Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Near Miss Over SFO  
User currently offlinePWMRamper From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 611 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 23917 times:

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/30...lided-over-san-francisco/?hpt=Sbin

Sounds like a close one, but ATC was aware and TCAS worked like it should. Glad all are safe.

80 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 5120 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 23850 times:

A United Airlines B-777 jetliner came dangerously close to striking a small aircraft over San Francisco on Saturday, with the two planes coming an estimated 200 to 300 feet from each other

United Airlines Flight 889 was departing San Francisco International Airport at about 11:15 a.m. Pacific time on a flight to Beijing, China. It was carrying 251 passengers and a crew of 17



Wow, that sounded scary. The pilots must be really shaky after such a shock., would they continue to PEK?



Next trip : DUB-AUH-CGK-DPS-KUL-AUH-CDG-ORK :-)
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 23726 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 1):
Wow, that sounded scary. The pilots must be really shaky after such a shock., would they continue to PEK?

One would suspect so. No reason to dump that much money in jet fuel if nothing happened. 200-300 feet is what I would call a near miss when travelling at 250 MPH or more. I wonder what, if any evasive maneuvers were done?

UAL


User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 23543 times:

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 2):
I wonder what, if any evasive maneuvers were done?

I would imagine, but how "evasive" can a 777 that's heavy be, especially with only 300 ft. of leway?



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlinej0rdan From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 127 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23546 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 1):
would they continue to PEK?

Yes.


http://avherald.com/h?article=4296acd5&opt=0

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/U...9/history/20100327/1818Z/KSFO/ZBAA


The United pilot dosent sound very happy.


jordan.

[Edited 2010-03-30 18:14:42]

User currently offline413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23389 times:

Near Miss must be the worst term in aviation next to FinalS

User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23289 times:

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 5):
Near Miss must be the worst term in aviation next to FinalS

"When two planes almost collide, they call it a 'near miss'. IT'S A NEAR HIT! A collision is a near miss. *POOF* 'Look, they nearly missed'. Yes! But not quite!" - George Carlin.


User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23298 times:

"Okay, that just set off a T...TCAS"

"We need to talk."

I wonder what they "talked" about? LOL. Yeah, she's not happy that pilot.

UAL


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8193 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23283 times:

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 2):
200-300 feet is what I would call a near miss when travelling at 250 MPH or more.

But what does 200-300 feet mean? 200-300 feet vertically and 0 laterally? That's fantastically close, especially since a 777 can cover 200-300 verticle feet in seconds. The F/O doesn't sound happy at all.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineUALORD From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23121 times:

When I first read it I thought it could have been my OGG-SFO on saturday but if it was, you would prob know. But not a good way to start out a PEK trip!

User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 23115 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 1):
Wow, that sounded scary. The pilots must be really shaky after such a shock., would they continue to PEK?

Scary - Yes

Mad/ unhappy - Yes

Shaky or distracted enough to not continue the flight - No. If that was the case, they should probably consider a career change.

Pilots have to have the ability to control their emotions and deal with problems. Not become upsed when things happen and continue to be a professional pilot.

The shaky part comes when filling out the reports after landing.


User currently onlineMarcoPoloWorld From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 634 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 22990 times:

I continue to be baffled by the fact that general aviation aircraft are still allowed to freely roam the airspace around major airports, hobbling up ATC and air capacity and introducing additional layers of risk.

User currently offlinePWMRamper From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 611 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22867 times:

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 5):

Oh I agree. And whenever I hear it, I think of that George Carlin bit. But it's become standard, for whatever reason.


User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22779 times:

Quoting PWMRamper (Reply 12):
Oh I agree. And whenever I hear it, I think of that George Carlin bit. But it's become standard, for whatever reason.

Well, a "near miss" could denote that "we missed each other, very closely." near = close....I dunno.


User currently offlinecomairguycvg From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 337 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22732 times:

And the good 'ole media has it mixed up again. This is on the Fox News site:


User currently offline413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22648 times:

I can forgive stock photos being used, the general public has no idea what a 777 or a 737 are

User currently offlineVanguard737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 682 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22623 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 15):
I can forgive stock photos being used, the general public has no idea what a 777 or a 737 are

Ordinarily I MIGHT agree. But, when you specifically say the photo is of a 777, 'just like' the aircraft involved, then you'd better use a picture of a 777 and not a 737...



320 717 722 732 733 735 737 738 744 752 753 763 772 DC9 DC10 MD80 B1900 S340 E120 ERJ CRJ CR7
User currently offlineSJC4Me From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 373 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22475 times:

The TCAS doesn't take everything into account though. The GA aircraft could have been turning to "pass behind" as instructed. Also, the GA aircraft could have been a picture taker, or traffic watch aircraft since it was a 28 departure (over land) and not necessarily some ignorant GA pilot. Neither the tower controller or the GA pilot sounded overly concerned about the proximity of the B777 taking off to the GA aircraft and since he was talking to ATC, he obviously has Bravo clearance. That being said, 300 feet is still pretty close. Just my   


Unable.
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4488 posts, RR: 21
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22448 times:

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 5):
Near Miss must be the worst term in aviation next to FinalS

Cute, but never rely on a comedian for proper English. "Near" describes "miss." "How close of a 'miss' was it?" "It was a 'near' miss."

But "finalS" isn't as bad as "left finalS" or "straight-in finalS"....



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlinealphaomega From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 568 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22408 times:

Quoting SJC4Me (Reply 17):
The TCAS doesn't take everything into account though. The GA aircraft could have been turning to "pass behind" as instructed. Also, the GA aircraft could have been a picture taker, or traffic watch aircraft since it was a 28 departure (over land) and not necessarily some ignorant GA pilot. Neither the tower controller or the GA pilot sounded overly concerned about the proximity of the B777 taking off to the GA aircraft and since he was talking to ATC, he obviously has Bravo clearance. That being said, 300 feet is still pretty close. Just my

Not sure he would have been instructed to turn behind - if I had been instructed to turn behind a 777 that close while flying in my Cessna, I wouldn't want to do it....never should have been that close off the departure end anyways.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4488 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22328 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 11):
I continue to be baffled by the fact that general aviation aircraft are still allowed to freely roam the airspace around major airports, hobbling up ATC and air capacity and introducing additional layers of risk.

GA aircraft do not "freely roam" airspace around major airports. If SFO was too busy, they could have simply denied the GA aircraft entry into the Class B, or held them for long enough to "discourage" them.

As for me, when I fly into large cities, I generally try to scoot under the Class B VFR into smaller reliever airports--they're generally closer to where I'm headed anyway. If I'm IFR, they usually scoot me under anyway. I don't do mean things like try to fly VFR into CLT...I fly at times I'm sure I'll blend in well with the big boys, and always file IFR going into the large airports.

As for clogging up the ATC system, see above--ATC prevents accidents. If you're not on top of your game, flying into a small New York City airport VFR on a nice day can kill you with all the bozos flitting around out there.

And if you're going to shut down ALL the airspace around major airports...frankly, that's just dumb. You're shutting down small, medium, and large-sized businesses that fly corporate aircraft to conduct business, not to mention police/news helicopters (IMO far more dangerous than rogue Cessnas), pipeline patrols, aerial surveys, and any of a number of small GA-provided aircraft services.

GA is not just a toy for the elite. Having a small aircraft has helped my small business expand our reach to new customers, which has expanded our backlog by several magnitudes. If it weren't for our GA aircraft, honestly, we could've been out of business by now.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days ago) and read 21965 times:

Quoting alphaomega (Reply 19):
Not sure he would have been instructed to turn behind - if I had been instructed to turn behind a 777 that close while flying in my Cessna, I wouldn't want to do it....never should have been that close off the departure end anyways.

Agreed. That airspace is hectic, at least along the departure end.

Props to the FO for reacting properly (descending on that flight path gives you terrain off to the right @ 1,500) and calling the controller on their mistake "That was too close" Controller passes them off a second later, she keys in again "No, we need to talk." The controller should have known better than to tempt it but ultimately the GA pilot acknowledged the 777 and said he would pass behind it, without objection to his instructions. 300 feet in front, behind, below, above, is too close.



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5128 posts, RR: 22
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days ago) and read 21716 times:

I'm a little confused as to why we're assuming that the female voice wasn't the captain. The FO was the PF, which would mean normally that the CA was the PNF and doing the radios. The authority in her voice said "captain" to me, although the stuttering appeared to indicate that she was flustered. OTOH, she probably also was talking to her crew in the cockpit off the radio as well, and the appearance of being flustered may just have meant other things to do. At the end of the day, "we need to talk" was pretty polite.

User currently offlineUA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1730 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21638 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 22):
I'm a little confused as to why we're assuming that the female voice wasn't the captain. The FO was the PF, which would mean normally that the CA was the PNF and doing the radios. The authority in her voice said "captain" to me, although the stuttering appeared to indicate that she was flustered. OTOH, she probably also was talking to her crew in the cockpit off the radio as well, and the appearance of being flustered may just have meant other things to do. At the end of the day, "we need to talk" was pretty polite.

Could also be the relief pilot, though I'm not sure the relief crew would say "we need to talk."


User currently onlineAirIndia From United Arab Emirates, joined Jan 2001, 1634 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21457 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 18):
But "finalS" isn't as bad as "left finalS" or "straight-in finalS"....

it culd also mean financial Slump......... certainly the worst term for avaition.......... :P


25 kaitak : Is an aircraft of the Aeronica's size legally obliged to have TCAS? Or are they obliged to do so if they are entering/passing through Class A airspace
26 Mir : It is not required to have TCAS, and I don't know of any light piston aircraft that has TCAS (though many have TIS or ADS-B, but those don't offer RA
27 UA777222 : I don't think this has anything to do with gender. Whomever she was, whatever seat she was in, she had every right to be "flustered," though I think
28 vikinga346 : Let's wait for the facts to develop on this.. if we ever get to see them... I don't know why in the world a cessna would be passing behind a Boeing 77
29 Post contains images aero145 : and then you say Say what? Why don’t you just do as you said we should do, wait for the facts?
30 na : A jounalist is not the "general public". Stock photos have titles, and journalists have eyes. One cannot expect an average Fox jounalist to be an avi
31 swiftski : ???? He was in CTA.
32 Post contains links UA777222 : Actually, KTVU Channel 2 News, the local Fox affiliate, got all of their facts right on their 5 o'clock news. Even filmed a UA 777 taking off today,
33 thrufru : They just stated on the a.m. news that the aircraft came within 300 ft vertically and 1500 ft horizontally. That is a straight line distance of just a
34 Post contains links Gulfstream650 : ATC audio from LiveATC.net (might need to log in to listen): http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcavi...-ctr)/?action=dlattach;attach=3554 http://www.live
35 peteg913 : I'm sorry, but that's just a ridiculous thing to say.
36 Post contains images KLXA380 : If i were those 777 pilots i'll be checking my pants!!!!!
37 777fan : I'm sure that experience pales in comparison to some of the turbulence they've faced over the North Pacific! Wrong. If anything, the controller in ch
38 Post contains links andysim : Recordings up on Liveatc Link below. http://www.liveatc.net/recordings.php Sorry didnt see it was posted already.[Edited 2010-03-31 07:40:07]
39 PeterSpence : And I continue to "be baffled" at how many people like you know nothing about Class Bravo but talk as if you do ... a GA aircraft is not allowed to "
40 gregarious119 : Completely offbase here. How is the GA pilot on the hook for following instructions/vectors through that airspace? Not to mention calmly and readily
41 mho : When you hear "we need to talk" from a woman, you know you are in trouble. But seriously, if I was in the small airplane, I would have been really, r
42 mho : I'd be baffled too, if that was the cae, but it isn't. Calss Bravo airspace is very tightly controlled. ATC is talking to everyone, and you need expl
43 DiamondFlyer : Make that two of us. The amount of general aviation hate/bashing that goes on here is unbelievable. But, alas, people continue to hate on general avi
44 Jetmatt777 : Megyn Kelly on FoxNews and Trace Gallagher really screwed the pooch a few minutes ago, pardon the French. Their "transcript" said T TEST for TCAS, and
45 Oshkosh1 : Make that a "threesome"...well, not literally...anyhow. If any of you have flown into the EAA you'd know that most of the GA pilots out there are not
46 Post contains links Highflier92660 : Here is the general aviation aircraft involved. It is a fixed-gear Cessna 182: http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/356570.html The Cessna pilot
47 413X3 : Rely on a comedian? I had no idea Carlin had a bit on it. It is horrible english. How close of a miss was it? Why would you ask that?
48 AlaskaATC : So.. we have a VFR cessna who reports the heavy in sight and says he will maintain visual seperation... and we are blaming the ATC? Maybe the Cessna w
49 mikefad : The ABCNEWS story on this incident explains that the planes were as close as 300 ft apart vertically and 1500 ft apart horizontally. Yet the computer
50 SJC4Me : ABC News' transcript says "maintain zero separation" when the controller actually said "maintain visual separation". Zero separation doesn't even mak
51 Post contains images Oshkosh1 : Whoah...Your "handle" is "AlaskaATC"...and YOU are asking about sep reqs'?...
52 mariner63 : From the facts the we have so far, it seems to be the tower controller at fault. Flying thru that kind of airspace, the controllers would be giving tr
53 413X3 : haha. Good one!!
54 mtnwest1979 : Maybe 777 didn't climb out fast enough. LOL. Anyway, ATC and GA pilot sounded calm, so it must not have seemed as big of deal as with UA crew.
55 SYfan100 : After looking about on everything that happened it seems in my mind that ATC was at fault. Granted I would have been shaken up as well if I were flyin
56 aviators99 : And we GA pilots continue to be baffled that they allow these heavy jets to share our airspace. We were here first, you know. There are plenty of bad
57 mariner63 : Ok. After hearing the ATC transcripts, it was a simple overreaction and if you want to play the blame game, it was the GA pilots fault. ATC told the G
58 AlaskaATC : Don't worry, I know the answer to the question I posed. It was more to get others out there thinking about the difference between seperating two IFR
59 Post contains links AAFLT1871 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNVOS1HB7OA
60 timz : It was a C182 for sure? No Aeroncas involved? Anybody yet heard what his earlier instructions were? Stay east of US 101, or west, or what? At 1500 ft?
61 Mir : I would avoid saying that the controller was at fault. He did his job - implemented required separation (visual separation in this case). The fact th
62 Post contains images MarcoPoloWorld : Yeah, and maybe they shouldn't allow anything other than single-occupant vehicles on our streets and highways. No carpools, transit buses, just solo
63 aviators99 : Hmm...I think you just proved my point? Are you saying that people should be baffled by the fact that single occupant vehicles are still allowed on t
64 UALWN : Indeed single occupant vehicles are not allowed in the carpool (HOV) lanes. Buses are. Yes, great analogy.
65 Norcal773 : There's a reason TCAS is there, you just can't ignore it. Don't forget right ahead at 1500 feet, there's terrain and if UA Triple 7 didn't do the cor
66 413X3 : Not in states with partial zero emission vehicle stickers
67 timz : If they were climbing straight out, the terrain reaches a maximum 700-750 ft at 5+ nm from the departure end of the runway. The 1500-ft radio towers
68 AirCalSNA : Don't know if anyone asked this ... but how do these stories become public?
69 Norcal773 : Thanks for the correction, I thought the terrain right ahead of the 28 departures was the 1500 one.
70 CO787EWR : Sites like Live ATC, I assume
71 Mir : Takeoffs from 19 have the terrain issues, which is why they avoid using that runway for takeoffs whenever possible. -Mir
72 AlaskaATC : If the controller tells you to maintain visual seperation, and you acknowledge, then all you must do is make sure your aircraft does not hit the othe
73 UA777222 : Most 19L/R departures will do exactly as they do off of the 1L/R which is to pull a quick turn north or south (normally south). I've only seen 19 dep
74 Norcal773 : Was on a 'light' JAL 744 that took off 19L 2 years ago, banked left immediately after gear up and did a complete 270 degrees turn which took us right
75 wjcandee : All these things now get reported to the NTSB, so they are public information.
76 spacecadet : No, you're misunderstanding the usage. It was near and it's a miss. Near miss is the correct term. You're assuming "near" is modifying "miss", which
77 timz : They turn, yes; aside from that, no similarity. Flights off 1L usually turn left to 350 initially, 1R usually right to 030 initially; departures off
78 UA777222 : In terms of their turns. Each route is obviously different and while it may occur, I haven't seen a straight out 19R/L departure (into majority of te
79 suseJ772 : The Cirrus SR22 I fly has TCAS in it. Love it! Exactly. I thought the exact same thing!
80 Post contains links cessna2 : Just to clear some things up the Captain was the Female pilot speaking to the Controller as reported in the NTSB report located here... http://www.nts
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...
QF And NZ B744s Involved In Near Miss Over AKL posted Mon Apr 11 2005 12:48:37 by 777ER
Near -miss Over Wales posted Fri Jul 5 2002 20:15:33 by Captjetblast
LH Near Miss Over Pakistan posted Wed Oct 10 2001 12:32:04 by Thud
Two Aircraft In Near Miss Over TRD posted Fri Aug 3 2001 10:21:07 by Heisan67
Near Miss Over Western Canada posted Sun Jun 17 2001 17:46:45 by ACA330
Near Miss Over Tokyo posted Thu Feb 1 2001 15:10:22 by Airmale
JAL Near Miss Over Japan posted Wed Jan 31 2001 17:00:22 by Singapore_Air
Near Miss Over Finland posted Thu Jan 11 2001 21:47:41 by Brissie_lions
Virgin Atlantic And United Near Miss Over London posted Tue Sep 5 2000 02:14:35 by GUNDU
Dragonair And China Southern Near Miss Over HKG posted Fri Aug 11 2000 05:21:01 by HS-LTA