Narrative:

I am a commercial airplane pilot getting my glider rating and was on a dual flight. The winds favored runway 26 but at the suggestion of the unicom operator most aircraft were using the opposite runway 8. At dillingham airport the unicom is considered to almost be a control tower instead of an airport advisory service as it is intended to. The unicom was stating that runway 8 was in use and most aircraft were using runway 8 as the active runway as such. However, some aircraft, including me, decided to land on runway 26 since the winds were favoring it. My instructor, sitting behind me, agreed to my decision. Being in a glider, once we entered right downwind for runway 26, we were committed to land. On the turn into downwind, however, we spotted the king air on long final for runway 8. After turning base for runway 26, we had lost sight of the king air and decided to land in the grass on the side of the runway so as to avoid the oncoming traffic. When we finally spotted the king air again he had apparently seen us and had gone around with an abbreviated pattern so as to be certain of avoiding us. At this point we were on final approach and continued to touch down on the grass without further incident. The king air resumed its approach and also landed safely. Both of the aircraft involved did a good job of seeing and avoiding the traffic as is shown by our actions and those of the king air. Having a situation where two opposite direction runways are in use seems to be an unnecessary hazard, but one that seems to be partly a result of the layout of the airport. Runway 8/26 is 9000 ft long with 2000 ft displaced thresholds at each end, for the use of glider operations. Off each end of the runway is a parachute drop zone -- the one on the departure end is the one to be used. In hawaii there are very constant winds from the northeast, the trade winds, so the runway in use most of the time is runway 8. The parachute jump operations and the glider operations have set themselves up to accommodate those trade wind conditions and each operation is very reluctant to switch runways. When the tailwind component became roughly 10 KTS on runway 8, some of us glider pilots told the unicom operator on the telephone before taking off that we planned to use runway 26. Her response was 'no.' after a discussion she finally gave us reluctant permission to use runway 26 by finally acknowledging she is not a tower and that we were the PIC's. She also said that while we could use whatever runway we thought best, she would continue to advise that runway 8 was the active runway. What I assume the king air heard, therefore, is that he should land on runway 8. I do not know whether or not he was advised that some glider pilots would be using the opposite runway. In my opinion the two main contributing factors were the reluctance of the glider and skydiving operations to switch runways and the unicom operator's attempt to act as an ATC instead of an airport advisory service. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that he was satisfied that everything is being done to help prevent collisions between the varied aviation activities at the airport by the local special interest operators, airport management, FAA FSDO and the state department of transportation (DOT). He further stated that the DOT had published an airport procedures directive of its own to alert pilots to special procedures to use, and expect, at airports such as this one with multiple and varied operations, with terrain and restr areas to consider. He also stated that the unicom operator did not advise that the runway used was the pilot's discretion since unicom was not a controling facility. Even though the airport facility directory indicates that unicom must be contacted by all aircraft, most gliders do not have radios so the request mainly is provided for powered aircraft coming from other airports.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GLIDER PLT TRAINEE LANDED ON THE GRASS ON THE OPPOSITE END OF THE MAIN PAVED RWY CAUSING A JUMPER KING AIR TO MAKE A GAR FROM THE OPPOSITE END AT A NON TWR ARPT. UNICOM OPERATOR ADVISED THE NORMAL ACTIVE RWY WAS USED EVEN WHEN THE WIND WAS FAVORING THE OTHER END. HOWEVER, IT WAS KNOWN AND COMMON PRACTICE FOR THE GLIDERS TO USE THE WIND FAVORED RWY.

Narrative: I AM A COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE PLT GETTING MY GLIDER RATING AND WAS ON A DUAL FLT. THE WINDS FAVORED RWY 26 BUT AT THE SUGGESTION OF THE UNICOM OPERATOR MOST ACFT WERE USING THE OPPOSITE RWY 8. AT DILLINGHAM ARPT THE UNICOM IS CONSIDERED TO ALMOST BE A CTL TWR INSTEAD OF AN ARPT ADVISORY SVC AS IT IS INTENDED TO. THE UNICOM WAS STATING THAT RWY 8 WAS IN USE AND MOST ACFT WERE USING RWY 8 AS THE ACTIVE RWY AS SUCH. HOWEVER, SOME ACFT, INCLUDING ME, DECIDED TO LAND ON RWY 26 SINCE THE WINDS WERE FAVORING IT. MY INSTRUCTOR, SITTING BEHIND ME, AGREED TO MY DECISION. BEING IN A GLIDER, ONCE WE ENTERED R DOWNWIND FOR RWY 26, WE WERE COMMITTED TO LAND. ON THE TURN INTO DOWNWIND, HOWEVER, WE SPOTTED THE KING AIR ON LONG FINAL FOR RWY 8. AFTER TURNING BASE FOR RWY 26, WE HAD LOST SIGHT OF THE KING AIR AND DECIDED TO LAND IN THE GRASS ON THE SIDE OF THE RWY SO AS TO AVOID THE ONCOMING TFC. WHEN WE FINALLY SPOTTED THE KING AIR AGAIN HE HAD APPARENTLY SEEN US AND HAD GONE AROUND WITH AN ABBREVIATED PATTERN SO AS TO BE CERTAIN OF AVOIDING US. AT THIS POINT WE WERE ON FINAL APCH AND CONTINUED TO TOUCH DOWN ON THE GRASS WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. THE KING AIR RESUMED ITS APCH AND ALSO LANDED SAFELY. BOTH OF THE ACFT INVOLVED DID A GOOD JOB OF SEEING AND AVOIDING THE TFC AS IS SHOWN BY OUR ACTIONS AND THOSE OF THE KING AIR. HAVING A SIT WHERE TWO OPPOSITE DIRECTION RWYS ARE IN USE SEEMS TO BE AN UNNECESSARY HAZARD, BUT ONE THAT SEEMS TO BE PARTLY A RESULT OF THE LAYOUT OF THE ARPT. RWY 8/26 IS 9000 FT LONG WITH 2000 FT DISPLACED THRESHOLDS AT EACH END, FOR THE USE OF GLIDER OPS. OFF EACH END OF THE RWY IS A PARACHUTE DROP ZONE -- THE ONE ON THE DEP END IS THE ONE TO BE USED. IN HAWAII THERE ARE VERY CONSTANT WINDS FROM THE NE, THE TRADE WINDS, SO THE RWY IN USE MOST OF THE TIME IS RWY 8. THE PARACHUTE JUMP OPS AND THE GLIDER OPS HAVE SET THEMSELVES UP TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE TRADE WIND CONDITIONS AND EACH OP IS VERY RELUCTANT TO SWITCH RWYS. WHEN THE TAILWIND COMPONENT BECAME ROUGHLY 10 KTS ON RWY 8, SOME OF US GLIDER PLTS TOLD THE UNICOM OPERATOR ON THE TELEPHONE BEFORE TAKING OFF THAT WE PLANNED TO USE RWY 26. HER RESPONSE WAS 'NO.' AFTER A DISCUSSION SHE FINALLY GAVE US RELUCTANT PERMISSION TO USE RWY 26 BY FINALLY ACKNOWLEDGING SHE IS NOT A TWR AND THAT WE WERE THE PIC'S. SHE ALSO SAID THAT WHILE WE COULD USE WHATEVER RWY WE THOUGHT BEST, SHE WOULD CONTINUE TO ADVISE THAT RWY 8 WAS THE ACTIVE RWY. WHAT I ASSUME THE KING AIR HEARD, THEREFORE, IS THAT HE SHOULD LAND ON RWY 8. I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS ADVISED THAT SOME GLIDER PLTS WOULD BE USING THE OPPOSITE RWY. IN MY OPINION THE TWO MAIN CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE THE RELUCTANCE OF THE GLIDER AND SKYDIVING OPS TO SWITCH RWYS AND THE UNICOM OPERATOR'S ATTEMPT TO ACT AS AN ATC INSTEAD OF AN ARPT ADVISORY SVC. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE WAS SATISFIED THAT EVERYTHING IS BEING DONE TO HELP PREVENT COLLISIONS BTWN THE VARIED AVIATION ACTIVITIES AT THE ARPT BY THE LCL SPECIAL INTEREST OPERATORS, ARPT MGMNT, FAA FSDO AND THE STATE DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT). HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE DOT HAD PUBLISHED AN ARPT PROCS DIRECTIVE OF ITS OWN TO ALERT PLTS TO SPECIAL PROCS TO USE, AND EXPECT, AT ARPTS SUCH AS THIS ONE WITH MULTIPLE AND VARIED OPS, WITH TERRAIN AND RESTR AREAS TO CONSIDER. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE UNICOM OPERATOR DID NOT ADVISE THAT THE RWY USED WAS THE PLT'S DISCRETION SINCE UNICOM WAS NOT A CTLING FACILITY. EVEN THOUGH THE ARPT FACILITY DIRECTORY INDICATES THAT UNICOM MUST BE CONTACTED BY ALL ACFT, MOST GLIDERS DO NOT HAVE RADIOS SO THE REQUEST MAINLY IS PROVIDED FOR POWERED ACFT COMING FROM OTHER ARPTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.