BIGJETDUDE From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 4 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 12292 times:
After being a very avid follower and reader of A.net for a very long time I finally joined due to the incident below to help get some advice and input. I am by no means a rookie flyer and I understand that often the general public exaggerates rather routine situations, in this situation I do not believe that to be the case.
I sent an email to both US Airways and the FAA and received generic responses but that's it so far. This email text was sent on the evening of February 3, 2010.
"I was a passenger on flight 1022 out of CLT to RIC tonight. I was in seat 10A and we were taking off on runway 18L, I was watching a plane on approach for runway 23 which intersects runway 18L (the plane was very close maybe 20-30 seconds from landing) when to my amazement our engines spooled up and we started our take-off. Having flown out of the airport many times I was aware the runways intersected and some quick math said we were in for trouble. The pilots continued their take-off and as we crossed runway 23 the plane on approach was probably 3-5 seconds from touchdown and literally just off the end of the runway. I could see that the plane on approach aborted their landing and performed a go around. I was amazed that the pilots on my flight (who had a clear visual of the plane on approach) initiated take-off even if cleared from the tower. I would like to know more about what happened, who was at fault, and what could be done to avoid this, like most of these potential accidents it could have been very serious, it was WAY TOO CLOSE!"
I did receive this email response from US Airways:
"US Airways’ goal is to ensure our customers have a safe and timely flight each and every time they fly. We work hard to make certain our airline pilots and crew is experienced, thoroughly trained in safety, alert, and professional at all times. It is always a concern to learn this has not been the case.
I have documented your experience for review by the relevant supervisory staff and appropriate manager. Additionally, this incident will be discussed with the employee and handled internally. Thank you for notating the runway numbers and exactly what you observed. This will be of great assistance in our review with the crew of this flight. Because of the right to privacy under the federal Privacy Act, we are unable to provide information regarding the outcome of our review process."
Just to be fair I am a US preferred flyer and it's actually my airline of choice out of Richmond, especially when connecting through CLT which I think is a fantastic airport. As CLT is generally well laid, has mediocre volume, and good visibility makes the situation even more hard to believe. The plane was a A-319 by the way.
Any suggestions as to how I can validate what happened???
By leaving any complaints to the big boys up front and not overestimating your own abilities. Remember the aspirin commercials where Robert Young said "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV?" That's much akin to what you're doing by saying "I'm not a pilot (or at least not the PIC), but I fly lots as a passenger."
Rest assured--in this day and age, if there was truly a loss of separation, at least one of the aircrews and/or the tower would have known about it almost immediately. And since there was a go-around, there obviously was. Go-arounds aren't inherently unsafe...they're generally an "extra layer of caution." If it looks like the landing might be fishy, or a little close to other traffic, we go around. Though it "can" be, it's not a last-ditch heroic effort to save lives.
I've been shoehorned into CLT many times. Go-arounds are not all that unusual and neither are S-turns on approach.
Your flight crew was not necessarily at fault and the reason that you sent a complaint to US Airways is beyond me.
Sounds like a typical case of the backseat aviator to me....
Edit also to add: I hope you don't fill out a complaint to A.net about me for this post
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11910 times:
Quoting MYT332 (Reply 4): Hardly audacious. If he has a real worry then who are you to tell him what to do? Airline crew and ATC are only human afterall and shit happens.
I've filed ASRS reports before when ATC has forgotten about me, and almost run me into someone else. Such reports are commonplace. If the parties involved in this event felt it necessary, they would have no qualms about doing it either.
But safety judgments are NOT best left to amateurs. I understand him being scared, but I don't appreciate him spreading what's basically misinformation all over the Internet--smearing US Airways, their flight crews, and CLT controllers.
Derridd From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 26 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11872 times:
Wow, the venom being spewed in this thread is sickening. Passengers have every right to ask questions about safety. To just "assume" that all pilots are perfect all the time is a radical over-generalization, and for crew to chastise a passenger (who pays their wages) for something like this is absurd, and it quite frankly scares me that you all are so defensive over it.
MYT332 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 9112 posts, RR: 74 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11856 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 5): But safety judgments are NOT best left to amateurs. I understand him being scared, but I don't appreciate him spreading what's basically misinformation all over the Internet--smearing US Airways, their flight crews, and CLT controllers.
And that's fine but I was just telling the chap earlier on, in so many words, that people have freedom of speech. I wouldn't call it smearing US Airways either, he does go on to say he rather preferes them! If I was in his shoes I would have just shrugged it off and got a beer when in the air.
The key here is the other airplane went around. ATC likely tried to squeeze one out and as the situation developed realized it wouldn't work so either ATC or the other aircrew initiated a missed approach/go around. 10A was not occupying either seat on the other side of the door so has no idea of what transpired vs what the larger plan was.
BIGJETDUDE From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11818 times:
Allright, I expected the blasting and please understand that I am not trying to place blame nor make judgement, that's why I would like to get answers and input instead. If no one was at fault and like I've explained I'm just trying to get more details why then would anyone mind an inquiry?
I tried to speak with the flight crew after the flight but the flight door was closed. I also tried to call the Operations Center, no luck. I have many friends that are pilots and they too insist the situation sounds "unusual". I have been involved in go-arounds (on approach) and declared emergency landing (typically small mechanical errors) but honestly have never been near as worried as when this happened. I have the utmost trust, respect, and admiration for the flying community and the job they do.
However, I still am interested in specifically how a plane on the ground can be cleared for take-off in the path of a plane on close approach. How does the process work and with better understanding maybe I would not have felt the way I did? That is why I joined to get the expert advice of the professional A.netters out there. Does ATC clear the plane for take-off for a specific period, could there have possibly been a delay in the cockpit after clearance that led to the loss of seperation? I assume (again I'm assuming and looking for input) that the plane on approach has some sort of priority when it comes to right of way. Finally, is there so much going on in the cockpit on take-off that visual checks are often not possible or is there limited field of view from the cockpit such that the pilots could not have seen the plane on apprach?
Look forward to your input, thanks! You are right in one respect that I am a bit of a backseat aviator and it's my love of the aviation community (admittedly from the back of the plane) that makes me want to understand what happened.
Airportugal310 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3056 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 11771 times:
Quoting MYT332 (Reply 4): Hardly audacious. If he has a real worry then who are you to tell him what to do? Airline crew and ATC are only human afterall and shit happens.
I understand your position, which is OK, but I think my personal issue here is that this went as far as the FAA (should they choose to respond is up to them). And now US Airways states that there will be an internal-investigation...whats next? Why should we, for even one moment, second guess a flight crew who was in complete control of the situation? They chose to start the takeoff, more than likely knowing that another plane was coming down the pipe on an intersecting runway. I have to have faith in them...its certainly not my call!
MCOatc From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 150 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11697 times:
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Thread starter): As CLT is generally well laid, has mediocre volume, and good visibility makes the situation even more hard to believe.
Mediocre volume? We're talking about the same airport right? There is flow control running to CLT every day I work and they are currently opening a new runway that's badly needed. When US has a arrival/departure bank push there is tremendous volume running through CLT.
Good visibility = visual separation. Visual separation allows controllers to run airplanes closer because both the pilots and controllers can see other aircraft. You as a passenger have absolutely no idea what you're seeing or what "too close" is. It's pretty hard to see the big picture looking out the dirty 10A window.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Thread starter): The pilots continued their take-off and as we crossed runway 23 the plane on approach was probably 3-5 seconds from touchdown and literally just off the end of the runway.
So then what's the problem? While I don't work with crossing runways (I'm blessed with parallels), I'm pretty sure the rules require your airplane to be clear of the intersection prior to the other aircraft crossing the threshold for 23. That's it. Your tail clears the intersection and the other runway is good for landing. It might be too close for you but it's a standard operation for the tower crew. If the other aircraft went around then maybe it wasn't going to work or maybe the go-around was unrelated entirely. I wasn't there so I'm not passing judgement on what happened (or on you either).
Controllers are always thinking two steps ahead and your situation, while unusual to you, just seems like spacing that didn't work.
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11660 times:
It does sound like a moderately close call, but you do say that the airplane on final was 3 - 5 seconds from touchdown at the time you crossed the runway. 3 - 5 seconds is a heck of a long time in the span of a takeoff or a landing, especially since the threshold of the landing runway (23) is approx. 1/3 of a mile (1,875 feet, more or less) in front of the intersection w/ your departing runway (18L).
Furthermore, if the A319 on final was traveling at 140 knots (160 mph or 236 feet per second), and was, let's say, 4 seconds from touching down 500 feet down the runway, that means he was approximately 2,300 feet away from your airplane when you crossed paths. At 236 feet per second, that's approximately 10 seconds* of separation between the arriving airplane and the departing airplane, not including any deceleration from runway friction, reverse thrust, spoilers, etc.
I'm not saying that's not too close, because it is. That's why he went around. But it wasn't like he had to pour on the coal and pull up just enough to barely grease the wheels off the roof of your plane.
*Calculations are based on many assumptions, including the author's memory, a moderately heavy landing weight of an A319 for an approach speed of 140 knots, and calm winds.
MYT332 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 9112 posts, RR: 74 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11601 times:
Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 10): And now US Airways states that there will be an internal-investigation...whats next? Why should we, for even one moment, second guess a flight crew who was in complete control of the situation?
Well long story short, I once saw a photo here on Airliners.net that showed a BD ER4 landing in Germany with an access panel wide open. I emailed bmi about it and I got an email back asking for my phone number as somebody wanted to speak to me. In the end I did get a phone call from bmi and it was from the CEO, god knows why but it's the honest truth. He wanted to reassure me that safety is a high priority and then we went on to talk about bmi and how they weren't doing too well. He even asked what I suggested doing to improve things! A quality 20 minute phone call I must say.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6506 posts, RR: 11 Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11581 times:
Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 10): Why should we, for even one moment, second guess a flight crew who was in complete control of the situation?
How do you know? Is this not a free country? Why do people seem to second guess management on decisions all the time? (not saying i'm for or against it but I digress) They should have done this; they should have done that; stupid move, etc. When these people are obviously privy to MUCH MORE data than the arm chair pilots and CEOs of A.net.
Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 10): They chose to start the takeoff, more than likely knowing that another plane was coming down the pipe on an intersecting runway. I have to have faith in them...its certainly not my call!
That is correct, you must have faith in your flight crew. If your don't, you're going to be a nervious paranoid reck that probably never flies.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
mcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1274 posts, RR: 17 Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11534 times:
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): Allright, I expected the blasting and please understand that I am not trying to place blame nor make judgement,
It appears from your statements that the above sentence really isn't what you want to do.
Here is the issue. You don't have any knowledge first hand of how close the arrival was. The tower controller most likely didn't like the spacing and sent the airplane around. It happens ever day in the airline/airport business.
With only your 10A view you don't have a clue and your reports and letters to US Airways and the FAA are a bit over the top. Unless you have substantive data that what you saw was a violation of an FAR then you are just being......well you can figure that out.
Here is the a situation. Not sure what you do for a living. But let's say I am watching you do your job. I haven't a clue about the regulations about your craft but have anointed myself as an authority on your job because I am a customer. I suspect you are doing something wrong but haven't any proof. Instead of allowing your company and the oversight of a Federal Authority to do its job, I take it upon myself to be Barney Fife and make a citizens arrest.
This may not be your intent but it sure appears that way.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11538 times:
Quoting Derridd (Reply 6): and for crew to chastise a passenger (who pays their wages) for something like this is absurd
How can you accuse me of spitting "venom" when you call my viewpoint "absurd?" And passengers pay MY wages? Not mine, thanks...I fly for my own company. And try telling that to a cop the next time you get pulled over for speeding. It honestly just sounds like you're trying to stir the pot. Ah well, leave it to an attorney...
I'm not spewing venom. I'm just being realistic.
The OP mentioned a takeoff in clear weather with good visibility. If the weather had been lousy, rest assured such close spacing wouldn't have been attempted.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9):
I tried to speak with the flight crew after the flight but the flight door was closed. I also tried to call the Operations Center, no luck. I have many friends that are pilots and they too insist the situation sounds "unusual".
Do your pilot friends routinely fly into busy airports? Regardless of their experience, such a situation is still hearsay and they can't give an accurate opinion that some wrong was committed, just as I can't say with certainty that something bad DIDN'T happen. Also, your assertions that CLT isn't "that" busy are unfounded--it's one of the busiest airports in the US and one of the few Class B airfields.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): However, I still am interested in specifically how a plane on the ground can be cleared for take-off in the path of a plane on close approach. How does the process work and with better understanding maybe I would not have felt the way I did? That is why I joined to get the expert advice of the professional A.netters out there. Does ATC clear the plane for take-off for a specific period, could there have possibly been a delay in the cockpit after clearance that led to the loss of seperation?
In such a circumstance, ATC very often issues a "no-delay" takeoff clearance...i.e. "Cactus 149, cleared for takeoff runway 23, no delay, traffic on a 2 mile final for runway 18L." This is often followed by a warning to the traffic on final that there will be traffic departing prior to his arrival.
Safe completion of such a no-delay takeoff clearance can be compounded by certain things. If the departing aircraft doesn't "pour on the coals" to take off as quickly as the controller estimated, if the approach speed of the landing aircraft is higher than anticipated, if there wasn't as much space as the controller estimated (and controllers are VERY good at estimating spacing), this can lead to a potential conflict.
At this point, if action is taken, several things can happen:
1) The controller sees the potential conflict and orders the landing aircraft to go around
2) The landing aircraft sees the potential conflict and initiates a go-around;
3) If time permits, have the landing aircraft perform S-turns, a 360, or slow further
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): I assume (again I'm assuming and looking for input) that the plane on approach has some sort of priority when it comes to right of way.
MCOatc is far more qualified to answer this than me, but I seriously doubt they'd have tried to stop your aircraft on the takeoff roll. As the landing aircraft is much more maneuverable than your departing aircraft, it's much safer and easier for the former to initiate an avoidance maneuver.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): Allright, I expected the blasting and please understand that I am not trying to place blame nor make judgement
1) I don't think I blasted you
2) So writing a letter to US Airways telling them about the dangerous situation their pilots put you into isn't placing blame nor is it making judgment??
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): Look forward to your input, thanks! You are right in one respect that I am a bit of a backseat aviator and it's my love of the aviation community (admittedly from the back of the plane) that makes me want to understand what happened.
That's fine (hey, it's why I'm here too--I've been at least a lurker on here since before I moved from the back to the pointy end) but why would you want to do your absolute best to have the flight crew hauled in for a carpet dance in the chief pilot's office BEFORE you had a better understanding of what happened? That's what makes us skeptical of your motives and puts us on the defense.
Wagz From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 504 posts, RR: 18 Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11494 times:
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): I have the utmost trust, respect, and admiration for the flying community and the job they do.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Thread starter): I sent an email to both US Airways and the FAA and received generic responses but that's it so far. This email text was sent on the evening of February 3, 2010.
If you have the utmost trust in the crew, then I can't figure out why you're trying to hang them for a non-event by blowing the whistle to everyone possible.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): Does ATC clear the plane for take-off for a specific period, could there have possibly been a delay in the cockpit after clearance that led to the loss of seperation?
There was no loss of separation. ATC clears the aircraft for takeoff anticipating that they will clear the intersection before the aircraft landing on the intersecting runway crosses his landing threshold. That is the requirement for runway separation in this situation. There is only a loss of separation if that landing aircraft crossed the threshold before you were through the intersection without being issued a go-around by ATC. The go-around was issued by ATC and therefore separation is maintained.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Reply 9): I assume (again I'm assuming and looking for input) that the plane on approach has some sort of priority when it comes to right of way. Finally, is there so much going on in the cockpit on take-off that visual checks are often not possible or is there limited field of view from the cockpit such that the pilots could not have seen the plane on apprach?
There is no "right-of-way" as you put it here. All that is required by ATC is the separation minimums I mentioned above. If it becomes apparent that separation will not exist, we take action to insure it. In this case the only way to achieve this is to issue a go-around to the arrival. One could cancel the take-off clearance of the departure, but that would really only be an option had the departure not started his takeoff roll yet when it becomes apparent separation may not be maintained.
Both aircraft in this situation are advised of the other aircraft by ATC, so the crews are fully aware of the situation. This is a required traffic call as stipulated in the Air Traffic "rule book", the FAA JO 7110.65. As to why this happened the way it did, there are a myriad of possible reasons. The arrival may have descended in to different winds than higher up which caused his ground speed to increase on final approach, thus hastening his arrival at the runway threshold. Your crew may have been a little slow initiating the takeoff roll. No one really knows. Your aircraft was issued a takeoff clearance by ATC because it appeared that you could "beat" the arrival. The situation changed and ATC took corrective action and separation was maintained. End of story. Happens all day, every day, all over the country (and world).
Just do me a favor and don't fly through PHL. I don't need you frantically calling the tower when you see what we do with airplanes (safely and legally I might add) up here.
I think Big Foot is blurry, Its not the photographers fault. Theres a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
BIGJETDUDE From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11466 times:
I agree that I was 1) not in the cockpit and 2) I'm not a pilot and thus all my judgements and perceptions of the situation are subject to more expert and professional interpretation and analysis.
I guess that's what I'm really getting at, how does anyone know or how can you find out more about any aviation situation as part of the general flying public? I tried the crew, operation center, FAA, US Airways, and still you're right I have no idea if it was absolutely nothing or a potential mistake.
I certainly trust every flight crew, the ATC, and the Federal Authority or I wouldn't fly as often as I do.
Is it even possible to follow-up on a "perceived" sitution like this and get more detail, admittedly to satisfy my personal knowledge and understanding in this case?
Per the example that mcdu gave if someone had a question regarding what I was doing I would answer them personally, unfortunately in my case I couldn't talk to the flight crew. Perhaps I should have waited around if I really wanted to inquire, my mistake.
And to clarify, US Airways is my preferred carrier and one of my favorite airlines.
Appreciate some of the more analytical posts given lately, great info.
tharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1778 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 11349 times:
Wow, people are really really defensive here.
Quoting mcdu (Reply 15): Instead of allowing your company and the oversight of a Federal Authority to do its job, I take it upon myself to be Barney Fife and make a citizens arrest.
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 17): 2) So writing a letter to US Airways telling them about the dangerous situation their pilots put you into isn't placing blame nor is it making judgment??
He did nothing of the sort. He simply related what he saw, and would simply like to have some more information. There is nothing wrong with that. US and the FAA can do whatever they want with it, as can any company/agency that gets a comment from a customer who may or may not have the perspective to really know what happened. The whole point is that the OP wants to know what happened, or if indeed anything truly unusual happened.
Asking on here is a reasonable step. Maybe somebody was listening in to ATC. Who knows. Or, maybe there will be some publicly available information from the FAA about the event - not prompted by the OP, but by the pilots/ATC.
Quoting mcdu (Reply 15):
Instead of allowing your company and the oversight of a Federal Authority to do its job, I take it upon myself to be Barney Fife and make a citizens arrest.
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 17):
2) So writing a letter to US Airways telling them about the dangerous situation their pilots put you into isn't placing blame nor is it making judgment??
He did nothing of the sort. He simply related what he saw, and would simply like to have some more information.
Quoting BIGJETDUDE (Thread starter): I was amazed that the pilots on my flight (who had a clear visual of the plane on approach) initiated take-off even if cleared from the tower. I would like to know more about what happened, who was at fault, and what could be done to avoid this, like most of these potential accidents it could have been very serious, it was WAY TOO CLOSE!"
He didn't JUST relate what he saw. He made a judgment that "it was WAY TOO CLOSE!" and he pointed out his "amazement" that the pilots acted contrarily to his definition of safety. He went as far as calling it a "potential accident," and wanted to know "what could be done to avoid this."
A thirst for knowledge is not the same as vigilantism.
A vigilante would have jumped up, stormed the cockpit, and gotten beaten up by his fellow passengers.
Asking a question afterwards is not vigilantism. Maybe he could have worded it a bit differently, but that wouldn't change how the FAA or US deal with it. If either one takes a look and sees nothing wrong happened, then that's all that happens. If there was already a report filed about the event, then still, nothing happens as it's already being dealt with. But as far as the OP knew, maybe one of the two would write back and tell him more.
25 Bennett123: I frankly find attitudes here staggering. "Were the planes too close". I do not know, neither does the OP, neither does anyone else here, (None of you
26 JBirdAV8r: It wasn't the question. It was a statement. "Something unsafe happened, and I want something done about it." How would you feel if I walked into your
27 tharanga: My boss would thank you, assess the situation, and ignore it if there was nothing out of the ordinary. Maybe he'd tell you that afterwards, maybe not
28 2H4: Just because they can spend their time fielding questions from inquisitive passengers doesn't mean they should be doing so. I'd prefer that they spen
29 Kaiarahi: Tenerife?? The KLM captain knew he was in complete control of the situation - right? So if one of the pax on the helicopter over the Hudson had happe
30 Whappeh: Different circumstances. A passenger in a Jetranger can tap the pilot on the shoulder... a passenger sitting in Row X of a Airbus has a totally diffe
31 2H4: You seem to be suggesting that a passenger should feel free to speak up if he/she determines that there is immediate danger and is motivated to alert
32 Mir: Which is legal separation, because: In other words, a non-event. Consider that you're pulling up to a stop sign at an intersection, and there is a ca
33 Bennett123: JBirdAV8r "No one's saying the crew/ATC knew "best," but they certainly knew better than the OP. No need for the sanctimonious "read the accident data
34 planespotting: Indeed. Local TV news loves finding passengers on airline flights that make emergency landings who say things like "I think we stalled the engine!" o
35 Mir: He didn't express them appropriately. That's the problem. -Mir
36 Kaiarahi: Not really - I just have a knee-jerk reaction to daddy knows best. Some of the best pilots I've shared a cockpit with (military and civil) were women
37 AGANX: According to my understanding: The FAA rules specified in FAA Order 7110.65 for the situation at CLT seems to be as follows: --- An arriving aircraft
38 tharanga: Every once in a while, a public comment might be worth looking at. I would hope the people at the FAA can quickly determine which public comments are
39 Airportugal310: Both situations are light years apart from each other. That accident taught us more about roles of members on the flight deck than anything else. And
40 Mir: Theoretically, yes that is possible. I don't know of any controller who would feel comfortable doing that. Just because the rules say you can do some
41 soon7x7: You don't have to be a high time pilot too observe something wrong...Why do you guys "dog pile on the rabbit" in these threads...BIGJETDUDE just migh
42 Airportugal310: oh i dont know about that btw, you have quiet a nice selection of photos that i presume you took. one of the best i have seen on here
43 JBirdAV8r: As stated ad nauseam on this thread, most posters don't have a problem with the asking of a question. My personal sticking point is the way in which
44 Kaiarahi: Exactly. The danger of assuming that the captain (or in this case the flight deck) could never have made a mistake - which is what many posters on he
45 FlyASAGuy2005: Well he did seem to try that originally but said the cockpit door was closed. For all we know, he had a connection and couldn't stick around to wait
46 JBirdAV8r: I saw that, however he was departing CLT for another destination, so it may have been his final stop. I still maintain he could have let a flight att
47 2H4: It's not that nothing was wrong...it's that he, as a passenger in the cabin, did not have enough information to properly assess whether something was
48 tharanga: If he changes just a few words, it sounds nothing like a complaint, and 100% like an inquiry. And I don't know, but I don't see how those changed wor
49 Kaiarahi: Understood - but he did have enough information to know that he was sh*t-scared, and reacted - perhaps without knowing what the implications could be
50 Bennett123: Hopefully US and the FAA will have enough information.
51 TJM321: Beyond, obviously. This is hardly a "moot point." We may not be able to prove that there was anything wrong with this flight, but likewise we cannot
52 soon7x7: Thank you for your kind words...yes the images are mine...just don't have enough posted on the site. I don't feel the thread starter was bloviating t
53 mariner63: I'll add my two cents. If the aircraft was performing a go around, then there would be no loss of separation, hence the go around. As some of you have
54 N766UA: If this was truly a serious incident, the FAA, USAir, and the crews are already well aware of it. They don't need random passengers casting judgement,
55 EADC8: Just searched LiveATC.net and listened to the archive, which is time stamped 2/4/2010 0100-0130 Zulu. The arriving flight for 23 was AA 2082 from DFW.
56 JBirdAV8r: That's true, but everyone knows how management operates and what happens if you call the federal authorities to report a perceived crime as well. Cal
57 Kaiarahi: Sounds like either a delayed take-off roll, or the take-off clearance was given while US1022 was still taxiing. Did you happen to hear if US1022 was
58 EADC8: It's hard to understand, but it sounds like the controller mentioned something about "high soar", which US 1022 acknowledged on the read back. Not su
59 ManuCH: I've had to delete a few posts in this thread because things were getting quite personal. Please try to stick to the topic without getting personal. E
60 JBirdAV8r: I'm not in a position to listen to that at the moment...could you have heard "hold short?"
61 Kaiarahi: Doesn't sound like any of the published SIDs ... "eyesore" perhaps?
62 EADC8: Definitely not "hold short". He was being given take off clearance at the time.
63 TheGreatChecko: A lot of you guys are putting way too much faith in the functionaries in the FAA and airline management. They are both filled with people who are tryi
64 Kaiarahi: I just listened to the ATC archive. AA2082 was told to go around because the previous arrival on 23 was stopped on the runway waiting for a taxiway to
65 IlliniCMI: Perhaps the OP could have handled the situation differently, i.e. posting the question on here prior to writing the airline. However, after having rea
66 EADC8: Not disagreeing with you, but the OP did state that he witnessed the go-around as they crossed the intersection. Something doesn't add up time wise,
67 B727LVR: I think that this was exactly the OP's reason for asking why and how. I agree 100% From a mechanics stand point I have de-briefed crews after flights
68 Kaiarahi: Tower wasn't busy between the US1022 take-off clearance and directing AA2082 to go around. There were 5+ aircraft in line for 18L, so the tower would
69 JetCaptain: My interpretation listening to the LiveATC tape ... The controller is saying "RNAV to HISOR", HISOR is a waypoint on the MERIL 5 SID. AAL2082 had to g
70 tharanga: I was hoping somebody could bring that up. I guess that settles it? Now that I know that within a day, somebody on here can dig up the ATC archive, I
71 Kaiarahi: Exactly what I heard - see above. Thanks. I heard it on many of the 18L clearances, but I only had the SID names, not the waypoints. Does MERIL 5 hav
72 IlliniCMI: Exactly. Seems like the consensus here is that there was no real danger, which is fine, but it doesn't make the OP's concerns invalid just because so
73 BIGJETDUDE: I certainly appreciate all the help getting answers on this and we have come quite far in a day, never knew you could pull up recordings from ATC and
74 JetCaptain: http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/1002/00078MERIL.PDF JC[Edited 2010-02-16 18:58:37 by srbmod]
75 SupraZachAir: http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kclt/KCLT-Twr-Feb-04-2010-0100Z.mp3 Start around 20:40. Around 24:15 controller tells AA 2082 he asked him to go aro
76 JFKLGANYC: I want to echo other sentiments . . . I am tired of this forum being used by passengers telling us about "near misses" "near crashes" "near crash land
77 mariner63: He has the right to post this if he wants. In the end, I am sure that he was glad that he posted this topic because he actually found out why the oth
78 JBirdAV8r: You're welcome, and...um...welcome to the site? Seriously, no hard feelings.
79 SolarFlyer22: Hindsight is twenty twenty. He's not judging he's questioning and he has every right to do that. His life is on the line too and for all you know a pa
80 tharanga: How often do these topics come up? Once a week, at most? Think of it as a teaching moment. People have certain thoughts, perceptions or fears of what
81 MD80fanatic: Had BigJetDude been on Comair 191, with his gift of being more aware than the average passenger, that accident might not have happened. Do you think h
82 SolarFlyer22: Exactly. How much human effort is wasted by looking into it? A few hours maybe? I agree that most passengers have erroneous complaints but even if 99
83 Qantas767: Just a couple of points for all those having a sook... 1. He has every right to report the incident. I don't have to be the driver of a car to know th
84 CatIII: Seriously? So you're presupposing that he would have, through the powers of mental telepathy, divined which runway they were cleared to takeoff from
85 IlliniCMI: Excellent posts. Exactly right. So what if he was wrong? Point is, what if he was right? I do hope others that are concerned about things they've see
86 Mir: One would hope, indeed. But the unfortunate reality is that the FAA is not as benevolent as some would think: One nasty FAA inspector can really ruin
87 IlliniCMI: I agree, but if nothing happened then nothing will become of it, either. He certainly didn't deserve the attacks that he got here as a "stupid civili
88 MCOatc: The Federation Against Aviation? Benevolent? Ah, dream we can. Funny, I know of a guy who speculated something like that: I'm not going to say that p
89 DWController: A plane went around at CLT...i don't see what the issue is here. A controller acted correctly to an adverse situation. In related news a plane diverte
90 DTWSXM: I am impressed with the level of arrogance displayed in this thread. My wife is an FA on a regional carrier. She had a passenger who was quite anxious
91 DWController: You are exactly right and in the case discussed in this thread it seems all parties did exactly as they should have. It seems the only fault may be o
92 YULWinterSkies: Would I have been in your situation, first, i most likely would not have noticed what you saw, end of story. But say i had anyway, i would probably ha
93 MD80fanatic: Really? LEX has two runways, one 7000 ft and the other is barely1500 ft. The short one would never be given as a takeoff runway for a regional jet. A
94 ThirtyEcho: We have no idea why the aircraft on final went around, do we? We are assuming that it was a separation issue involving your flight but we don't know t
95 SJC4Me: Yeah we do, it was in the audio clip. Aircraft slow to depart rwy 23. The tower controller even details it in his transmission to the AA pilot. Speak
96 Bennett123: Thinking back to the Comair crash, surely runways have numbers, (based on compass bearings). Also if a runway is not in use, then surely it is not lit
97 RussianJet: An aircraft went around, nothing happened. What 'gift' are you talking about?? The gift of making baseless complaints perhaps? The gift of causing pe
98 Kaiarahi: It's all in this thread. Maybe you could try reading before posting. [Edited 2010-02-17 03:01:45]
99 RonProphet: Good grief people! Get some perspective. It appears to me that BIGJETDUDE, regardless of his/her aviation experience as an operator or passenger, has
100 peterjohns: @ronprophet Of course everyone is entiteld to an safe and expeditiuous journey, but the point is that that person should not accusate others of not do
101 Mir: As has been pointed out, this isn't entirely true. Certainly not before finding out whether something really was amiss or not. -Mir
102 tharanga: The average person out there wouldn't have any clue how to research the circumstances of the situation. They wouldn't know what to do, beyond checkin
103 P3Orion: But how can you say that? How do you know when the ATCT is conducting LAHSO? How do you know when the TRACON is using visual seperation?
104 JBirdAV8r: Don't know if you're being sarcastic, but the lack of lights perhaps might be noticed. The runway number, in the dark, probably not. If you knew LEX,
105 Bennett123: No sarcasm intended. Having never been to LEX, I was simply asking a question. As you say a regular passenger, partularly with flying experience might
106 2H4: I think you're both misinterpreting and generalizing here. The people to whom you're referring are not saying pilots are infallible. They're saying t
107 Flyboy1108: Amen brother, amen haha I commend the OP for attempting to get answers to a situation that made him feel uncomfortable. He's not a pilot or a control
108 Bennett123: You could equally say that those on this thread have not seen the whole picture. The OP did at least have the advantage of witnessing the "incident".
109 2H4: Sure. I don't think anyone here is claiming otherwise. But, as good and reasonable as his intentions were, it's a fact that his perspective was compl
110 soon7x7: Lest we forget the crash of NW flt#235, an MD-82 in Detroit, I believe was 1997. This plane failed to take to the sky as the crew failed to utilize th
111 Bennett123: 2H4 I think if you read my response again in full, then have agree that ultimately the OP concerns were incorrect. However, without the ATC tapes this