|Quoting Skyman (Reply 44):|
This is completely unthinkable in Germany. We are only allowed to issue a landing or departure clearence if there is no aircraft on the RWY.
It's the same in Switzerland. Eventhough I've been issued "HB-XXX, runway about to be vacated, runway 19, cleared to land" a couple of times now, when the airplane vacating the runway had already left and maybe had its tail still sticking onto the runway. Basically the runway was still "legally engaged" but not physically and thus not posing a safety risk.
I guess some flexibility is allowed, but a real "cleared to land" with an engaged runway isn't allowed here. It's hard to tell what method is better, though.
I'm curious about the use of "behind" in the US. In ICAO phraseology, you get things like: "HB-XXX, behind the vacating Saab 2000, backtrack runway 19 behind". Notice the double use of "behind", which was instated after an accident caused by a misunderstanding (can't find it at the moment). How would this be done in the US?