Dr. Pilot, I am a pilot with the 112th Fighter Squadron at KTOL and I want to thank you for posting this video and highlighting a potentially dangerous situation. I want to say that we have outstanding controllers at KTOL, but as always, there is training being accomplished and these things happen. I just wanted to relay to you that as a result of your video, we have changed our terminal area procedures and switched to using VHF frequencies for Ground, Tower and Approach. Whereas before, we were on UHF and all of us only ever heard one side of the conversation in the pattern. This give us (and you) the extra situational awareness of hearing both sides of the conversation of what's going and should only increase safe operations within the terminal area. Again, thanks for posting this video and highlighting a safety issue.
Flying on PPL in Europe myself, i noticed in US flight videos that in the USA multiple planes can be cleared to land and even take off on the same runway, or like in this case crossing runways. I guess as long as the ATC estimates there is sufficient separation. Here in Europe, always only one plane is either cleared to land or cleared for take off. Other will get a "number 1", or "number 2" call, and possibly an "expect late landing clearance". I think that is a safer approach.
@@frdml01 I think both proceedures have their pros and cons. I'll admit i have no experience with ATC, nor am I a pilot, but I'm very much into aviation and researching aviation. I feel as tho the controllers in the US clearing multiple planes at once is a way to increase their situational awareness instead of trying to remember to call each individual aircraft when it is their turn. This could potentially cause more confusion for pilots, but puts more responsibility on pilots to be aware of their surroundings. It also allows controllers to know "they are good until the plane or myself say otherwise" and can focus on maintaining separation vs trying to push radio calls out. I also relate this to unregulated road intersections in many 3rd world countries. Those of us used to traffic lights would end up in a car crash in seconds there. But when it is a generally accepted practice, everybody involved will be more aware of their surroundings and traffic flow. They also recognize that their safety is their responsibility.
Razenas what you’re talking about is called LAHSO, there are certainly procedures for it and every aircraft still requires certain separation criteria, however the pilot in command is under no obligation to accept a lahso and is the final authority as to the safe execution of one.
While the controller clearly forgot about the Skylane, slowly rolling past a serviceable taxiway and stopping on the runway also isn’t cool. All factors lining up for a more serious outcome.
I'm confused, did you call out full length on 34 prior? With a very active airport why would you need the full length? If only for parking purpose, not a valid reason to use full length. Risky assumption knowing the tower was somewhat busy. Don't assume the controller is only watching you, taxi off the active ASAP, at least your safe. I get your frustrations, but it's not worth it. Advise or request full length early on final
He was not asked to hold short of 25. Doesn't matter if he needed 500' or 5000', he was given the whole runway. tower was watching the airshow that's all. a mistake on the controller part, a save on the pilot part. I would have vacated sooner myself, but even though Doc did not, he was not told to.
@@djchopperd yea, I get the controller said nothing about holding short. Shouldn't that be a huge red flag as a pilot when you hear other traffic departing the crossing runway? Don't ever rely 100% on the controller without at least confirming with them when something doesn't feel right. Too easy to just say "tower, confirm full length is okay".
@@Shape415 yeah I hear what you are saying. But with the untimely responses from the controller, he would have probably gotten his response too late anyhow. At least he was smart about it and held short. If those F16s would know what almost happen, then the shit would really hit the fan for that controller. They probably have no clue what could have happened as they were on a different band
@John Kyle - Expected to, but *NOT required to!* When you are cleared for a runway, you own the runway until you clear it. If you want, you can land long. Or what if for any reason the pilot in the video had to go around? Landing at the threshold and exiting onto taxiway as soon as possible is procedure to keep a busy airport flowing. Apart from the training F-16's, this didn't seem like a very busy airport. Either RWY25 is active, and Dr. Pilot should've been told to hold short of 25. Or RWY25 wasn't active, in which case the F16 should've been told to wait until the crossing runway had cleared. Instead the controller had 34 and 25 active at the same time, in their entirety, which could've (and almost did) cause a lethal crash for 3 people and an 18 million dollar jet.
@John Kyle - Cute how you copy and paste from the AIM, without understanding what the AIM is. 😂 The AIM is non-regulatory, meaning that what's inside it isn't binding. It's basically a guide on best practice. So exactly what I said; You're expected to, it might in general be best practice to (eg. for flow on a busy airport), but you are NOT REQUIRED to. If you are cleared for a runway, you own the runway until YOU clear it at your discretion. You can land long, you can roll-out for ages, you can reject and go around. It's yours. With exception of parts that have been copied into actual *federal regulations,* the AIM merely suggests best practice. Typical armchair pilot.
I'm only at the 3:42 mark, but the pilot checked in 3 times with the tower in quick succession. It's important to know that the F-16's (which he knew were coming) were likely calling on UHF. The tower controller is coordinating them regarding SFO pattern (simulated flame out) and the barrier cable. Don't mistake silence for a controller working another frequency.
And you didn't tear his head off!!?? When he sent you to parking I would have requested his friggin supervisor meet me!!! GOOD JOB staying aware!!! I saw your situation developing as soon as he cleared the jet to land with you short final. GOOD JOB!!!
This incident highlights the huge attention and consequence disparity between controllers and pilots. This is a clear Operational Error for the tower. Will any of them get training? Written up? The error even pointed out to supervisors? No. On the other hand, had the pilot crossed in front of the F16 then you bet the tower would be jumping up and down about a Pilot Deviation and dishing out a number for the pilot to call. The solution would be for the FAA to change the Pilot Deviation and Operational Error process by merging the two incident types into one. The pilot and the ATC involved both suffering the same consequences. (Administratively) Currently the OE and PD processes are separate and create an incentive for a blame game. If you put the ATC and the pilot in the same boat they will have more of an incentive to conduct due care. In this situation, Ground would’ve had much more attention to the Cessna and would’ve issued a needed warning rather than thinking it’s solely the pilot’s responsibility to keep eyes out. I’m glad the outcome was benign. Good work pilot.
Yes, technically the tower was at fault. But you could have helped the situation. For one, you are expected to vacate the runway as soon as you are able and minimalize the time on the runway. You passed at least one good turnoff. Also, if you did want to roll that far down the runway, you should have asked for a long landing. The controller would have then had more awareness of your intentions. If he had somone behind you, they would have had to go around. There are more people than you using the airport. This was just as much poor airmanship as it was controller error.
Now try it without a tower. I was at a towerless airport with a plane doing the proper pattern (me), another doing a reverse pattern, and a third taking off with a tailwind. All three of us converging head-on like it's a 3-way stop, but we ain't stopping. Fun times.
Got a call from Cleveland FAA FAASST Team and they have reprimanded the controller and would like to use this video for training purposes. They were very apologetic and nice.
That's great. Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, some more serious than others. Like they always say, the important thing is to learn from the mistake. I'm glad the event turned out to be a non-event in the grand scheme of things. It's a good thing you had the big picture and din't just assume you were cleared to cross the runway. Like a previous post said, your spidey senses went up when you were not getting the radio calls you needed. That's a good point, when something doesn't seem right go with your gut. Nice flying Doc!
Despite my vitriol, I am glad to hear that it came out well for everyone. I tend to go nuclear and then worry about names and dates later. Training is always good, seeing your good choices used for that training has got to feel great!! Again, nice job!
The comments are: 1% good reaction of the pilot (and hell yeah this is true) 1% people knowing a lot of ATC and stuff 98% damn, this passenger is bored AF
Kudos to the pilot for remaining calm. It would have been that much more stressful for him had he gotten angry, making the passenger get worked up too.
I require pax heads on a swivel in critical phases of flight, t/o and landing and high density areas irrespective of VFR/IFR (in VFR conditions)flight. Excellent video.
This is why I'd stopped watching plane videos, they're almost all 10 minutes of absolutely nothing with 5 seconds of almost something. I'm glad this wasn't worse and everyone's ok, but that was such a waste of time to watch.
Considering this was investigated by the FAA, the controller was reprimanded, the video is now literally used in training ATC controllers as a bad example AND it led to procedural changes at the airport; it absolutely _blows my mind_ how many armchair pilots feel the need to pipe up in the comments about how it's totally the pilot's error and they'd do 100 times better. As if copy-pasting a bit of the AIM makes you an expert. Either that or they're all butthurt ATC controllers. 🤣
At first I was thinking "what are you talking about?", but then I read a few more comments. I think people have spent too much time in sims and think you can actually take a corner at 60 knots in a Cessna.
As a retired controller and check Airman the controller knows you saved what could have been a bad day in the making. This is part of working as a team and as the controller/supervisor on duty I would have given you a phone number to call so I could thank you for excellent heads up flying and offer you an explanation if there was one to offer. Remember as pilots we have all had our moments and controllers have stepped in and it turned out as a learning experience. Unfortunately now and then controllers loose situational awareness and the pilot as part of the team keeps things from going south and it becomes a learning moment for the controller. Just my two cents....
Our lack of attention and due diligence almost killed you. But here's a number you can call. It's this type of nonchalant FAA attitude that needs to change.
I mean... Safety is on the pilot. Air traffic controllers are dealing with many different things going on at once. You can't always rely on them, they make mistakes like everyone else. Furthermore, the pilot should have exited the active onto the taxiway as soon as it was possible instead of taxiing along an active runway. He also would have had to receive a clearance to cross that runway instead of creeping up to it like he did. Should atc have caught it? Sure, but this shows poor airmanship on the pilot side.
Ed Jarvis , exactly. Errors were made by the controller and they should become a teaching moment. The FAA has moved beyond punitive enforcement for the most part, especially on the controller side. My only recorded operational error occurred just after I was checked out in the early days working departure on a busy UPS outbound where I had 2.968 miles and 13 degrees of separation where 3 miles and 15 degrees were required. I was decertified and had to go through a bunch of training. Before I retired, the FAA changed their attitude and no longer went the punitive route and training was required although no decertification happened. I now harass the airspace from the other side of the scope in the cockpit, run the IMC Club in our city, and am president of the local pilot’s association.
Tower: 669iner, hav u landed yet? 669iner: ya, we're havin' lunch on 25.. Tower: Oh..did u see the F16 grease that landing?! 669iner: ya...can we park now?
You're right. The tower messed up. Having said that, had there been an accident, and had the video survived, it would have shown that contributing factors to the accident were that the Skylane pilot knowingly passed 2 taxiways that he could have and should have used to clear the runway and that he failed to comprehend the significance of the radio traffic concerning the F-16 activity on the intersecting runway. It would have also shown that the Skylane pilot failed to insist that the self-loading baggage/visual obstruction in the right seat keep a active lookout for conflicting traffic. Maybe next time you could have him sleep in the back so he doesn't block your view to the right. Part of your preflight instructions to other occupants should be that they actively assist in keeping watch for conflicting traffic - especially during takeoffs, climbouts and approach to landings. If not, get out. The next time you want to post a public video, maybe you should review it first to make you're not half the problem.
You should have called the tower and asked to speak with a supervisor. They certainly would have would report this incident if you were guilty. Thanks for the video.
Your dead right how could he have missheard that, what was the actual problem any way was it that he was directed toward a junction in the runway where other traffic take off or what i dont get it saw him do the 180 then he had him do another one wtf
@@michaeladrianbooth9968 - Yes, runway 25 crosses runway 34. The pilot in the video was cleared to land on runway 34, that means all of runway 34. The only reason why this wasn't a deadly crash with an F16 is because the pilot in the video didn't trust the situation and had good awareness. The F16 pilot should NOT have been cleared on runway 25. As for "how could he have misheard that",.. maybe try sitting in metal tube, going 100mp/h trough the air and wind, with a loud roaring engine right in front of you. Also it is the job of the air traffic controller to correct that. If ATC says 2300, and the pilot reads-back 2500. ATC is supposed to repeat their instruction. Just _another_ mistake of ATC here.
@mrvengeance. About your comment of not hearing 2300. He has Bose A20’s on, the noice cancelling works exceptionally well for chopping out engine noise. Unless he was not using that function at the time, there shouldn’t be much noice to listen to atc through.
@@jettmoyer6123 - NC isn't perfect though, on top of that, radio signals degrade and interfere, and while on approach you're dividing your attention on multiple simultaneous tasks. Not hard to mishear 2300 as 2500, that's the entire _point_ of the read-back. And it's exactly why the ATC should've corrected and repeated the instruction until the read-back was correct.
Good SA on your part. The non-responsiveness of the controller had your spider-senses tingling, and it paid off. Given the time to edit and publish, it’s probably too late for a NASA form, and I’m not one to jump to the “call FSDO” extreme. A more measured response of calling the tower supervisor, explain what happened, and offer to send a link to this video as a “teaching moment” would suffice to me. The boss will know if the guy was just having a bad day or if something more formal is warranted, and will act accordingly.
Just an FYI, but you can always fill out a close call NASA form no matter how long ago the incident occurred; Or so I've been told. I've filled them out over a week after an incident after incidences I didn't think were serious but my Union recommended I fill one out anyway.
I dont think this was too much of win here for the pilot.. the first comment you noted in the video was traffic crossing and no factor... it WAS no factor, it was the F16's that crossed you not the envoy flight that they pointed out. Second, in AIM 4-3-20 section "A" states to exit the runway as soon as possible at he first available taxiway and that you are not allowed to taxi onto another runway without permission so he was expecting you to hold short as you were now taxing on the runway. You were at taxi speeds and did your after landing up and after checks the rest of the runway was not required for a safe landing. The taxi diagram for KTOL even states to be alert for runway crossing clearances. You came to a gentle stop at the 2000' board meaning you chewed up 3600' in a Cessna, he did not clear you to roll to the end. Trying landing at JFK and leisurely rolling to the end of the runway and see what happens to you. I would say it was reasonable for the controller to think you could make the exit at taxi way D before you passed it and if you could not you should have advised, as your aircraft does not require such lengths to land. Now the the new procedures and "training" from this video is going to be having to break down instruction barney style for all the pilots now and more radio traffic... I hope that guy still has a job... and BTW F16's fly in pairs... he probably had you turn around on delta(cuz you should have) and because the first F16's wing man was right behind him, also landing... you didnt see cuz you were turned around..
My thoughts as a pilot and controller here. So you can tell the controller is working local and ground co took combined, and I wouldn’t doubt he also is doing clearance delivery and tower flight data and maybe even CIC by himself, but I don’t know. But you can tell he has some ground traffic and is working several F-16s on a UHF frequency. I took a look at TOL and there is no LAHSO, so that’s not an option. He definitely didn’t pay too much attention to you, but I actually would care to guess that the operation was totally legal before you kept on rolling. What he needed to do to keep it legal was to either have you hold short of the runway or issue and receive readback of exit instructions for a taxiway prior to the intersection and get that done prior to the F-16 crossing the threshold on his landing runway. I haven’t seen the morning reports in the last few days but I’d guess this event is in there, and the controller definitely sounded a little shaken up. Good job keeping aware. But I’ll also mention, as a pilot before I’m gonna use all that much runway in a Cessna I’ll ask for a long landing, most controllers aren’t gonna be anticipating someone to keep on rolling down the runway at taxi speed past useable intersections, and if you aren’t getting a response from the controller I’d just exit as soon as practical (I’m sure he was hearing people on the other frequency and it was being blocked in his headset). But it does sound like he didn’t do a great job protecting that intersection and keeping you appraised of the situation and positively controlling it. If you wanna follow up I’d give the facility a call and if you ave the time that would be helpful to find the audio and radar replays, contrary to what some people are commenting FSDO will be of zero use since flight standards and air traffic are completely independent organizations.
Gabriel Zeifman great analysis. I actually did not start out planing on crossing 25. It’s when I got no instruction from tower and saw I was approaching 24 I stopped and asked
Dr. Pilot always a good call to ask if you’re not sure. So I asked my manager and he looked into it a little, we saw the radar replay and it looked damn close, and there appeared to be a mandatory occurrence report (MOR) filed on the event. The report appeared to be filed yesterday, so I figure someone must have seen this video and filed it based on that. I’m considering making a FOIA request, it’d be interesting to see what it says. We weren’t able to access the report, just see it was there. But at least air traffic QC knows about the incident.
Dr. Pilot glad to hear someone is following up, except that’s flight standards so I’m not exactly sure what they’ll be able to do except pass info along. Sounds like air traffic is investigating though, I’ll keep looking to see if something more shows up.
Gabriel Zeifman Issuing and receiving a read back of exit instructions for a taxiway prior to the runway intersection is not good enough. The controller must issue and receive a read back of hold short instructions or observe the preceding aircraft initiate the turn onto a taxiway prior to the runway intersection.
I can respect the comments that we as Pilots are part of the equation and have a responsibility to keep ourselves safe. BUT when the controller makes a mistake he’s still going home, that’s not always the case for the pilots he’s responsible for keeping safe. At a minimum this controller needs to know what happened and learn from it. If he has a Conscience he will be on top of it next time. Good job Doc!
Many years ago I refused a command issued by the tower at FXE due to my judgement concerning flight safety. They came unglued immediately and asked that I report to the tower after securing the aircraft. I did so, and they learned they were lucky I was more attentive than they were. At the time, they had two aircraft with similar call-signs in the control area; they confused them and gave me a command that was intended for the other aircraft. That command conflicted with the flight path of another aircraft (somewhat close to). They scared the crap out of me with that one, and I'm glad I was paying very close attention. They were soon looking for a rock to crawl under and became very apologetic.
You sure do sharpshoot the controller a lot here. A lot of your radio calls were sloppy, you were instructed to descend to 2300 initially and you responded with 2500. The runway incursion you’re patting yourself on your back for avoiding was your responsibility regardless. You, as the PIC are responsible for the safe operation of your aircraft, not the controller. Maybe you should pay more attention to your own issues before calling out the controller on his. Nobody is perfect. Especially in aviation.
I did not call out anybody nor did I make any reports, however there were MANY unanswered calls to the controller. Thinks he may take SOME responsibility ?
Dr. Pilot I agree that a problem needs to be identified with the controller. It sounds like the reprimand that you were told he received indicates that it was. As I’m sure you know, it is almost never one single mistake or issue that leads to an accident in aviation. It’s usually a series of mistakes that lead up to it. Usually when I fly into an airport, with intersecting runways, the ATIS will say that “LAHSO are in effect” if both runways are being used. Do you remember this being the case when you listened to the ATIS? I honestly don’t expect you to. Who would remember that. My point is that you acting in a conservative manner and understanding your situation may have broken a chain of events that could have lead to an accident. That is your responsibility as PIC. If an accident did occur, you would have been a contributing factor for crossing the runway regardless of what the controller did or didn’t do. I just feel that based on the comments in the video and in the comments section made by you that you think you saved the day by being vigilant because the controller was not on his game. It’s you job to be vigilant all the time. Not just when a controller is having issues. I would have a very different opinion had you actually been IMC. Also, keep in mind that the AF likes to talk on UHF to controlling agencies. That can cause confusion with GA guys and gals that aren’t equipped to listen. Happy flying!
TaxfreeSVT I did not save the day but the FAA person who called me said that the controller is supposed to maintain posture control of all runways at all times and he fails to do so.
Dr. Pilot he is responsible for positive control of all runways. Just like you’re responsible for flying your assigned altitude. You both failed that day.
Happened to me 50 yrs ago. ATC not paying attention. My SA drove me to bank high right and get out of Dodge. My heart stopped pounding weeks later. My Baron was no match for the DC 3 cross landing. 😎. Still here.
You managed to keep your cool and stayed professional. Now that everyone is safe, this is a great training video that I can share with students. There’s a little something to learn for both pilots and controllers. On that note, can you tell me more about how you rigged your camera system?. You have great camera angles and great video presentation.
Jesus let's talk about over reacting and patting yourself on the back foot nothing. Guess what. There could have been a major incident this morning if I wasn't vigilant. But yet I don't post a video about it just to boost my ego and show everyone how vigilant of a pilot I am.
A controller at KDPA got the two tail numbers transposed about a year ago when I was on short final. He was trying to instruct the business jet over a mile away to line up and wait on 02L for crossing traffic (me) landing on 28. He mixed the tail numbers by using the 1st half of the jet’s tail and last half of the Cirrus waiting next in line to take off on 28. 😳I caught it right away and looked over the nose to see the Cirrus taking the runway. I think as he took 28 he must have seen me “larger than life” in his right side window and just gunned it down the runway. I had already started my go around and that point and sidestepped to the north a little and I saw the Cirrus go airborne and sidestep to the south. A guy in a 182 behind the Cirrus waiting his turn jumped on the tower frequency to say with excitement “did you just see that guy... he just took off without a clearance!!”. A sheepish “I know” was the only response from the controller who realized he caused the confusion. The Cirrus just continued on his IFR flight plan, I explained to my cousin in the right seat that what he was seeing below us was indeed “NOT our shadow as he had happily pointed it out to be” but another airplane. All’s well that ends well, and I was happy that I was paying attention. Good lesson for all involved! 🛩
Yes, the controller is absolutely in the wrong here for forgetting about you and the crossing F16 traffic. However, he’s not planning on a Cessna 172 to take the entire runway on rollout. You had ample opportunity to exit 34 but for some reason decided you needed to spend more time on the runway than you absolutely had to. This is KOSH, the controller is BUSY trying to work a mix of military, GA and commercial traffic. Again, he’s in the wrong here but you’re not the only bird in the sky.
I was waiting for the controller to do so, but he was pretty preoccupied and distracted with what was going on during the military exercise. Which is was quite apparent in this video and led to a pretty dangerous situation.
We can all use this video to help is better understand the importance of situational awareness and using extreme caution even when the airfield/airspace is controlled. It was a good upload and I always like watching approaches.... the passenger looked like he was bored out of his mind.... long flight? That or a few too many beer the night before? Lol
Fantastic situational awareness! You saw how things were developing by understating the big picture, despite the controller's inattentiveness. Man, you avoided a potentially disastrous situation. Never assume anything. When in doubt, shout.
@@DrPilot Not a pilot, but a sometime sailor. Learned this from my first sailing instructor. Here lies the grave of John O'Day who died defending his right of way He was right, dead right, as he sailed along but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.
windtee, no, the Cessna pilot did NOT see how things were developing; that's the whole point of the problem. The Cessna pilot should have heard (as we all heard) and given consideration to the tower controller's transmission to whomever it was: "... traffic is on a 5-mile final for runway 2-5, an F16 on the ILS." If the Cessna pilot had been using situational awareness he would have heard and understood the collision threat that was brewing and known that he would not be able to cross runway 2-5 without a clearance. And yes, while the tower controller should have issued a LAHSO clearance to the Cessna pilot, he also expected the Cessna pilot to land within the first 1/3 of runway 3-4 (as is normal, and as he did...), and then exit that runway on the first available taxiway - as the AIM section 4-3-20 instructs us to do. The tower controller never gave the Cessna pilot a "long-landing" clearance. This is a great learning experience for all of us: Follow the procedures in the A.I.M.
That would get a callTO the tower. I would want to speak to whoever is the mgr on duty. That could have been real ugly. Good job on situational awareness and keeping your head on a swivel!
Dr. As also a Skylane pilot I am appalled at the comment regarding "real" and "silly" planes. ATC certainly seemed more interested in military and commuter traffic instead of you. They didn't give you any expedite and clear instructions. Even so, you probably could have made an earlier taxiway. Hope you enjoyed OSH. Been at 30 of them so far.
As a current atc controller and ga pilot I would always try to make first turn off as soon as able, these things happen and he should have offered you a phone number to call. It’s not to late to talk to them and you know if it’s on TH-cam someone is gonna report that controller anyways. You did a nice job not loosing your cool. Luckily they didn’t land a F16 up your 6 o’clock on same runway. The controller didn’t sound to busy but we are shift workers also so sometimes fatigue plays a big factor in our performance. Keep up great videos
Coulda shoulda woulda, are you kidding me??? Hindsight is always 20/20. Ahh poor little baby controller needs a nappy poo? I'm sure being a controller is a tough job, but pulleeeze, we all have tough jobs and need to stay alert.
@@dixienormous3262 the guy said that they should have talk it through the phone, what is your problem? And no, not all jobs are tought....where did you get that?
No problem here Cartman. You should learn some facts about the aviation industry before posting brainless comments. If and when you reach that point, then let's debate it.
@@dixienormous3262 explain me sir, what about my comment is brainless and what is there to debate...it seems that you have no idea what you are talking about
I do think you were technically right in using the entire runway as a taxiway but the aim says you are to exit an active runway at the first available taxiway unless otherwise instructed by atc. You passed two exits more for your convenience rather than to slow the airplane down. In other words you were right but you don't want to be dead right
@Concerned Citizen Really? Going literal cross country into busy and unfamiliar airspace, when the pilot is instrument rated? That's not wasting anybody's time. Clunking a slow mover across busy intersections where the controller has to route everyone else around you? Now that's wasting time imo.
@Concerned Citizen Huh? Thousands of pilots fly thousands of IFR flight plans in VMC every day. The idea that the only legitimate reason for an IFR flight plan is IMC, and all others are self-absorbed, is just nonsensical. It is the legally required responsibility of every PIC to make use of whatever resources he/she deems contributes to the safe conduct of their flight. I know many pilots that file IFR for all longer flights and prefer the benefits of flying within the system.
@Concerned Citizen - The only one jumping to conclusions here is you. Making all kinds of assumptions on why Dr.P and a lot of other pilots fly IFR. You can read minds then? Through the internet? Nah, I'm getting the feeling that you are supremely hurt in your ego by the fact that you're not instrument rated, so you need to talk down to them as to not feel inferior. As for the OP, they passed the first exit at ~50mph. That's way over taxi speed, and definitely over the speed for cornering. Sure, they could've taken the next, but he was cleared for the entirety of RWY34 so what's the point? Make two corners and cross RWY25 or just cross RWY25 straight. It shouldn't be active, and going straight over would've cleared it up faster.
@Concerned Citizen - Again, the only one self-aggrandizing here is YOU. With your holier than thou attitude, proclaiming how much better of a pilot you are for flying VFR everywhere. Demanding everyone do exactly as you, as if you're the messiah of aviation. With your years of experience "earning your ticket". The level of projecting you're doing is _incredible._ And if we're talking about risks, demanding that everyone fly everywhere VFR even if they're completely unfamiliar with the area for instance, while they're IFR rated is a _much bigger_ risk than... [checks notes] people filing a flight plan? 🤨 And if you wanna talk being a burden on an overburdened system. How big do you think the burden is if all these people you are forcing to needlessly fly VFR get lost, and need ATC to guide them? Or worse, get into accidents? This is like demanding that everyone drive on the highway with their eyes closed and their hands tied, just because YOU are able to do it. While claiming that it'll somehow alleviate the burden on police and paramedics. 🤣
I’ve never heard of being cleared to exit... always been taught and taught my students that the accepted practice is to exit as soon as practical unless given specific instructions.
@@pw1340 As a student I have been following tower's directions and thought that was standard practice. I guess I was wrong. You're basically stating a pilot can exit wherever they want, at their discretion, unless told otherwise, but it is assumed a pilot will exit as soon as they can. If that is the case, then it would depend on where my destination at the airport is going to be, that would determine where I would get off. Which looking at the video, it seems the pilot was going the quickest route to his destination by following the runway and was correct in doing so. Interesting. I will ask my instructors tomorrow.
@@stumpbumpers No, the AIM specificly states that you have to exit onto first taxiway as soon as you can safely do so. This guy blew through 2 exits. Tyoically, ATC will instruct you to exit if they see that you've blown through multiple opportunities to exit. However, it's ultimately on the pilot to follow regulations. He should have known to exit asap.
Dr. Pilot. Seriously good vigilance on your part at runway intersection. It is terrifyingly clear what would have happened if you had simply continued through.. I trained out of Teterboro and Farmington in the late 90's and developed a healthy appreciation for situational awareness. I am glad you are here to post this very informative video.
WHY would you keep on with your taxi on the active runway when you could have clearly turned off to the left. Also...were you NOT paying attention to the tower when they said that an F-16 was coming in on 25. Common sense will tell you that these two runways will cross somewhere on the field...Duuuuuuh. I am a 32 years of flying and you and the tower were at fault. When you slow down to a taxi...get your ass off the active runway and then announce that you are clear of the active, which in your case...clear of 340.
Common sense is not clearing runway 25 for landing when it crosses the *very active* runway 34. Disregard for a moment whether he was taxiing, what if he landed long? What if he had to abort the landing and go around? If the entirety of runway 34 has been cleared for landing and is in use, you don't allow an F-16 to cross through it... Duuuuuuuhhhh.
You're lucky. The pilot of N3607V wasn't so lucky. It's easy to blame the controller, but the real culprit is a continuing disregard for safety by USAF fighter wings who continue to operate with their targeting radars shut off.
Just some standard AIMS stuff........4−3−20. Exiting the Runway After LandingThe following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed. a.Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed byATC. Pilots must not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without firstobtaining ATC approval. b.Taxi clear of the runway unless otherwisedirected by ATC......
I'm a air traffic controller at SNA in southern calif. In the ATC industry we call that a operational error on the controllers part. He should've been de-certified and given remedial training.
You could have stopped and exited the runway at multiple locations. The AIM 4-3-20 states you shall exited the runway at the first available taxiway unless instructed by ATC. You didn’t. And please don’t give me the AIM isn’t regulatory. That’s a poor excuse for poor airmanship.
Seems like the tower control totally forgot about you. Probably at this point a NASA report would be appropriate. Controller needs to be aware of their serious error.
@@DrPilot I would, its a good learning opportunity for all and you will be doing everyone a good deed, These things happen its about sharing and learning to reduce it. Happy Flying and great video. I like they a pure as it is flying.
This would make for an excellent training video of a situation where ATC did not provide instructions to hold short of another active runway. And where excellent pilot situational awareness was executed during runway and ground operations. Good work! But really bad job by that ATC. And we see what is happening at Class Bravo towers with Part 121 operators the last few years. There can’t be this much margin for error by ATC! Sorry to say it.
Have you given some thought to getting off the runway onto the taxiway at the first available opportunity? Sure you may have had right of way but why tie up the runway. Being dead right is no good either.
I normally get the heck off the runway as soon as I can and two taxiways were passed that could have easily been used. The controller probably did not expect a Skylane to take the entire length. Granted he should have issued land and hold short instructions.
The first taxiway was passed at over 50mph. I'd like to see you pull a 90 corner at 50mph, that's faster than the normal max taxispeed for a straight line. About 20mph faster (and 40 for cornering). So how exactly would he "easily" exit there?? The only other option before RWY25 was taxiway delta, and sure, he could've taken that. He was still going to fast but he had the room to slow down for that one. But that was only 600ft away from RWY25, a runway that *_shouldn't have been active_* and parking is just on the other side of it. What would be the point in going 90° left and then 90° right and _then_ crossing RWY25, instead of just going across RWY25? The only reason is the hindsight of knowing RWY25 was wrongly cleared for use. So realistically only 1 possible taxiway wasn't taken, and that was practically _at_ RWY25 already. Hardly anything to cry over when the ATC is clearing two crossing runways for landing at the same time. 🤷🏻♀️
Controllers fault for not telling you to hold short after you were at taxi speed. Your fault for passing multiple exit points at taxi speed. He should have done his job, you should have done yours.
Obviously we live in a POLITICAL world, where AUTHORITY can be, and at times, is, overreaching. YET that does NOT negate WORKING TOGETHER to make it BETTER and SAFER for all involved. And in this business WORKING TOGETHER is ESSENTIAL.
I'm learning to fly now. Aren't you expected to take the first available turnoff (FAR 4-3-20) unless asked for full length after landing. Controller definitely should have issued traffic both ways. He may have assumed you'd be off runway before the F16 crossed threshold judging you were at taxi speed with two turn offs available? Also if he's not answering you immediately it sounds like he was listening to a lengthy request from Sting on his UHF freq as he simulcasted on VHF when responding.
The controllers were not the only one’s at fault. I had a discussion about this exact situation with the DPE who I took my CFI check ride with. It is a gray area. Nicely done being situationally aware! Look in the AIM 4-3-20, a. “ Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC.”
I agree with this, he was using the runway as an extended fast taxii, not only is it against the rules, but its pretty bad practice to tie up the runway because you don't want to have to hold short of the active on a taxi way.
Without exception, when two intersecting runways are being used, ATIS will state "Land and Hold Short in Effect", but the ATIS report wasn't added to this video. If a landing aircraft can't comply, the pilot must advise the tower. Rolling out and expecting to cross an active runway is simply bad practice. In addition, crossing any active runway without a clearance violates FAA rules. It was actually your responsibility to request a clearance to cross the active runway and your responsibility to prevent the accident. Had there been an accident, you would have been the case regardless of whether or not your'er a Dr.
I had something somewhat similar happen 45+ years ago... BUT we were both cleared for the same runway. Me taking off solo in a C150 vs a MUCH faster jet landing.
Leave passenger home... no interest, self absorbed, doesn't care about what's going on, learning to fly or even helping to look out for traffic. Take along someone that wants to be there and a little more conscious and coherent. What a putz.
Aren’t you suppose to exit the runway when able per the AIM or FARs? AIM 4-3-20 Exiting the Runway After Landing The following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed. a. Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC. Pilots must not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without first obtaining ATC approval. b. Taxi clear of the runway unless otherwise directed by ATC. An aircraft is considered clear of the runway when all parts of the aircraft are past the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its continued movement beyond the runway holding position markings. In the absence of ATC instruc- tions, the pilot is expected to taxi clear of the landing runway by taxiing beyond the runway holding position markings associated with the landing.
Could you imagine being so disinterested in aviation that you missed almost being hit by military aircraft? Fuck, right seat, I get it you're edgy. Or hungover. Whatever it is. You're passing on about 10k of flight instruction. Gl.
This guy with his bored attitude annoys the heck out of me... so uninterested and not caring about anything.... He could’ve been dead and not even noticing it...
calopii < me too!!! I would have told him to keep looking around as they approached the airport. If he continued to dog it, he would be riding in a greyhound bus back home!
@@lottiestanley7696 Well I'm a pilots son... I damn near fly the airplane whether I'm in the left seat, OR the right one. A cockpit is a busy place, any help at all makes it soooo much easier.
sorry, can I have a few questions? if "cleared to land" means I have all runway for land, what is "land"? Because what I saw was taxiing on the runway to the apron.. I mean land is procedure when my flight change to no flight by safe contacting with the ground and reducing my speed to taxiing speed? Can I block 2km runway without no reason 2 mins after my wheels contacted to the ground and after I didnt vacated runway in first possible point? Isnt taxiways dedicated for taxiing back to the apron? Im not from U.S. sorry my english is bad, but I think pilot should leave runway in first possible place and this pilot didnt do it.Maybe other rules are applied in U.S. Pls send me and anwer.
Sometimes (especially when the FBO at the departure end of the runway) it makes sense to use the full length of the runway. The pilot assumed he was legal to do so and probably did it to help save him a couple of extra taxi instructions.
That was blown way out of proportion. An indecent on the ground is always the irresponsible pilot's fault, you might blame the ATC, but don't depend on anything from anyone other than yourself radio chatter, etc. If no answer, stop where you are. you call again ASAP. Chatter doesn't match what's happening on the ground...Speak up.
Reminds me of the time I flew to a FAA seminar on runway incursions. When leaving the seminar, the tower cleared us to take off on 6L. I said, do you mean 6R? That one would be better, it doesn't have a jet on it! Controllers are humans. Trust but verify.
@00:11 ATC gave instructions to descend and maintain 2,300' but the pilot read back 2,500. I'm not a pilot or ATC, but shouldn't someone have caught that?
Aren’t you supposed to exit the runway at the first available taxiway after slowing? Looks to me like he just kept taxiing down the runway without a clearance.
Curt Cannon in ATC land, the controller gave that pilot all of Rwy 34 when landing clearance was issued and permitting crossing traffic is what we used to call a ‘Deal’ in ARTCC land. Otherwise, it’s ‘betting on the come’ and that isn’t positive control. Given his type and capability, issuing a Hold Short clearance would have demonstrated positive separation. That did not happen.
@@feversol I agree the controller should have given a lahso clearance, but the pilot was also in error by not exiting at the first available taxiway. Btw, the Airman's Information Manual is a little more than "some book".
Curt Cannon AIM isn’t being held responsible for positive control. It may be the Bible of flying, but the supposed controller must be in control. I told trainees that if they had two aircraft even on opposition sides of their airspace, it had better be his/her ‘fault’ that they didn’t hit. What we saw here was a video that is, and will be, being played during training sessions from now on. It demonstrates a controller getting headlocked on one part of his job and losing the Big Picture. Three people were involved here. The controller, the F-16 pilot who should have also been aware of crossing runways and this pilot who was paying attention. That the F-16 pilot may have had little experience at this airport would’ve been cited as just a contributing cause. Not at all responsible, but he could’ve caught it or also seen the conflict approaching. Two of three were unaware. Bad stuff. Reality is, this stuff happens all the time and it’s just terrific that this Deviation is recorded. Because it will make controllers work to remain more aware and pilots to scan a bit more.
Controller is wrong. You do realize that the F16s were on UHF not VHF right? So when you were transmitting you were both stepping on each other and I bet the controller purposely talked to the F16s bc how fast they are compared to you. You clearly readback an incorrect altitude. You were issued 2300 and you readback 2500 but I see nothing from you stating you made a mistake on that. You landed short and were at taxi speed over a thousand feet short of the runway. Get off the runway plain and simple. You should have gotten off at the first taxiway available to you not when you felt like. In my book that's just inconsiderate and not a good pilot. What if there was someone behind you trying to land and they had to go around bc you decided to take your time getting off the runway or the lack of? What if that aircraft was a medvac would you still feel the need to just taxi down the runway bc you want to? Your supposed to get off on the first available taxiway especially when your already at taxi speed and not when you feel like it. Errors on both parties.
Big issue here was the Air Farce not being up on VHF, reducing everyones SA. Dont hesitate to ask tower to request the jets come up on VHF if able. The reason he was not hearing your calls was the jets were talking over you on the other band. If you have 2 radios tune one to the UHF yourself to help with your SA. And once again you failed to get your passenger involved to assists in airspace surveillance.
Good job! I was cleared to depart at my local airport. I looked to my right before taking the runway and saw another plane on very short final to land on the runway. Yes, I discussed this with ATC. It's like a fight. "Protect yourself at all times." Even back in the "position and hold" days, I would hold at a 45 degree angle on the runway so I could see behind me.
This is your own fault. You should not be using the runway as your own private taxiway when you have multiple turnoffs available to get on the taxiway. A controller expects you to exit as soon as possible. Its even worse that you would do this at a busy ANG base that you know has jets with a faster landing speed than your cessna can even fly. Simultaneous runway ops is very common, especially at fields with high military activity. You also never conveyed any request to stay on the runway or cross. You are the root cause here.
I don't like how giddy you seem to be about getting this controller in trouble. Props for situational awareness and averting an accident. But instead of fuming about it, why not make a joke on frequency and have a laugh with the controller. He knew he screwed up - we're all human. I'll bet you've committed reportable errors before as well, I know I have. ATC gave me a descent once and I started a climb. Controller joked "well that works better for me anyway, climb and maintain...". Point was made.
While i get your frustration, tower controllers are allowed to use implied separation, or clear someone for something because under normal operations the separation required will be there or is predicted to be there within reason. I think it's within the controllers reason to expect a cessna to not taxi allll the way down the runway. While i do think the tower should be at fault, i would definitely rethink your methods as well. You didn't act unsafe, but you acted in a way that put you in a position that could be unsafe without any reason. Tower controllers expect an expeditions exit from the runway, which you didn't do. you went beyond multiple exits. i believe the controller to be at fault but its also fair to critique your decision making up to that point as well.
The controller warned up front on first contact about the 2 F-16's that would be using the cross runway...While the pilot is making a blame list against the controller fact is the pilot landed slightly long and cruised up too fast on the runway considering he had F-16's ahead of him crossing...The Pilot also failed to call the tower on landing...The controller didn't expect the pilot to go past the first taxiway - nor should he have...The controller sent the pilot back to the taxiway he should have stopped short of considering he was warned about the fast movers and was not in communication with the tower...That said the controller knew he screwed up...You can hear it in his voice...
AIM 4-3-20The following procedures must be followed afterlanding and reaching taxi speed.a.Exit the runway without delay at the firstavailable taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed byATC.
Dr. Pilot,
I am a pilot with the 112th Fighter Squadron at KTOL and I want to thank you for posting this video and highlighting a potentially dangerous situation. I want to say that we have outstanding controllers at KTOL, but as always, there is training being accomplished and these things happen. I just wanted to relay to you that as a result of your video, we have changed our terminal area procedures and switched to using VHF frequencies for Ground, Tower and Approach. Whereas before, we were on UHF and all of us only ever heard one side of the conversation in the pattern. This give us (and you) the extra situational awareness of hearing both sides of the conversation of what's going and should only increase safe operations within the terminal area. Again, thanks for posting this video and highlighting a safety issue.
Was gonna say, lots of stepping on each other on different freqs was for sure going on there.
Flying on PPL in Europe myself, i noticed in US flight videos that in the USA multiple planes can be cleared to land and even take off on the same runway, or like in this case crossing runways. I guess as long as the ATC estimates there is sufficient separation.
Here in Europe, always only one plane is either cleared to land or cleared for take off. Other will get a "number 1", or "number 2" call, and possibly an "expect late landing clearance".
I think that is a safer approach.
@@frdml01 I think both proceedures have their pros and cons. I'll admit i have no experience with ATC, nor am I a pilot, but I'm very much into aviation and researching aviation. I feel as tho the controllers in the US clearing multiple planes at once is a way to increase their situational awareness instead of trying to remember to call each individual aircraft when it is their turn. This could potentially cause more confusion for pilots, but puts more responsibility on pilots to be aware of their surroundings. It also allows controllers to know "they are good until the plane or myself say otherwise" and can focus on maintaining separation vs trying to push radio calls out.
I also relate this to unregulated road intersections in many 3rd world countries. Those of us used to traffic lights would end up in a car crash in seconds there. But when it is a generally accepted practice, everybody involved will be more aware of their surroundings and traffic flow. They also recognize that their safety is their responsibility.
@@frdml01 that us incorrect im also Europe and they can clear many planes to land at once sufficient time depending otherwise forcing go around
Razenas what you’re talking about is called LAHSO, there are certainly procedures for it and every aircraft still requires certain separation criteria, however the pilot in command is under no obligation to accept a lahso and is the final authority as to the safe execution of one.
Yeah, tower, I have a phone number for you to copy when ready...
Best comment right here!!!
Welcome to Steam edition!
The dangers of UHF/VHF ops....
There should be a rebroadcast service hey?
While the controller clearly forgot about the Skylane, slowly rolling past a serviceable taxiway and stopping on the runway also isn’t cool. All factors lining up for a more serious outcome.
I'm confused, did you call out full length on 34 prior? With a very active airport why would you need the full length? If only for parking purpose, not a valid reason to use full length. Risky assumption knowing the tower was somewhat busy. Don't assume the controller is only watching you, taxi off the active ASAP, at least your safe. I get your frustrations, but it's not worth it. Advise or request full length early on final
He was not asked to hold short of 25. Doesn't matter if he needed 500' or 5000', he was given the whole runway. tower was watching the airshow that's all. a mistake on the controller part, a save on the pilot part. I would have vacated sooner myself, but even though Doc did not, he was not told to.
@@djchopperd yea, I get the controller said nothing about holding short. Shouldn't that be a huge red flag as a pilot when you hear other traffic departing the crossing runway? Don't ever rely 100% on the controller without at least confirming with them when something doesn't feel right. Too easy to just say "tower, confirm full length is okay".
@@Shape415 yeah I hear what you are saying. But with the untimely responses from the controller, he would have probably gotten his response too late anyhow. At least he was smart about it and held short. If those F16s would know what almost happen, then the shit would really hit the fan for that controller. They probably have no clue what could have happened as they were on a different band
@John Kyle - Expected to, but *NOT required to!* When you are cleared for a runway, you own the runway until you clear it. If you want, you can land long. Or what if for any reason the pilot in the video had to go around? Landing at the threshold and exiting onto taxiway as soon as possible is procedure to keep a busy airport flowing. Apart from the training F-16's, this didn't seem like a very busy airport.
Either RWY25 is active, and Dr. Pilot should've been told to hold short of 25.
Or RWY25 wasn't active, in which case the F16 should've been told to wait until the crossing runway had cleared.
Instead the controller had 34 and 25 active at the same time, in their entirety, which could've (and almost did) cause a lethal crash for 3 people and an 18 million dollar jet.
@John Kyle - Cute how you copy and paste from the AIM, without understanding what the AIM is. 😂
The AIM is non-regulatory, meaning that what's inside it isn't binding. It's basically a guide on best practice.
So exactly what I said;
You're expected to, it might in general be best practice to (eg. for flow on a busy airport), but you are NOT REQUIRED to.
If you are cleared for a runway, you own the runway until YOU clear it at your discretion. You can land long, you can roll-out for ages, you can reject and go around. It's yours.
With exception of parts that have been copied into actual *federal regulations,* the AIM merely suggests best practice.
Typical armchair pilot.
I'm only at the 3:42 mark, but the pilot checked in 3 times with the tower in quick succession. It's important to know that the F-16's (which he knew were coming) were likely calling on UHF. The tower controller is coordinating them regarding SFO pattern (simulated flame out) and the barrier cable. Don't mistake silence for a controller working another frequency.
Then they should not broadcast so I can hear any of it then. Partial conversations imply that they are on ,y frequency and I cannot hear them
@@DrPilot that would be worse. It's one controller working both freqs. Think it through.
And you didn't tear his head off!!?? When he sent you to parking I would have requested his friggin supervisor meet me!!!
GOOD JOB staying aware!!! I saw your situation developing as soon as he cleared the jet to land with you short final. GOOD JOB!!!
This incident highlights the huge attention and consequence disparity between controllers and pilots.
This is a clear Operational Error for the tower. Will any of them get training? Written up? The error even pointed out to supervisors? No.
On the other hand, had the pilot crossed in front of the F16 then you bet the tower would be jumping up and down about a Pilot Deviation and dishing out a number for the pilot to call.
The solution would be for the FAA to change the Pilot Deviation and Operational Error process by merging the two incident types into one.
The pilot and the ATC involved both suffering the same consequences. (Administratively)
Currently the OE and PD processes are separate and create an incentive for a blame game. If you put the ATC and the pilot in the same boat they will have more of an incentive to conduct due care.
In this situation, Ground would’ve had much more attention to the Cessna and would’ve issued a needed warning rather than thinking it’s solely the pilot’s responsibility to keep eyes out.
I’m glad the outcome was benign. Good work pilot.
Yes, technically the tower was at fault. But you could have helped the situation. For one, you are expected to vacate the runway as soon as you are able and minimalize the time on the runway. You passed at least one good turnoff. Also, if you did want to roll that far down the runway, you should have asked for a long landing. The controller would have then had more awareness of your intentions. If he had somone behind you, they would have had to go around. There are more people than you using the airport. This was just as much poor airmanship as it was controller error.
Now try it without a tower. I was at a towerless airport with a plane doing the proper pattern (me), another doing a reverse pattern, and a third taking off with a tailwind. All three of us converging head-on like it's a 3-way stop, but we ain't stopping. Fun times.
Is monica Lewinsky blowing the air traffic controller? looks like he is well pre occupied in the lonely tower
10:49 I’m never getting back.
is the passenger ok? i think he might need a snickers
And a V-8
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Either he is having a hangover from hell or he does not like flying..
Randomnick123 I heard his name was Jose Cuervo. Oh no...that’s who he was partying with last night
He's the son next to the emotionally unavailable father and a overbearing mother. Probably on pills since age 5.
i hope you reported this -- the tower was doing an awful job of being aware of the situation
The tower controller was a little lax there, but the Cessna pilot was clearly at fault.
@@megadavis5377 at fault? For what? Please explain your take on this
Got a call from Cleveland FAA FAASST Team and they have reprimanded the controller and would like to use this video for training purposes. They were very apologetic and nice.
That's great. Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, some more serious than others. Like they always say, the important thing is to learn from the mistake. I'm glad the event turned out to be a non-event in the grand scheme of things. It's a good thing you had the big picture and din't just assume you were cleared to cross the runway. Like a previous post said, your spidey senses went up when you were not getting the radio calls you needed. That's a good point, when something doesn't seem right go with your gut. Nice flying Doc!
Despite my vitriol, I am glad to hear that it came out well for everyone. I tend to go nuclear and then worry about names and dates later.
Training is always good, seeing your good choices used for that training has got to feel great!! Again, nice job!
Dr. Pilot fantastic!
Wow ! You can’t teach that . Great instincts Dr Pilot .
It would seem that the controller was having too much fun with the Vipers to be burdened by a mundane Skylane.
The comments are:
1% good reaction of the pilot (and hell yeah this is true)
1% people knowing a lot of ATC and stuff
98% damn, this passenger is bored AF
Right seat guy, hungover, bored, not from this planet, all of the above
Kudos to the pilot for remaining calm. It would have been that much more stressful for him had he gotten angry, making the passenger get worked up too.
I require pax heads on a swivel in critical phases of flight, t/o and landing and high density areas irrespective of VFR/IFR (in VFR conditions)flight. Excellent video.
The passenger needs a flight attendant.
Lol
"Tower, I have a number for you. Advise when you're ready to copy."
Hahaha Brilliant
Watch out for thoes hot air balloons going Mach 2.
Welcome to Steam edition!
Yeah exactly. Like not kidding. That’s what I would have done.
Also remember to request to earmark the tape and get his operator initials
Yes sir, lol
Pilot: "Dude we almost died right now!"
Passenger: "Kill me"
8:15 This is why you are here.
Thank you Randomnick123!
The passenger was bored as hell because he was watching the video from 0:00 :(
Cheers man- just about falling asleep there
I'll name my first child after you
scrolled to find the hero we don't deserve.
This is why I'd stopped watching plane videos, they're almost all 10 minutes of absolutely nothing with 5 seconds of almost something. I'm glad this wasn't worse and everyone's ok, but that was such a waste of time to watch.
Your passenger looked absolutely fascinated with this flight.
Neo Matrix love salad fingers!
@@billfiveash Haha me too, it's freaky, I love it.
Neo Matrix I like to caress rusty kettles
@@whirledpeas1182 haha.. It seems…the nettles…have made the milk drop out… from inside my teat
Neo Matrix I I LiKe iT wHeN tHe ReD wAteR CoMEs OuT
What do pilots and controllers have in common?
If the pilot screws up, the pilot dies.
If the controller screws up, the pilot dies.
yep
until the pilot says *fuck this* and turns it towards the tower
And if the pilot does something stupid, a lot of people may die.
Considering this was investigated by the FAA, the controller was reprimanded, the video is now literally used in training ATC controllers as a bad example AND it led to procedural changes at the airport; it absolutely _blows my mind_ how many armchair pilots feel the need to pipe up in the comments about how it's totally the pilot's error and they'd do 100 times better. As if copy-pasting a bit of the AIM makes you an expert. Either that or they're all butthurt ATC controllers. 🤣
At first I was thinking "what are you talking about?", but then I read a few more comments. I think people have spent too much time in sims and think you can actually take a corner at 60 knots in a Cessna.
Thats pretty cool someone actually made an improvement on something, rare these days.
@@crazybastid85 Not rare at all, it's how aviation safety works.
Passenger is the life of the party
I wasn't going to say it! Hehehe
Yeah, he was at the party last night lol
J B he WAS the party! Looks like too much company with Jose Cuervo
@@savoy99 Yep he was lol
Probably should have been visually scanning for other aircraft rather than being useless.
10:13 that scared the shit out of me
Same
What??
LMAO, yeah, I had to go look at 10:13 and you're obviously referring to his transition! Scared me to!
The passenger must be his son that he just bailed out of jail after a drunken night of partying
I was thinking that he was severely hungover and hating his father for making him go to Oshkosh to drink a case of Hamms as punishment!
as long as he scored which is better than I get from the misses...
He is a pilot like he can afford to bail his kid out of jail.
@@lemonator8813 I think the joke is about how expensive flying is if it's just a hobby.
Or perhaps they had to get up early and he was tired from being up late? We have all done that and looked like absolute crap as a result.
Passenger is learning a valuable lesson. Too much alcohol causes hangovers. Took me quite some time to figure out it's not worth it.
Chris Barth lol exactly!
As a retired controller and check Airman the controller knows you saved what could have been a bad day in the making. This is part of working as a team and as the controller/supervisor on duty I would have given you a phone number to call so I could thank you for excellent heads up flying and offer you an explanation if there was one to offer. Remember as pilots we have all had our moments and controllers have stepped in and it turned out as a learning experience. Unfortunately now and then controllers loose situational awareness and the pilot as part of the team keeps things from going south and it becomes a learning moment for the controller. Just my two cents....
Thanks
Our lack of attention and due diligence almost killed you. But here's a number you can call. It's this type of nonchalant FAA attitude that needs to change.
I mean... Safety is on the pilot. Air traffic controllers are dealing with many different things going on at once. You can't always rely on them, they make mistakes like everyone else. Furthermore, the pilot should have exited the active onto the taxiway as soon as it was possible instead of taxiing along an active runway. He also would have had to receive a clearance to cross that runway instead of creeping up to it like he did. Should atc have caught it? Sure, but this shows poor airmanship on the pilot side.
Ed Jarvis , exactly. Errors were made by the controller and they should become a teaching moment. The FAA has moved beyond punitive enforcement for the most part, especially on the controller side. My only recorded operational error occurred just after I was checked out in the early days working departure on a busy UPS outbound where I had 2.968 miles and 13 degrees of separation where 3 miles and 15 degrees were required. I was decertified and had to go through a bunch of training. Before I retired, the FAA changed their attitude and no longer went the punitive route and training was required although no decertification happened. I now harass the airspace from the other side of the scope in the cockpit, run the IMC Club in our city, and am president of the local pilot’s association.
@@cscinc Yes glad they moved in a more positive way. I run a GA airport now and do a lot more flying than talking....
Tower: 669iner, hav u landed yet? 669iner: ya, we're havin' lunch on 25.. Tower: Oh..did u see the F16 grease that landing?! 669iner: ya...can we park now?
669iner?
DorianTM 😹🤷🏼♀️❤️
Lol 😂 was he taking the scenic tour of the airport? Must not be used to busy airports. Turn off when able!
You're right. The tower messed up. Having said that, had there been an accident, and had the video survived, it would have shown that contributing factors to the accident were that the Skylane pilot knowingly passed 2 taxiways that he could have and should have used to clear the runway and that he failed to comprehend the significance of the radio traffic concerning the F-16 activity on the intersecting runway. It would have also shown that the Skylane pilot failed to insist that the self-loading baggage/visual obstruction in the right seat keep a active lookout for conflicting traffic. Maybe next time you could have him sleep in the back so he doesn't block your view to the right. Part of your preflight instructions to other occupants should be that they actively assist in keeping watch for conflicting traffic - especially during takeoffs, climbouts and approach to landings. If not, get out.
The next time you want to post a public video, maybe you should review it first to make you're not half the problem.
JB Agree. Seems he is calling out the exits as he passes them. Why didnt he stop and request the first available taxiway.
You should have called the tower and asked to speak with a supervisor. They certainly would have would report this incident if you were guilty. Thanks for the video.
You really have no clue how this works and u sound so serious man 😂😂
@@cheaterfeet331 he completely understands how this works and you're an idiot
cheater feet, he sounds serious because this was a serious matter. Nice try at a witty comment though LOLOL 😂
Read the comment from the original uploader. Action was taken against the controller and they will be using the video for training.
Ok Karen
0:09, the read back is wrong, ATC said 2300, read back was 2500.
Yea I was conused
Your dead right how could he have missheard that, what was the actual problem any way was it that he was directed toward a junction in the runway where other traffic take off or what i dont get it saw him do the 180 then he had him do another one wtf
@@michaeladrianbooth9968 - Yes, runway 25 crosses runway 34. The pilot in the video was cleared to land on runway 34, that means all of runway 34. The only reason why this wasn't a deadly crash with an F16 is because the pilot in the video didn't trust the situation and had good awareness. The F16 pilot should NOT have been cleared on runway 25.
As for "how could he have misheard that",.. maybe try sitting in metal tube, going 100mp/h trough the air and wind, with a loud roaring engine right in front of you.
Also it is the job of the air traffic controller to correct that. If ATC says 2300, and the pilot reads-back 2500. ATC is supposed to repeat their instruction.
Just _another_ mistake of ATC here.
@mrvengeance. About your comment of not hearing 2300. He has Bose A20’s on, the noice cancelling works exceptionally well for chopping out engine noise. Unless he was not using that function at the time, there shouldn’t be much noice to listen to atc through.
@@jettmoyer6123 - NC isn't perfect though, on top of that, radio signals degrade and interfere, and while on approach you're dividing your attention on multiple simultaneous tasks. Not hard to mishear 2300 as 2500, that's the entire _point_ of the read-back.
And it's exactly why the ATC should've corrected and repeated the instruction until the read-back was correct.
Good SA on your part. The non-responsiveness of the controller had your spider-senses tingling, and it paid off. Given the time to edit and publish, it’s probably too late for a NASA form, and I’m not one to jump to the “call FSDO” extreme. A more measured response of calling the tower supervisor, explain what happened, and offer to send a link to this video as a “teaching moment” would suffice to me. The boss will know if the guy was just having a bad day or if something more formal is warranted, and will act accordingly.
Just an FYI, but you can always fill out a close call NASA form no matter how long ago the incident occurred; Or so I've been told. I've filled them out over a week after an incident after incidences I didn't think were serious but my Union recommended I fill one out anyway.
I dont think this was too much of win here for the pilot.. the first comment you noted in the video was traffic crossing and no factor... it WAS no factor, it was the F16's that crossed you not the envoy flight that they pointed out. Second, in AIM 4-3-20 section "A" states to exit the runway as soon as possible at he first available taxiway and that you are not allowed to taxi onto another runway without permission so he was expecting you to hold short as you were now taxing on the runway. You were at taxi speeds and did your after landing up and after checks the rest of the runway was not required for a safe landing. The taxi diagram for KTOL even states to be alert for runway crossing clearances. You came to a gentle stop at the 2000' board meaning you chewed up 3600' in a Cessna, he did not clear you to roll to the end. Trying landing at JFK and leisurely rolling to the end of the runway and see what happens to you. I would say it was reasonable for the controller to think you could make the exit at taxi way D before you passed it and if you could not you should have advised, as your aircraft does not require such lengths to land. Now the the new procedures and "training" from this video is going to be having to break down instruction barney style for all the pilots now and more radio traffic... I hope that guy still has a job... and BTW F16's fly in pairs... he probably had you turn around on delta(cuz you should have) and because the first F16's wing man was right behind him, also landing... you didnt see cuz you were turned around..
My thoughts as a pilot and controller here. So you can tell the controller is working local and ground co took combined, and I wouldn’t doubt he also is doing clearance delivery and tower flight data and maybe even CIC by himself, but I don’t know. But you can tell he has some ground traffic and is working several F-16s on a UHF frequency. I took a look at TOL and there is no LAHSO, so that’s not an option. He definitely didn’t pay too much attention to you, but I actually would care to guess that the operation was totally legal before you kept on rolling. What he needed to do to keep it legal was to either have you hold short of the runway or issue and receive readback of exit instructions for a taxiway prior to the intersection and get that done prior to the F-16 crossing the threshold on his landing runway. I haven’t seen the morning reports in the last few days but I’d guess this event is in there, and the controller definitely sounded a little shaken up. Good job keeping aware. But I’ll also mention, as a pilot before I’m gonna use all that much runway in a Cessna I’ll ask for a long landing, most controllers aren’t gonna be anticipating someone to keep on rolling down the runway at taxi speed past useable intersections, and if you aren’t getting a response from the controller I’d just exit as soon as practical (I’m sure he was hearing people on the other frequency and it was being blocked in his headset). But it does sound like he didn’t do a great job protecting that intersection and keeping you appraised of the situation and positively controlling it. If you wanna follow up I’d give the facility a call and if you ave the time that would be helpful to find the audio and radar replays, contrary to what some people are commenting FSDO will be of zero use since flight standards and air traffic are completely independent organizations.
Gabriel Zeifman great analysis. I actually did not start out planing on crossing 25. It’s when I got no instruction from tower and saw I was approaching 24 I stopped and asked
Dr. Pilot always a good call to ask if you’re not sure. So I asked my manager and he looked into it a little, we saw the radar replay and it looked damn close, and there appeared to be a mandatory occurrence report (MOR) filed on the event. The report appeared to be filed yesterday, so I figure someone must have seen this video and filed it based on that. I’m considering making a FOIA request, it’d be interesting to see what it says. We weren’t able to access the report, just see it was there. But at least air traffic QC knows about the incident.
Gabriel Zeifman I got a call from them to discuss. From cleavland FASSTTEAM
Dr. Pilot glad to hear someone is following up, except that’s flight standards so I’m not exactly sure what they’ll be able to do except pass info along. Sounds like air traffic is investigating though, I’ll keep looking to see if something more shows up.
Gabriel Zeifman Issuing and receiving a read back of exit instructions for a taxiway prior to the runway intersection is not good enough. The controller must issue and receive a read back of hold short instructions or observe the preceding aircraft initiate the turn onto a taxiway prior to the runway intersection.
I can respect the comments that we as Pilots are part of the equation and have a responsibility to keep ourselves safe. BUT when the controller makes a mistake he’s still going home, that’s not always the case for the pilots he’s responsible for keeping safe. At a minimum this controller needs to know what happened and learn from it. If he has a Conscience he will be on top of it next time.
Good job Doc!
Many years ago I refused a command issued by the tower at FXE due to my judgement concerning flight safety. They came unglued immediately and asked that I report to the tower after securing the aircraft. I did so, and they learned they were lucky I was more attentive than they were. At the time, they had two aircraft with similar call-signs in the control area; they confused them and gave me a command that was intended for the other aircraft. That command conflicted with the flight path of another aircraft (somewhat close to). They scared the crap out of me with that one, and I'm glad I was paying very close attention. They were soon looking for a rock to crawl under and became very apologetic.
Looks like the passenger had a few Dos Equis the night before.
Duane Little - maybe figure out your own life before you trash millennials. Cool profile picture
flyinshu123 😂
Steven Clayton you seem like a good guy why can’t we be friends!! Boomers and millennials don’t always have to buck heads
You sure do sharpshoot the controller a lot here. A lot of your radio calls were sloppy, you were instructed to descend to 2300 initially and you responded with 2500. The runway incursion you’re patting yourself on your back for avoiding was your responsibility regardless. You, as the PIC are responsible for the safe operation of your aircraft, not the controller. Maybe you should pay more attention to your own issues before calling out the controller on his. Nobody is perfect. Especially in aviation.
I did not call out anybody nor did I make any reports, however there were MANY unanswered calls to the controller. Thinks he may take SOME responsibility ?
Dr. Pilot I agree that a problem needs to be identified with the controller. It sounds like the reprimand that you were told he received indicates that it was. As I’m sure you know, it is almost never one single mistake or issue that leads to an accident in aviation. It’s usually a series of mistakes that lead up to it. Usually when I fly into an airport, with intersecting runways, the ATIS will say that “LAHSO are in effect” if both runways are being used. Do you remember this being the case when you listened to the ATIS? I honestly don’t expect you to. Who would remember that. My point is that you acting in a conservative manner and understanding your situation may have broken a chain of events that could have lead to an accident. That is your responsibility as PIC. If an accident did occur, you would have been a contributing factor for crossing the runway regardless of what the controller did or didn’t do. I just feel that based on the comments in the video and in the comments section made by you that you think you saved the day by being vigilant because the controller was not on his game. It’s you job to be vigilant all the time. Not just when a controller is having issues. I would have a very different opinion had you actually been IMC. Also, keep in mind that the AF likes to talk on UHF to controlling agencies. That can cause confusion with GA guys and gals that aren’t equipped to listen. Happy flying!
TaxfreeSVT I did not save the day but the FAA person who called me said that the controller is supposed to maintain posture control of all runways at all times and he fails to do so.
Dr. Pilot he is responsible for positive control of all runways. Just like you’re responsible for flying your assigned altitude. You both failed that day.
Action starts at 8:10 . Your are welcome.
thanks!
Thanks. VIdeo's still a colossal waste of time.
Thank you so much! I agree with Karl! Nobody wants to see 10 minutes of crap... cut to the chase!
@@VIKING165165 Even the "chase" isn't worth it. The title is strictly clickbait.
@@karllautman Yep. Average day at a controlled field.
Happened to me 50 yrs ago.
ATC not paying attention. My SA drove me to bank high right and get out of Dodge. My heart stopped pounding weeks later. My Baron was no match for the DC 3 cross landing. 😎. Still here.
The world still needs Robert's sexy ass that's why
You managed to keep your cool and stayed professional. Now that everyone is safe, this is a great training video that I can share with students. There’s a little something to learn for both pilots and controllers.
On that note, can you tell me more about how you rigged your camera system?. You have great camera angles and great video presentation.
I second this question.
Jesus let's talk about over reacting and patting yourself on the back foot nothing. Guess what. There could have been a major incident this morning if I wasn't vigilant. But yet I don't post a video about it just to boost my ego and show everyone how vigilant of a pilot I am.
Dude. Congrats. You have that whole being a Dick down to an art.
A controller at KDPA got the two tail numbers transposed about a year ago when I was on short final. He was trying to instruct the business jet over a mile away to line up and wait on 02L for crossing traffic (me) landing on 28. He mixed the tail numbers by using the 1st half of the jet’s tail and last half of the Cirrus waiting next in line to take off on 28. 😳I caught it right away and looked over the nose to see the Cirrus taking the runway. I think as he took 28 he must have seen me “larger than life” in his right side window and just gunned it down the runway. I had already started my go around and that point and sidestepped to the north a little and I saw the Cirrus go airborne and sidestep to the south. A guy in a 182 behind the Cirrus waiting his turn jumped on the tower frequency to say with excitement “did you just see that guy... he just took off without a clearance!!”. A sheepish “I know” was the only response from the controller who realized he caused the confusion. The Cirrus just continued on his IFR flight plan, I explained to my cousin in the right seat that what he was seeing below us was indeed “NOT our shadow as he had happily pointed it out to be” but another airplane. All’s well that ends well, and I was happy that I was paying attention. Good lesson for all involved! 🛩
The right seat sure wasn’t offering any help looking out
That's criminal! I'm so shocked!
Nope. He could have given even earlier warning of the F-16 if his head was up vs. stuck in his phone.
Was keeping an eye on MANAPD's!
TronZX14 he was scouting for the F-16’s below them I’m sure. That, or wondering if he should just open the door and put an end to this .
Yes, the controller is absolutely in the wrong here for forgetting about you and the crossing F16 traffic. However, he’s not planning on a Cessna 172 to take the entire runway on rollout. You had ample opportunity to exit 34 but for some reason decided you needed to spend more time on the runway than you absolutely had to. This is KOSH, the controller is BUSY trying to work a mix of military, GA and commercial traffic. Again, he’s in the wrong here but you’re not the only bird in the sky.
Not OSH...
I suspect that the entire runway is the shortcut to his tie down.
Ah, my mistake.
JB Thats what I was thinking too, but the point still stands. He doesn’t need to be tying up the runway for 5 mins just to save a bit of taxi time.
@@snowbrains9113 I agree with you 100%.
7:24 "I'm gonna puke."
@ 0:10 did the controller say 2300 and the pilot answered 2500?? Or is it just my hearing?
Read back was incorrect or did I hear atc say descent to 2300 and he read back 2500???
Yep definitely incorrect
Yup. The controller got him down to 23... wasn't a big deal in this case.
The readback helps the atc to know that the Pilot did understand his massage. If the pilot makes a mistake, the atc should repeate 2300.
I was waiting for the controller to do so, but he was pretty preoccupied and distracted with what was going on during the military exercise. Which is was quite apparent in this video and led to a pretty dangerous situation.
We can all use this video to help is better understand the importance of situational awareness and using extreme caution even when the airfield/airspace is controlled. It was a good upload and I always like watching approaches.... the passenger looked like he was bored out of his mind.... long flight? That or a few too many beer the night before? Lol
Fantastic situational awareness!
You saw how things were developing by understating the big picture, despite the controller's inattentiveness.
Man, you avoided a potentially disastrous situation. Never assume anything. When in doubt, shout.
Amen. It doesn't matter if you are right when you are dead!
@@DrPilot Not a pilot, but a sometime sailor. Learned this from my first sailing instructor.
Here lies the grave of John O'Day
who died defending his right of way
He was right, dead right, as he sailed along
but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.
windtee, no, the Cessna pilot did NOT see how things were developing; that's the whole point of the problem. The Cessna pilot should have heard (as we all heard) and given consideration to the tower controller's transmission to whomever it was: "... traffic is on a 5-mile final for runway 2-5, an F16 on the ILS." If the Cessna pilot had been using situational awareness he would have heard and understood the collision threat that was brewing and known that he would not be able to cross runway 2-5 without a clearance. And yes, while the tower controller should have issued a LAHSO clearance to the Cessna pilot, he also expected the Cessna pilot to land within the first 1/3 of runway 3-4 (as is normal, and as he did...), and then exit that runway on the first available taxiway - as the AIM section 4-3-20 instructs us to do. The tower controller never gave the Cessna pilot a "long-landing" clearance. This is a great learning experience for all of us: Follow the procedures in the A.I.M.
That would get a callTO the tower. I would want to speak to whoever is the mgr on duty. That could have been real ugly. Good job on situational awareness and keeping your head on a swivel!
Dr. As also a Skylane pilot I am appalled at the comment regarding "real" and "silly" planes. ATC certainly seemed more interested in military and commuter traffic instead of you. They didn't give you any expedite and clear instructions. Even so, you probably could have made an earlier taxiway. Hope you enjoyed OSH. Been at 30 of them so far.
As a current atc controller and ga pilot I would always try to make first turn off as soon as able, these things happen and he should have offered you a phone number to call. It’s not to late to talk to them and you know if it’s on TH-cam someone is gonna report that controller anyways. You did a nice job not loosing your cool. Luckily they didn’t land a F16 up your 6 o’clock on same runway.
The controller didn’t sound to busy but we are shift workers also so sometimes fatigue plays a big factor in our performance. Keep up great videos
that controller was enjoying the airshow, forgot that he was actually at work. I doubt it was fatigue even though fatigue does play in sometimes.
Coulda shoulda woulda, are you kidding me??? Hindsight is always 20/20. Ahh poor little baby controller needs a nappy poo? I'm sure being a controller is a tough job, but pulleeeze, we all have tough jobs and need to stay alert.
@@dixienormous3262 the guy said that they should have talk it through the phone, what is your problem? And no, not all jobs are tought....where did you get that?
No problem here Cartman. You should learn some facts about the aviation industry before posting brainless comments. If and when you reach that point, then let's debate it.
@@dixienormous3262 explain me sir, what about my comment is brainless and what is there to debate...it seems that you have no idea what you are talking about
I do think you were technically right in using the entire runway as a taxiway but the aim says you are to exit an active runway at the first available taxiway unless otherwise instructed by atc. You passed two exits more for your convenience rather than to slow the airplane down. In other words you were right but you don't want to be dead right
@Concerned Citizen Really? Going literal cross country into busy and unfamiliar airspace, when the pilot is instrument rated? That's not wasting anybody's time. Clunking a slow mover across busy intersections where the controller has to route everyone else around you? Now that's wasting time imo.
@Concerned Citizen Huh? Thousands of pilots fly thousands of IFR flight plans in VMC every day. The idea that the only legitimate reason for an IFR flight plan is IMC, and all others are self-absorbed, is just nonsensical. It is the legally required responsibility of every PIC to make use of whatever resources he/she deems contributes to the safe conduct of their flight. I know many pilots that file IFR for all longer flights and prefer the benefits of flying within the system.
Concerned Citizen Are you for real? In this instance, the pilot’s cautious radio traffic may have prevented a serious collision.
@Concerned Citizen - The only one jumping to conclusions here is you. Making all kinds of assumptions on why Dr.P and a lot of other pilots fly IFR. You can read minds then? Through the internet?
Nah, I'm getting the feeling that you are supremely hurt in your ego by the fact that you're not instrument rated, so you need to talk down to them as to not feel inferior.
As for the OP, they passed the first exit at ~50mph. That's way over taxi speed, and definitely over the speed for cornering. Sure, they could've taken the next, but he was cleared for the entirety of RWY34 so what's the point? Make two corners and cross RWY25 or just cross RWY25 straight. It shouldn't be active, and going straight over would've cleared it up faster.
@Concerned Citizen - Again, the only one self-aggrandizing here is YOU. With your holier than thou attitude, proclaiming how much better of a pilot you are for flying VFR everywhere. Demanding everyone do exactly as you, as if you're the messiah of aviation. With your years of experience "earning your ticket".
The level of projecting you're doing is _incredible._
And if we're talking about risks, demanding that everyone fly everywhere VFR even if they're completely unfamiliar with the area for instance, while they're IFR rated is a _much bigger_ risk than... [checks notes] people filing a flight plan? 🤨
And if you wanna talk being a burden on an overburdened system. How big do you think the burden is if all these people you are forcing to needlessly fly VFR get lost, and need ATC to guide them? Or worse, get into accidents?
This is like demanding that everyone drive on the highway with their eyes closed and their hands tied, just because YOU are able to do it. While claiming that it'll somehow alleviate the burden on police and paramedics. 🤣
Tower probably wasnt expecting a skyhawk to take the full 5600 feet to land and get off the runway...but then again thats his job to make sure.
I'm a student, but if the tower didn't tell him to exit, doesn't he have full use of the run way and only the runway until cleared to exit?
Expecting is a dangerous word in aviation. Never assume anything.
I’ve never heard of being cleared to exit... always been taught and taught my students that the accepted practice is to exit as soon as practical unless given specific instructions.
@@pw1340 As a student I have been following tower's directions and thought that was standard practice. I guess I was wrong. You're basically stating a pilot can exit wherever they want, at their discretion, unless told otherwise, but it is assumed a pilot will exit as soon as they can. If that is the case, then it would depend on where my destination at the airport is going to be, that would determine where I would get off. Which looking at the video, it seems the pilot was going the quickest route to his destination by following the runway and was correct in doing so. Interesting. I will ask my instructors tomorrow.
@@stumpbumpers No, the AIM specificly states that you have to exit onto first taxiway as soon as you can safely do so. This guy blew through 2 exits. Tyoically, ATC will instruct you to exit if they see that you've blown through multiple opportunities to exit. However, it's ultimately on the pilot to follow regulations. He should have known to exit asap.
Your passenger looks board. Maybe a near miss might wake him up
"board"
Maybe you should retake English class. Bored is spelled like this!
@@DrPilot Maybe you should retake it together, your video description and info messages aren't exactly correct either.
Dr. Pilot. Thanks for the correction. I saw it after I posted it. Yeah, bak tu skool
Dr. Pilot Well, he’s a Packer fan from Wisconsin, so their you go!
Dr. Pilot. Seriously good vigilance on your part at runway intersection. It is terrifyingly clear what would have happened if you had simply continued through.. I trained out of Teterboro and Farmington in the late 90's and developed a healthy appreciation for situational awareness. I am glad you are here to post this very informative video.
As a former military controller I have to say good job on the pilot. Glad you didn’t land long and roll out to the end!
No, he landed normal and then tried to taxi long.
WHY would you keep on with your taxi on the active runway when you could have clearly turned off to the left. Also...were you NOT paying attention to the tower when they said that an F-16 was coming in on 25. Common sense will tell you that these two runways will cross somewhere on the field...Duuuuuuh. I am a 32 years of flying and you and the tower were at fault. When you slow down to a taxi...get your ass off the active runway and then announce that you are clear of the active, which in your case...clear of 340.
Common sense is not clearing runway 25 for landing when it crosses the *very active* runway 34. Disregard for a moment whether he was taxiing, what if he landed long? What if he had to abort the landing and go around? If the entirety of runway 34 has been cleared for landing and is in use, you don't allow an F-16 to cross through it... Duuuuuuuhhhh.
An extra set of eyes would have been helpful.
You're lucky. The pilot of N3607V wasn't so lucky. It's easy to blame the controller, but the real culprit is a continuing disregard for safety by USAF fighter wings who continue to operate with their targeting radars shut off.
Just some standard AIMS stuff........4−3−20. Exiting the Runway After LandingThe following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed. a.Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed byATC. Pilots must not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without firstobtaining ATC approval. b.Taxi clear of the runway unless otherwisedirected by ATC......
The whole time, I was wondering.. why is he taxiing down an active runway?
I'm a air traffic controller at SNA in southern calif. In the ATC industry we call that a operational error on the
controllers part. He should've been de-certified and given remedial training.
Why didn’t you exit the runway at N2 or Delta?
You could have stopped and exited the runway at multiple locations. The AIM 4-3-20 states you shall exited the runway at the first available taxiway unless instructed by ATC. You didn’t. And please don’t give me the AIM isn’t regulatory. That’s a poor excuse for poor airmanship.
Did you report it? good for controller to learn from it as post incident he seems non the wiser about it occurring or his role in it.
I did not but probably should have. I can send thm the video haha
Seems like the tower control totally forgot about you. Probably at this point a NASA report would be appropriate. Controller needs to be aware of their serious error.
Please report
Just send them the link to this video here on YT.
@@DrPilot I would, its a good learning opportunity for all and you will be doing everyone a good deed, These things happen its about sharing and learning to reduce it. Happy Flying and great video. I like they a pure as it is flying.
99% of comments: Passenger is so bored!
Should he be like, smiling and waving with both thumbs up for the duration of the 45min flight or?
He should be making himself useful and watching for traffic.
When i am that hungover in the passenger seat, i would do the same.
That stressed me and I was on my couch Good jo on your part. Controller no so.
This would make for an excellent training video of a situation where ATC did not provide instructions to hold short of another active runway. And where excellent pilot situational awareness was executed during runway and ground operations. Good work! But really bad job by that ATC. And we see what is happening at Class Bravo towers with Part 121 operators the last few years. There can’t be this much margin for error by ATC! Sorry to say it.
That passenger saved the day when he said," Holy smokes watch out dad I think it's an F16 Taking off!" Buy him a Dos Equis on me
bud struck what’s the timestamp?
@@JimzAuto Sarcasm. 😉
Kat Locke good one, he ‘got’ me :)
Have you given some thought to getting off the runway onto the taxiway at the first available opportunity? Sure you may have had right of way but why tie up the runway. Being dead right is no good either.
I normally get the heck off the runway as soon as I can and two taxiways were passed that could have easily been used. The controller probably did not expect a Skylane to take the entire length. Granted he should have issued land and hold short instructions.
Yes dr pilot was being a dick by imitating a heavy. Get off the dam runway lots of taxiways.
The first taxiway was passed at over 50mph. I'd like to see you pull a 90 corner at 50mph, that's faster than the normal max taxispeed for a straight line. About 20mph faster (and 40 for cornering). So how exactly would he "easily" exit there??
The only other option before RWY25 was taxiway delta, and sure, he could've taken that. He was still going to fast but he had the room to slow down for that one. But that was only 600ft away from RWY25, a runway that *_shouldn't have been active_* and parking is just on the other side of it.
What would be the point in going 90° left and then 90° right and _then_ crossing RWY25, instead of just going across RWY25?
The only reason is the hindsight of knowing RWY25 was wrongly cleared for use.
So realistically only 1 possible taxiway wasn't taken, and that was practically _at_ RWY25 already. Hardly anything to cry over when the ATC is clearing two crossing runways for landing at the same time. 🤷🏻♀️
Controllers fault for not telling you to hold short after you were at taxi speed. Your fault for passing multiple exit points at taxi speed. He should have done his job, you should have done yours.
Not a pilot but I assume its standard practice to take the first available taxiway once you've reached taxi speed?
Too Wun poh - you’re to take the first available taxiway unless instructed otherwise. You NEVER stop in the middle of a runway
Excactly. Pilot must vacate the rwy from first possible intersection, unless otherwise instructed.
@Dan Ruehl so let's say he exited and took Gulf, he still had to cross runway 25 so...... your dumb
County207 # except you have to ask to cross a runway, you don’t “just do it”
Obviously we live in a POLITICAL world, where AUTHORITY can be, and at times, is, overreaching. YET that does NOT negate WORKING TOGETHER to make it BETTER and SAFER for all involved. And in this business WORKING TOGETHER is ESSENTIAL.
I'm learning to fly now. Aren't you expected to take the first available turnoff (FAR 4-3-20) unless asked for full length after landing. Controller definitely should have issued traffic both ways. He may have assumed you'd be off runway before the F16 crossed threshold judging you were at taxi speed with two turn offs available? Also if he's not answering you immediately it sounds like he was listening to a lengthy request from Sting on his UHF freq as he simulcasted on VHF when responding.
The controllers were not the only one’s at fault. I had a discussion about this exact situation with the DPE who I took my CFI check ride with. It is a gray area. Nicely done being situationally aware!
Look in the AIM 4-3-20, a. “ Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC.”
I agree with this, he was using the runway as an extended fast taxii, not only is it against the rules, but its pretty bad practice to tie up the runway because you don't want to have to hold short of the active on a taxi way.
Without exception, when two intersecting runways are being used, ATIS will state "Land and Hold Short in Effect", but the ATIS report wasn't added to this video. If a landing aircraft can't comply, the pilot must advise the tower. Rolling out and expecting to cross an active runway is simply bad practice. In addition, crossing any active runway without a clearance violates FAA rules. It was actually your responsibility to request a clearance to cross the active runway and your responsibility to prevent the accident. Had there been an accident, you would have been the case regardless of whether or not your'er a Dr.
Finally someone named it! Thank you! Our hero pilot is NO HERO!!!
I had something somewhat similar happen 45+ years ago... BUT we were both cleared for the same runway. Me taking off solo in a C150 vs a MUCH faster jet landing.
Just a word of advice bro, NEVER EVER fly with your son in law...If he's your son, buy his sex reassignment surgery....You wont be disappointed then.
Leave passenger home... no interest, self absorbed, doesn't care about what's going on, learning to fly or even helping to look out for traffic. Take along someone that wants to be there and a little more conscious and coherent. What a putz.
I Will be happy if soneone take and Pick up to fly at Oshkosh airshow man . But i am a simple worker..
Aren’t you suppose to exit the runway when able per the AIM or FARs? AIM 4-3-20 Exiting the Runway After Landing The following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed. a. Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC. Pilots must not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without first obtaining ATC approval. b. Taxi clear of the runway unless otherwise directed by ATC. An aircraft is considered clear of the runway when all parts of the aircraft are past the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its continued movement beyond the runway holding position markings. In the absence of ATC instruc- tions, the pilot is expected to taxi clear of the landing runway by taxiing beyond the runway holding position markings associated with the landing.
Wow @DRPILOT you are one of the only prop pilots that can say that "I almost took out a F16 with my prop plane ! Who needs a f22...
Could you imagine being so disinterested in aviation that you missed almost being hit by military aircraft? Fuck, right seat, I get it you're edgy. Or hungover. Whatever it is. You're passing on about 10k of flight instruction. Gl.
Right seat passenger did not seem enthused about being on board..
This guy with his bored attitude annoys the heck out of me... so uninterested and not caring about anything.... He could’ve been dead and not even noticing it...
calopii Honestly he looks hungover and feeling miserable.
calopii < me too!!! I would have told him to keep looking around as they approached the airport. If he continued to dog it, he would be riding in a greyhound bus back home!
Jonny Sprague - It’s the pilot’s son, ‘along for the ride’. 😉
@@lottiestanley7696
Well I'm a pilots son... I damn near fly the airplane whether I'm in the left seat, OR the right one. A cockpit is a busy place, any help at all makes it soooo much easier.
sorry, can I have a few questions? if "cleared to land" means I have all runway for land, what is "land"? Because what I saw was taxiing on the runway to the apron.. I mean land is procedure when my flight change to no flight by safe contacting with the ground and reducing my speed to taxiing speed? Can I block 2km runway without no reason 2 mins after my wheels contacted to the ground and after I didnt vacated runway in first possible point? Isnt taxiways dedicated for taxiing back to the apron? Im not from U.S. sorry my english is bad, but I think pilot should leave runway in first possible place and this pilot didnt do it.Maybe other rules are applied in U.S. Pls send me and anwer.
I would have exited runway onto taxi way ASAP without trying to go all way down runway to cross.
Sometimes (especially when the FBO at the departure end of the runway) it makes sense to use the full length of the runway. The pilot assumed he was legal to do so and probably did it to help save him a couple of extra taxi instructions.
That was blown way out of proportion. An indecent on the ground is always the irresponsible pilot's fault, you might blame the ATC, but don't depend on anything from anyone other than yourself radio chatter, etc. If no answer, stop where you are. you call again ASAP. Chatter doesn't match what's happening on the ground...Speak up.
Reminds me of the time I flew to a FAA seminar on runway incursions. When leaving the seminar, the tower cleared us to take off on 6L. I said, do you mean 6R? That one would be better, it doesn't have a jet on it!
Controllers are humans. Trust but verify.
@00:11 ATC gave instructions to descend and maintain 2,300' but the pilot read back 2,500. I'm not a pilot or ATC, but shouldn't someone have caught that?
Aren’t you supposed to exit the runway at the first available taxiway after slowing? Looks to me like he just kept taxiing down the runway without a clearance.
Curt Cannon tower will usually tell you what taxiway left or right to exit on
@@DrPilot You might want to take a look at AIM 4-3-20 (a).
Curt Cannon in ATC land, the controller gave that pilot all of Rwy 34 when landing clearance was issued and permitting crossing traffic is what we used to call a ‘Deal’ in ARTCC land. Otherwise, it’s ‘betting on the come’ and that isn’t positive control. Given his type and capability, issuing a Hold Short clearance would have demonstrated positive separation. That did not happen.
@@feversol I agree the controller should have given a lahso clearance, but the pilot was also in error by not exiting at the first available taxiway. Btw, the Airman's Information Manual is a little more than "some book".
Curt Cannon AIM isn’t being held responsible for positive control. It may be the Bible of flying, but the supposed controller must be in control. I told trainees that if they had two aircraft even on opposition sides of their airspace, it had better be his/her ‘fault’ that they didn’t hit. What we saw here was a video that is, and will be, being played during training sessions from now on. It demonstrates a controller getting headlocked on one part of his job and losing the Big Picture. Three people were involved here. The controller, the F-16 pilot who should have also been aware of crossing runways and this pilot who was paying attention. That the F-16 pilot may have had little experience at this airport would’ve been cited as just a contributing cause. Not at all responsible, but he could’ve caught it or also seen the conflict approaching. Two of three were unaware. Bad stuff. Reality is, this stuff happens all the time and it’s just terrific that this Deviation is recorded. Because it will make controllers work to remain more aware and pilots to scan a bit more.
Controller is wrong. You do realize that the F16s were on UHF not VHF right? So when you were transmitting you were both stepping on each other and I bet the controller purposely talked to the F16s bc how fast they are compared to you. You clearly readback an incorrect altitude. You were issued 2300 and you readback 2500 but I see nothing from you stating you made a mistake on that. You landed short and were at taxi speed over a thousand feet short of the runway. Get off the runway plain and simple. You should have gotten off at the first taxiway available to you not when you felt like. In my book that's just inconsiderate and not a good pilot. What if there was someone behind you trying to land and they had to go around bc you decided to take your time getting off the runway or the lack of? What if that aircraft was a medvac would you still feel the need to just taxi down the runway bc you want to? Your supposed to get off on the first available taxiway especially when your already at taxi speed and not when you feel like it. Errors on both parties.
Wow! you're so f** cool, no one admits or even realizes his mistakes. WTF Love from the French Air Force
Big issue here was the Air Farce not being up on VHF, reducing everyones SA. Dont hesitate to ask tower to request the jets come up on VHF if able. The reason he was not hearing your calls was the jets were talking over you on the other band. If you have 2 radios tune one to the UHF yourself to help with your SA. And once again you failed to get your passenger involved to assists in airspace surveillance.
Good job! I was cleared to depart at my local airport. I looked to my right before taking the runway and saw another plane on very short final to land on the runway. Yes, I discussed this with ATC. It's like a fight. "Protect yourself at all times." Even back in the "position and hold" days, I would hold at a 45 degree angle on the runway so I could see behind me.
This is your own fault. You should not be using the runway as your own private taxiway when you have multiple turnoffs available to get on the taxiway. A controller expects you to exit as soon as possible. Its even worse that you would do this at a busy ANG base that you know has jets with a faster landing speed than your cessna can even fly. Simultaneous runway ops is very common, especially at fields with high military activity. You also never conveyed any request to stay on the runway or cross. You are the root cause here.
Wow that controller was terrible
So much respect for your ability to remain calm through this whole video. I would’ve gone nuts after the 3rd call to tower on final.
I don't like how giddy you seem to be about getting this controller in trouble. Props for situational awareness and averting an accident. But instead of fuming about it, why not make a joke on frequency and have a laugh with the controller. He knew he screwed up - we're all human. I'll bet you've committed reportable errors before as well, I know I have. ATC gave me a descent once and I started a climb. Controller joked "well that works better for me anyway, climb and maintain...". Point was made.
While i get your frustration, tower controllers are allowed to use implied separation, or clear someone for something because under normal operations the separation required will be there or is predicted to be there within reason. I think it's within the controllers reason to expect a cessna to not taxi allll the way down the runway. While i do think the tower should be at fault, i would definitely rethink your methods as well. You didn't act unsafe, but you acted in a way that put you in a position that could be unsafe without any reason. Tower controllers expect an expeditions exit from the runway, which you didn't do. you went beyond multiple exits.
i believe the controller to be at fault but its also fair to critique your decision making up to that point as well.
The controller warned up front on first contact about the 2 F-16's that would be using the cross runway...While the pilot is making a blame list against the controller fact is the pilot landed slightly long and cruised up too fast on the runway considering he had F-16's ahead of him crossing...The Pilot also failed to call the tower on landing...The controller didn't expect the pilot to go past the first taxiway - nor should he have...The controller sent the pilot back to the taxiway he should have stopped short of considering he was warned about the fast movers and was not in communication with the tower...That said the controller knew he screwed up...You can hear it in his voice...
Error on the first readback of altitude assignment. Everyone is human.
It's the controllers' responsibility to ensure correct readback.
Didn’t hear the controller correct him
AIM 4-3-20The following procedures must be followed afterlanding and reaching taxi speed.a.Exit the runway without delay at the firstavailable taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed byATC.