notEnuf

Procedures change like underwear around here. Maybe this should be considered. Either way the captain was assured of the suitability of the runway by asking airport ops. Done. I found a tow line and hook on a runway once but it was on a grass strip not used by 121 operators. The back taxi seems like an excessive mitigation to me but if you can't get ahold of airport ops then what, if you have a legitimate suspicion?

Nantonaku

Then you surely know how bad 70 year old GA pilots can be. They don’t make calls, mix up runways and would definitely land on top of an airliner. There is no world in which taxiing around a dark GA runway for 10 minutes is a good decision. He is wrong. Repeated 2 million times you would find .001 pieces of FOD that could result in an incident on TO and you would be struck by three GA planes resulting in multiple deaths and hull losses.

notEnuf

1 70 year olds aren't flying at odark30.
2 uncontrolled fields have the same risks as controlled fields
3 Class B excusions at low altitude put you at way more risk to GA that aren't required to be on frequency or even have a radio or transponder
4 training is routinely conducted on approaches in opposite directions to the pattern/runway in use.

tennisguru

On the flip side, there are a limitless number of things that our manuals don't specifically say are prohibited, and thus COULD be done. But just because something isn't expressly forbidden doesn't mean it SHOULD be done. Nothing prohibits one pilot from following the other pilot around on the walk around to make sure they don't miss anyting. But just because you COULD follow the other pilot doesn't mean you SHOULD, nor does the lack of prohibition mean such an action makes sense or falls within operating norms. Having some degree of leeway in an extremely complex, dynamic environment is absolutely necessary. Every single contingency and iteration cannot be fully scripted. It is up to us to use common sense and judgment to determine how much of that leeway we need to safely and legally operate a flight.

So no, a back-taxi FOD check is not prohibited in our manuals. My guess is it is not mentioned not because someone assessed that it would be an operational option one day, but rather no one even thought that someone might consider doing that and thus never thought to mention such a procedure, pro or con, in any manual.

Having said all that, for some fleets (or pilots on those fleets), going in/out of an uncontrolled field is practically an emergency procedure. Other fleets (I'm looking at you, 717) non-towered ops are encountered with some regularity. Doing a back-taxi FOD check is definitely outside of the norm, but if a CA wanted to do that I'm not sure it would be a hill I'd die on by refusing to operate the leg.

OOfff

what “legitimate suspicion” did OP have?

Buck Rogers

All the Monday morning quarterbacking. They will continue to kick you in the crotch even though you have cried "Uncle".

They are the same guys that probably start their brief with...."There are no dumb questions".

The day that pilots quit asking questions or seeking information/feedback is a sad day indeed.

The quickest way to snuff out that curiosity is on full display in the previous 3 pages of posts.

notEnuf

"if you have a legitimate suspicion?" - reading comprehension

It's an if/then statement for anyone in the future. What would you do?

Buck Rogers

I've seen guys deviate 100 miles around a line or thunderstorms even though other planes are picking their way through.

Same logic.

Were they paranoid?

notEnuf

I've amended my route/arrival hundreds of miles out to not have to bother with picking. I guess I suffer from paranoia. Dispatch puts you on the most economical route by default, that's not always the best route IMHO.

Nantonaku

1. But any traffic that is operating is less experienced and more likely to do something dumb even if they aren’t 70.

2. I don’t agree. Risks are different. And even for the risks that are the same the rate of incidents per flight is lower.

3. This isn’t a risk you can avoid. It is different placing yourself in risk on purpose and the risk from operating normally. (Aren’t transponders required 30NM from class B?).

4. Doesn’t this result in an even higher risk of doing a FOD sweep?