 |
Aviation Forums
Aviation discussions newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dallas
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: Right of way questions |
 |
|
Sec. 91.113 - (d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are
converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly
so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the
aircraft are of different categories --
They go on to specify the categories but they never specify who's got the
right of way in an airplane vs. rotorcraft.
I was taught the general rule of the less maneuverable craft has the right
of way, but that's not legally spelled out in 91.113.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I read it the Boeing 737 to the left of my
Cessna should give way to me.
--
Dallas |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
Dallas <Cybnorm (AT) spam_me_not (DOT) hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Sec. 91.113 - (d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are
converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly
so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the
aircraft are of different categories --
They go on to specify the categories but they never specify who's got the
right of way in an airplane vs. rotorcraft.
I was taught the general rule of the less maneuverable craft has the right
of way, but that's not legally spelled out in 91.113.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I read it the Boeing 737 to the left of my
Cessna should give way to me.
|
There is a classical sailing cartoon that shows a couple of guys in a
dinky little sailboat with an aircraft carrier bearing down on them.
The caption reads:
"Don't worry about it, we have the right of way."
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Ash
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
In article <1mlmmgx9wl8y2.1qebgt9o5y944$.dlg (AT) 40tude (DOT) net>,
Dallas <Cybnorm (AT) spam_me_not (DOT) Hotmail.Com> wrote:
| Quote: | Sec. 91.113 - (d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are
converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly
so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the
aircraft are of different categories --
They go on to specify the categories but they never specify who's got the
right of way in an airplane vs. rotorcraft.
I was taught the general rule of the less maneuverable craft has the right
of way, but that's not legally spelled out in 91.113.
|
In the absence of a description for that scenario, I would assume that
it would go back to the default rule where the aircraft on the right has
the right-of-way. But it appears that you're correct that this case
isn't actually covered; it's excluded from the general case and not
listed in the specific cases.
(Note: I'm not an instructor, or even a lawyer, so this is just my
layman's opinion.)
| Quote: | Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I read it the Boeing 737 to the left of my
Cessna should give way to me.
|
Legally speaking, I believe that is absolutely correct. Practically
speaking, maneuver to avoid as soon as you realize that you're
converging!
Another fun example is that if two aircraft are landing, the one that's
at a lower altitude has the right of way, even if the higher one is a
glider. (Should be no surprise that I ignore this rule with some
frequency!)
I tend to agree with Jim's cartoon. Right-of-way is good to know from a
theoretical point of view, but in practical matters I always give the
other guy the right of way unless it would somehow compromise my safety
more than the possibility of a mid-air collision would. You have no idea
if the other guy saw you, and "But I had the right of way" would not
make a good epitaph.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crash Lander
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
"Mike Ash" <mike (AT) mikeash (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:mike-54E67C.18083404022009@mara100-84.onlink.net...
| Quote: | I tend to agree with Jim's cartoon. Right-of-way is good to know from a
theoretical point of view, but in practical matters I always give the
other guy the right of way unless it would somehow compromise my safety
more than the possibility of a mid-air collision would. You have no idea
if the other guy saw you, and "But I had the right of way" would not
make a good epitaph.
|
Yep, me too. I always let the other guy have right of way when I'm in the
air unless it puts my safety at risk. on the ground though is different.
Crash Lander |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Lieberman
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:40 am Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
On Feb 4, 5:08 pm, Mike Ash <m...@mikeash.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I always give the
other guy the right of way unless it would somehow compromise my safety
more than the possibility of a mid-air collision would.
|
Gotta mess with you on this Mike as I do know what you mean!
How can your safety be less compromised with a mid air?
The way you worded it tickled my funny bone, carry on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Ash
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:06 am Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
In article
<26f5c129-a0f7-4ea8-9a41-b3a3da256f80 (AT) m15g2000vbl (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
A Lieberman <atlieb (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Feb 4, 5:08 pm, Mike Ash <m...@mikeash.com> wrote:
I always give the
other guy the right of way unless it would somehow compromise my safety
more than the possibility of a mid-air collision would.
Gotta mess with you on this Mike as I do know what you mean!
How can your safety be less compromised with a mid air?
The way you worded it tickled my funny bone, carry on.
|
It was intended to tickle it, so good.
But I was half serious as well. You're right that a mid-air collision is
pretty much a worst-case scenario, but the collision isn't a given. If
you're on a collision course, there's a certain probability that the
other fellow will see you and maneuver to avoid, or that you will simply
have a near miss.
(I'm reminded of the late lamented George Carlin: "Here's one they just
made up: 'near miss'. When two planes almost collide, they call it a
near miss. It's a near hit! A collision is a near miss!")
Obviously this must not be counted on. But we can imagine a scenario,
unlikely though it may be, where the alternative has a greater
probability of causing one's imminent demise. For example, if somehow
your only out were to maneuver into terrain, better to hold course and
let the other guy move out of the way instead.
Now I'm not saying it's likely. Indeed, I don't expect ever to encounter
such a situation. But it's always good to stay mentally flexible like
this, just in case. And if it lets me be funny, all the better.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kobra
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
| Quote: | They go on to specify the categories but they never specify who's got the
right of way in an airplane vs. rotorcraft.
|
This may be true, but I believe a rotorcraft and an airplane (as far as the
FAA is concerned) are equally maneuverable and therefore the one on the
right has the right-of-way.
Someone else wrote about the cartoon that reads at the end, "The caption
says, Don't worry about it, we have the right of way." It would be more
applicable to our discussion and even funnier if it was done the other way
around. One of the guys in the small dingy calmly explaining to the
passenger, who's frantically pointing out the aircraft carrier with bulging
eyes, "Don't worry about it, we have the right of way." Personal preference
I guess.
Kobra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dallas
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:08:34 -0500, Mike Ash wrote:
| Quote: | Another fun example is that if two aircraft are landing, the one that's
at a lower altitude has the right of way, even if the higher one is a
glider.
|
Na... I think in Sec. 91.113 the placement of "(d) If the aircraft are of
different categories", before "(g) Landing" makes the landing rules
subordinate to the categories.
--
Dallas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
Kobra <drgwentzel (AT) verizon (DOT) net> wrote:
| Quote: |
They go on to specify the categories but they never specify who's got the
right of way in an airplane vs. rotorcraft.
This may be true, but I believe a rotorcraft and an airplane (as far as the
FAA is concerned) are equally maneuverable and therefore the one on the
right has the right-of-way.
Someone else wrote about the cartoon that reads at the end, "The caption
says, Don't worry about it, we have the right of way." It would be more
applicable to our discussion and even funnier if it was done the other way
around. One of the guys in the small dingy calmly explaining to the
passenger, who's frantically pointing out the aircraft carrier with bulging
eyes, "Don't worry about it, we have the right of way." Personal preference
I guess.
Kobra
|
Umm, that is the caption, I thought that was obvious.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kobra
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
| Quote: | Someone else wrote about the cartoon that reads at the end, "The caption
says, Don't worry about it, we have the right of way." It would be more
applicable to our discussion and even funnier if it was done the other way
around.
|
OOOPS...that IS the way the cartoon is made....sorry.
Kobra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dallas
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 02:13:20 GMT, Crash Lander wrote:
| Quote: | Yep, me too. I always let the other guy have right of way when I'm in the
air unless it puts my safety at risk. on the ground though is different.
|
Remind me not to write your auto insurance policy.
:- )
--
Dallas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dallas
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:51:07 GMT, Kobra wrote:
| Quote: | This may be true, but I believe a rotorcraft and an airplane (as far as the
FAA is concerned) are equally maneuverable and therefore the one on the
right has the right-of-way.
|
Too bad.. they do a lot of rotorcraft training at my airport and the
little bastards are constantly popping up and getting in everyone's way.
"Surprise! Guess what I'm going to do?" Why don't you wait, 'cause I'm
not sure what I'm going to do yet either..."
--
Dallas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Ash
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
In article <agxuov6uhugw.96yl8jam7lc5$.dlg (AT) 40tude (DOT) net>,
Dallas <Cybnorm (AT) spam_me_not (DOT) Hotmail.Com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:08:34 -0500, Mike Ash wrote:
Another fun example is that if two aircraft are landing, the one that's
at a lower altitude has the right of way, even if the higher one is a
glider.
Na... I think in Sec. 91.113 the placement of "(d) If the aircraft are of
different categories", before "(g) Landing" makes the landing rules
subordinate to the categories.
|
In the copy I'm looking at*, (d) starts with "Converging" in italics.
Sections (1), (2), and (3) describe who has the right of way if they
have different categories, and are subordinate to section (d), meaning
they only apply to the converging case. Sections (e), (f), and (g) (the
last one being "Landing") are outside that case and aren't subject to
the rules for different categories.
This mostly makes sense. For example, if an aircraft towing another
aircraft is overtaking a normal airplane, it makes no sense for the
towing aircraft to have the right of way, as the other airplane simply
will not be able to see him. Of course my original example is a case
where it doesn't make sense.
At least, such is my interpretation. Did I mention I'm neither an
instructor nor a lawyer? :)
* Long version:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/934
F0A02E17E7DE086256EEB005192FC?OpenDocument&Highlight=91.113
* Short version: http://tinyurl.com/loggu
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kobra
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
| Quote: | Umm, that is the caption, I thought that was obvious.
Sorry...I didn't read "caption"...I read it as "Captain" as in Captain of |
the aircraft carrier...again...my appologies.
Kobra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Dohm
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:06 pm Post subject: Re: Right of way questions |
|
|
"Dallas" <Cybnorm (AT) spam_me_not (DOT) Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:1ed0eltqw535h$.15t2452vyw2do$.dlg (AT) 40tude (DOT) net...
| Quote: | On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 02:13:20 GMT, Crash Lander wrote:
Yep, me too. I always let the other guy have right of way when I'm in the
air unless it puts my safety at risk. on the ground though is different.
Remind me not to write your auto insurance policy.
:- )
--
Dallas
|
Wimp!
Peter  )))) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
