catiii
Topic Author
Posts: 2391
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Tue Apr 19, 2011 9:34 pm

I guess her airplane didn't have the required spacing behind a C-17.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...LC7D_story.html?wpisrc=al_national

Fair use from the article: The Federal Aviation Administration, already dealing with a series of controversies involving controllers sleeping and watching a movie on the job, on Tuesday sent a team of investigators to the Warrenton radar control center where the mistake was made. The First Lady was returning from a television appearance and other events with Jill Biden in New York and was aboard a Boeing 737 that is part of the presidential fleet of jets when the error occurred on final approach to Andrews. The controllers in the tower at Andrews recognized that the massive C-17 and Obama flight designated EXEC1F, a classification for a plane carrying members of the president’s family, were far too close when the Warrenton controller handed off responsibility for the two aircraft.
 
Galaxy5007
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Tue Apr 19, 2011 10:56 pm

This is really a non news story; CNN is just now breaking news on this (which happened yesterday) and again, its a non issue. The aircraft were 3 miles apart when the first ladys plane were notified to circle the airfield; it happens all the time in the civil world. The only reason why its news is because it probably delayed Obamas landing by 5 minutes....whoopdee do!
 
catiii
Topic Author
Posts: 2391
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 12:04 am

CNN and Eliot Spitzer (client #9) are skewering FAA right now. And they have some idiot named Michael Goldfarb who used to be the Chief of Staff at the FAA who is throwing around terms like "harrowing experience for the first lady and Dr. Biden" and saying that they must have been fearful when the plane was making typical S turns, and that 3 miles is "dangerously close."
 
JohnM
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:12 am

I knew the article was BS when it referred to the C-17 as "massive".......
 
WESTERN737800
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:06 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:25 pm

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 1):
This is really a non news story;

Exactly! Anyone who has flown for any length of time has had to do their share of go-arounds, big deal! I've done several go-arounds over the years. I've seen several other people do go-arounds and nobody called the press! What they fail to realize is that go-arounds can actually enchance safety.
Bring back Western Airlines!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:31 pm

It is obiously the C-17's fault.

Or did another Controller fall asleep in the RAPCON?
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:33 pm

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 1):
This is really a non news story;

It's just fuel to the fire given the recent news about 8 controllers getting busted for various issues.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6676
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:46 pm

So are we heading for the Republican President to pull another fire all the controllers to set another example?
Ooops, my bad, current president is a Democrat, I'm lost, too early  
 
cargotanker
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:41 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 4:33 pm

I wonder why the Andrews controllers didn't send the C-17 around and let the C-40 land? Clearly the C-40 would have a higher priority and Andrews tower knew the First Lady was on board. Maybe the C-17 was already on the ground and the C-40 on three mile final? Not enought time to let the C-17 clear the runway?
 
calpilot
Posts: 881
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 1999 5:16 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 4:39 pm

Quoting cargotanker (Reply 8):
I wonder why the Andrews controllers didn't send the C-17 around and let the C-40 land? Clearly the C-40 would have a higher priority and Andrews tower knew the First Lady was on board. Maybe the C-17 was already on the ground and the C-40 on three mile final? Not enought time to let the C-17 clear the runway?

Because protocol is for the lower/lead aircraft have priority of the runway. As cat3 and others said this was a non event. cat3, you are right,,, this Michael Goldfarb is a total tool.
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 5:30 pm

NPR said they had to "Wave off" the first lady's plane. I guess Andrews is a navy carrier now.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
cargotanker
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:41 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:10 pm

Quoting CALPilot (Reply 9):
Because protocol is for the lower/lead aircraft have priority of the runway.

Yes, given the two aircraft are of equal importance. Andrews AFB and the President's family are a different story. Andrews routinely shuts down ALL movement on the ramp as well as departures and arrivals if AF1 or AF2 are taking off/landing. It seems odd to me having transited Andrews numerous times that the C-17 is allowed to continue while Exec1Foxtrot has to do a pattern. That being said, the attention level of this is absolutely ridiculous.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:55 pm

Quoting cargotanker (Reply 11):
It seems odd to me having transited Andrews numerous times that the C-17 is allowed to continue while Exec1Foxtrot has to do a pattern.

Obviously, that is the problem and that is why the FAA is in a tizzy. In terms of govt protocol, what happened is beyond ridiculous. Probably you tell the C-17 to take a hike, and let Michelle land! Internally, there must be at least double or triple separation the norm for VVIP flights (POTUS, First Lady, VP). You know, the C-32, E-4B, VC-25 type of people. Don't they give the VC-25 very wide separation?
 
Flighty
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Thu Apr 21, 2011 2:22 am

Update:

FAA says "supervisors" now must oversee the arrivals and departures of VVIP aircraft. This is clearly a "cover your ass" Washington style nonsense-fest.

"The Warrenton controller’s error was rated an “A,” the top of the FAA scale for degree of seriousness."

WTH? I've been in go-arounds before. Seen them happen, they are common at some airports. Is this ceremonial error really an A? Just because they aren't polishing the boots of Michelle Obama enough?

Maybe VVIP super separation is one of FAA's prime directives? What is _going on_ here?

     Wash Post Story



[Edited 2011-04-20 19:24:13]
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Plane With Michelle Obama Had To Abort Landing

Thu Apr 21, 2011 2:01 pm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 13):

WTH? I've been in go-arounds before. Seen them happen, they are common at some airports.

Don't get confused. The go-around was not the error. The error was not enough spacing between the aircraft that ultimately ended up with the go-around. Wake turbulence is a big issue, no matter who's on board.

From the article you quoted:

"Warrenton were occupied with other duties and unaware that one of their controllers had allowed the first lady’s plane to get two miles closer than allowed by FAA regulations to the wake of a 200-ton C-17 . . . The Warrenton controller’s error was rated an “A,” the top of the FAA scale for degree of seriousness."

Seems like the folks at Andrews WAS paying attention and did the correct call for the go-around.

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests