The Civil Aviation Safety Authority guidance for pilots using non-controlled aerodromes did not clearly define the active runway. The guidance did not provide practical advice to pilots using a secondary runway, and in some situations, it was contrary to existing regulations.
In response to the draft ATSB investigation report, CASA advised:
While the term ‘active runway’ is used in CASA guidance material as a way of referring to the runway which the majority of airport users are using at any particular time it is not a defined term in CASR. This is because while one runway might be used by the majority of airport users, it does not mean that any other runway is ‘inactive’. A runway is always considered available to a pilot unless deemed to be closed or unserviceable. The runway a pilot chooses to use is determined by many factors, including but not limited to wind, operational requirements, performance calculations, aircraft limitations etc. which makes any determination of an ‘active’ status inherently problematic at uncontrolled aerodromes.
CASA also advised:
The regulatory framework does not support a requirement to clearly define an active runway. Instead, the regulations require pilots to make decisions about runway usage based on the runways which are available for use at the time of operation.
CASA does however acknowledge the use of the word 'active' within guidance material could create uncertainty around its use or misuse as the case may be.
CASA is better articulating throughout all guidance material the factors and the safety issues which should be considered in determining runway use and to better align with the regulations and avoid confusion, removing all references of the term 'active' when associated with a runway. AC 91-10 and AC 91-14 have been reviewed and are going through document control process at the time of providing this feedback. Furthermore, CASA is reviewing the nomenclature associated with runway selection to best promote and ensure safe operations at aerodromes.
The response also stated that CASA will expand the guidance provided in the Part 91 Acceptable means of compliance and guidance material for regulation 91.340 to assist in the industry's understanding of this issue.
The ATSB considers that the changes described by CASA in improving the guidance material and removing the term 'active' will likely adequately address this safety issue once they are implemented.
