User avatar
LockheedBBD
Topic Author
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:37 am

According to major news outlets, AC flight 759 was inadvertently preparing to land on a taxiway instead of 28R:

Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/10/e ... n-history/

ATC audio recording of incident: https://soundcloud.com/user-66001055/au ... liveatcnet

“If it is true, what happened probably came close to the greatest aviation disaster in history,” said retired United Airlines Capt. Ross Aimer, CEO of Aero Consulting Experts. He said he’s been contacted by pilots from across the country about the incident.






Source: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html
Air Canada pilot: Tower Air Canada 759 I can see lights on the runway there. Can you confirm we’re clear to land?

Control tower: Air Canada 759 confirmed cleared to land on 28-right. There is no one on 28-right but you.

Air Canada pilot: OK, Air Canada 759

Unknown: Where is this guy going? He’s on the taxiway!

Control tower: Air Canada, go around.

The FAA said the air traffic controller told the Air Canada jet to circle around and make another approach.

Air Canada pilot: Going around. Air Canada 759.

Control tower: Air Canada, it looks like you were lined up for Charlie there. Fly heading 280. Climb maintain 3,000.

Air Canada pilot: Heading 2-8-0. 3,000. Air Canada 759.

United pilot: United One, Air Canada flew directly over us.

Control tower: Yeah, I saw that guys.


Image
Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/10/e ... n-history/
 
77H
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:35 am

I imagine the tower had a phone number for the captain after they landed. Pretty serious mix up especially with aircraft lined up.

We've obviously heard of commercial airliners landing on taxiways before but this seems curious. One would think the AC crew would have been able to see the taxi lights and anti-collision beacons of the other aircraft on the taxiway. UA1 is operated by a 789 which have very bright LED beacons.

SFO no longer has taxiway edge lights along most of the taxiways parallel to the 28's. Could this have been a contributing factor ?

77H
 
ConorBall
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:35 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:36 am

Was Harrison Ford the pilot? Haha.
 
vtdl
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:15 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:21 am

According to WebTrak, the incident happens on July 7 at 11:56 pm. AC 759 was at 200 ft when it reached the end of the runway and initiated the go-around.
 
drgmobile
Posts: 833
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:06 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:26 am

77H wrote:
I imagine the tower had a phone number for the captain after they landed. Pretty serious mix up especially with aircraft lined up.

We've obviously heard of commercial airliners landing on taxiways before but this seems curious. One would think the AC crew would have been able to see the taxi lights and anti-collision beacons of the other aircraft on the taxiway. UA1 is operated by a 789 which have very bright LED beacons.

77H


As noted in the original post: "Air Canada pilot: Tower Air Canada 759 I can see lights on the runway there. Can you confirm we’re clear to land?"
 
wn676
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:07 pm

SFO 28R is equipped with a pretty beefy approach lighting system as well as TDZLs. Were all those systems on and functioning? I'm the kind of person that can understand mistaking long and wide stretches of pavement for runways in the daytime under the right conditions, so believe me when I say this is an honest question: how do you mistake a taxiway for a runway at night with those kind of lighting systems? I mean, they even presumably saw and questioned the flashing beacon lights ahead of them. And even in the absence of blue TELs doesn't SFO still employ green centerline lights on their taxiways?
 
mtnwest1979
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:23 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:36 pm

So what then did they rhink the long stretch with white lights was? Since it adjacent to what they were aiming for, I assume it was clearly visible. Lame.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
 
User avatar
blackbox67
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:13 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:38 pm

Asking about disturbing lights at the end of a 5 h flight in dusk and darkness sounds like a fatigue issue. Maybe we should look onto their duty times.

http://www.jacdec.de/2017/07/11/2017-07 ... francicso/
 
runway23
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:43 pm

Visibility couldn't have been that bad if they could see the other aircraft and well the other aircraft could clearly see them.

Very lucky there was some visibility, as could have been a remake of TFN.

Most likely that's the end of the two pilots' careers.
 
twincessna340a
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:26 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:47 pm

77H wrote:
SFO no longer has taxiway edge lights along most of the taxiways parallel to the 28's.

77H


Why not and how is that even possible?
 
wn676
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:57 pm

twincessna340a wrote:
77H wrote:
SFO no longer has taxiway edge lights along most of the taxiways parallel to the 28's.

77H


Why not and how is that even possible?


Blue reflectors can be used in lieu of edge lights when there is a centerline lighting system installed.

viewtopic.php?t=1351669

I wonder if this will change the lighting guidance, should it be listed as a contributing factor.
Last edited by wn676 on Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:03 pm

mtnwest1979 wrote:
So what then did they rhink the long stretch with white lights was? Since it adjacent to what they were aiming for, I assume it was clearly visible. Lame.


The parallel runway?
Everyone landing on a taxiway is an idiot until it happens to yourself.

Taxiway landings keep happening and no one does anything about it.

In pitch dark night vision, ie a dark cockpit, the eyes can lose a lot of color perception. In addition, contaminants in the air and clouds can change the preception of a color.
Time to look for a more clear system than light colors.

Illuminating the runway numbers could help.
 
wn676
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:09 pm

Waterbomber wrote:

The parallel runway?
Everyone landing on a taxiway is an idiot until it happens to yourself.

Taxiway landings keep happening and no one does anything about it.

In pitch dark night vision, ie a dark cockpit, the eyes can lose a lot of color perception. In addition, contaminants in the air and clouds can change the preception of a color.
Time to look for a more clear system than light colors.

Illumi nating the runway numbers could help.


Would something like a more robust system of sequenced lights help? Or would that be too distracting for normal ops?

Maybe this is worth its own thread...
Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 4333
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:42 pm

blackbox67 wrote:
Asking about disturbing lights at the end of a 5 h flight in dusk and darkness sounds like a fatigue issue. Maybe we should look onto their duty times.

http://www.jacdec.de/2017/07/11/2017-07 ... francicso/


I think he was asking about plane lights lined up on the taxiway. The crew is at least aware something is not right.

UA pilot may be the hero, saved the day.

What happened to ILS??
 
Western727
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:51 pm

I shudder at the thought of what could've happened had the 320 continued its approach. I look forward to the report.
Jack @ AUS
 
User avatar
tjwgrr
Posts: 2154
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2000 4:09 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:13 pm

wn676 wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

The parallel runway?
Everyone landing on a taxiway is an idiot until it happens to yourself.

Taxiway landings keep happening and no one does anything about it.

In pitch dark night vision, ie a dark cockpit, the eyes can lose a lot of color perception. In addition, contaminants in the air and clouds can change the preception of a color.
Time to look for a more clear system than light colors.

Illumi nating the runway numbers could help.


Would something like a more robust system of sequenced lights help? Or would that be too distracting for normal ops?

Maybe this is worth its own thread...

.
.
Were the REIL's not in use?
.
.
Image
Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:29 pm

Scary situation. Is there ATC audio available?
 
User avatar
Kickert
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 10:34 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:36 pm

AirlineCritic wrote:
Scary situation. Is there ATC audio available?

It's the SoundCloud link in the first post.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:40 pm

Sounds terrifying. Besides UA 1, do we know what other three planes waiting for takeoff? The retired captain in the Mercury News article said they were all widebodies.
 
User avatar
atypical
Posts: 640
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:28 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:48 pm

The audio from the incident is edited which leaves the impression the events were much closer than they actually may have been. The call for go around due to misaligned approach 30 seconds after initial contact with tower was made is not normal and is unsafe. We don't know if the pilot was maneuvering to avoid a collision or was performing a standard go around because he could not correct a deviation.
Last edited by atypical on Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ChicagoFlyer
Posts: 210
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:00 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:48 pm

As wrong airport landings happen from time to time, it's typically on a clear night with pilots executing a visual approach and landing on a runway with the same alignment as one they have been cleared on. I have never heard of a taxiway landing attempted this way though.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:49 pm

Waterbomber wrote:
mtnwest1979 wrote:
So what then did they rhink the long stretch with white lights was? Since it adjacent to what they were aiming for, I assume it was clearly visible. Lame.


The parallel runway?
Everyone landing on a taxiway is an idiot until it happens to yourself.

Taxiway landings keep happening and no one does anything about it.

In pitch dark night vision, ie a dark cockpit, the eyes can lose a lot of color perception. In addition, contaminants in the air and clouds can change the preception of a color.
Time to look for a more clear system than light colors.

Illuminating the runway numbers could help.


And 28L and 28R are very close to each other, which is the problem at SFO with low weather conditions. There isn't a taxiway between them, as is the case at many airports with parallel runways, which would provide lighting color separation.
 
sixtyseven
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:50 pm

runway23 wrote:
Visibility couldn't have been that bad if they could see the other aircraft and well the other aircraft could clearly see them.

Very lucky there was some visibility, as could have been a remake of TFN.

Most likely that's the end of the two pilots' careers.


Hang on now Sparky lets think about things for a couple seconds. Pilot is lined up with wrong runway conducting a visual approach. Lower visibility and same pilot is flying an instrument approach hooked up to an ILS likely.

If the visibility is bad, this doesn't happen as they wouldn't be flying by visual reference.

And these two pilots will most certainly fly again, after a thorough debriefing, investigation and possible retraining. Calm down on the theatrics.
Stand-by for new ATIS message......
 
reltney
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:34 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:01 pm

Thanks for the comment about the theatrics......90% of the non pilots love the theater in their posts. Oh the drama........
I am a pilot, therefore I envy no one...
 
Western727
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:02 pm

Sightseer wrote:
Sounds terrifying. Besides UA 1, do we know what other three planes waiting for takeoff? The retired captain in the Mercury News article said they were all widebodies.


According to http://www.jacdec.de/2017/07/11/2017-07 ... francicso/ referenced above, we have PAL 115 (343 headed to MNL), UAL 863 (789 headed to SYD) and UA 118 (seems to be an error; 118 shows up as a 752 to Edinburgh from ORD).

So...at the very least, it seems like two UA 789s and one PR 343 with that 4th jet to be determined. Assuming full loads in all 4 jets, that's north of 1,000 people, not counting those on the AC 320.
Jack @ AUS
 
Bavd
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:56 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:09 pm

Well, if you are expecting to see 2 rwys and are cleared for 28R and 28L is dark, twy c might be an obvious mistake.....
 
twincessna340a
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:26 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:14 pm

[quote="tjwgrr"][/quote]

Point of clarification that isn't 28R at SFO.

I found a YouTube video of a night landing on 28R: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNMtMYUGjnQ

It is from back in 2012 but it appears that there are no edge lights on C (either not on or not there).

The runway becomes clear at :40 into the video. The green center line light of C is by far the most prominent light source by brightness compounded by how straight it is. By comparison apart from the approach lights and PAPI the runway lights almost seem nonexistent.

From a human factors point of view, practically since birth we are conditioned that 'green is good' and are naturally drawn to bright lights; combine that with how straight the lights are and a fatigue factor it is easy to understand how human instinct can overcome training. It is the same principle on why police/firefighters/EMTs get struck by passing vehicles at traffic stops/accident scenes.

IIRC green center line lights in taxiways were originally implemented to use during low visibility conditions (they lighted charted low vis taxi routes)?

IMHO with how reliable and efficient LED lights are there should be no reason not to have edge lights everywhere and green centerline lights should only used in low visibility conditions or in good visibility only as runway lead in/exit lights. For the snow clearing argument, ATL has LED taxi edge lights installed in the pavement.
Last edited by twincessna340a on Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Western727
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:15 pm

Bavd wrote:
28L is dark


28L was dark? Why?
Jack @ AUS
 
jimbo737
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:16 pm

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-r ... 3p0259.asp

Rare, but this has occurred before after a long flight.
 
Bavd
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:56 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:31 pm

Western727 wrote:
Bavd wrote:
28L is dark


28L was dark? Why?


I meant, If rwy 28L was dark....
It could not be in use at the time?
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:37 pm

Lost in the drama is the fact that the AC pilot had the presence of mind to ask the tower why there were lights on the "runway." He was clearly aware that something wasn't right and inquired. Now, would he have recognized the misalignment in time and initiated a go-around on his own, or for the tower to order one? That only Providence knows, but at least he was heads-up enough to ask a question. Also, kudos to the other pilot for saying, "Where is this guy going? He’s on the taxiway!" In other words, another alert pilot being observant about his surroundings.

I am not trying to minimize this incident. It could have ended tragically for so many. There will be an investigation and is discipline is warranted, it will certainly be meted out. What I am saying is that alert people asked questions and/or made statements that helped to avert a tragedy and in the midst of everything else, we should remember that.
 
Western727
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:47 pm

Bavd wrote:
Western727 wrote:
Bavd wrote:
28L is dark


28L was dark? Why?


I meant, If rwy 28L was dark....
It could not be in use at the time?


Perhaps, though I doubt it was, given the time of the day (11:00p local time), and the likelihood of multiple arriving aircraft at the time.
Jack @ AUS
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 372
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:08 pm

Western727 wrote:
Perhaps, though I doubt it was, given the time of the day (11:00p local time), and the likelihood of multiple arriving aircraft at the time.

Why would you doubt it was? Seems like 28R was handling both arrivals and departures by that point in the evening. There is even a video linked in reply #27 that illustrates 28L approach and runway lights turned off.
FLYi
 
Western727
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:15 pm

flyPIT wrote:
Western727 wrote:
Perhaps, though I doubt it was, given the time of the day (11:00p local time), and the likelihood of multiple arriving aircraft at the time.

Why would you doubt it was? Seems like 28R was handling both arrivals and departures by that point in the evening. There is even a video linked in reply #27 that illustrates 28L approach and runway lights turned off.


Good question; I could certainly be wrong here. My speculation is that the video referenced in #27 was shot after midnight when arrivals have diminished significantly. At 11:00p I'm thinking there is still a substantial volume of arrivals, with SFO being a west coast airport.
Jack @ AUS
 
wn676
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:23 pm

tjwgrr wrote:
wn676 wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

The parallel runway?
Everyone landing on a taxiway is an idiot until it happens to yourself.

Taxiway landings keep happening and no one does anything about it.

In pitch dark night vision, ie a dark cockpit, the eyes can lose a lot of color perception. In addition, contaminants in the air and clouds can change the preception of a color.
Time to look for a more clear system than light colors.

Illumi nating the runway numbers could help.


Would something like a more robust system of sequenced lights help? Or would that be too distracting for normal ops?

Maybe this is worth its own thread...

.
.
Were the REIL's not in use?
.
.
Image


What you've shown is a MALS/MALSF system; REILs are just the strobes that identify a runway end (more or less in line with the runway threshold). IINM the two can't be combined.
Last edited by wn676 on Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
 
User avatar
NOLAWildcat
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:25 pm

I flew out of SFO on July 7th on an 23:55 flight. With regards to the speculation regarding low ceilings at SFO, the weather was clear that night, we didn't even have fog coming in through the Golden Gate much less the gap in the hills between Daly City and Brisbane, which is relatively rare for July in the Bay.

I'm also pretty sure 28L was open as of midnight when we departed. SFO has been closing runways on the weekend for resurfacing as of late, but 1R/19L was closed on Friday night (we departed 1L) and I didn't notice the lighted X's or those temporary "runway/taxiway closed" lights on 28L as we roared by. I'd be surprised if SFO had 2 runways closed at the time in question, particularly as the 10pm-12am period is busy with TPAC and transcon departures.
 
CO953
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:05 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:32 pm

Ummm .... maybe this is where we NON-pilots (I'm an auto mechanic) can suggest simple solutions to repeated potentially deadly problems like landing on taxiways///////

WHY CAN'T EVERY AIRPORT UNIFORMLY JUST PUT A BIG FREAKING BRILLIANT EYE-PIERCING KING-KONG SIZED RED "X" THAT LIGHTS UP AT THE APPROACH END OF EVERY TAXIWAY AND EVERY RUNWAY NOT IN USE?? (And a giant green smiley face for the ones that are in use, to make it kindergarten-simple.)

And no typical aviation excuse allowed for how "the X lights aren't working tonight." I'm talking a big hammer to force international compliance like a $1-million fine levied on the airport for each aircraft allowed to land while the X is not functioning. It's amazing how aircraft are designed with multiple system redundancy, whereas airports and their lighting systems seem to be held to the same level of compliance as a children's lemonade stand.

Not having something this low-tech seems to me as brilliant as not putting stop signs at intersections........ Am I being too simplistic? What am I missing here?

:confused:
Last edited by CO953 on Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:41 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
airtechy
Posts: 608
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 7:35 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:35 pm

Was the ILS active? Sounds like he was making a visual approach. Shades of Asiana 214 on 28L. :roll:
 
YYZYYT
Posts: 920
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:41 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:43 pm

Hold on... based on the edited transcript, the AC pilot called to identify lights on the runway. Isn't that a good reason to initiate a missed approach then and there? (Especially when the tower confirm there is no one on the runway), which your own eyes are telling you isn't true).

if not, at what point does traffic on the runway lead to a missed approach?

(From a non-pilot who wants to know)
 
Caspian27
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:48 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:04 pm

Most likely they were flying the FMS Bridge Visual to 28R which isn't aligned with the runway at all. If the lights were not on 28L and the Air Canada is trying to align with the runway, they most likely align with lights on the right. It's not as common to have multiple aircraft lined up on twy C so it might have easily presented the illusion of runway lights.
Meanwhile, somewhere 35,000 ft above your head...
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 2696
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:08 pm

reltney wrote:
Thanks for the comment about the theatrics......90% of the non pilots love the theater in their posts. Oh the drama........


Nice downplay by AC:

Air Canada issued a statement Monday saying, "Air Canada flight AC759 from Toronto was preparing to land at SFO Friday night when the aircraft initiated a go-around. The aircraft landed normally without incident. We are still investigating the circumstances."


Interpretation: Our pilot's mistake could have killed a thousand people but didn't. Please move on. Didn't Trump tweet something about Hillary?
 
stealth777
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:12 pm

28L was closed after 11:00pm local, so all arrivals and departures were using Runway 28R.
 
dopplerd
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:16 pm

Western727 wrote:
Sightseer wrote:
Sounds terrifying. Besides UA 1, do we know what other three planes waiting for takeoff? The retired captain in the Mercury News article said they were all widebodies.


According to http://www.jacdec.de/2017/07/11/2017-07 ... francicso/ referenced above, we have PAL 115 (343 headed to MNL), UAL 863 (789 headed to SYD) and UA 118 (seems to be an error; 118 shows up as a 752 to Edinburgh from ORD).

So...at the very least, it seems like two UA 789s and one PR 343 with that 4th jet to be determined. Assuming full loads in all 4 jets, that's north of 1,000 people, not counting those on the AC 320.


The flight was a United 737-900 flying UA 1118, SFO-MCO.
 
mwscan
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:29 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:36 pm

I'm not a pilot, but I do notice things about communication.

Quote: Air Canada pilot: Tower Air Canada 759 I can see lights on the runway there. Can you confirm we’re clear to land?

This is somewhat ambiguous.

"Lights on the runway" can be interpreted as "runway lights".

or

"Lights on the runway" can be interpreted as simply "lights" which could be the landing lights and nav lights of the aircraft lined up on the taxiway.

The fact that he said, "Can you confirm we're clear to land" might indicate that he had some concern that things looked out of the ordinary. He could have/should have been more specific in what he meant by "Lights on the runway".
 
User avatar
MSPSXMFLIER
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:37 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:42 pm

runway23 wrote:
Visibility couldn't have been that bad if they could see the other aircraft and well the other aircraft could clearly see them.

Very lucky there was some visibility, as could have been a remake of TFN.

Most likely that's the end of the two pilots' careers.



That's quite the wildly blind assertion that you make about these Air Canada pilots, don't you think?

Former NWA Capt. Lyle Prouse got a second chance at flying, with NWA no less, after piloting a 727 while legally intoxicated, back in 1990. He was brought up on federal charges, stood trial and was convicted, serving a 16 month prison sentence. After his release, he worked his ass off to rebuild his reputation and career, retiring from NWA in 1998 as a 747 captain. He was pardoned by Pres. Bill Clinton.

I would hazard a guess that the AC pilots will probably have to go through mandatory training and instruction, perhaps face a fine from their employer and then once again get back to flying. I see no reason to punish this crew, everyone deserves a second chance.....no one is perfect.
 
Blockplus
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:55 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:52 pm

surprized the media hasnt latched onto a united pilot saying they were lined up on the taxiway causing a go around and delaying a flight... you know, cause everything is United's fault. ;~)
 
Squeezix
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:10 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:22 pm

Just put up some damned lighted X's at the ends of these taxiways and call it good. Taxiway landings are a serious issue and yet they keep happening. Happened at SEA a few years ago, Harrison Ford had a close call at SNA a few months ago, and now this incident at SFO could have ended horrifically.

Put up some lighted X's and end this problem.
Last edited by Squeezix on Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:24 pm

Yeah that comment above about "most likely be the end of their career" is pretty ridiculous IMO. I'm not denying the fact that there is an issue here that seems to be all on the pilots, but remember it was the pilot that spoke up and questioned the landing clearance. As mentioned, they knew something wasn't right. I don't know for sure what would have happened if United 1 didn't speak up or if the controller didn't tell them to go around, but I would like to think they would have done the go around on their own.

Didn't a Delta 767 actually land on a taxiway in ATL some years ago?
 
Longhornmaniac
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:33 pm

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:04 pm

CO953 wrote:
Ummm .... maybe this is where we NON-pilots (I'm an auto mechanic) can suggest simple solutions to repeated potentially deadly problems like landing on taxiways///////

WHY CAN'T EVERY AIRPORT UNIFORMLY JUST PUT A BIG FREAKING BRILLIANT EYE-PIERCING KING-KONG SIZED RED "X" THAT LIGHTS UP AT THE APPROACH END OF EVERY TAXIWAY AND EVERY RUNWAY NOT IN USE?? (And a giant green smiley face for the ones that are in use, to make it kindergarten-simple.)

And no typical aviation excuse allowed for how "the X lights aren't working tonight." I'm talking a big hammer to force international compliance like a $1-million fine levied on the airport for each aircraft allowed to land while the X is not functioning. It's amazing how aircraft are designed with multiple system redundancy, whereas airports and their lighting systems seem to be held to the same level of compliance as a children's lemonade stand.

Not having something this low-tech seems to me as brilliant as not putting stop signs at intersections........ Am I being too simplistic? What am I missing here?

:confused:


As a pilot, I would absolutely hate a "big freaking brilliant eye-piercing king-kong sized red "X," since I want to actually be able to see. ;-)

The reality is, it's pretty hard to confuse a runway for a taxiway, but under the right circumstances, not impossible. I don't know what portions of the lighting system were up at the time, but 28R at KSFO has an ALSF-2 system, which is a "metric shitload" of lights leading to the runway.

If it was visual conditions, as it sounds like it was, then it's likely some components of it were turned off or turned down, as they're considered wholly unnecessary in VMC (visual meteorological conditions). I've asked a tower to turn up the ALSF at KAUS so I could show a student what they look like, and they're really freaking bright at "fog" intensity. As in, "turn them down so we can see and land" kind of bright.
Cheers,
Cameron
 
rbavfan
Posts: 1552
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Potential accident involving AC 759 prevented at SFO.

Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:12 pm

wn676 wrote:
twincessna340a wrote:
77H wrote:
SFO no longer has taxiway edge lights along most of the taxiways parallel to the 28's.

77H


Why not and how is that even possible?


Blue reflectors can be used in lieu of edge lights when there is a centerline lighting system installed.

viewtopic.php?t=1351669

I wonder if this will change the lighting guidance, should it be listed as a contributing factor.


While blue reflectors are nice for the aircraft on the taxiway it does not do much for approaching aircraft at night. Mind you the fact that all the aircraft were flashing should have been seen sooner.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos