Short Approach?

[hotrod180]

I was going into Seattle's Boeing Field KBFI one summer evening,
I was coming from the west and requested 31R (the short runway) as it was closer to the FBO where I was going.
Apparently after a certain hour they only use the long runway, they cleared me to land 31L.
I kept asking for 31R, they asked why, I told them.
They told me to land 31L, "cleared for a short approach".
I was pretty green then, didn't know what that was about so just landed normally near the threshold and had a long taxi.
After switching to the ground frequency,
the controller explained that they were clearing me to turn base at the numbers and land long-
which would have put me abeam where I was going.
Oh well, you learn something new every time I guess.

 

[bob turner]

And that is what is wrong with ATC instructions that have no clear definition.

I have probably already grumbled about "line up and wait" and "maintain visual separation" - both have succinct definitions of course, but do not resemble ordinary English usage.

 

[mvivion]

I've always been told that a "long landing" does not require any clearance, though letting the controller know that's what you're doing is a good idea.

Remember, once you are cleared to land on that runway, you can use as much or as little of the runway as you need/want. So, if you fly to the far end before touchdown, so what? Again, unless you've been asked to expedite for traffic. That's a different story.

When I land 12 at Bozeman, Hotel taxiway is a loooooong way from the approach end. When I'm cleared to land, I could just mosey down to a couple hundred feet short of Hotel, and land, but generally I just inform the controller that I'm going to land long. They always clear me, but, who cares?

If you land long, and they ever question it, just tell them you're a low time pilot, just learning this plane.....

Again, though, if they have traffic, I'll do whatever I need to do to expedite traffic flow, even if it means a long taxi. My experience is that if you work with controllers, they'll generally work with you. These guys here all know your tail number if you fly more than twice a year.

MTV

 

[mvivion]

And that is what is wrong with ATC instructions that have no clear definition.

I have probably already grumbled about "line up and wait" and "maintain visual separation" - both have succinct definitions of course, but do not resemble ordinary English usage.

Bob,

You can thank the rest of the world for "line up and wait" phraseology. That was an ICAO thing prior to the US adopting it, so us using it made it uniform everywhere.

MTV

 

[bob turner]

We still have to explain it. Every day I hear the controllers tell somebody that "line up and wait means 'position and hold' ". Of course, every day they beg about 20 pilots to recite "hold short" properly, and that one makes sense.

"Maintain visual separation" does not mean avoid hitting him. It means you are in charge of your own wake separation. I kid you not.

I am with you - If I want a long landing, or even the second turnoff, I ask.

 

[hotrod180]

Kase - you are the key. I am actually looking for a definition of "short approach" that I can apply to actual operation......

After another similar discussion on another forum,
I pored through the FAR/AIM looking for actual distances for the "standard pattern".
Found nothing.
I did find something in the old FAA "Flight Training Handbook", aka AC61-21A
(originally circa 1965-ish, mine is a newer revised in 1980 edition).

http://avstop.com/ac/flighttrainghandbook/index.html

http://avstop.com/ac/flighttrainghandbook/airporttrafficpatterns.html

Chapter 7 airport traffic patterns & operations says
"the downwind leg ....should be approximately 1/2 to 1 mile out from the landing runway".
If you use the old "45 degrees behind the shoulder" rule-of-thumb for when to turn base,
this translates to a 1/2 to 1 mile final.

 

[bob turner]

Here you go - try Figure 4-3-2 in the AIM. it says, among other things:

2. Maintain pattern altitude until abeam . . .
3. Complete turn to final at least 1/4 mile from the runway.
. . .
5. . . . commence turn to crosswind leg beyond the departure end of the runway within 300' of pattern altitude.

Cannot get much more definitive than that, even though AIM is not regulatory.

 

[hotrod180]

Item 3 is not very definitive IMHO--
turn final at least 1/4 mile from the runway.
They could have said "between 1/4 mile and 1/2 mile".
So these 747-pattern fliers are following AIM to the letter when they fly a 2 or 3 mile final in their Cherokee,
or fly their downwind 2 or 3 miles from the runway.

 

[aktango58]

Some great discussions!

One thing, and I shall start a new thread, is the go-around procedures. Every FAA guy I have flow with wants the plane to be sidestepped to allow the pilot to observe the runway activity that created the need for the go-around; by doing this you can maintain clearance of that guy that is taking off under you, and keep the situation from becoming much worse.

This side discussion deserves it's own room, so will carry that over to another.

Short approaches- Bob, why not go talk to the Chief Pilot of the Cherokee training place and get it figured out. Often a coffee session saves lots of confusion and hard feelings.

 

[kase]

Interesting thread. I had no idea flying a traffic pattern was so complicated. Kinda hard to turn your base at the same place every time at a busy airport because of the mix of traffic and the skill set of the various pilots and atc.

If a controller denies a long landing its probably for a reason. Usually traffic on final and they want to get a dept out as a example. They want you off the runway asap so the next guy can launch. If you want to land and taxi a mile to prove a point your only screwing the other pilots.

Go around left or right started so you don't over fly the aircraft on the runway and or you can see the other traffic as in a touch and go that could be climbing out. If no other traffic its just a normal straight ahead go around. If a FAA inspector or DPE wants to watch you do that I assume its to evaluate your ability to do it.

 

[bob turner]

I am engaging other instructors. A long short approach really doesn't hurt anything, so long as the tower does not start expecting clearance requests for normal Cub approaches.

On the go-around, be careful. A dual runway situation can present problems, and we have helicopter ops that make the sidestep problematic. I teach " get a clearance" for any offset or early crosswind, and the tower chief agrees with me.

Uncontrolled fields - you bet! Offset to the right for left hand pattern? But be aware that faster traffic behind you can quickly become a threat.

To Kase's point: we are expected to use the first available turnoff. For a Cub that can often be the warmup pad, so at a tower airport you actually need some sort of clearance. I just ask, or tell them: "Mike OK for the Cub?" or "Full stop, off at Mike". They say "Approved." Uncontrolled - let the guy behind you know.

 

[BC12D-4-85]

Agreeing on pattern mileage is convenient and safety conscious but I'm of the opinion that whenever I fuss with the power the unexpected might happen. I like to stay within expected gliding distance from pattern AGL if traffic allows. Determine that during a simulated engine out at Vg at a safe altitude.

Gary