Antonio wrote:
was once instructed to depart the airport to a different location when , on safety grounds, the PIC refused to accept the allocated tailwind parking position in a 30kt wind, while taxiing in after landing.
In detail this question is quite complex to answer because it is a complex network of relationships between the airport owner / operator, its representatives, ATC and probably some other people.
But in the grand scheme of things: The airport operator has the right of owner of the airport.
On a private airfield it can tell you where to park your plane and if you don’t like it you have to leave without undue delay (obviously that doesn’t include that they can command you to take off unsafe).
On public airfields situation gets more complex as they typically have some public obligation to accept all traffic. That is all national law but typically that implies that if they have a suitable parking spot they can’t deny it to you unless for a valid reason. Then your questions comes down to the point if a parking position can actually be unsuitable due to tailwind – and I actually doubt that. It can be impossible to taxi in too strong tailwind or to start your engines in tailwind (and thus you need some “external movement” to bring the airplane to or from the parking position) – but what would be the reason why this parking position itself is unsuitable? And if that exists, how would you react a if in the middle of the night the wind changes and your plane is in such tailwind?
AFAIK, Ground ATC don’t control or own the parking area or what is called “Apron”, there is usually a line before getting into taxiways, but one is expect to park along the yellow lines or into wind if required in his parking spot
I landed at Duxford museum in 30G45 headwinds, I called before hand to PPR and check if they will allow me to land & park as it suits me, they seemed more understanding but warned I will have the whole apron for myself to do whatever I wish, actually there was a helicopter behind 
Once in Nantes Atlantic, we landed on a calm day before but 40kts winds were forecasted in next 2 days, Ground ATC laughed to death when I asked if there are any tie-down points on their hard surfaces, they suggest I get in touch with handlers/aéroclubs but at the end they accepted the aircraft to be pushed back in the apron with tail tied to the grass behind far away from the parking spot…
In theory, you can argue that you will need winds more than stall speed for your aircraft to move inside surface boundary layer, which equates about 80kts at windsock but you don’t want it to rotate or hit something else…
Malibuflyer wrote:
On public airfields situation gets more complex as they typically have some public obligation to accept all traffic. That is all national law but typically that implies that if they have a suitable parking spot they can’t deny it to you unless for a valid reason
Yes that was the case, it was an AENA airport with public access.
Malibuflyer wrote:
It can be impossible to taxi in too strong tailwind or to start your engines in tailwind (and thus you need some “external movement” to bring the airplane to or from the parking position) – but what would be the reason why this parking position itself is unsuitable?
Well, during taxi I am handling flight control surfaces always wary of wind direction. When parked, I can only keep controls in their one locked position. This works OK in a headwind, but understandably rocks the airplane and flaps the controls between lock play-ends or back and forths against the rudder springs. I know of two cases where a defective lock damaged control hardware after parking in a strong tailwind.
And if that exists, how would you react a if in the middle of the night the wind changes and your plane is in such tailwind?
I look at the forecast. This will not avoid a sudden gust, but then nothing will, in terms of parked airplane heading.
BTW in my case I had an 100000sq mt apron all to myself, no tie-downs, and we were instructed to park at a certain designated position (not that any of the other designated positions would have been upwind) with the aircraft heading along the painted line or else please depart the airport. PIC accepted any position as long as it was allowed to head the aircraft into the wind.
Point is, on a public-use airport, does ATC have that authority (not to deny upwind parking, but to ask you to leave) , whatever the reason?
In the UK, I have been told by an old ATCO, the tower has to use a form of words like “on behalf of the landowner” – to deny you a landing.
This is because there are really no “public” airports; that is largely an American idea, with the obligation to accept traffic being tied in to the airport getting FAA funding. In Europe, everything is on private property (could be govt property). Maybe there are airports in Europe which have an obligation to accept all arriving (non mayday) traffic but I have never heard of such a thing.
They cannot make you depart – that is a decision made solely by the pilot. Of course they can make your life hell then e.g. impound the plane. I think most people, if they had enough fuel and the wx was ok, would just fly back out. But not if all the options need 24hr PNR, or whatever… because any of those can refuse a landing clearance.
I would certainly take off again if the airport refused me a suitable parking surface. There is a pretty marginal situation at the Scilly Isles EGHE for example, which I have thus far managed to avoid, and a prop strike there would be a massive issue. I saw someone in a Meridian haggle with ATC when asked to park on grass; he got it eventually.
Peter wrote:
Maybe there are airports in Europe which have an obligation to accept all arriving (non mayday) traffic but I have never heard of such a thing.
In Germany, a lot of the smaller airfields are “Verkehrslandeplätze”, they have a service obligation, and their fee structure require approval.
What if you have not complied with PNR etc?
There is normally no PPR during the published operating hours.
Germany has three “tiers” of aerodromes – airports, “verkehrslandeplatz”, best translated as “air transport aerodrome”, “sonderlandeplatz” (literally special aerodrome)
The first two are obliged to publish opening hours and are PPR only outside those hours or for some movements (e.g. requiring a particular fire category) while the latter tend to require PPR.
This is because there are really no “public” airports; that is largely an American idea, with the obligation to accept traffic being tied in to the airport getting FAA funding. In Europe, everything is on private property (could be govt property). Maybe there are airports in Europe which have an obligation to accept all arriving (non mayday) traffic but I have never heard of such a thing.
Information on U.K. public versus ordinary licenced airfields is available here
Just checked. I can’t get that link to work Just google public/ordinary licenced aerodromes. The relevant text states:
Two types of permanent aerodrome licence – ‘public use’ and ‘ordinary use’ – are granted by the CAA in accordance with Article 212 and 214 of Air Navigation Order 2016 (CAP 393). The essential differences between the two are that the hours of availability of a ‘public use’ licensed aerodrome must be notified in the UK Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) and the aerodrome must be available on equal terms and conditions to all persons permitted to use it. An ‘ordinary use’ aerodrome may only be used by the licence holder and those persons specifically authorised by them (i.e. with prior permission). Operations at an ‘ordinary use’ aerodrome are normally of the general aviation type.
[ link fixed, by making it a clickable link, which avoids the text processor interpreting some fomatting characters ]
