In the spring, airline pilot union members began refusing LAHSO clearances, claiming the procedure was unsafe and pilots were not properly trained. With the airlines under pressure to minimize delays and the FAA under fire from Congress, the LAHSO controversy came to a head in July - the peak of the summer travel season.
The FAA held a meeting of interested parties to discuss the problem, and Dennis Roberts, executive director of government and technical affairs, represented AOPA. At first Dennis thought, as I did, that GA wasn't really involved in the matter. But once the meeting got under way, we discovered that wasn't the case. It seemed that the FAA would announce that land-and-hold-short procedures would be reinstated to aid traffic flow at major airports, but general aviation aircraft and foreign air carriers would be excluded from participation.
It was shocking to think that all the major newspapers would carry this story, implying that GA was the source of the problem and some sort of second-class citizen with regard to holding short at an intersecting runway. Was GA once again being used as a scapegoat?
Later that same day, Dennis and I met for two hours with the management of air traffic control at the FAA. We wanted to better understand the situation and seek a superior solution. It became obvious that the problem was one of training all pilots - airline, foreign carriers, air taxi, and general aviation. The airlines weren't just concerned about whether an aircraft cleared to land and hold short would be able to stop before the intersection. They were worried about what would happen if the landing aircraft had to make a go-around. An aircraft departing the crossing runway would then be on a near-collision course with the airplane that was going around - an airplane that was expected to be no factor.
At many general aviation airports the LAHSO procedure has been used for years, and many reading this column may have been given this clearance. Under the compromise we reached, there will be absolutely no change when both the aircraft involved in LAHSO are GA. However, no mixed (airline and GA aircraft) LAHSO can take place.
We also reaffirmed an important principle. FAA policy has historically been to sequence all traffic on a first-come-first-served basis. That is not the case in other countries where air carriers may take precedence over other types of operations. The final rule issued by the FAA restated this important first-come-first-served doctrine, meaning that GA operations won't have to take a backseat.
Under the compromise, all pilots who wish to be approved for mixed operations must undergo training and certification on LAHSO. But the FAA has yet to define the standards for training and certification. Student pilots are excluded from mixed operations regardless of training.
The important thing to remember is that when you are flying a light airplane you will not be denied a landing clearance, even if you have not had the LAHSO training. If you have been certified, you may be cleared to land and hold short while an airliner is using the intersecting runway. All airline pilots must have training in these procedures. In the future, GA pilots may be able to get training as part of the flight review.
Training is a nonissue for a majority of us in GA who will never need to participate in mixed aircraft LAHSO. If you choose to get certification, you may be required to fly with special charts showing the exact details of a "rejected landing procedure" - a go-around to you and me. In addition, you may be required to carry instrument departure procedures even though the weather is VFR. All of these are good reasons to leave the LAHSO controversy where it belongs - with the airlines.
The retention of a critical arrival and departure sequencing principle - first come first served - and the acceptance of general aviation operations in the FAA final order, demonstrate AOPA's work on your behalf in Washington, D.C.
Related Articles
