Mooney doesn’t clear runway fast enough

[hammdo]

One question is - did they have a notam about LAHSO? If not, don’t stop. Also, he was not given a LAHSO instruction by the tower - that he could of said unable if given so, don’t stop…

Also, the tower could have said turn left on RWY xxx if able so, they are not absolve either.

-Don

[Echo]

8 hours 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?

No.  Some underscore this as using caution.  The guy clearly needs additional training.  A lot of humor in the “oh my” from the controller.  It’s his runway to manage.  You do something knuckleheaded that impacts safety and you better EXPECT a terse rebuke.  I would.  The comments by the pilots speak to their character.  They have as much or more to learn than the Mooney driver imo.

[Schllc]

58 minutes ago, Echo said:

No.  Some underscore this as using caution.  The guy clearly needs additional training.  A lot of humor in the “oh my” from the controller.  It’s his runway to manage.  You do something knuckleheaded that impacts safety and you better EXPECT a terse rebuke.  I would.  The comments by the pilots speak to their character.  They have as much or more to learn than the Mooney driver imo.

I agree, I said as much in a previous post.  

[PeteMc]

4 hours ago, hammdo said:

One question is - did they have a notam about LAHSO? I

There may be a LAHSO NOTAM that you may get a LAHSO request from the Tower, but there is no NOTAM that you MUST do a LAHSO.  So no reason for the guy to think he had to stop.

 

[PeteMc]

I just watched the video and as someone that was based at FRG for decades, I'll toss in my "local" thoughts.  Though that still doesn't mean anything I say has anything to do with what really happened.  But my thoughts are:

The video was very short, but it  appears the Mooney missed some calls, then was cleared to land. 

There was a Bonanza #2 and another plane behind the Bo, but based on the Controller's pace, my guess is that there was a LOT more traffic in the pattern.

As for the LAHSO discussions, they did eventually institute LAHSO at FRG, but they were VERY RARE.  I also think they only gave them to aircraft that they KNEW would/could do it.  There was a LOT of training there and LAHSO was not just a common thing they did a lot of.  The few times they were doing LAHSO I got them, but that meant maybe 4 over the years.

Also, with the short video we did not hear how many other planes were in the pattern.  I recognized the Controller's voice and yes, he was, um... passionate.  But not one that just got flustered.  So wanting the guy to get off the Rwy was probably a lot about the number of planes in the pattern.  Again, no clue based on the video, but as a reference point, FRG had 402,488 operations in 2023. So there is a good chance that the pattern was full. 

Based on potentially full pattern, it makes more sense that the guy may have missed some calls that were blocked by the other traffic.

But having said all the above...  There is no way anyone would think they need to hold short of an intersecting Rwy if they did not ACCEPT a LAHSO instruction.  Also I'm not sure why he referred to it as the  intersecting runway as "the main runway."  

 

[MikeOH]

We talk a lot about safety and good "ADM" but are, apparently, quite ready to lose sight of that when convenient to our criticisms of a fellow pilot.  Here, is a tale of two pilots:

1) Our subject pilot of this thread who stopped short of an intersecting runway because he was concerned with possible conflict and failed to know he did not have to.  He exercised his ADM to make an unquestionably SAFE decision.

2) Jacob van Zanten who did not suffer from such indecision regarding the runway environment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Veldhuyzen_van_Zanten

 

Result:

1) One pi$$ed off controller. One aircraft 'forced' to perform a go-around.  No one put in any danger.

2) 583 dead in what remains the deadliest aviation accident in history.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster#

 

[PeteMc]

9 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

1) Our subject pilot of this thread who stopped short of an intersecting runway because he was concerned with possible conflict and failed to know he did not have to.  He exercised his ADM to make an unquestionably SAFE decision.

Sorry, that's not the case.  Unless you've accepted a Land And Hold Short landing clearance, you never have to hold short of an intersecting runway. You own the entire runway you've been cleared to land on (basic primary training).  So whether it was bad training, a brain fade on his part or something else, it is on him for stopping and not clearing the runway.  It was not actually a "safety issue" it was a pilot error.  

I'm basing this on the graphic I saw, so if it was not Rwy 01 at FRG, then forget everything I  said.  But if it was Rwy 01, there was NO reason to stop on the Runway.  Most GA aircraft should be able to clear at B5 and G7.  But beyond that, Taxiway A runs parallel on the  south side of Rwy 14/32.   So if he stopped short of the intersecting Rwy (14/32), that means he stop right by four options to exit the Rwy. 

[MikeOH]

4 minutes ago, PeteMc said:

Sorry, that's not the case.  Unless you've accepted a Land And Hold Short landing clearance, you never have to hold short of an intersecting runway. You own the entire runway you've been cleared to land on (basic primary training).  So whether it was bad training, a brain fade on his part or something else, it is on him for stopping and not clearing the runway.  It was not actually a "safety issue" it was a pilot error.  

I'm basing this on the graphic I saw, so if it was not Rwy 01 at FRG, then forget everything I  said.  But if it was Rwy 01, there was NO reason to stop on the Runway.  Most GA aircraft should be able to clear at B5 and G7.  But beyond that, Taxiway A runs parallel on the  south side of Rwy 14/32.   So if he stopped short of the intersecting Rwy (14/32), that means he stop right by four options to exit the Rwy. 

@PeteMc

You COMPLETELY miss the point:  What he did was the SAFE decision.  Keep right on bashing him for "not knowing" he 'owned' the entire runway, but his 'pilot error' showed good judgement: he was concerned with conflict. The fact that there was NOT any conflict is irrelevant.  He was uncertain about a PERCEIVED safety issue and acted to eliminate it. That's good ADM.

[midlifeflyer]

17 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Republic Airport (KFRG) Framingham

Pretty sure you mean “Farmingdale.” “Framingham” is in Massachusetts.

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, hammdo said:

One question is - did they have a notam about LAHSO? If not, don’t stop. Also, he was not given a LAHSO instruction by the tower - that he could of said unable if given so, don’t stop…

Also, the tower could have said turn left on RWY xxx if able so, they are not absolve either.

-Don

“LAHSO operations in effect” is generally broadcast on the ATIS but either way, the requirement for a specific airplane to “land and shod short of runway XX” needs to be part of the landing clearance. Otherwise the runway you were cleared to land on is yours from end to end, although subject to the requirement to exit without delay. “Without delay” in this situation without a specific taxiway designated would have been  to cross the runway and turn off at the first available taxiway.

Don’t confuse crossing a crossing runway with turning on to it. Turning onto a crossing runway requires a clearance. Sure, Tower “coulda” said to turn onto it - if it was empty and being used as a taxiway that day but they didn’t need to, so no absolution was necessary. 

[midlifeflyer]

5 hours ago, PeteMc said:

I just watched the video and as someone that was based at FRG for decades, I'll toss in my "local" thoughts.  Though that still doesn't mean anything I say has anything to do with what really happened.  But my thoughts are:

[snip]

But having said all the above...  There is no way anyone would think they need to hold short of an intersecting Rwy if they did not ACCEPT a LAHSO instruction.  Also I'm not sure why he referred to it as the  intersecting runway as "the main runway."  

 

Question for you. Would they even issue a LAHSO clearance for that runway? Looks like only about 2500’. Yes, that Mooney was able to hold short, and lots of folks could too, but I don’t see that as being in the comfort zone for enough aircraft for it to be in Tower’s comfort zone either, especially at a busy place like FRG (yes, been there a few times).

But to the second point. I made the comment about the pilot error in not clearing the runway on the video. Got a quick reply saying, but he wasn’t cleared to cross it.” So, apparently there is way and not just for the pilot in the video.

[Danb]

12 hours ago, hammdo said:

One question is - did they have a notam about LAHSO? If not, don’t stop. Also, he was not given a LAHSO instruction by the tower - that he could of said unable if given so, don’t stop…

Also, the tower could have said turn left on RWY xxx if able so, they are not absolve either.

-Don

LAHSO is listed in the supplement for FRG 

[N201MKTurbo]

After 6000 hours of flying, I have only been issued a LASHO twice. And both times were landing at Tucson on runway 21. Which is not a problem. I have to power up to taxi down the runway to Alpha anyway.

[1980Mooney]

3 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Pretty sure you mean “Farmingdale.” “Framingham” is in Massachusetts.

Yes that is correct - Thanks.  My autospell checker is my enemy and I am terrible about proof-reading (I see what I meant to write and not what I actually wrote).

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

Yes that is correct - Thanks.  My autospell checker is my enemy and I am terrible about proof-reading (I see what I meant to write and not what I actually wrote).

I do it All. The. Time. 

[N201MKTurbo]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

After 6000 hours of flying, I have only been issued a LASHO twice. And both times were landing at Tucson on runway 21. Which is not a problem. I have to power up to taxi down the runway to Alpha anyway.

Holy crap, after 30 years of commuting to KTUS, I just pulled up the airport diagram. They changed all the runway numbers and deleted a runway! I haven't been there in about 6 months. What is going on down there?

[EricJ]

19 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Holy crap, after 30 years of commuting to KTUS, I just pulled up the airport diagram. They changed all the runway numbers and deleted a runway! I haven't been there in about 6 months. What is going on down there?

They deleted the old parallel so that they can put in a proper parallel runway, or something like that.   

https://www.faa.gov/tus

https://www.hdrinc.com/portfolio/tucson-international-airport-runway-12r30l-design

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

They deleted the old parallel so that they can put in a proper parallel runway, or something like that.   

https://www.faa.gov/tus

https://www.hdrinc.com/portfolio/tucson-international-airport-runway-12r30l-design

For decades if you descended to pattern altitude as you rounded the Tucson mountains, they would let you cut across the 11L centerline under the glideslope to land on 11R if they were busy. About 3 years ago they stopped doing that and would climb you to 6000 and vector you on the grand tour of southern AZ. Essentially sending you west of the 11L FAF. This would add 15 minutes to a 40 min flight. When they would try this I would request 21. They would say the winds were wrong and I would say it was OK, I can handle it.

I always heard that they made the Tucson runways 11 instead of 12 because the runways at DM were 12. They didn't want to be confused. Now they are the same. Someone unfamiliar could easily confuse the two. For those not familiar, there are two air carrier sized airports with the same runway alignment five miles from each other. One is the commercial airport and the other is the AFB.

In the past they swapped. What is now the commercial airport used to be the AFB and what is the AFB used to be the municipal airport.

 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

They deleted the old parallel so that they can put in a proper parallel runway, or something like that.   

https://www.faa.gov/tus

https://www.hdrinc.com/portfolio/tucson-international-airport-runway-12r30l-design

Pretty cool how they rotated the whole airport 10 degrees in the last six months.

[exM20K]

21 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Pretty cool how they rotated the whole airport 10 degrees in the last six months.

Coriolis force.  There is little it cannot do.

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Pretty cool how they rotated the whole airport 10 degrees in the last six months.

Nogales changed their runway numbers a while back, too.    Must be going around down there. 

 

[Echo]

22 hours ago, Schllc said:

I agree, I said as much in a previous post.  

lol.  You asked a question.  I answered it in agreement...

[PeteMc]

15 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Question for you. Would they even issue a LAHSO clearance for that runway?

Honestly am not sure.  I *think* I got a LAHSO on Rwy 01 & 32, but that could be just be thinking that from the discussion.  For sure on 32.  Also, I did not hear a lot of LAHSO clearances.  Maybe they did it on other days more often, but not when I was out flying.  And I also only heard it given to someone I recognized on the radio and I think the Twr knew was capable of doing it and not messing them up.

I will tell you that landing and holding short of 14/32 is NOT a tough thing to do at all in a single.  I could get off at B5, but would roll to A and then up A to pull into the Echo Ramp.  Assuming no one was on short final behind me, which was not uncommon there.  

I did not mention in my original post, but with the Twr calling out someone on a "5 mile Final" my guess is they may have had an extended downwind all the way to the South Shore.  Also not uncommon on a busy day.

[PeteMc]

19 hours ago, MikeOH said:

You COMPLETELY miss the point:  

No I didn't.   There would NOT be a conflict to stop for!  So sorry, you can't convince me they just blew it.  No clue as to why as I stated.  Now maybe we'll find out he saw someone booking down A and didn't think they were going to stop.  But that's not what he said.  He said he was stopping for the "Primary Runway" and he was on and owned the Primary Runway. 

Did he get a visit from the FAA, I doubt it.  Did he get an ear full from the Controller for probably having a number of people go around while the Controller figured out what the issue was.  But as soon as he found out it was not an aircraft issue or physical issue, just the guy blew it, I'd be pissed too.

 

[Andy95W]

You’re still missing MikeOH’s point.