POTENTIAL CONFLICT ON LNDG; OPPOSITE DIRECTION TFC; SINGLE RWY OP AT A NON TWR ARPT. RWY EXCURSION.

Date: 1992-03 · Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|conflict-ground-conflict|critical|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-other-unknown|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|other-runway-or-taxiway-excursion

Synopsis

POTENTIAL CONFLICT ON LNDG; OPPOSITE DIRECTION TFC; SINGLE RWY OP AT A NON TWR ARPT. RWY EXCURSION.

Narrative

ON MAR/XX/92 AT XA00 PM; 2 ACFT WERE IN THE PATTERN AT FRONT ROYAL ARPT IN VA. THE FIRST WAS AN SMA X FLOWN BY PLT X AS PIC AND ANOTHER LCL PLT AS PAX. THE SECOND WAS ANOTHER SMA Y FLOWN BY INSTRUCTOR PLT Y GIVING INSTRUCTION TO ANOTHER PRIVATE PLT. THE SMA X HAD LANDED AND TURNED AROUND ON RWY 27; ANNOUNCED ITS INTENTIONS TO BACK-TAXI (THERE IS NO TAXIWAY AT FRONT ROYAL) AND COMMENCED TO TRAVEL APPROX 1000-1300 FT WHEN IT WAS FORCED TO RUN OFF THE RWY BECAUSE THE SMA Y LANDED WHERE THE SMA X WAS. THE PLT BACK-TAXIING TRIED REPEATEDLY TO ALERT THE PLTS IN THE SMA Y OF HIS BEING ON THE RWY AT THE TIME; WITH NO ANSWER OR RESPONSE FROM THE SMA Y. WHEN THE PLT OF THE SMA Y WAS QUESTIONED AS TO WHETHER HE COULD SEE OR HEAR THE SMA X; HE CLAIMED THAT YES HE COULD AND THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE STAYED AT THE FAR END AND HELD FOR HIM AS HE WAS ON DOWNWIND AT THE TIME THAT THE SMA X WAS TURNING AROUND. SO THEN IF THEY CHOSE TO BACK-TAXI THEY SHOULD HAVE EXPECTED TO HAVE TO PULL OFF THE RWY. AT NO TIME DID SMA Y ANNOUNCE HIS POS IN THE PATTERN. HE FURTHER SAID HE DID NOT SEE REASON TO EXECUTE A GAR AS THE SMA X WAS IN THE WRONG. I FEEL THAT THIS TYPE OF UNREASONABLE ATTITUDE COUPLED WITH NO TAXIWAY AND NO SAFE PLACE TO PULL OFF THE RWY AT FRONT ROYAL IS GOING TO HURT IF NOT KILL SOMEONE.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.