Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Right of Way

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Avbug, (or anyone)

In VMC conditions does an aircraft on IFR flight plan have any sort of priority over VFR aircraft?

Ali
 
Avbug,

Of course you are right. See and avoid is the most important rule, and one should never take advantage of the lower altitude rule to get right of way.

Unfortunalty in the real world that is not always the case. The case that I am describing actually happened. There where no violations given. There were however 4 fatalties in the incident, the final cause was failure of both airplanes to see and avoid.

The reason I wanted to bring this discussion to the forum is to discuss uncontrolled airport procedures. There are gray areas in the FAR's. The ones I would like to discuss are 91.113(g), where does final approach start? Another that I would like to bring in is 91.126(B) making turn in the direction of traffic.

I believe that so far we have concluded in all previous examples that Aircraft 1 (straight-in ILS), has the right of way over aircraft 2 (aircraft on downwind).

Now to finish the accident scenario, there were two more airplanes in the pattern. Aircraft 3 is on short final to the runway. While aircraft 4 is on a left base for the runway. Aircraft 2 was following aircraft 3 and 4 to the runway when he had a mid-air with aircraft 1 while turning a 2 mile final.

Does aircraft 1 still have the right of way? Does the presence of other airplanes in the pattern make a difference.

Now don't worry I am not a lawery or have anything at all to do with this ancient accident. Just seems that some busy uncontrolled fields are ripe for another incident of this kind.
 
Alimaui,

In VMC conditions an IFR aircraft has absolutley no priority over a VFR aircraft. 91.113(B) clearly states that see and avoid is the rule. In other words is an IFR aircraft is flying along on an airway at 3000' AGL and has a near-miss with a VFR aircraft in VMC it is incumbent on BOTH aircraft to see and avoid.

In the previous example it should make no difference if aircraft 1 was IFR or VFR.

A real life example of this is shooting an ILS in IMC only to break out, and have the tower tell you to enter a downwind and follow the VFR traffic in the pattern.

Along those lines remember that ATC's job is to seperate IFR traffic from IFR traffic. If you believe you are any safer flying IFR in VMC, think again! If you have TCAS equipment you will know what I mean. ATC does an excellent job of seperating IFR with other IFR traffic or traffic in Class B airspace, but from my personal experience ATC will only call traffic about 40% of the time. It's very scary what you don't see out there! Put it this way, ATC has no problem descending you into VFR traffic as long as you make that crossing restriction (those of you flying the DUVAL, or KAYOH arrival will know that).
 
Final approach is defined as the segment of the pattern where the base leg intersects the extended runway centerline.

"Just seems that some busy uncontrolled fields are ripe for another incident of this kind."

Not only do I agree with you, but recent history has shown that this happens with regularity, and has for many years. I gaurantee you that it will happen again soon, and will continue to happen. Most likely, we will continue to see a gradual rise in such incidents over the coming years and decades. Put enough birds in a room, and you'll start to see some busted beaks.

Consider that the first two automobiles built in this world were involved in the first auto accident; a collision with each other.

There is too little information about the case in question to cast blame on the individuals for their actions; we simply don't know what they were. However, clearly if each aircraft had seen the other and taken actions to avoid contact, there would be no story. Therefore, each is responsible to some degree. Likewise, how many of us hasn't been involved in near situations in flight that made us look back with just a little cold sweat?

I have, and I believe that the longer pilots fly, the greater the majority who will say without reservation that their biggest concern or fear in aviation is a potential collision in flight. Most specifically, a potential collision with VFR traffic, and for most of us, specifically weekend warrior VFR traffic.

That said, the most spectacular and deadly incidents historically have involved professional commercial aviation, operating under IFR. There are a number of reasons that preclude singling out any segment of the industry (including the fact that a commercial airliner will be more deadly for the mere fact that it has more souls on board). The fact remains that it behooves us all to be extremely vigilant in all our activities; especially so at uncontrolled fields regardless of weather conditions or rules of flight.

The following excerpt refers specifically to operations to airports with an operating control tower. However, it sets forth terminology standardized throughout the industry, which is also relevant to operations at non-towered fields.

AIM 4-3-2(c)(5):

c. The following terminology for the various components of a traffic pattern has been adopted as standard for use by control towers and pilots:

5. Final approach: A flight path in the direction of landing along the extended runway centerline from the base leg to the runway.
 
The senario that started this thread is almost the same as one at the airport I call home. A buisness jet is making multiple VFR approaches for training, A Cessna is doing touch and go's. The instructor in the Cessna believes in short power off approaches and the Buisnes jet is screwing up his patterns, the Cessna starts cutting off the Jet causing him to go around on several occaisions, The Jet pilot calls the FSDO and reports the Cessna's actions. The Cessna pilot has his pilot cert. revolked for violation of numerous FAR's including all those just discussed. Now who has the right of way? See and avoid, be courteous and all will be happy.
 
Sadly, that episode would never have been necessary had the bizjet pilot been provided with a set of .50's, ample ammunition, and the training to use them. (The aeronautical version of a cow catcher).

Who hasn't ever wished for a trigger in the pattern?
 
At my advanced age I've found it easier and less stressful to just sit back and enjoy the ride. Unfortunately the jerk I refered to has his certificate back and is still just as inconsiderate as ever!
 
Finally I found something with some legal "teeth." I wish I could find a way to cut and paste it here, unfortunaly I am not computer literate enough. It is NTSB Order EA-4236, dated August 22, 1994.

Here's the story a 21,000 hour Chief Flight Instructor did not believe that straight-in approaches were legal, Doing pattern work in New Jersey he cut-in front of somebody that was making a straight-in. In the end the NTSB sided with the FAA and REVOKED all of his certificates for failure to give right of way 91.113 and for endangering 91.13 the people making the staight-ins.

Let that be a lesson to all the traffic pattern "nazi's" out there! Bottom line though, everybody still needs to cooperate!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top