Question re runway backtrack sharing of runway

[DrZoos]

Hi we lieve in Port Macquarie and have an aviation college that is training many many chinese students. This is great that it provides employment, but it is a nightmare for aircraft movement at our airport with lots of congestion...

 

When we operate off runway 21 its not so bad, but when we operate of 03 which has the taxiways and hangers at the northern end it creates massive problems when back tracking...

 

Up until around 6 months ago this was never an issue, then the aviation training mob introduced a company plicy not to share the runway with anyone and not to back track together...

 

The airport used to work fantastic till this occured...

 

Now due to the traffic, mainly from this company it often takes 15-25 minutes to get on the runway which is a huge problem and expense, particularly for people hiring our club aircraft and instructors..

 

Personally i hate this policy and think if they are not capable of sharing the runway with instructors on board they probably shouldn't be flying...

 

How are other airports handling this...is it causing a massive problem elsewhere or is this the norm everywhere... ta.

 

 

[Cosmick]

If the traffic is that bad, stack the AGM and get a taxi way built

 

 

[Aldo]

Their company policy is not able to be imposed on anyone else, just taxi out with them as you have always done. Their students may not be allowed to taxi out behind you but nothing stopping you taxing out behind them.

 

Aldo

 

 

[rhysmcc]

that's doesn't show very good airmanship though, considering there isn't a taxiway for you to get off at the end so they can depart, you will basically be holding them from departing until after you (assuming your not going to pull off onto the grass or "get around them" to be behind.

 

Other then sorting out the departure order, nothing really prevents more then one aircraft back tracking (taxiing) on the runway at the same time. At controlled aerodromes we are prevented from having multiple aircraft back tracking to line up at the full length but to other points along the runway it's all good.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Its called working together

 

 

[Jaba-who]

that's doesn't show very good airmanship though, considering there isn't a taxiway for you to get off at the end so they can depart, you will basically be holding them from departing until after you (assuming your not going to pull off onto the grass or "get around them" to be behind.

Unless they are in big big aircraft this is not how you need to do it.

Depending on who is ready first you can:

 

1. If front A/C is ready first do a turn at the end and the following aircaft just move to the side and the first starts off a little off centre opposite then comes back to centre when past the followers.

 

2. If followers are ready first you all turn and it puts follower in position ahead of the original leader.

 

Our club does yearly week or longer trips around the country with multiple (up to 15 some years) aircraft and at most airports it's multiple backtrackers. Most airports do not have taxiways. It's way better airmanship to backtrack in blocks of 3 or 4 and be clear in a few minutes than blocking up a runway for half an hour or more while people back track singly.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Thanks guys this is what i thought.,. Our runway is massive, wide and has a huge turn around area at the southern end where three to four GA could easily turn around together...two taxiing aircraft can also pass easily side by side...and with 1800m we have plenty of length...this is part of the problem its about a 1600m backtrack.

 

It used to work perfect and now is an absolute quagmire ...because of one stupid inconsiderate "company policy"

 

Yesterday A fellow pilot did exactly that and followed them...they stopped...turned around and wanted to exit the runway due to a breach of company policy...causing him to also have ot exit the runway...

 

 

[Aldo]

Someone needs to go have a quiet chat with their CFI and tell them to grow a brain

 

Aldo

 

 

[rhysmcc]

The issue would be that 2 aircraft can't use full length at the same time, yes one could taxi a couple of aircraft lengths to allow another to be behind them, but they are also entitled to use the full length of the runway, it would make sense for all parties on the field to sit down and work out a suitable outcome for all involved.

 

 

[jakej]

Has anyone tried that ? Ie communicating

 

 

[Nobody]

I don't know the local conditions that well but looking at the google earth image could the road to the east of 03/21 be upgraded to be a taxiway for small aircraft?

 

 

[DrZoos]

communicating has been tried a lot, but yes we need to apply some heat.

 

Potentially yes, but with a council recovering from having to call in administrators several years ago..roads and bridges still face massive shortfalls...so not likely...our millions from the Oakshot/gillard partnership money got spent on a badly needed carpark and a runway code upgrade for jets that may never be cost efective...

 

The likely solution is to get coucncil to apply the blow torch to the CFI for his policy of clogging up the traffic flow , but i wanted to see what was happening elsewhere before i suggested this approach.

 

 

[KRviator]

With a 45m wide runway, and turning nodes either end, I'd simply follow them down, and if they demand use of the full length, advise "No worries" and slot in behind them at the end node. IF you'll be ready first, hook a 180 and blast off before him.

 

The CAR's do not prohibit two aircraft backtracking at the same time, only that you must not operate on the ground so as to create a hazard (CAR 166-2a), and not attempt to takeoff until no apparent risk of collision (CAR 162-8).

 

 

[facthunter]

Aerodromes used to have a run up bay for pistons, and others just bypass them. If not ready for immediate take off, go to the run up bay and hold. The proper fix is a taxiway, full or part. There must be feeder aircraft, and executive Jets, being forced into a potential go around position with this sort of thing, and you don't want them stooging around in the circuit with a lot of students if you can avoid it. Nev

 

 

[Aldo]

The issue would be that 2 aircraft can't use full length at the same time, yes one could taxi a couple of aircraft lengths to allow another to be behind them, but they are also entitled to use the full length of the runway, it would make sense for all parties on the field to sit down and work out a suitable outcome for all involved.

What are you flying to need all 1800m? I'm all for using all the runway but with that length I don't think it would be too bad with just having 1500m

 

 

[DrZoos]

Correct none of us need more than around 600m but we all use it anyway....we all get trained that the only useless runway is the one behind you. These chinese pilots are being trained for CPL so clearly they are being encouraged to go right to the end every time. Thats not the issue, we have all always used the length the issue is with so many aircraft the policy of individually backtracking is causing chaos and constant 20 min plus delays for departing aircraft ....

 

 

[rhysmcc]

What are you flying to need all 1800m? I'm all for using all the runway but with that length I don't think it would be too bad with just having 1500m

I didn't say it was required, but they are still entitled to use it. A lot of schools use full length so if there is an engine failure they have more runway to put it back down, you'd look a bit stupid crashing off a 1800m because you only went back 600m.

 

 

[Aldo]

I didn't say it was required, but they are still entitled to use it. A lot of schools use full length so if there is an engine failure they have more runway to put it back down, you'd look a bit stupid crashing off a 1800m because you only went back 600m.

Rhys

 

Understand that which is why I said 1500 mts should be sufficient, what happens when you only have 800 to use on a short strip your fully loaded and require 700 take off run if you have never had to do that most people find it pretty daunting. Engine failures are pretty rare.

 

AlsoAlso

 

 

[rhysmcc]

And as PIC of your aircraft you get to decide what is sufficient or not. But because the PIC of another aircraft decides he'll use the 300m that you leave behind doesn't make him less of a pilot. Simple priorities really, first to use the runway has right of way (in this case departure vs departure). If you can follow the aircraft and depart before they are "ready" at the end then great, but to block their departure just because your happy with 1500m would be very poor airmanship.

 

 

[planesmaker]

Taxi behind them and turn short, takeoff while they are still backtracking, you will be clear before they are ready :)

 

 

[Aldo]

And as PIC of your aircraft you get to decide what is sufficient or not. But because the PIC of another aircraft decides he'll use the 300m that you leave behind doesn't make him less of a pilot. Simple priorities really, first to use the runway has right of way (in this case departure vs departure). If you can follow the aircraft and depart before they are "ready" at the end then great, but to block their departure just because your happy with 1500m would be very poor airmanship.

I never said any of the above and don't subscribe to it either you need to go back and read what I first said

 

Aldo

 

 

[Russ]

Can recall "local goose here" on downwind.......got upurty when another chap backtracked active runway. Goose insisted, aircraft in circuit had ROW.....ol mate said nar......base to finals.....yes.

 

Same goose.......backtracks, then holds at piano keys doing runups, seatbelts......whatever, other folks get agro at his antics. Will come to a head one day.

 

 

[Pearo]

I just had a look at google, they clearly need a taxiway to 03. Its fairly substantial runway, surprising that it does not already exist. 1600m (have not checked ersa btw) is a long backtrack!

 

I have one instructor that insists that you cannot be on an runway when a plane is taking off (class G) but my understanding is that you can be on the runway, you just cant takeoff until the separation minima is met. Maybe I need to review the CAR's, because I often enter a runway to backtrack as soon as the departing plane has passed the holding point (I stress this is all in class G).

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

I just had a look at google, they clearly need a taxiway to 03. Its fairly substantial runway, surprising that it does not already exist. 1600m (have not checked ersa btw) is a long backtrack!I have one instructor that insists that you cannot be on an runway when a plane is taking off (class G) but my understanding is that you can be on the runway, you just cant takeoff until the separation minima is met. Maybe I need to review the CAR's, because I often enter a runway to backtrack as soon as the departing plane has passed the holding point (I stress this is all in class G).

I think there may be a couple of issues here. Also, I believe the class of airspace has no relevance as to how you conduct yourself on the ground.

 

 

[facthunter]

You better get a taxiway built with the traffic level you have. Nev