曝光臺 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

the painted runway markings and runway/taxiway
sign which was posted to the left side of the aircraft. As I
continued to taxi in darkness and recognized the painted
runway markings and runway lights, I realized that I had
taxied onto the runway. I immediately performed a 180
degree turn to the left and exited the runway back onto the
taxiway. The Tower ordered a B727 on a 3-mile fi nal to that
runway to go around.
This was a failure of CRM. I was not familiar with this
airport or the runway and taxiway confi guration. In
retrospect, I should have requested that the Captain not
turn off the taxi lights and read the airport diagram and
follow along our progress to the runway....
For a C310 air taxi pilot, a distracting “puff of smoke” in
the cockpit was the precursor to a runway incursion event.
■ I was cleared to taxi from the ramp to Runway 32 via
taxiway S on the ramp Runway 27L to Runway 32. As
I was taxiing on Runway 27L, I became distracted by a
puff of smoke in the cockpit. Rather than stop taxiing, I
continued down the runway while investigating the source
of the smoke and attempting to open the door and windows.
While taxiing, I crossed Runway 32. When I looked up, I
realized that I had crossed the runway and received a call
from Ground, also informing me that I had crossed the
runway. The smoke was coming from a DC to AC inverter
that was plugged into the cigarette lighter. I believe that
the cause of this indiscretion was my inattention to taxiing
and my concentration on the smoke in the cockpit. It was
a foolish choice to continue taxiing rather than stop and
investigate the source of the smoke.
Non-Tower Airport Operations
In one incident reported to the ASRS, three aircraft occupied
a runway at a non-Tower airport. As the reporter’s narrative
makes clear, “three’s a crowd” on any runway—especially
when the third aircraft landing had the option to go around.
Lack of position reporting and frequency congestion also
contributed to this event.
■ There was a lot of uncontrolled traffi c trying to land at
[airport]. We entered the traffi c pattern on the downwind
having made position reports from at least 30 miles to the
west of the fi eld on the CTAF. We observed on the TCAS
II, from about 15 miles out on the downwind, an airplane
at our 8 o’clock position, which maintained very close
proximity up to and including landing. On short fi nal for
Runway 27 we received a TCAS II traffi c warning from this
same aircraft from behind us but we decided that landing
and not going missed would be the safest course of action
since the runway was clear. Due to high volume in the
vicinity using the CTAF, many airplanes were not making
position reports or [were] being stepped on or blocked on the
frequency. After announcing our position on short fi nal, we
proceeded to land.
Upon announcing our back-taxi to the ramp, and while
still in a 180 degree turn, we realized a C210 had landed
directly behind us, while we were still on the runway. Even
more alarming was the transmission over CTAF that a
Beech King Air was on short fi nal to land. The pilot whose
voice would later be recognized as the Captain for the King
Air instructed us to remain at the end of the runway so he
could land. I told him that he should not land, that there
was a Cessna in the middle of the runway already, and
that it was a very unsafe situation...The King Air refused
to agree and landed while we prepared to exit the runway
into the sand, gravel, and non-paved area adjacent to the
runway, if warranted. All of these aircraft then proceeded
to back-taxi to the ramp without further incident. Several
other pilots witnessed the event.
Editor’s Note:
The AOPA Air Safety Foundation originally
developed an interactive Runway Safety course as a
free resource for GA pilots.
The original course (for general aviation pilots) is
available at http://www.asf.org/runwaysafety.
Based on the success of that course, AOPA later
partnered with ALPA to develop a version for
airline pilots, available at http://fl ash.aopa.org/asf/
runway_safety_alpa/.
Number 343 July 2008
In “interactive” issues of CALLBACK, readers are
given the opportunity to consider an appropriate
course of action for a given situation. The front
page of this issue describes various situations
encountered by ASRS reporters (the beginning
of the story). On the back page, you will fi nd the
actions actually taken by the reporters to resolve
these incidents (the rest of the story). Keep in mind
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：CALL BACK 3(36)