Me personally...I would have told ATC that "if you put him out on the rwy, I'm going around." That's just me...

But, the good news is, that you are a very "safety minded" pilot. I would be happy to fly with you someday.

Cheers,
Lax

 

Landing aircraft definitely have the right-of-way, but interfering with an ATC clearance feels wrong. Granted, that was a stupid clearance to give. Maybe a new guy or a guy who's a little behind and trying to catch up. I don't believe that is a good policy to have, but I can see where it might be necessary. I'd want to have a discussion with the controller as to why he thought I'd want to land in the jet wash (assuming it's a nice day an no one's behind me).

 

I don't think you were wrong. It looked unsafe from your point of view, you made a gametime decision which didn't place the aircraft in any additional danger (It's hard to have a mid-air when the other guy is holdin' short). ATC wasn't amused...oh well. Sure, there were probably better ways to go about it...but if it was going to be close enough to make you nervous...you probably didn't have enough time to run through the scenarios. Truthfully, if placed in the same situation...I may have done the same thing.

 

I think you were out of line because you had options. Going around being the obvious one. If everyone began doing what you did think about the effect it would have on daily ops. Not bitching at ya, but since you asked...

 

I'm going to defer to pilot judgement on this one. Think about LGA landing 22 and departing 31. It's very easy to "go-around" right into the departure path of the aircraft blasting off...

P.S. - Upon re-reading the scenario it sounds more like PSA was using the runway he was landing on and not a crossing runway...but I'm still more inclined to defer to the pilot. The problem with the scenario is nothing bad happened so you can't tell if he actually averted a potential disaster or just stepped on ATC toes.

 

I went with opt #3 for lack of better option.

I believe that as long as things like that do not become a matter of fact where we try to do their job and they try to do ours, this ain't that big of a deal so the word chill comes to mind.

You can claim that it was blatantly out of protocol to do it the way you guys did it back then, but just like we have landings games and board games and all kind of games to keep us entertained from the dull every day autopilot flying so does ATC. As you mentioned yourself, there was no hurry to get the PSA out however they chose to anywayz..... you think they don't enjoy seeing one liftoff as another one is crossing threshold?... sure they do. It's a job, we all come here because we WANT to. A game here and there in a relatively quiet times is not that big of a deal.

Would I do it in JFK in an afternoon time, most certainly not.

 

20 years ago, SMF only had one runway...I say Go-around, the radar pattern isn't that big there anyways.

 

Time to chime in again. I am disappointed to hear all the talk of going around. I've been cleared to land dammit! The controller should give me the right of way. I don't think I should have said what I said but the controller was wrong. What I think I should have done was continued and if it seemed like it was going to be a problem then gone around.


Either way I should probably called the tower and explained my problem with landing so close to a 3 holer.

 

I agree with calling him afterwards. Cleared to land...all that means is you won't get violated if you land, I've had plenty of landing clearances canceled inside the FAF...frustrating, but oh well, he's got a crappier job then mine. Maybe he really had to get that Smile Jet outta there...or maybe he just plain blew it. Doesn't matter, nothing in the AIM says you can amend somebody else's clearance...the controller's regs give him the authority to jack up his own pattern.

 

Exactly. Taking over the controller's job is unsafe and unprofessional in my opinion. If PSA thought it was too tight they could've held, or you could've gone around. Yes, you were cleared to land, that means nothing. Are you telling me you've never gone around after being cleared to land?

I realize that your decision was one based on safety, and that is important and just, yet it sets a very ugly precedent.