Narrative:

After several lndgs, the student/private pilot taxied to the end of the grass runway for takeoff. While the aircraft was still moving the airport manager drove his van directly in front of the aircraft. The student stopped. The airport manager appeared upset at our use of the airport and demanded identify, which we refused to show. The airport is public use, on charts, and we had not violated any laws. The student and I had observed other aircraft use the airport shortly before and also noticed a low-wing airplane pass over the airport and head away at low altitude. After arguing a short time, we pushed the aircraft away from the van and took off from the remaining runway. Had we not seen the van while taxiing there surely would have been a collision and damage. I feel the airport manager acted extremely unsafely. A radio call on CTAF, which we were monitoring would have been sufficient. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states he has since found out this manager is a grumpy old xxxxx. He has done similar things to other instructors who bring students to practice. He apparently just does not want practice lndgs done at his airport. Reporter went there to give grass strip experience to his student. Reporter called FSDO and was told that airport is not in their jurisdiction. They did, however, research to find that the airport manager owns the land on which the airport is built. It is a public use airport, however. FSDO says there is nothing they can do. It was recommended that reporter write to the FSDO which does have jurisdiction. Aircraft was stopped 1 ft from the van.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ARPT MGR DRIVES HIS VAN IN FRONT OF MOVING ACFT TO BLOCK TKOF.

Narrative: AFTER SEVERAL LNDGS, THE STUDENT/PRIVATE PLT TAXIED TO THE END OF THE GRASS RWY FOR TKOF. WHILE THE ACFT WAS STILL MOVING THE ARPT MGR DROVE HIS VAN DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE ACFT. THE STUDENT STOPPED. THE ARPT MGR APPEARED UPSET AT OUR USE OF THE ARPT AND DEMANDED IDENT, WHICH WE REFUSED TO SHOW. THE ARPT IS PUBLIC USE, ON CHARTS, AND WE HAD NOT VIOLATED ANY LAWS. THE STUDENT AND I HAD OBSERVED OTHER ACFT USE THE ARPT SHORTLY BEFORE AND ALSO NOTICED A LOW-WING AIRPLANE PASS OVER THE ARPT AND HEAD AWAY AT LOW ALT. AFTER ARGUING A SHORT TIME, WE PUSHED THE ACFT AWAY FROM THE VAN AND TOOK OFF FROM THE REMAINING RWY. HAD WE NOT SEEN THE VAN WHILE TAXIING THERE SURELY WOULD HAVE BEEN A COLLISION AND DAMAGE. I FEEL THE ARPT MGR ACTED EXTREMELY UNSAFELY. A RADIO CALL ON CTAF, WHICH WE WERE MONITORING WOULD HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HE HAS SINCE FOUND OUT THIS MGR IS A GRUMPY OLD XXXXX. HE HAS DONE SIMILAR THINGS TO OTHER INSTRUCTORS WHO BRING STUDENTS TO PRACTICE. HE APPARENTLY JUST DOES NOT WANT PRACTICE LNDGS DONE AT HIS ARPT. RPTR WENT THERE TO GIVE GRASS STRIP EXPERIENCE TO HIS STUDENT. RPTR CALLED FSDO AND WAS TOLD THAT ARPT IS NOT IN THEIR JURISDICTION. THEY DID, HOWEVER, RESEARCH TO FIND THAT THE ARPT MGR OWNS THE LAND ON WHICH THE ARPT IS BUILT. IT IS A PUBLIC USE ARPT, HOWEVER. FSDO SAYS THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO. IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT RPTR WRITE TO THE FSDO WHICH DOES HAVE JURISDICTION. ACFT WAS STOPPED 1 FT FROM THE VAN.

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.