Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Jets Nearly Collide At Ft. Lauderdale Airport  
User currently offlineDb373 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 231 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 10366 times:

http://www.nbc6.net/news/5341085/detail.html


Sorry if this has already been discussed, but this is starting to get a little ridiculous. It seems like these near-misses have been happening a lot lately. Is this the case, or are they just getting more media coverage?


Keep Delta My Delta
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 10290 times:

Wow!  eyepopping 

100 feet is nothing! I guess the airlines and airports do a good job of keeping this away from the media.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 10233 times:

Sigh...

Forget the media graphic, it's worthless...

It sounds like the smaller jet was told to "position and hold" at the end of the runway, meaning that he wasn't pointed -at- the 737 like the media graphic shows, but was in fact pointed in the same direction, and was at the end (not the middle) of the runway, with the 737 coming in to land on the same runway.

If any of this seems vaguely familar, it's pretty much the same scenario of the LAX accident some years ago where ATC had a Skywest turboprop position and hold on 24L and a USAir 737 landed on top of him. That one was at night, but the scenario can also occur in the daytime. Just a few months ago, there was a SWA 737 position and hold on LAX's 24L and an Asiana 747 almost landed on top of him. The 747 crew caught the controller's error and went around on his own, missing the 737 by 100-200 feet.

Automation is one thing, but human error is another...

[Edited 2005-11-17 02:09:46]

User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 10174 times:

i've seen it happen with a riddle 172 and a private arrow at PRC.... sounds like an ATC foul-up again.


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3288 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 9896 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
It sounds like the smaller jet was told to "position and hold" at the end of the runway, meaning that he wasn't pointed -at- the 737 like the media graphic shows, but was in fact pointed in the same direction, and was at the end (not the middle) of the runway, with the 737 coming in to land on the same runway.

OPNL, you are 100% correct. How do I know this? I personally witnessed the event myself.

I normally commute home via I-595 at around 5:15-5:30. However, that evening, I had to stay at work late to finish up a project. I finally left work around 6:30, and joined I-595 westbound from US-1 about 10 minutes later. As an aviation enthusiast, I always glance over toward the field while on that particular stretch of highway, and I happened to notice a 737 on short final.

A few seconds later, I glanced back toward the landing traffic, and...What the hell? He's going around! I couldn't immediately see if there was anyone on the runway since the hangars & buildings to my left blocked the view of the runway itself, but as I passed the Fedex facility, I could clearly see the RJ in position.

At that point, I wasn't sure if the RJ had been given the "position & hold" clearance because the 737 went around, or if it was there the whole time; I didn't know if enough time had elapsed for him to be able to get into position from the time the go-around had been initiated to the time when I saw him. After reading the article today, I now know that I had truly witnessed a runway incursion (and thankfully nothing more).

-Bryan



"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
User currently offlineTPAnx From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1021 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9740 times:

To pick a nit...it's near-collision...not near-miss.
TPAnx (whose mom was an old-school english teacher, and whose blood pressure rises every time he hears the suddenly in-vogue phrase..."went missing"  banghead 



I read the news today..oh boy
User currently offlineMIAMIx707 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9673 times:

I saw something similar at Miami once. A BA 747 was on the runway about to take off and a Mexicana 727 was aproaching on the same runway, (he had the sun on his back and all) so I'm wondering why the Mexicana jet waited almost until coming iinside the Airport boundaries to pull up and away. Distracted crew or..?

User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 1003 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9585 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Poor ATC. I wonder if he was in on OT.


DHC1/3/4 MD88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9574 times:

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 4):
I personally witnessed the event myself.

Glad you got to see it, and confirm my suspicions. I actually started laughing when I first saw the station's animation, but then started shaking my head in disbelief. It was another reminder to me that what we see is not necessarily the actual news, but their opinion of the news, and that being further filtered by their lack of understanding of technical and procedural items in aviation, or other fields.

Of course, many of the folks who saw the animation are going wonder "why was the guy on the runway headed straight at the other guy?"

Glad it didn't result in metal-to-metal contact....  Wink


User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9549 times:

I was on a flight before going into EWR where the plane ahead of us got stuck on a taxiway with a tail sticking out. We had to go around, but the pilot in this case also initiated go around fairly late even though I'm sure he saw it all along

User currently offlineYV136C From Venezuela, joined Mar 2003, 198 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9292 times:

Having spent a lot of time at FLL I can honestly say these ATC guys really push tin! I have witnessed a couple of go arounds, latest one being an AV 757 having to go around in quite a hurry to avoid landing on a AA 738 holding in position. This happens a lot during high traffic times (around 5pm), you will see these guys squeeze a couple of departures when a plane is just 4 miles out, also you see Pilots taking their sweet time to begin the take off roll after they've been cleared....you can hear the ATC telling them: No delay!

Luis
YV136C



Proud to work for Embraer FLL!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16948 posts, RR: 48
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9273 times:

The NTSB is saying this is proof that pilots/airlines/aircraft need better navigation equipment...but isn't this a case of ATC needing better equipment???


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineYYZYYT From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9077 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 8):
I actually started laughing when I first saw the station's animation

I personally like the gratuitous inclusion of a 727, 757 and 767 (I think) among the 12 pictures in the slide show.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8970 times:

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 12):
I personally like the gratuitous inclusion of a 727, 757 and 767 (I think) among the 12 pictures in the slide show.

I saw that too. I was sorta surprised not to see a slide of a DC-3 or the Wright Flyer in there...  Wink


User currently offlineDarrenthe747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8595 times:

something is wrong here for me. i fly small planes, piper cherokees and stuff... there have been a handful of times when i was on short final and the airplane in front hadn't cleared the runway. i don't ask ATC for a go around nor do i wait for them to tell me. i start my go around procedeure and then TELL ATC i am going around. something isn't adding up with these stories. why don't the pilots see the airplane on the runway and go around themselves?

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8430 times:

Quoting TPAnx (Reply 5):
To pick a nit...it's near-collision...not near-miss

It is not, a "near miss" is the correct terminology, a combination of "near thing" and "miss".

-----------------------------------------------------------------
near miss
n.
1. A narrowly avoided collision involving two or more aircraft, ships, boats, or motor vehicles.
2. A narrowly avoided mishap.
3. An accidental collision that is narrowly avoided.
4. A missile strike that is extremely close to but not directly on target.
5. Something that fails by a very narrow margin: Her campaign for the Senate was a near miss.

[Blend of near thing, and miss.]



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineFutureUALpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8324 times:

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 14):
why don't the pilots see the airplane on the runway and go around themselves?

I would assume, flying small planes myself, it is because they are on a schedule and do not want to deviate from said schedule as a go-around in an airliner takes longer that it does for you and I in our Piper, and Cessna, respectively to go-around. I would guess he continued his approach hoping that the other a/c would clear the runway so he would not have to go-around, thus saving time and money for the airline.



Life is better when you surf.
User currently offlineB777A340Fan From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 753 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8262 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 1):
Wow!

100 feet is nothing!

Uhhhhh, if the illustration has any sense of accuracy, it looks like the US Airways jet would've crushed the little commuter jet right on. I believe 100 feet was referring to the vertical distance between the airplanes. Good thing it was able to climb back up. How can a traffic controller make such a mistake? Sigh  banghead  I think traffic control should be automated with human supervision. Most likely going to be less human error, well unless the computers crash, in which case it's going to be big doo doo.  faint 


User currently offlineNiteRider30 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8259 times:

Good afternoon. Is there any information on what instructions the RJ was given by ATC? I'd like to know if the RJ was cleared to "hold short" of the runway, or cleared to "taxi into position and hold". Those of you who are calling "ATC error" need to wait and see what ATC actually told them to do. Also, I won't concede that ATC was delayed in issuing missed approach instructions unless we know WHEN the RJ taxied on to the runway.

-Mike


User currently offlineFLAIRPORT From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8191 times:

I'll agree...
FLL rushes planes out, the animation sucks, and airlines want to be on a schedule...

I hope this doesn't happen on my flight to FLL tomorrow!


User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8050 times:

It should be standart procedure to require the FO or Captain, whoever has a clear view of the final approach side of the runway to visually confirm there are no aircraft on finals when authorized to move to the runway. And give a verbal confirmation to whoever is taxiing the aircraft.

When I am taxiing I have to call out clear finals. I am now used to always always always confirming there are no aircraft on finals. ATC is human, and errors can be made, a pilot can not blindly trust what tower tells him.


User currently offlineNiteRider30 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7459 times:

Quoting Luisca (Reply 20):
It should be standart procedure to require the FO or Captain, whoever has a clear view of the final approach side of the runway to visually confirm there are no aircraft on finals when authorized to move to the runway. And give a verbal confirmation to whoever is taxiing the aircraft.

When I am taxiing I have to call out clear finals. I am now used to always always always confirming there are no aircraft on finals. ATC is human, and errors can be made, a pilot can not blindly trust what tower tells him.

I agree with this sentiment completely. As someone very in tune with both the pilot and ATC side of things, it should be understood that the captain is indeed the final say in what happens with that aircraft. ATC is human, they can and do make errors. In this particular situation, we don't know yet what ATC told the pilot of the RJ to do. However, if the captain or FO of the RJ had checked the final approach path before taking the runway, this incursion might have been avoided. As you can see here, loss of separation usually includes multiple factors, not limited to pilot error, ATC error, weather, equipment malfunction, etc.

-Mike


User currently offlineCrjflyer35 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 668 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7317 times:

Quoting Luisca (Reply 20):
a pilot can not blindly trust what tower tells him.

 highfive  Totally! When I'm sitting in the left seat, I am the PIC, therefore, what ATC tells me isn't final, because I'm the one responsible for the safety of my aircraft and those around me, hence, I make the final call.



Ok, wait for the RJ to pass, cleared to push tail south Mike, and you're cleared to spin #2 in the push.
User currently offlineDarrenthe747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7157 times:

Quote:
FutureUALpilot
I would assume, flying small planes myself, it is because they are on a schedule and do not want to deviate from said schedule as a go-around in an airliner takes longer that it does for you and I in our Piper, and Cessna, respectively to go-around. I would guess he continued his approach hoping that the other a/c would clear the runway so he would not have to go-around, thus saving time and money for the airline.

I used to be stationed at Rhein Main AB, Germnay for 3 years (Frankfurt Intl EDDF) and worked on the flightline. I used to sit and watch airplanes takeoff and land for hours at a time. Once I saw an A346 at the end of his takeoff roll on 25R, still on the runway though starting to rotate, when a 744 was touching down on the same runway. Granted there were several thousand feet seperation, it was pretty close to a go around. the point of the story is that airlines definitely need to be consious of the huge operating/time costs involved in a go-around, and thus cut things close like that. But if there's an airplane sitting at the start of a runway and clearly isn't going to be out of your way, ATC doesn't need to tell you to go-around. i have seen dozens of go-arounds at FRA, so i know they can do it.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6945 times:

Quoting NiteRider30 (Reply 18):
Good afternoon. Is there any information on what instructions the RJ was given by ATC? I'd like to know if the RJ was cleared to "hold short" of the runway, or cleared to "taxi into position and hold".

You make an excellent point, which I'm happy to concede. My initial mention of the RJ being "position and hold" was based on the media's quote "A Comair commuter jet waiting to takeoff was told by a controller to "hold" at the end of the runway". That could be the media's "translation" of either "hold short" or "position and hold", and you're correct, the tapes/investigation will show us which it really was, and who made the mistake.

In any event, that graphic was just plain goofy....  Wink


25 Jblake1 : On my last two flights to FLL both have been go arounds due to traffic on the runway. One I was sitting on a Delta 767 and another was on a NWA DC9. I
26 Tguman : Wouldn't spool up time also have something to do with the reason it came so close. Anyone here actually fly a 737 who would be able to tell me what th
27 Luisca : You are correct, jet spool up can take anywhere from 3-6 seconds after the throtle is firewalled. traveling at 140 KTS and 600 FPS that means that th
28 Darrenthe747 : From idle to full throttle is only a few seconds. if it took that long to spool up there would be an awful lot more crashes. imagine you were only 50
29 Jumpseatflyer : Has anyone ever played Airport Tycoon? I think they ripped those graphics right out of the game. BTW, I knew before I clicked on this that it was medi
30 Tguman : The engines would not have been at idle. But there still is the fact that it would take time to get power. and when your going slow, it does make much
31 ChiGB1973 : There should have been no question. Granted it started with the controllers being to blame, but the pilots continuing to land after seeing a plane on
32 FutureUALpilot : I agree that they should have gone around, no question. I would have too in their situation. All I was saying is that I can understand why they might
33 Tguman : What if the other aircraft wasn't taxied into position yet? What if the the other plane had been told by the controller "Traffic is a 737 on final app
34 NiteRider30 : Agreed. We simply do not know what transpired yet. I even attempted to go to liveatc.net, where they have a feed based at FXE (Fort Lauderdale Execut
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA Jets Almost Collide At BOS! posted Sat Oct 8 2005 01:53:18 by SkyHigh777
Ft. Lauderdale Airport Questions posted Thu Dec 11 2003 10:03:05 by Modesto2
Is Ft Lauderdale Airport Spotting Area Open? posted Thu Oct 23 2003 19:28:53 by Big777jet
Spotting At Ft. Lauderdale posted Thu Oct 12 2000 17:54:26 by Copper1
I Saw 717 At Ft. Lauderdale Today posted Thu Oct 28 1999 00:50:45 by Navion
Swiss Planes Collide At Zurich Airport. posted Tue Apr 9 2002 19:29:02 by Swake
Two Aircraft Collide At Charles De Gaulle Airport posted Thu May 25 2000 09:42:42 by Starship
Airline Start Dates At JAX Imeson Airport posted Sat Oct 28 2006 03:53:28 by OttoPylit
Viewing Opportunities At New BKK Airport? posted Fri Oct 20 2006 10:52:02 by Flying Belgian
DL Landing Incident At Denver Int'l Airport posted Thu Oct 12 2006 02:50:17 by Brick