DAL767400ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 12 hours ago) and read 15040 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Thread starter): Gotta laugh at the Newspaper describing the difference between a runway and a taxiway . . .
Made for a good laugh, but it's probably the best way to describe it to the flying public.
Too bad the article doesn't mention what the weather conditions were. Not gonna defend the pilot's decision to depart, but there must have been a reason he and his FO mistook a taxiways for a runway.
ZakHH From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 12 hours ago) and read 14860 times:
Hmm... if you take a look at this northward "approach" to ANC... I can understand you can confuse the east taxiway with a runway (it looks rather suitable for takeoffs / landings ). But imagining a passenger a/c taking off from the west taxiway...
Btw, here is the "visual approach" (a bit steep maybe ) for Seattle, heading south - I am not a pilot, but you could mistake the west taxiway for a runway at first glance, could you?
I might have thought so too - except that was done this summer. In preparation for FedEx and UPS and the A380, the Taxiway Y got a complete once over, and 32/14 was resurfaced, remarked and relighted . . . .
Quoting ZakHH (Reply 3): Hmm... if you take a look at this northward "approach" to ANC...
This picture is 2 years out of date . . . Taxiway Y - to the right of RWY 32 is wider now. And there is a new Taxiway to the left of RWY 32, which can be seen under constrution in the photo you're showing.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 28854 posts, RR: 74
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 14737 times:
Actually, planes are Big Bear City airport in Big Bear Lake, California currently take off from the parallel taxiway as the main runway has been undergoing reconstruction. It is not the same thing as what happened at ANC, but is funny.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 14678 times:
"Runways are the broad concrete expanses where aircraft take off and land. Taxiways are the narrower access roads used by jets and planes to reach the runways for takeoff, or move to the terminal after landing."
A350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1129 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 14583 times:
I wonder why
this wasn't detected by ground radar and
a/c don't have advanced satellite navigation and electronic airport maps detailed enough to see even at bad weather where you are. Is the big ground navigation screen at the A380 really something found on no other airplane?
Threepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2309 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 14573 times:
You know, for the intended readers of that article, that's really not that bad of a description. While I may have reconsidered the use of the word 'roads', I think the author did a fine job explaining to the non-flyers what the difference is.
However, this comment: "At least eight times since 1999, aircraft have mistaken a certain taxiway for a runway. Three aircraft actually landed, the Times said, while five changed their flight paths at the last minute" referring to landing gaffes at SEA, speaks to the complacency of the pilots. Whether or not you are flying in IMC or visually, there are many visual and navigational clues to alert you if you're lined up on the wrong stretch of pavement. There's no excuse for ignoring or failing to notice an offset localiser. (Knock on wood that I don't do the same thing in future...)
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
ACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7908 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 14205 times:
Couple of questions about this. First of all, did this happen at night or at day? What were the WX conditions like? VMC or IMC?
I would assume that something like this could only happen during daytime IMC conditions. At night, you have 2 very different lighting systems (white for runways and blue for taxiways), so I couldn't imagine getting those mixed up, even in IMC conditions. The pavement markings are also very different and normally unmistakable, but in IMC conditions, it may have been possible to not see the markings clearly.
Anyone who could let us know what the WX conditions were like, that would be great.
CosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2268 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 14110 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4): . Taxiway Y - to the right of RWY 32 is wider now. And there is a new Taxiway to the left of RWY 32, which can be seen under constrution in the photo you're showing.
That's taxiway "R" on the east side of rwy 32. Taxiway "Y" is the newly constructed taxiway on the west side of 32. I'm afraid it doesn't look like a rwy; it has a big yellow stripe down the middle and for the night flyers lots of blue lights.
CHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 7 hours ago) and read 14070 times:
Quoting CWAFlyer (Reply 13): Not really funny at all. Remember the Singapore 747 that took off
on a closed runway in TPE a couple years ago?
Somebody needs to get fired.
Taxiways and runways have different coloured lights dont they? I dont care what anyone says about an honest mistake - thats not acceptable. If stuff that blindingly obvious is going awry, then who can tell about the harder stuff to spot?
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
ANC's signage and lighting systems are regulated (just like every other US FAA-certificated airport) by the FAA and its Federal Air Regulations, in this case FAR Part 139. FAA also issues various compliance guidance through its Advisory Circulars. Signage and lighting are both covered in various Advisory Circulars.
I would say pilot familiarity, or in this case the lack thereof, would be the issue here, not signage, and unless it was not functioning at the time, neither is lighting.
Tom at MSY
"The criminal ineptitude makes you furious"-Bruce Springsteen, after seeing firsthand the damage from Hurricane Katrina
SkySurfer From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 1146 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 5 hours ago) and read 13770 times:
IIRC, when Fargo's main runway was being reworked last year aircraft routinely used the taxiway to land/take off from. Granted, it was extended slightly and there was no ILS available, but they still did it. The viewing enclosure was closed for ages due to safety distances etc, buggers!
In the dark you can't see ugly, but you can feel fat
Argonaut From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 2004, 424 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 5 hours ago) and read 13699 times:
Quoting SkySurfer (Reply 19): when Fargo's main runway was being reworked last year aircraft routinely used the taxiway to land/take off from
Same thing happens at LGW when maintenance/construction works takes place on the (one and only) main runway. The main taxiway was purposely widened and strengthened to make it possible. I never feel comfortable about it, though--it places the main terminal building more or less right on the extended centre-line.
Loisencroach From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 373 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 2 hours ago) and read 13561 times:
Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 13): Couple of questions about this. First of all, did this happen at night or at day? What were the WX conditions like? VMC or IMC?
Weather was clear - RVR was runway length and better. It happened at night. The tower is pushing the investigation. Airport 10 was in the vicinity of the "incident", but didn't see anything strange. There is no way to prove it with the CCTV's limited nighttime range.
Pilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1427 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 1 hour ago) and read 12877 times:
Quoting Argonaut (Reply 20): Same thing happens at LGW when maintenance/construction works takes place on the (one and only) main runway. The main taxiway was purposely widened and strengthened to make it possible. I never feel comfortable about it, though--it places the main terminal building more or less right on the extended centre-line.
I remember an incident at LGW when they were working on the main runway as well, it must have been about 10yrs ago now, but an Air Malta plane landed on the inner taxiway (the taxiway for the main taxiway/backup runway), it was night time and the pilots got confused with the lights, so it has happened in quite a few places. The question has to be how seriously airports/carriers are taking this type of incident compared to runway incursions? Unfortunately it may take a collision between an aircraft on a legitimate taxiway and one that has mistakenly lined up with the wrong strip before it's dealt with seriously??
Csturdiv From Australia, joined Aug 2005, 1824 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 1 hour ago) and read 12644 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Thread starter): Is this a common occurence? Twice in four years two Heavy Jets have departed from ANC using Taxiway Y rather than the adjacent RWY 32.
I know it is not commercial and it is under different circumstances, but several years ago when the idiot mayor of Chicago closed down Meigs in the middle of the night, he had bulldozers and other equipment destroy the runway. In doing this, he stranded numerous airplanes that were parked at Meigs, and they took off from the taxiway.
An American expat from the ORD area living and working in Australia