Jawed
Topic Author
Posts: 312
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:47 am

Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:19 pm

I was wondering whether it's generally possible to land at a large airport (like MSP or SFO) with a small Cessna 150 airplane. I always thought it would be cool to do that, on the main runway, like one of the big guys.

How would a private pilot go about this? Just radio the tower and announce you're coming? Or will ATC scream at you and tell you to take a hike?

[Edited 2007-03-26 05:23:57]
 
louA340
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:19 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:40 pm

I don't really think it would be possible...especially during rush hour. But I have some friends who landed at ORD with a Cessna 172 with an AA MD-80 following right behind. It was quite late at night though so I guess there was not alot of traffic.
RyEng
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 1970
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:41 pm

I have landed at large airports before (JFK and PVD to name a few) in a small a/c before (C152 and Piper Warrior). Just study your stuff before hand. Know what typical traffic patterns to expect. Use flight following and they will often vector you into the airport in a way that doesn't disrupt the faster aircraft. Make your intentions clear and your communications professional and the tower controllers won't really have a problem with you. Also, get off the runway quickly...unless they tell you to exit at a particular intersection. Also, know where you are going after you land (i.e.: which FBO if there is more than one). It is really fun to land a small plane at a big airport!!!!

Oh, I would also suggest not trying it during a rush hour time.

Hope that helps...happy flying!!!
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11516
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:50 pm

A lot of the flight schools in the Charlotte area have a sheet taped somewhere in their planes with the busy times at CLT. Even at a lot of busy commercial airports (CLT is north of 700 daily movements), there are definitely quiet times during the day.

And if nothing else, it's great fun to file ORD as an alternate when going to PWK, or ATL as an alternate when going to FFC. Makes you feel important...

[Edited 2007-03-26 05:50:40]
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
InnocuousFox
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 1:30 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:03 pm

I was under the impression that ORD didn't take private small stuff like that for some time now.
Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
 
ZBBYLW
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:17 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:22 pm

It is relatively easy to get into YVR, all they get you to do is basically go for 08R/26L and get you to come in from the south 90 degrees to the threshold and once you get to the threshold, turn a nice sharp final and voila you land taxi off ass soon as possible and your on your way to the south side. Late at night it is less busy, I know one guy who did a 5 foot low and over of the ENTIRE runway at 60 kts, just to do a tear drop and do a "high" speed low and over again over the entire runway in his C-172, have to get tower at the right time.
Keep the shinny side up!
 
pilottim747
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2001 2:34 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:27 pm

Small planes can land at MSP but no training flights are permitted. You need to terminate the flight at the FBO and you need to pay a landing fee. It is not uncommon for Cessna 172s or Piper Warriors to land at MSP.

I am guessing that VFRs theoretically can land at many major airports but air traffic controllers wouldn't let any VFRs in unless it is slow. IFR flights have priority of VFR flights so air traffic controllers are not going to inconvenience an IFR flight just so a small VFR flight can get in.

Some busy airports require reservations for unscheduled IFR arrivals (e-CVRS - Faa.gov).
Aviation Photographers & Enthusiasts--Coordinate your life.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:32 pm



I've flown a 152 into DTW for some quick pattern work. I simply got into the pattern at a neighboring airport (YIP) and asked the controller to call over to DTW to see if they could fit us in.

Sure enough, moments later, I was instructed to fly a heading of 090 and contact DTW tower. Easy as that....in the middle of the day, no less.


2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
phxplanes
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 9:24 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:06 pm

Your best shot to make it into a big airport is to go real late at night.

Quoting Jawed (Thread starter):
How would a private pilot go about this? Just radio the tower and announce you're coming? Or will ATC scream at you and tell you to take a hike?

You would have to contact approach first to be able to enter the bravo airspace then they would try to squeeze you in somewhere in the traffic flow.
 
COSPN
Posts: 1535
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:13 pm

You have to Land a bit off Center at MNL Because the Runways Center Lights are too bumpy for a 172...
 
deltaflyertoo
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 3:18 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:23 pm

I know you have to pay like a 60 or 70 dollar landing fee to go into SFO. So in another words, they try to discourage it! But yeah I guess if you go EARLY in morning or late at night I'm sure it no problem. But if you go at rush hour, I guess its a little inconsiderate.
 
A346Dude
Posts: 1161
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:23 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:24 pm

It's not the busiest airport in the world, but I am training at YOW which has one runway for GA traffic on the "north field" and two main runways on the "south field". When it's not busy, it is quite easy to run circuits on the main runways.

Always fun landing a Cessna 150 on a 10,000 foot runway.  Cool
You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
 
User avatar
Aeroflot777
Posts: 2995
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 2:19 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:08 pm

I train at SLC, landing together with jets of all sizes. The best so far was when a Delta 767 was behind us in the pattern. Boy I felt so superior and special, it was a great moment Big grin

Aeroflot777
 
as739x
Posts: 5008
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:15 pm

Quoting Deltaflyertoo (Reply 10):

Correct. There is from what I have been tol a landing fee for SFO. Though if you know the right people and land during late hours they will let you make an approach. I was offered by an air traffic controller approaches after midnight if I'd like. Never took the offer though.

ASLAX

[Edited 2007-03-26 08:15:48]
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8558
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:29 pm

Going into KMER (old Castle AFB in Merced, CA) was always fun as a student from the Bay Area. Not another plane in sight and all the 12000 feet of runway you can handle!
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
timz
Posts: 6120
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:26 am

So where do you look to find out whether you're allowed at a given airport? The link in Reply 6 says no reservations required at JFK--zat mean you can show up anytime and they have to accept you? If not, what rule could they cite?

The link only mentions LGA-ORD-DCA-- no reservations needed anywhere else?
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:23 am

Quoting Jawed (Thread starter):
I was wondering whether it's generally possible to land at a large airport (like MSP or SFO) with a small Cessna 150 airplane. I always thought it would be cool to do that, on the main runway, like one of the big guys.

How would a private pilot go about this? Just radio the tower and announce you're coming? Or will ATC scream at you and tell you to take a hike?

Not to come of half cocked on you, but do the commerical airlines and airports a favor, use a reliever airport. That's what they're there for. SFO doesn't need you sucking up capacity with your 150. Odds are ATC will put you into a holding pattern until you have a fuel issue anyway.
 
JayDub
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:14 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:45 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 16):
Not to come of half cocked on you, but do the commerical airlines and airports a favor, use a reliever airport. That's what they're there for. SFO doesn't need you sucking up capacity with your 150. Odds are ATC will put you into a holding pattern until you have a fuel issue anyway.

On a perfectly clear day with no enroute contraints and light/calm winds during the quiet part of the day/night, give it a shot...sounds like it could be fun. Make sure the airport isn't above arrival demand, though.

On most days (like today)...throw some low cigs/vis or some awkward winds into SFO, ORD, and other major commercial hubs...and they will quickly be above arrival demand. Throwing another unnecessary flight into the mix just makes the airline delays that much longer.
"Travel is only glamorous in retrospect." - Paul Theroux
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:50 am

I was flying out of ATL the Monday after the last time the Superbowl was held there. I was in the BizE lounge when I saw a C172 transiting the taxi way between the N and S sides of the airfield at about 4 PM in the afternoon. I had my aviation hand held radio with me so I tuned it to tower frequency and listened in. Every 15 minutes or so the C172 would come on and "check in" with Atlanta Ground because he was still holding short of the Lima taxiway at Dixie. For those of you unfamiliar with the ATL layout http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KATL/APD/AIRPORT+DIAGRAM.

The controllers made that guy sit there for at least 2 hours (I say at least because my flight to Amsterdam was called and I left while he was still sitting there).

Serves him right if you ask me. A light single engine plane has absolutely no business flying into or out of a major airport during a busy time. The sheer amount of room that a controller has to clear to allow such a plane to even taxi to the runway is a major disruption to the operations. A 757 at idle can probably flip him over a good 300 away.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it. IMO the C172 showed very poor airmanship and professional courtesy to his fellow aviators by doing what he did.

[Edited 2007-03-26 21:51:55]
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4972
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:58 am

Most large airports discourage small planes with landing fees. Other than that, I am not aware of any restriction. It's pretty much first come first served, but do yourself and everyone else a favor and be thoroughly familiar with the airport, taxiways, and FBO locations first. Also, check on the landing fee beforehand. The best source would be the FBO at the airport you want to land at. I know that at BOS it costs about $100 to land there; be aware that there are often ramp fees and/or minimum fuel purchases as well as the actual landing fee. My suggestion: many smaller airports served by the airlines are small-airplane friendly; for example, in my area, BDL is a delight. No landing fees, no hassle, they just work you into the pattern and the FBO is one of the friendliest I have encountered, and you get to watch plenty of big planes (OK, no 747's but there's everything else).
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
zotan
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:42 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:01 am

Pope,

First off, the C172 has every right to use ATL that you do. ATL is a public airport, and is open to any plane. He pays taxes just like everyone else, therefore he is allowed to use ATL.

You have no right to say he shouldn't be there. You had no idea what his circumstances were, and why he was there when he was. He could have had a medical emergency, a mechanical problem, etc.

If anything, the controller was the unprofessional one. Making a plane sit for more than 2 hours is just crazy, especially on an active taxiway. If he was so busy, he should have never let the plane start up. Making the C172 sit on an active taxiway because he decided to use ATL (For reasons unknown to you and the controller) is immature, disrespectful, and shows a lack of professional conduct by the controller.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4972
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:37 am

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 20):
First off, the C172 has every right to use ATL that you do. ATL is a public airport, and is open to any plane. He pays taxes just like everyone else, therefore he is allowed to use ATL.

While this is true I am of the opinion that private planes should show consideration for the realities of the situation. My 182 burns 8-12 gallons of fuel an hour; an airliner burns thousands. If I want to land at ATL or a similar airport at busy times, it will probably take as much time as 2 or 3 airliners because of my slower speed, costing the airlines thousands of dollars in fuel costs. Just because I legally can do it doesn't mean that it I should; also bear in mind that I would also be delaying hundreds of passengers. As stated in my previous post, many less busy airline airports are very friendly to GA traffic, and there are reliever airports at all major cities that welcome GA planes, so I do not see any need to land at places like BOS, JFK, ATL, or the like. I am not sure just where SFO fits in the scheme of things, but I would personally avoid it if I were flying in that area if possible, just out of courtesy.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:44 am

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 20):
First off, the C172 has every right to use ATL that you do. ATL is a public airport, and is open to any plane. He pays taxes just like everyone else, therefore he is allowed to use ATL.

You have no right to say he shouldn't be there. You had no idea what his circumstances were, and why he was there when he was. He could have had a medical emergency, a mechanical problem, etc.

First of all, I never denied that he had the right to use it. In fact my second to last sentence explicitly concedes that point.

Second, there is a ton of general aviation airports in the area all better suited for medical emergencies than KATL. (and that assumes that there was a medical emergency issue).

Third, as a private pilot myself, I know the amount of disruption that flying a GA plane into KATL would cause for literally thousands of people. I would estimate that conservatively at least 4 aircraft, if not more, trailing the C172 would have their approaches disrupted to provide sufficient spacing for a C172. At max structural cruising speed, the C172 is probably slower than the approach speed of a CRJ let alone a 757 with its wake issues. Then when the aircraft lands, it needs to taxi and a significant amount of space in front of it needs to be left clear further disrupting the clearance of planes transiting from the outer runways to the gates (and therefore the departures from the inner runways). Add up all the people on those flights and a thousand people is probably on the low end.

If you've ever been to or through ATL you know what a well choreographed ballet it is with the volume of traffic that is moved through there. If you ask me, it is extremely selfish for someone to do this because they can. Add to the fact that the departure was during the afternoon rush and he's just created his own problem.

Perhaps as you grow older you'll realize that "can" and "should" are too different things.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:21 am

I can't imagine they would ever let a Cessna 150 land at SFO. I would think they would tell you to land at San Carlos airport which is about 12 miles away from SFO. I remember a few years ago Mayor Willie Brown calling United Airlines 30 passenger planes "ittsy Bittsy Pantywaist" aircraft that should be banned from SFO. I don't think SFO likes any prop aircraft, not sure if they have a ban in effect, but it seems odd to even think about a Cessna 150 at SFO. SJC has a general aviation runway, and I have even heard people say general avaiation should be banned at SJC, especially after PSA flight 182 collided with a Cessna 172 in San Diego.
 
jetstar
Posts: 1371
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:24 am

One time I had to do an unscheduled tire change on our JetStar, which had a layover at Newark airport (EWR). Instead of driving, I flew my C-150 VFR into EWR with the spare tire, tire jack and tools.

EWR was using runway’s 22L/R that day and they vectored my to Runway 29 so I was able to stay out of the airliners path. After I finished my work I took off on 29 for the flight back home to HPN.

I had to pay the landing fee, which of course was reimbursed by my company and was able to cut out almost 3 hours of driving. As soon as I could I contacted New York Approach and advised them of my intentions, they cleared me to fly right down the Hudson River and make a right turn at the Statue of Liberty and the tower cleared me for a straight in for runway 29.

EWR controllers had no problem with me and when I was on final approach to 29 there was a Northwest 727 in position for takeoff on 22L. I requested that the tower advise the Northwest pilots that a small airplane was landing right behind them and to keep the power at idle, they forwarded that request and the Northwest acknowledged it.

But is was a VFR day, I would never fly any small airplane into a large airport like EWR IFR, that could cause problems with the air traffic controllers.

Most large airports will bring a small airplane VFR in on a different approach and sometimes land on a different runway to keep them away from the jet traffic. It is the airport operating authority who does not want small airplanes there, not the FAA.

I also flew my airplane to DCA VFR on a couple of occasions and again had no problems with the controllers, pre 9/11 of course.
 
jhooper
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 8:27 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:33 am

While private and commercial aircraft alike are entitled to land at public use airports such as DFW, ATL, JFK, etc, aircraft oparating under VFR are considered an "additional operation", therefore ATC may deny you depending on workload. If you need to go there, I'd recommend filing IFR if you can.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
 
noelg
Posts: 2313
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:39 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:34 am

Quoting Deltaflyertoo (Reply 10):
I know you have to pay like a 60 or 70 dollar landing fee to go into SFO.

Is that all? That's much less than I woulud have expected. I know somebody who landed a King Air at LGW. They were charged a £600 landing fee - that's $1200!

Over here you can only fly into LHR/LGW if you're IFR traffic and multi engine. You can land at most of the other airports though.

Every now and then you see a little twin prop landing at LHR, more common at LGW I believe.
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:34 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 18):
Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it. IMO the C172 showed very poor airmanship and professional courtesy to his fellow aviators by doing what he did.

And in my opinion there wasn't anything wrong with it. If the controller yanked his chain for those 2 hours the controller was way in the wrong.

That said, the 2 hours doesn't automatically mean he was getting yanked around.

But hey, if you are willing to pay the time and money to fly into and out of major airports, more power to you. Most of the time it makes little sense, but there's certianly nothing wrong with it, nor is it discourteous or poor airmanship.

Steve
 
timz
Posts: 6120
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:37 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 23):
I can't imagine they would ever let a Cessna 150 land at SFO.

Can anyone find a rule anywhere that says so?
 
itsnotfinals
Posts: 1573
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:51 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:58 am

Quoting Timz (Reply 28):
Can anyone find a rule anywhere that says so?

You can land a C150 at SFO so no one will find anything to the contrary  Wink

Back in the late 80's I was a maintenance director for a flying club at CMH. One of our C172XP's had an alternator go out so I flew it from MFD to CMH just "stick and rudder" and I actually called ahead and spoke to the tower and got light signals from the tower for landing clearance when I got there since I had no Radios.

Does anyone remember light signals? (It was last Century lol)
Speedbird 178 Heavy, FINAL runway 27L
 
KingAirMan
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:33 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:08 am

I took my Grumman Cheetah into KIND at about 1100 AM on a Friday morning, along with the NW jets and FX heavies. Approach control was great, as a courtesy, i came in over the numbers at 130 IAS , and coasted about 2000 feet of the 110000 available, to bleed the airspeed. Everyone was certainly nice during this, It took longer to taxi to Signature then it did to fly to IND from LAF, but hey, the grumman did exactly what I expected it to do, Its nice to be able to burn 7.5 gph, travel at 130 kts on a small 150 hp engine.

Long live the cheetah!

kingairman
 
peterinlisbon
Posts: 842
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:37 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:11 am

I flew once at Cairns airport in Australia in a C152. When we were coming back to the airport there was a 747 bound for Toyko on the runway, so we stretched out the downwind leg to give it time to take of and avoid the wake turbulence.
 
socalfive
Posts: 474
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 5:37 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:27 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):
I am not sure just where SFO fits in the scheme of things, but I would personally avoid it if I were flying in that area if possible, just out of courtesy.

Courtesy is it. Things happen fast at big airports, back in the early 80s when I used to fly in and out of PHX quite a bit in a 182, I was flying in one morning during rush and while on downwind for 26 south of the airport (expecting 26L as the FBOs and executive terminal were off the north runway) the tower called for me to expedite and immediate landing on 26R. I made the immediate turn all the while looking at a Frontier I 732 on a not so long Final. I pulled the fan, dropped the flaps and aimed straight for the numbers, got it on the ground, hit the brakes while the tower was instructing the Frontier pilot to expect a go-round. I called back that I would be clear of the active at the first intersection and DID. The Frontier pilot expressed his gratitude over the frequency and I managed not to interrupt the flow, but it was close.

Here in SAN, I think GA are prohibited since the PSA 182 crash, not certain about that one though.
 
UnknownUser
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:02 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:31 pm

Best way is to ask to transition through bravo and request a touch and go if they have time.
Die Skybus!!! You need to die for the good of the industry!
 
highflier92660
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:10 pm

As an airspace user in these good 'ol United States, it's your right to create general aviation chaos in Class B airspace provided you have the approved avionics aboard and have established 2-way communications with the Air Traffic Control folks. Now with the fury of your 100 horsepower Continental engine at 2700 rpm, you and your nifty Cessna 150 can try to make a bee-line for SFO's runway 28's before getting run over by a JAL 747-400 on short final.

The biggest problem with light aircraft pilots at major hubs is the sometime lack of airport knowledge and the rapid-fire clearances issued to them by ground and clearance delivery which may as well be in a foreign language. A SID (standard instrument departure) or a taxi clearance is abbreviated (example:"taxi 28L via inner/outer, foxtrot") due the tremendous radio traffic and many times the pilot of the Bugthrasher RG is left scratching his or her head. Having to send for a yellow pick-up with a big FOLLOW ME sign does nothing for one's ego or smooth the flow of ground traffic. Also, runway incursions are highly discouraged.

Why not go over to Oakland instead of pushing your luck?
 
ATCGOD
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:13 pm

Quoting InnocuousFox (Reply 4):
I was under the impression that ORD didn't take private small stuff like that for some time now.

Just so everyone knows, any airport that takes federal money cannot turn away an aircraft. Now, what they charge for a landing fee is another story. Ever seen what they charge for 100LL at a major airport FBO?
 
JayDub
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:14 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:22 pm

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 20):
If anything, the controller was the unprofessional one. Making a plane sit for more than 2 hours is just crazy, especially on an active taxiway. If he was so busy, he should have never let the plane start up. Making the C172 sit on an active taxiway because he decided to use ATL (For reasons unknown to you and the controller) is immature, disrespectful, and shows a lack of professional conduct by the controller.

How is making a smaller, slower aircraft wait for a safe gap in the takeoff/landing sequence unprofessional? I would call this very professional and responsible conduct on the part of the controller. A controller has to optimize spacing at peak hours and a C172 at peak hours of a major commercial airport does nothing but slow everyone else down. Reliever airports exist for a reason...

As far as sitting on an active taxiway for 2+ hours...just because you get a taxi clearance doesn't mean you'll get a takeoff clearance.
"Travel is only glamorous in retrospect." - Paul Theroux
 
sphealey
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:24 pm

1) Both _Flying_ and _AOPA Flight Training_ have articles on where you can do this and how to plan and execute it about once every two years; search their database and order one of those back issues.

2) Read the regulations, TFRs, and NOTAMs that pertain to that airport four or five times

3) Strongly consider making your first flight with a CFI who is knowledgable about that airport

4) As a matter of courtesy, if you are just flying for fun only attempt this during off hours (generally Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning, but this will be different for each airport so you will want to _ask_ during your planning process).

5) Be courteous

6) Think about the impression you are creating for all GA pilots, and be courteous.

sPh
 
vprzebinda
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:16 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:44 am

Does the landing fee apply for practice approaches and touch and gos? I heard the if you just ask for a touch and go when it's not busy they may waive the landing fee. Anyone been able to touch and go at SFO without having to pay a landing fee?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4972
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:14 am

Quoting Vprzebinda (Reply 38):
Does the landing fee apply for practice approaches and touch and gos?

Yes it does. If you want to do touch-and-gos do them at a less busy airport. Approaches are another matter; technically a landing fee only applies if you touch the ground. By the way, the one legal restriction at big airports (defined as the main airport of a class-B area) is that you must have at least a private license to land there; i.e. no student pilots.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
phishphan70
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:56 am

i personally have done dozens of flights directly over SFO in a 152, but never landed there. i decided i was never going to try it when i was vectored with a right turn directly over the airport at the runway intersections, as a JAL 744 was taking off needed the airspace i would have occupied. seeing that big hunk of plane rise from out of view below to out of view above showed me that the little boys need to stay away from the men... Wink
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:04 am

Touch and Go at SFO?  banghead  I honestly don't understand you private pilots. Is it an ego thing or what? Why can't you be happy with San Carlos, Palo Alto, Reid-Hillview, or even SJC 29/11 ? I would have thought after PSA 182 that nobody would think twice about practicing their Hobby at SFO.
 
phishphan70
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:29 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 41):
Touch and Go at SFO? banghead I honestly don't understand you private pilots. Is it an ego thing or what? Why can't you be happy with San Carlos, Palo Alto, Reid-Hillview, or even SJC 29/11 ? I would have thought after PSA 182 that nobody would think twice about practicing their Hobby at SFO.

100% agree. i am never trying to mess with the big birds!
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2235
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:42 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 41):
I would have thought after PSA 182 that nobody would think twice about practicing their Hobby at SFO

Lets see, that's the one where the PSA pilots called the traffic in sight then hit a 172. Kinda hard to blame that on the GA pilot since the 727 was behind them and had called them in sight and said they would avoid them.

As tax payers GA pilots have as much right to go to SFO, SAN, LAX, ATL or any any other airport as the airlines. I don't see anything wrong with a small GA aircraft at a major airport, as long as they can keep up on the radios. On a VFR day it shouldn't be that huge a deal except at rush hour. That said, trying it IFR is going to piss off a lot of people.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:01 am

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 43):
As tax payers GA pilots have as much right to go to SFO, SAN, LAX, ATL or any any other airport as the airlines.

And there you have the problem - to hell with how many people are inconvenienced and/or put at risk by you exercising a "right". With rights come responsibilities. Most pilots I know would say that putting a C151/172 in the mix with some of the biggest planes on earth is just a receipt for disaster.

Given what you've written I hope to God I don't ever end up on a flight your piloting (if in fact you are a pilot) because I wouldn't want to be somewhere when you were proving you had a right to be there even though common sense would lead you elsewhere.

I can see it now, "I didn't abandon the approach because I was cleared for landing. I had a right to be there. The other plane should have moved."
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:10 am

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 43):
Lets see, that's the one where the PSA pilots called the traffic in sight then hit a 172. Kinda hard to blame that on the GA pilot since the 727 was behind them and had called them in sight and said they would avoid them.

As tax payers GA pilots have as much right to go to SFO, SAN, LAX, ATL or any any other airport as the airlines. I don't see anything wrong with a small GA aircraft at a major airport, as long as they can keep up on the radios. On a VFR day it shouldn't be that huge a deal except at rush hour. That said, trying it IFR is going to piss off a lot of people.

I guess using that logic, you should also be able to land on a carrier too. I don't fault the GA pilot, it was an accident. It's not like the 727 has radar, they just could not see the 172 because it was below them. That's how accidents happen. So what's wrong with using Gillespie Field, why did the 172 need to use SAN which is an extremely busy single runway airport with a reasonable difficult approach. I have heard citizens in San Jose calling for removal of GA from SJC. Now, SJC is a fairly lazy airport, lots of slow time and a seperate runway for GA. One mistake at a big airport like SFO, and the non GA public will start calling for a BAN on all GA at larger airports. I would think private pilots would want to avoid larger airports just to keep the non-pilots from going hysterical after a GA plane collides with a Heavy.
 
socalfive
Posts: 474
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 5:37 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:18 am

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 43):
Lets see, that's the one where the PSA pilots called the traffic in sight then hit a 172. Kinda hard to blame that on the GA pilot since the 727 was behind them and had called them in sight and said they would avoid them.

LOL... oh man, that's a pretty arrogant way to state your opinion, especially since you "claim" to be a Dash-8 FO. The PSA 182 accident was a combination of factors, remember Mr FO that it takes "three bad things to happen" to create a disaster? For the record, it isn't certain the PSA crew spotted the right aircraft, there is some conjecture about another GA VFR aircraft in the general vicinity. Not necessarily was the possible second aircraft even in the wrong airspace since Montgomery Field and Lindburgh's control area overlapped right where this accident occurred. The 172 was climbing eastward onto the same heading as PSA 182 and add that to what is rarely brought up, both aircraft were flying eastward into the rising sun. So visibility was impaired to some degree, the Controller at Lindbergh Tower did NOT reverify PSA having the 172 in sight after the Collision avoidance alarm sounded and the PSA crew NOT verifying having the right aircraft sighted, were ALL factors contributing to this accident. The only real innocence here was the 172, But, had it not been over there-rightfully or not-this thing would never have happened. Back in 1978 9am at SAN wasn't probably all that big a deal, especially since the 172 was practicing IFR on 09 when the active was 27. Today at 9am at SAN, that wouldn't even be an option. Point is, there are a lot of less congested places to practice IFR--especially here in SoCal--than to jam up the big airports with a slow airplane.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2235
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:01 am

Quoting Socalfive (Reply 46):
But, had it not been over there-rightfully or not-this thing would never have happened.

Same for the PSA aircraft. Oh, I've read the NTSB report for this accident a few times so I am well aware of the conjecture about other aircraft. All I was trying to point out was that GA wasn't to blame in that accident. It wasn't the problem. Banning GA from busy airports isn't necessary for safe operations.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 45):
I guess using that logic, you should also be able to land on a carrier too.

Now we are talking military. It is an acknowledged fact that military operations can be hazardous to other types of aviation, and I have no problem with them going off and doing their own thing. But I'd love the chance to land a cessna on a carrier Big grin

Quoting Pope (Reply 44):
And there you have the problem - to hell with how many people are inconvenienced and/or put at risk by you exercising a "right".

It doesn't have to be much of an inconvenience on a VFR day, as long as pilots and ATC are willing to work with eachother to find a gap for the GA aircraft. And please explain how I am putting people at risk by flying into say Boston in a Piper Seminole. A pilot in a CRJ is safe, but the same pilot in a C-172 is dangerous???
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
jettaknight
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:43 pm

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:51 am

Quoting Jawed (Thread starter):
I was wondering whether it's generally possible to land at a large airport (like MSP or SFO) with a small Cessna 150 airplane.

I don't see what the big deal is. It's been done before and documented in the pilot for the NBC drama series 'San Francisco International Airport' (1970). IIRC, a distressed kid pilot 'hijacks' something similar in size to a 150 or 172 and has to be talked back to a safe landing at the airport (but I'll be darned if I can find any pictures).

Ah...that was a different time - both in aviation and on the tube!
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Landing At SFO With Cessna 150

Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:08 am

Quoting JettaKnight (Reply 48):
I don't see what the big deal is. It's been done before and documented in the pilot for the NBC drama series 'San Francisco International Airport' (1970). IIRC, a distressed kid pilot 'hijacks' something similar in size to a 150 or 172 and has to be talked back to a safe landing at the airport (but I'll be darned if I can find any pictures).

You sure that's not "The High and the Mighty" with John Wayne helping to bring a DC-4 into SFO from Hawaii with only 30 gallons of fuel left?
Big version: Width: 300 Height: 178 File size: 13kb