• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Pilot on wrong frequency causes near miss on runway

By NASA · May 11, 2023 ·

This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.

First Narrative

I was in my Chancellor 414 with my wife. We stopped for fuel. I was about to taxi out on Runway X at ZZZ. VFR conditions. No taxiway, so before I back taxied on Runway X I announced on Unicom that I was going to back taxi on Runway X and I looked in both directions and saw no planes on final approach.

I proceeded to back taxi and about 1,000 feet down the runway I see a plane on about a 1.5 mile final. I radioed three times and said “I am taxiing, go around.”

He did not answer me. I have a witness who was also in his plane with the radio on waiting for me to takeoff.

I stopped and watched this Cardinal continue to land, so I taxied off the runway on the grass. It was soft grass and muddy so I still had my tail sticking out on the runway. I shut my plane off immediately.

The Cardinal pilot touched down, then finally saw me and did a go-around.

After he landed I was very upset he didn’t have his radio on. Also that he didn’t see us until after he touched down.

He was an elderly man who, in my opinion, should not be flying.

My plane needed a tow but a local mechanic cleaned up the wheels. I ran it up and everything was fine and proceeded with my flight back to ZZZ1.

Narrative 2

Flying final at ZZZ to Runway X. Aircraft was taxiing back to Runway X for takeoff.

I inadvertently had my radios on another frequency than CTAF (I thought I was on the correct frequency but it was on the other radio).

I didn’t notice the back taxiing aircraft until on very short final, who had taxied off the runway into the grass with its tail extending over the runway. When I noticed the airplane i went around. No damage was done and I landed uneventful. The other aircraft wasn’t damaged.

Recommend that all non-controlled airports have taxiways to the end of the runway so back taxi not required.

Primary Problem: Human Factors

ACN: 1955345

About NASA

NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) captures confidential reports, analyzes the resulting aviation safety data, and disseminates vital information to the aviation community.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Greg Shetterly says

    May 14, 2023 at 8:55 pm

    Everyone must keep in mind that radio communications at non controlled fields are not required. There are still many airplanes out there with no electrical systems without any electronic equipment on board. Hence it is imperative that pilots at non controlled fields be extra vigilant.
    One of the last great freedoms in the world is to be able to fly coast to coast and not have to talk to anyone. It’s a privilege we do not want to lose. So if you have a radio use it but remember to keep your eyes outside!

  2. William Cox says

    May 13, 2023 at 2:42 pm

    Insisting on “my rights” is fine in New York City on Broadway at noon but be wiser, make a go around and take the opportunity to discuss it with the other pilot when both of you are safely in the chocks and tied down..

    I instructed in T-33s at Webb AFB for 3 years. Have 3,200 accident free hours. Do not insist on the right of way, even if you clearly have it. You do not know what is going on in the other plane. Could be an emergency inside, heart attack. Ease up a bit.

  3. Steve Pankonin says

    May 13, 2023 at 12:52 pm

    ADS-B is not for the purpose you might think. It is a control device for the FAA . Don’t think so ? Then why the only required part is the ADS-B “OUT”. If you do not have the “IN” also, which is not required, you can not see a single ADS-B out single. Just another FAA @%$^& up for gov only.

    • Ken T says

      May 14, 2023 at 7:13 am

      Geez. There’s a conspiracy EVERYWHERE.

  4. Steve Pankonin says

    May 13, 2023 at 11:05 am

    Airport is “UNCONTROLLED” so very “FIRST” consideration is any, and possibly “ALL” the aircraft are “NO RADIO”. There are standard procedures developed a long time ago for flying into and on a non-controlled airport and, long straight in approaches, and depending on radio transmissions are not on the list. One “MUST ASSUME” that no one”Sees” or”HEARS” you and fly accordingly. It is a shame that current student teaching is so prevalent on radio usage as a primary have to have. It is a necessary evil in controlled conditions and OK , but uncontrolled conditions they are a crutch only. We fly at uncontrolled airports because they are exactly that. “UNCONTROLLED”. I always have a problem with people wanting to put “blame” on someone, usually the other person, when in this situation, both had a share in the “blame”, one for making a long straight in to an uncontrolled field , and the other for assuming the other plane was in radio contact when he was not.

    • Dale L. Weir says

      May 15, 2023 at 12:12 pm

      Good points, AC 90-66B1 should be on every pilot’s reading list.
      Interesting to note that the FAA uses the term “non-towered airport” rather than “uncontrolled airport” .

    • Dale L. Weir says

      May 16, 2023 at 1:18 pm

      Good points, Steve. The FAA is pretty clear on what they consider safe operating practices as outlined in AC 90-66B1. Should be required reading for all pilots.
      Interesting to note that the FAA seems to prefer the term “non-towered airport” rather than “uncontrolled airport”….

  5. Jim says

    May 13, 2023 at 10:03 am

    The multi-engine pilot on the ground assumes that just because he is transmitting, everyone is receiving. Bad assumption. The arriving aircraft may have been in NORDO situation, in an emergency situation, electrical problems, or even not required to have a radio installed! I see too long finals often. He probably should have seen the aircraft on 1.5 mile final and held his position. His impatience and probable attitude allowed him to decide to take the runway regardless. Waiting 1 or 2 minutes for the arriving aircraft would have been the correct thing to do! ADM failure at its finest! ADM starts on the ground before preflight and flight planning.

  6. rtm says

    May 13, 2023 at 8:00 am

    “he plane on the ground taxiing was on the wrong frequency?” No, he was on the right frequency. Perhaps re-read the posts and re-think your statement.

  7. Dan says

    May 13, 2023 at 7:46 am

    “Recommend that all non-controlled airports have taxiways to the end of the runway so back taxi not required.” Also, free steak and lobster. We all make mistakes soooo we should all be more alert when we don’t have controllers to hold our hands. Or maybe some people should always use Class D + airports. I’ve landed at O’Hare huI see where both of these pilots carry some blame

  8. Douglas Dutton says

    May 13, 2023 at 5:33 am

    Typical 3-part chain of events: 1. Cardinal was on a mile and one-half final, so obviously he didn’t fly a standard pattern. On a standard down wind, base, final he likely would have seen the plane back taxiing. 2. Cardinal either wasn’t looking, or was unable to see the runway while on final. Why continue an approach when someone else is on the runway? 3. Cardinal didn’t verify his radios were operating or set correctly. Two planes moving on the tarmac would make it fairly obvious someone is on the radio. Break any link in this chain with better procedures and this would not have happened. The Cardinal pilot is unsafe and needs to be reevaluated.

  9. rc says

    May 13, 2023 at 5:16 am

    Part of being PIC is being able to admit a mistake and learn from it.
    “recommend all runways have taxiways to the end of the runway”? Really? That’s
    what you consider to be the cause of this?
    Yeesh, indeed!

  10. Ron says

    May 12, 2023 at 12:10 pm

    Age has no bearing on a persons ability to perform his or her pilot functions. Hence bi-annuals. Wait till you reach 80. I hope you will be around and flying to become a member of The UFO’s. (United Flying Octogenarians) Look us up. Smart pilots look at the charts and set their radios to Unicom prior to reaching the airport. Normally at a non towered airport we listen to see what runway is being used and amount of traffic in the pattern. You should be announcing position, altitude and intentions starting 10 miles from the airport.

  11. Rich says

    May 12, 2023 at 10:09 am

    Or you might try looking AND being on the right frequency.

  12. Gary Weikel says

    May 12, 2023 at 6:45 am

    at an uncontrolled airport, each party movement is to be announced on the correct frequency. The plane on the ground taxiing was on the wrong frequency. Secondly he’s to give way to landing aircraft. We don’t know if the old guy was announcing his approach or not.

    • mike pilot says

      May 12, 2023 at 11:07 am

      Wilbur above wrote: “The plane on the ground taxiing was on the wrong frequency. ” What article did you read? Obviously not this one.
      And he also wrote: “at an uncontrolled airport, each party movement is to be announced on the correct frequency.” Two way radios aren’t even legally required (though they are certainly a good idea). Where do you get your comment about ‘each party’ …?
      The offending pilot obviously erred, unintentionally, by being on the wrong frequency. A very dangerous, but unintentional error. Raise your hand if you’ve never made such an error.

    • Ken T says

      May 14, 2023 at 7:17 am

      You need to actually read the post. Your “facts” are all bass ackwards.

  13. Wylbur Wrong says

    May 12, 2023 at 6:39 am

    This actually demonstrates an expectation bias, or what might be called “Target fixation”.

    Regardless of radio freqs, the “radio was out”, one must always scan the runway from departure end to approach end, looking for a reason to go around. That way if it happens, one is armed for TOGA! (Take Off/ Go Around).

    And because of something else that happened (which I saw on You Tube recently), one needs to get to short final, just before the threshold and practice TOGA, so that you get everything done in the right order and do not touch the runway.

  14. Warren Webb Jr says

    May 12, 2023 at 6:32 am

    “I radioed three times and said “I am taxiing, go around.” If the aircraft on final had been on frequency and said I’m on final and have the right-of-way, so get off of the runway, I wonder what would have happened then.

    • Tom Curran says

      May 13, 2023 at 7:19 am

      My thoughts as well.

      To be expected: Their versions of events don’t quite match. Did the Cardinal actually “touch down” and then get airborne again? Or did he “go around” from short final?

      Either way, it highlights the much-accepted notion that aircraft on the runway “own it”… which is unequivocally incorrect. Aircraft on the runway don’t have the “right of way” over anybody.

      Unfortunate that the 414 got stuck in the mud, but…
      radios or no radios…the Cardinal Driver did in fact “see and avoid” the 414, albeit a bit late and much to the consternation of the 414 pilot.

      Regardless, it would be hard to prove that he did “…take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach” (14 CFR 91.113(g)).

  15. Steve says

    May 12, 2023 at 6:10 am

    “An elderly man who, in my opinion probably should not be flying” … says a lot concerning human factors here. It’s see and avoid at uncontrolled airports … you can’t just rely on your radio. Back taxiways at all uncontrolled airports? Most of these airfields are having a difficult time just maintaining a single runway.

  16. RD says

    May 12, 2023 at 6:03 am

    I own a Cardinal and I am so very glad that wasn’t me.
    But, then again, I would never suggest all uncontrolled airports require a taxiway (sheesh… even airports with no real estate for that??) simply because I made a mistake that potentially resulted in damage to another aircraft.
    So that could not possibly have been me.

    • Dennis gerstung says

      May 13, 2023 at 10:24 am

      Just another reason to have ADS-B…..

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines