two category 1 landing aircraft using the same runway (which obviously isn’t that much of a distance if too much time is taken by the first aircraft to expedite exiting the runway…) However, “unable” is still  the available to use when the safety of the movement/flight is on the table.  

[Schllc]

Lots of things happening there. The pilot should have known he would not need clearance to cross a runway on landing, that’s pretty basic stuff. 
I get the controllers annoyance, but the other pilots sounded pretty grumpy and catty. 
stuff happens, go around and move on. No need to make the kind of comments they made.  I do think that 77f needs some remedial training though, he should have known there were planes pretty close behind him and stopping on a runway is a bad idea. 

[GeeBee]

When you are in the batter's box, you swing the bat and unless you accepted a land and hold short clearance, you exit the runway when you feel it is safe to do so. The controller's irritation is because HIS plan did not work. You are not a slave to his plan unless you accepted a clearance to exit at a certain point. There is nothing here to show the airplane was at a safe speed to exit, only people irritated he did not exit when they wanted him to exit (their plan). In any event the airplane that had to go around was a T&G not an air ambulance. 

[midlifeflyer]

51 minutes ago, cbarry said:

I’d be curious to know if at least 3000 feet of separation was being provided between  two category 1 landing aircraft using the same runway (which obviously isn’t that much of a distance if too much time is taken by the first aircraft to expedite exiting the runway…) However, “unable” is still  the available to use when the safety of the movement/flight is on the table.  

Based on the video, I'd say there probably was more than enough.  When they show both aircraft, the Bo is further away from the Mooney than the full length of the runway. 

I am going to disagree with the use of the term "expedite" here. This wasn't about not "expediting" exiting the runway.  It was about coming to a dead stop on the active runway instead of exiting "normally."

[ArtVandelay]

We don’t know if he actually came to a stop or was just taxiing down the runway. The audio was edited so really can’t tell.

[cbarry]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

Based on the video, I'd say there probably was more than enough.  When they show both aircraft, the Bo is further away from the Mooney than the full length of the runway. 

But I a going to disagree with the use of the term "expedite" here. This wasn't about not "expediting" exiting the runway.  It was about coming to a dead stop on the active runway instead of exiting "normally."

The Cessna was the go around traffic, not the Bonanza.   The Bonanza ended up landing after the Mooney.  The Mooney pilot, I agree shouldn’t have paused, especially not stopped to ask permission to cross the other runway when no LAHSO had been given.  However,  he has every right to use the amount of runway needed to exercise safe operations.  It appears he was just being cautious about crossing the other runway out of concern for other conflicts when the main conflict was at his six.

[midlifeflyer]

7 minutes ago, cbarry said:

It appears he was just being cautious about crossing the other runway out of concern for other conflicts when then the main conflict was at his six.

I agree he was just being cautions. The problem was he was being unnecessarily cautious due to a lack of knowledge and caused problems for others.

That doesn't excuse either the controller's barking or the snarky other pilot, but it is the pilot's fault. Or, the pilot can chalk it up to a nasty controller and figure he did everything just fine and do it again next time.

[201Steve]

I’m with Geebee on this one. The plan didn’t come together for the tower. Oh well, adapt and overcome. If he was so strapped for time and energy he could have denied requests for training touch and gos. The brasher warning was a jerk flex. Would have been way more productive to clean up the situation and simply let the pilots know what he expected at his airport. They are all different and as much as controllers like to think everything they do is standard, that’s not how it works in the real world. Every tower operation is so different. It just takes reps to get people on the same page. 

[Barneyw]

I didn't think air rage - GA style - was such a thing.

Yes the Mooney may have made a bit of an error but the controller was totally unprofessional, the guy behind probably benefited from doing a rare go around but was obviously not concentrating on flying the aircraft making an angry comment and the clown who chimed in with the "they give licences to anyone" remark was totally unnecessary

If this is the reaction from all involved when something minor like this happens it begs the question what will the reaction be like when something serious happens.

ATC are there to serve and manage the airspace, I don't think "get off the runway" is standard phraseology.

All in all the pathways for something more sinister to happen were being nudge closer and closer by the reaction of the pilots and controller ganging up on one person who should have known the rules but hey hands up those of you who have gone through your aviation life without a mistake or error - if you have your hand up then I would say you are being somewhat economic with the truth.

Cheers

Barneyw

[Schllc]

Totally agree that the controller could have handled that better. They do space things too tightly for my comfort at times as well. However, stopping on the runway upon landing to get permission to cross an intersecting runway is bizarre. Is it just me that thinks this is strange?

[Marc_B]

My thought is giving a phone number to have a discussion with cool heads and education for both the controller and the pilot is probably a good thing.  Doesn't need to go any farther than that. 

ATC typically has plenty of room so this wasn't a "safety" issue, just a squeeze play that didn't work out.  But for a touch and go to be frustrated with a go around???  That's just silly.  Go arounds are probably what that pilot definitely needed more training on...probably most of us don't do that near as often as we should.

But I hope that I'm never recorded sounding spiteful or making rude comments.  It makes it harder for everyone on the freq to actually pay attention to what they're doing when these situations escalate.  Probably more likely for mistakes or omissions to be made in more than just the aircraft involved.  It's always like when you're having a conversation and there is a TV on in the room and the person you're talking too seems glued to it and you're sure they aren't "really" listening to you! 

[dzeleski]

51 minutes ago, Schllc said:

Totally agree that the controller could have handled that better. They do space things too tightly for my comfort at times as well. However, stopping on the runway upon landing to get permission to cross an intersecting runway is bizarre. Is it just me that thinks this is strange?

Maybe that pilot is out of somewhere that issues LAHSO often and they just defaulted to that?

Otherwise yeah kind of a weird reaction.

[1980Mooney]

This is some ancient ATC tape that likely has been altered (compressed).  I think this happened over 15 years ago and the graphics are just someone's "artistic creation" - maybe the whole thing has been doctored to enhance someone's Youtuber subscription following. 

The idiot can't even spell Mooney...."Moony".   I bet it is just a machine phonetically trolling ATC tapes.   AI at work!  The Future.....

N3277F last flew 7 years ago in 2017, before it was scrapped and deregistered following a gear up.  Additionally the graphics depict Republic Airport (KFRG) Farmingdale, New York (Matches the controllers accent).  The last time that particular Mooney was owned and based in the NY area was 2010 when it was sold to a Texas owner.

N3277F, a 1967 M20F, had a gear up landing at Farmington, New Mexico (KFMN) in July, 2017.  If was then scrapped, auctioned, purchased by Texas Aircraft Salvage and deregistered upon dismantlement.  This plane did not appear to be ADS-B out compliant.  On the salvage form this hapless F had only "Narco MK12D, Narco AT150, Narco 890 DME, King KMD 150" for avionics.

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2017/07/mooney-m20f-n3277f-incident-occurred_7.html

http://www.avclaims.com/N3277F.htm

http://www.avclaims.com/n3277f_photos.htm

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2024 by 1980Mooney
Corrected and highlighted spelling of Farmingdale, New York. NY.

[DXB]

The Mooney pilot sounds like a noob who had a brain fart thinking he needed a clearance to cross an intersecting runway on the landing runway.  We've all been that guy in some form or other early in our development.  But he gets points for a calm professional demeanor on the radio despite his confusion and the unnecessary commotion on frequency. By contrast, the tower controller is being a d*ck over the Mooney pilot's mistake rather than simply doing his job of managing the conflict that's been created by it. And the Bonanza pilot is being a complete a-hole by ganging up on the Mooney pilot in response to the controller's inappropriate irritation plus the modest inconvenience created for him.  His apparent bullying of another pilot on tower frequency makes him the one most deserving of a Brasher warning in my view. At the very least, he should have his Bonanza confiscated and be told he would better fit in with the Cirrus crowd. 

 

[Coachella Bravo]

My hats off for Great research for 1980 Mooney !!    ;-)

[201er]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

N3277F last flew 7 years ago in 2017, before it was scrapped and deregistered following a gear up. 

N3277F, a 1967 M20F, had a gear up landing at Farmington, New Mexico (KFMN) in July, 2017.  If was then scrapped, auctioned, purchased by Texas Aircraft Salvage and deregistered upon dismantlement.  This plane did not appear to be ADS-B out compliant. 

Sounds like there's some history of multiple occasions not clearing the runway for N3277F...

[Yetti]

The second plane is doing a touch and go.  So doing pattern work.   The controller should have been more in control of the situation.  The runway was not clear, should have just told the #2 to go around in a calm voice instead of focusing on the Mooney who technically owned the run way at that moment. 

Pretend the mooney had a flat.   We had this happen on a taxiway.   My friend's plane had a flat crossing a runway.     He was not sure what had happened.   I drove by and confirmed his main was flat.   The Tower is known to be grumpy at this airport.   They went into grump mode.   Things happen.   Work you second or third plan when theings are not as expected.

[GeeBee]

I used to get really irritated at tower when they would say, "Plan no delay traffic close in behind you". When I was checking out new guys I would say, "You're up to bat, don't let them push you out of the batter's box". I would see so often guys land hard, slam on brakes and reverse throwing passengers all over the place just to appease the tower and the guy behind them (who probably was late slowing down). One it is your runway. Two it is your airplane. Three, your passengers. Four, yours or the company's brakes and tires. Tell me it is a Lifeguard or emergency aircraft, I'll even pull out of the pattern otherwise, leave me alone.

[Shadrach]

13 hours ago, GeeBee said:

When you are in the batter's box, you swing the bat and unless you accepted a land and hold short clearance, you exit the runway when you feel it is safe to do so. The controller's irritation is because HIS plan did not work. You are not a slave to his plan unless you accepted a clearance to exit at a certain point. There is nothing here to show the airplane was at a safe speed to exit, only people irritated he did not exit when they wanted him to exit (their plan). In any event the airplane that had to go around was a T&G not an air ambulance. 

The irritation is that he needlessly stopped and held short of a crossing runway and then needlessly asked permission to cross.  I think controllers expect a somewhat higher standard of professionalism when dealing with fast, high performance, retractables. This dude failed. He didn’t really break any regs. He just looked kind of silly. I doubt that anything came of it other than the humiliation of being an online example of what not to do.

[BravoWhiskey]

This started with “77F how do you hear?” While he was on final?  So I think it’s possible the controller was having communication issues with this aircraft.  I’m sure we have all been asked to “expedite” this or “without delay” that but the pilot of 77F seemed to be having trouble.  The following aircraft’s “come on!” was unnecessary and as was the follow up statement about giving anyone a license.  

[Schllc]

6 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

This is some ancient ATC tape that likely has been altered (compressed).  I think this happened over 15 years ago and the graphics are just someone's "artistic creation" - maybe the whole thing has been doctored to enhance someone's Youtuber subscription following.

 

Your diligence and ability to pull all of these details from reports and accidents is incredible.  I appreciate it…