I've noticed one or two planes at my airport continuously park on the Taxiway and stay for sometimes an hour+. I keep looking and can't seem to find any regulations on this topic. (Only finding stuff about taxiway construction) Can someone find me something released by the FAA regarding this issue. Are they to be fined or just told "move it".
3
-
2$\begingroup$ Who owns the airport? Is there an airport manager? This is probably best resolved at the local level. $\endgroup$– Michael HallJun 12, 2022 at 18:14
-
$\begingroup$ During The Master's golf tournament one taxiway is lined with parked aircraft. Here's some shots (from the Twitter video): google.com/amp/s/www.golfdigest.com/story/… $\endgroup$– RetiredATCJun 12, 2022 at 18:21
-
$\begingroup$ during the covid travel restrictions and the airspace closure after 9/11 many airports had taxiways and runways used as parking space for hundreds of aircraft, often for weeks or months at a time. In some cases this actually caused problems for the structural integrity of the taxiways. $\endgroup$– jwentingJun 13, 2022 at 9:21
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
8
If it's an airport with a Control Tower, access to the taxiway is controlled by ATC.
If it is an airport without a control tower, then concerns about aircraft parking on a taxiway would probably best be addressed with the entity that owns the airport (City, County, State, Port Authority, etc.).
The airport manager would likely be a good initial point of contact to whom you could voice your concerns.
Under the conditions and circumstances specified in 14 CFR 91.13 (b), that regulation may apply.
14 CFR 91.13 (b) states:
(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
-
1$\begingroup$ Hm. Does that mean that if you are operating an aircraft "for the purpose of air navigation" then you are allowed to operate it in a careless or reckless manner on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce? That's certainly how I would read it. $\endgroup$ Jun 12, 2022 at 23:57
-
$\begingroup$ @randomhead I think it means if you are operating an aircraft "for the purpose of air navigation" you would refer to FAR 91.13 (a), which covers that. $\endgroup$– user22445Jun 13, 2022 at 0:09
-
$\begingroup$ @randomhead, sometimes legalese like this is intended that each clause stand alone. i.e. "No person may operate an aircraft other than for the purpose of air navigation." and: "No person may operate an aircraft on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce." and: "No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner..." I can't swear that that's the intent, because I can get to your alternate interpretation as well. $\endgroup$ Jun 13, 2022 at 1:14
-
$\begingroup$ @MichaelHall 91.13 (b), I believe, is designed to apply to a variety of non-Air Navigation careless or reckless events. For example, if a taxi-qualified mechanic is taxiing a B737 from a gate to a maintenance hanger (never entering an ATC controlled movement area) and clips the tail of another aircraft or hits a parked fuel truck the mechanic might be subject to a violation of 91.13 (b). Lots of examples I can think of where 91.13 (b) would likely apply. It's to cover non-Air Navigation airport surface incidents. $\endgroup$– user22445Jun 13, 2022 at 2:52
-
$\begingroup$ An aircraft being parked isn't "being operated for the purpose of air navigation", is it? If the pilot taxied it there and turned off the engine maybe that'd be covered, if it were towed it wouldn't be afaik. $\endgroup$– jwentingJun 13, 2022 at 9:19