User avatar
nickflightx
Topic Author
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 1:43 am

Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:20 pm

ACA781 was on final at SFO when the tower instructed him to go around at least 5 times and they still landed.

Audio from tower:
https://soundcloud.com/user-771239359/oct-23-2017-0400z

They really aren't making a good case for themselves at SFO.
 
hz747300
Posts: 2206
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:26 pm

And apparently they are hiring a lot of new pilots now based off the HK PPRUNE Forum. Besides the right to abode in Canada they should add multiple and successful SFO landings as a requirement too.
Keep on truckin'...
 
sandyb123
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:29 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:39 pm

So what’s the deal here? Wrong frequency. Seems like a Fairly procedural fail.

Sandyb123
Member of the mile high club
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:39 pm

hz747300 wrote:
And apparently they are hiring a lot of new pilots now based off the HK PPRUNE Forum. Besides the right to abode in Canada they should add multiple and successful SFO landings as a requirement too.


How would multiple landings in SFO change anything? You've obviously already done the investigation, let us know your findings. Easily could've been a radio issue....but let's hang them first and then investigate.

And just because crews are new to AC doesn't mean they're new to aviation....
Last edited by Whiteguy on Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
B747forever
Posts: 13365
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:42 pm

I would say this is quite a serious incident. Being asked multiple times to go around, and yet they continue to land.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
User avatar
JannEejit
Posts: 988
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:55 pm

Whiteguy wrote:
hz747300 wrote:
And apparently they are hiring a lot of new pilots now based off the HK PPRUNE Forum. Besides the right to abode in Canada they should add multiple and successful SFO landings as a requirement too.


How would multiple landings in SFO change anything? You've obviously already done the investigation, let us know your findings. Easily could've been a radio issue....but let's hang them first and then investigate.

And just because crews are new to AC doesn't mean they're new to aviation....


You don't do sarcasm do you ? :-)
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:12 pm

JannEejit wrote:
Whiteguy wrote:
hz747300 wrote:
And apparently they are hiring a lot of new pilots now based off the HK PPRUNE Forum. Besides the right to abode in Canada they should add multiple and successful SFO landings as a requirement too.


How would multiple landings in SFO change anything? You've obviously already done the investigation, let us know your findings. Easily could've been a radio issue....but let's hang them first and then investigate.

And just because crews are new to AC doesn't mean they're new to aviation....


You don't do sarcasm do you ? :-)


Is that what that was? :roll: :D
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:37 pm

Too bad we didn't hear "Air Canada 781, we have a number for you to call.."
xx
 
chrisa330
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:24 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:52 pm

I wasn’t able to make out what the AC crew said close to the end of the recording. Can anyone transcribe?
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:13 pm

I think it was taxi instructions
xx
 
jetskipper
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2001 1:50 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:15 pm

What isn't clear is what was the reason for the instructed go-around?
 
crazyfoo88
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:16 pm

I believe they said "we're having radio issues"
crazyfoo88
 
deebee278
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:14 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:36 pm

jetskipper wrote:
What isn't clear is what was the reason for the instructed go-around?


I don't know about SFO but at some airports with closely spaced parallel runways, there are restrictions as to the size of aircraft that can be holding short between the runways while others are taking off or landing. I don't know if that was the case here.
 
User avatar
mikegigs
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 8:03 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:39 pm

crazyfoo88 wrote:
I believe they said "we're having radio issues"

"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?
Airports: BOS, JAX, JFK, EWR, LGA, CVG, ATL, CLT, DCA, IAD, STT, PVD, ALB, MCO
Aircraft: 733, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 717, A319, A320, MD-88, E190, E175, E145, CRJ-200, CRJ-700, Q400
Airlines: B6, CO, DL, US, NW, WN, DH
...a good start but a looong way to go!
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:51 pm

"Air Canada 781, as a precaution we got the taxiway all cleared up for you..." :duck:

(Don't shoot me, AC is actually my favorite North American airline)
 
Armodeen
Posts: 988
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:59 pm

mikegigs wrote:
crazyfoo88 wrote:
I believe they said "we're having radio issues"

"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?


He said company aircraft.

I made it 6 go around instructions without reply :eyepopping:
 
User avatar
CFM565A1
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:19 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:10 pm

Pretty serious period (I am an AC Fan). Hopefully they can nip whatever breakdown there was in this incident relatively quickly (if there was one). Not going around after multiple instructions isn't good!
Flown: C172-M/N/P/R/S , P2006T, PA-34-200T, DH8A/C Been on: DH8A/C ERJ-145, CRJ-100/200, DH8D, CRJ-700/705/900, E-175/190, A319/320/321, 737-200/300/400/600/700/800/900ER, MD-82/83, 757-200/300, 767-300, 777-300ER, F28-4000.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:12 pm

mikegigs wrote:
"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?


No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.

But it does seem like this was a radio issue perhaps they were on the wrong frequency or there was a serious issue with their radio. Correct me if I'm wrong (and no I'm not a pilot) but if an aircraft looses radio communications the pilot should continue to fly the route as filed with the FAA. I understand that things can and do change during the approach, final approach and landing phases of flight but this is the reason why pilots have arrival charts with explicit instruction on what they should do if they need to execute a missed approach. I think what some people are trying to do is draw a correlation between this event and the almost catastrophic event that was avoid this past spring. I could be wrong but I don't think these two events are connected. If the last communication the pilots heard before their radio problems started was clear to land (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't it then fall on the air traffic controller to make sure traffic is out of the way if communications with the aircraft fail and are not restored?
 
User avatar
CFM565A1
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:19 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:20 pm

jayunited wrote:
mikegigs wrote:
"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?


No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.

But it does seem like this was a radio issue perhaps they were on the wrong frequency or there was a serious issue with their radio. Correct me if I'm wrong (and no I'm not a pilot) but if an aircraft looses radio communications the pilot should continue to fly the route as filed with the FAA. I understand that things can and do change during the approach, final approach and landing phases of flight but this is the reason why pilots have arrival charts with explicit instruction on what they should do if they need to execute a missed approach. I think what some people are trying to do is draw a correlation between this event and the almost catastrophic event that was avoid this past spring. I could be wrong but I don't think these two events are connected. If the last communication the pilots heard before their radio problems started was clear to land (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't it then fall on the air traffic controller to make sure traffic is out of the way if communications with the aircraft fail and are not restored?


You are correct about comm failures. It's dependent on the the phase of flight they're in (Radar Vectors, Approaches, etc). In short, if they were trying to tell them to Go-Around, they would have known of a comm failure because procedure #1 is to Squawk 7600 to allow ATC to be notified of a comm failure. We may see in the findings at the end that they were aware or weren't aware and something other than a comm problem happened.
Flown: C172-M/N/P/R/S , P2006T, PA-34-200T, DH8A/C Been on: DH8A/C ERJ-145, CRJ-100/200, DH8D, CRJ-700/705/900, E-175/190, A319/320/321, 737-200/300/400/600/700/800/900ER, MD-82/83, 757-200/300, 767-300, 777-300ER, F28-4000.
 
qcpilotxf
Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:10 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:26 pm

CFM565A1 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
mikegigs wrote:
"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?


No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.

But it does seem like this was a radio issue perhaps they were on the wrong frequency or there was a serious issue with their radio. Correct me if I'm wrong (and no I'm not a pilot) but if an aircraft looses radio communications the pilot should continue to fly the route as filed with the FAA. I understand that things can and do change during the approach, final approach and landing phases of flight but this is the reason why pilots have arrival charts with explicit instruction on what they should do if they need to execute a missed approach. I think what some people are trying to do is draw a correlation between this event and the almost catastrophic event that was avoid this past spring. I could be wrong but I don't think these two events are connected. If the last communication the pilots heard before their radio problems started was clear to land (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't it then fall on the air traffic controller to make sure traffic is out of the way if communications with the aircraft fail and are not restored?


You are correct about comm failures. It's dependent on the the phase of flight they're in (Radar Vectors, Approaches, etc). In short, if they were trying to tell them to Go-Around, they would have known of a comm failure because procedure #1 is to Squawk 7600 to allow ATC to be notified of a comm failure. We may see in the findings at the end that they were aware or weren't aware and something other than a comm problem happened.


Well procedure #1 is Fly the Airplane. It is easily possible that if there was a communications issue that they were either not aware or since they were in a critical phase of flight they elected to not change the transponder. Aviate Navigate Communicate. Squawk Codes fall under the latter.


Edit: Typo
 
whywhyzee
Posts: 650
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:47 pm

Given where they were in the approach, and that they were already cleared to land, my judgement would be that a radio issue developed very late in the game and they elected to continue as per their last clearance. The crew seems to have reacted correctly in this scenario, and were let down by a technical fault. Stress seems to, of course, something else could have happened, but one thing is for certain, they did not hear the calls to go around.
 
User avatar
CFM565A1
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:19 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:51 pm

qcpilotxf wrote:
CFM565A1 wrote:
jayunited wrote:

No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.

But it does seem like this was a radio issue perhaps they were on the wrong frequency or there was a serious issue with their radio. Correct me if I'm wrong (and no I'm not a pilot) but if an aircraft looses radio communications the pilot should continue to fly the route as filed with the FAA. I understand that things can and do change during the approach, final approach and landing phases of flight but this is the reason why pilots have arrival charts with explicit instruction on what they should do if they need to execute a missed approach. I think what some people are trying to do is draw a correlation between this event and the almost catastrophic event that was avoid this past spring. I could be wrong but I don't think these two events are connected. If the last communication the pilots heard before their radio problems started was clear to land (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't it then fall on the air traffic controller to make sure traffic is out of the way if communications with the aircraft fail and are not restored?


You are correct about comm failures. It's dependent on the the phase of flight they're in (Radar Vectors, Approaches, etc). In short, if they were trying to tell them to Go-Around, they would have known of a comm failure because procedure #1 is to Squawk 7600 to allow ATC to be notified of a comm failure. We may see in the findings at the end that they were aware or weren't aware and something other than a comm problem happened.


Well procedure #1 is Fly the Airplane. It is easily possible that if there was a communications issue that they were either not aware or since they were in a critical phase of flight they elected to not change the transponder. Aviate Navigate Communicate. Squawk Codes fall under the latter.


Edit: Typo


Yes and I agree with everything you’ve said, I guess in a roundabout way the point I was making that what happened was serious, we don’t know everything, and we must wait and see to be able to figure it out. I was going based on the assumption that there was sufficient time to go off proper comm failure procedures. Like I said, we’ll wait and see what the facts are.
Flown: C172-M/N/P/R/S , P2006T, PA-34-200T, DH8A/C Been on: DH8A/C ERJ-145, CRJ-100/200, DH8D, CRJ-700/705/900, E-175/190, A319/320/321, 737-200/300/400/600/700/800/900ER, MD-82/83, 757-200/300, 767-300, 777-300ER, F28-4000.
 
hivue
Posts: 1703
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:57 pm

jayunited wrote:
No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.


I hear "company." It doesn't make a lot of sense that the tower would have an airplane cross a runway (expedited or not) where another airplane they were not in communication with was landing against instructions.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
FoxtrotSierra
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 7:06 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:30 pm

Man, that was difficult to listen to, you could really feel the irritation of ATC with AC781.
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 348
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:10 pm

jayunited wrote:
mikegigs wrote:
"Yeah that's pretty evident..." Honestly I'm surprised the air traffic controller kept so cool. Kudos to him for handling the situation well and keeping all safe. When he gave those instructions to UA about moving without delay was that due to the incoming AC aircraft, or did he say company aircraft?


No you heard him correctly he did tell a UA flight to move without delay do to the AC on final approach.

But it does seem like this was a radio issue perhaps they were on the wrong frequency or there was a serious issue with their radio. Correct me if I'm wrong (and no I'm not a pilot) but if an aircraft looses radio communications the pilot should continue to fly the route as filed with the FAA. I understand that things can and do change during the approach, final approach and landing phases of flight but this is the reason why pilots have arrival charts with explicit instruction on what they should do if they need to execute a missed approach. I think what some people are trying to do is draw a correlation between this event and the almost catastrophic event that was avoid this past spring. I could be wrong but I don't think these two events are connected. If the last communication the pilots heard before their radio problems started was clear to land (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't it then fall on the air traffic controller to make sure traffic is out of the way if communications with the aircraft fail and are not restored?


That's true, but for many larger airports, you have specific procedures in the aerodrome info charts/notams that specify what to do if you have a radio failure on the approach.

It could be caused by distractions by the pilots too. Maybe Air Canada doesn't have a silent cockpit rule below 10,000ft and the pilots simply were having a conversation together while maybe turning down the volume of the radio a tad bit too much. Could simply be due to complacency if the pilots often fly to this destination and they feel like they know it like the back of their hand.
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:28 pm

Some more info from Aviation Herald http://avherald.com/h?article=4b016414&opt=1

I assume this will be investigated and the CVR tapes reviewed?

Seems strange, they were apparently on the right frequency.
There is more than one radio box onboard, total radio failure is pretty rare.
cant imagine they would turn the volume down at a critical stage of the flight.
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 348
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:36 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Some more info from Aviation Herald http://avherald.com/h?article=4b016414&opt=1

I assume this will be investigated and the CVR tapes reviewed?

Seems strange, they were apparently on the right frequency.
There is more than one radio box onboard, total radio failure is pretty rare.
cant imagine they would turn the volume down at a critical stage of the flight.


With quite a few years experience in the industry, it's actually quite easy for me to imagine. I've seen many different kinds of crazy things such as pilots taking photos while on approach and even on a long final etc. Sorry but it's true.

And I agree that a total comm failure is very very unlikely. More unlikely than human error by far I would think.
 
mm320cap
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:03 am

FoxtrotSierra wrote:
Man, that was difficult to listen to, you could really feel the irritation of ATC with AC781.


That controller handled it like an absolute pro. Didn’t let him get it rattled. Just took care of business
 
hz747300
Posts: 2206
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:56 am

Whiteguy wrote:

You don't do sarcasm do you ? :-)

Is that what that was? :roll: :D


Of course! Since no one was hurt, we can have fun with it. As the host of one of the night shows at 680 KNBR used to say "Angels fly because they take themselves lightly"... That should bring out all the anti-religious nuts and this thread will be complete.
Keep on truckin'...
 
User avatar
NYPECO
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:55 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:17 am

Why would the controller let the UA aircraft cross the runway when the unresponsive AC aircraft was going to land on it?
 
dmg626
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:47 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:27 am

flyingphil wrote:
Some more info from Aviation Herald http://avherald.com/h?article=4b016414&opt=1

I assume this will be investigated and the CVR tapes reviewed?

Seems strange, they were apparently on the right frequency.
There is more than one radio box onboard, total radio failure is pretty rare.
cant imagine they would turn the volume down at a critical stage of the flight.



Both of their radios would be tuned in to tower freq, both comm selector heads selected to vhf 1 on panel, but only 1 box below for vhf 1 and 1 for vhf 2
 
emiratesdriver
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:04 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:34 am

Comm failures happen, I've had the same thing happen to me at 4 miles going into LHR, the tower called us for a speed reduction, the FO mentioned it had gone quiet, a quick check of the audio selectors revealed nothing. Luckily being familiar with the airport we flashed our nose gear light and received a solid green light from the tower (cleared to land). Comms came back as we were decelerating through 80kts or so, techlog updated on stand, ASR filed and a phone call to the shift leader in the tower to thank the controller on duty, the offer of a free pint was however declined :-)
 
cherif
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 12:48 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:35 am

The effect of the qualified pilot shortage!
 
klvk94550
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:43 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:56 am

Wow I'm glad the controller kept his cool during that,
 
sixtyseven
Posts: 661
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:43 pm

dmg626 wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
Some more info from Aviation Herald http://avherald.com/h?article=4b016414&opt=1

I assume this will be investigated and the CVR tapes reviewed?

Seems strange, they were apparently on the right frequency.
There is more than one radio box onboard, total radio failure is pretty rare.
cant imagine they would turn the volume down at a critical stage of the flight.



Both of their radios would be tuned in to tower freq, both comm selector heads selected to vhf 1 on panel, but only 1 box below for vhf 1 and 1 for vhf 2


What??? In English one time.
Stand-by for new ATIS message......
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:15 pm

dmg626 wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
Some more info from Aviation Herald http://avherald.com/h?article=4b016414&opt=1

I assume this will be investigated and the CVR tapes reviewed?

Seems strange, they were apparently on the right frequency.
There is more than one radio box onboard, total radio failure is pretty rare.
cant imagine they would turn the volume down at a critical stage of the flight.



Both of their radios would be tuned in to tower freq, both comm selector heads selected to vhf 1 on panel, but only 1 box below for vhf 1 and 1 for vhf 2


No both radios wouldn't have been tuned to TWR FREQ!
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2985
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:19 pm

Yet another incident involving a AC A320.

Nothing against the A320 - very reliable safe aircraft but you have to wonder about the cockpit instrumentation:

First there was a near disaster in July when AC759 mistook the taxiway for the runway. It was at night but still puzzling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

Now you have the second incident where the crew alleges to blame radio problems for not hearing control tower's instructions to enter into holding pattern.

And not to mention the crash at YHZ in March 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_624#Investigation

Maybe it was inadequate crew training in A320 simulators; but I for one am glad the A320 is being replaced by the 737MAX.
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
hivue
Posts: 1703
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:37 pm

787Driver wrote:
Maybe Air Canada doesn't have a silent cockpit rule below 10,000ft


Actually it does appear that they have a "silent cockpit rule" -- which extends as far as not answering radio calls. :)

Did you mean "sterile cockpit rule?"
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
ThatsNotAPlane
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:20 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:45 pm

If the controllers did a good enough job spacing aircraft, then there wouldn't have been a need to go around. SMH.
 
reltney
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:34 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:10 pm

This is too simple.

I have in the past as a co-pilot, after landing clearance is received, dialed in the next frequency in the standby side of the radio and accidentally switched it to make it the active. (Luckily tower did not call me on final). After turning off on the hi speed taxiway aster landing I went to switch to ground control and noticed the radio was already switched to ground freq..... Yup, I did it. Another time as Capt . I reached forward to lower the gear and pulled my headset out of the socket. Went a few more miles when the F/O looked at me and asked why I am not answering the radio. Noticing the cord out of the socket, I slid it back in and walaa, answered the radio.....

Simple things can cause big issues and will sneak up when you least expect. 2 in the cockpit help prevent 99.9% of this stuff but it creeps up on us.

Now for you non pilots and those who think there is heart stopping drama every time a plane moves, there is NO stress in the cockpit during normal operations. It is the most relaxing and complex as it is, very relaxing profession. If there are stressed pilots during normal operations ( non emergency), GET OFF THE PLANE! The pilot is a danger to himself and everyone around! You cannot perform under performance stress safely in a cockpit. I have had my share of emergencies and your heart rate bumps up initially but training and common sense takes over and turns 99.9% of all emergencies to a non event.

I see stress in aviation by:
Commuting to work on a bad weather day.
Whether they loaded enough first class Beef.
Did I buy enough gummy bears to last an ocean crossing.
The ATM doesn't work next to the hotel and I have to walk to the Kensington st ATM area and the cold wet rain.
I missed the cross river boat in AMS and have to walk back to get the hotel shuttle alternate drop off point.
I am at a 9hr layover and while in the lobby realize the hotel is a maze and signs are not clear where my room is.
Hoping my wife can make the flight so we can have the 2 day layover in Vegas .
Having to wash your uniform on a trip with limited time. I like my shirts crisp and white.
Feather pillows suck for my neck.


Throw me a nasty budget airline passenger who smells while I have a compressor stall and I'll handle them when I finish my meal on my terms...

Inflight fire.....now that is a bit stressful over the water or polar region with nearest airport 2 hrs away..

I know I made fun of the stress thing and digress a bit but the landing is not stressful, it's fun as is the job. Things happen in the cockpit and something caused the AC flight to miss 6 calls. The controller was not desperate so it wasn't something scary. In fact if you fly into SFO on 28R, the turn offs get crowded and leave little place to go except down to the end which causes other problems if a plane is close behind the other.

Let's see what the reason was. Air Canada is a GREAT airline with very professional pilots. Don't hang them on a wim....

Cheers.
Knives don't kill people. People with knives kill people.
OUTLAW KNIVES.

I am a pilot, therefore I envy no one...
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:29 pm

reltney wrote:
This is too simple.

I have in the past as a co-pilot, after landing clearance is received, dialed in the next frequency in the standby side of the radio and accidentally switched it to make it the active. (Luckily tower did not call me on final). After turning off on the hi speed taxiway aster landing I went to switch to ground control and noticed the radio was already switched to ground freq..... Yup, I did it. Another time as Capt . I reached forward to lower the gear and pulled my headset out of the socket. Went a few more miles when the F/O looked at me and asked why I am not answering the radio. Noticing the cord out of the socket, I slid it back in and walaa, answered the radio.....

Simple things can cause big issues and will sneak up when you least expect. 2 in the cockpit help prevent 99.9% of this stuff but it creeps up on us.

Now for you non pilots and those who think there is heart stopping drama every time a plane moves, there is NO stress in the cockpit during normal operations. It is the most relaxing and complex as it is, very relaxing profession. If there are stressed pilots during normal operations ( non emergency), GET OFF THE PLANE! The pilot is a danger to himself and everyone around! You cannot perform under performance stress safely in a cockpit. I have had my share of emergencies and your heart rate bumps up initially but training and common sense takes over and turns 99.9% of all emergencies to a non event.

I see stress in aviation by:
Commuting to work on a bad weather day.
Whether they loaded enough first class Beef.
Did I buy enough gummy bears to last an ocean crossing.
The ATM doesn't work next to the hotel and I have to walk to the Kensington st ATM area and the cold wet rain.
I missed the cross river boat in AMS and have to walk back to get the hotel shuttle alternate drop off point.
I am at a 9hr layover and while in the lobby realize the hotel is a maze and signs are not clear where my room is.
Hoping my wife can make the flight so we can have the 2 day layover in Vegas .
Having to wash your uniform on a trip with limited time. I like my shirts crisp and white.
Feather pillows suck for my neck.


Throw me a nasty budget airline passenger who smells while I have a compressor stall and I'll handle them when I finish my meal on my terms...

Inflight fire.....now that is a bit stressful over the water or polar region with nearest airport 2 hrs away..

I know I made fun of the stress thing and digress a bit but the landing is not stressful, it's fun as is the job. Things happen in the cockpit and something caused the AC flight to miss 6 calls. The controller was not desperate so it wasn't something scary. In fact if you fly into SFO on 28R, the turn offs get crowded and leave little place to go except down to the end which causes other problems if a plane is close behind the other.

Let's see what the reason was. Air Canada is a GREAT airline with very professional pilots. Don't hang them on a wim....

Cheers.


Excellent post!!
 
User avatar
CFM565A1
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:19 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:35 pm

bmacleod wrote:
Yet another incident involving a AC A320.

Nothing against the A320 - very reliable safe aircraft but you have to wonder about the cockpit instrumentation:

First there was a near disaster in July when AC759 mistook the taxiway for the runway. It was at night but still puzzling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

Now you have the second incident where the crew alleges to blame radio problems for not hearing control tower's instructions to enter into holding pattern.

And not to mention the crash at YHZ in March 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_624#Investigation

Maybe it was inadequate crew training in A320 simulators; but I for one am glad the A320 is being replaced by the 737MAX.


This has ZERO to do with the A320 vs 737 Max so don’t even bother to go there. When it comes to comm systems or mistaking a runway for a taxiway, I dare you to cite the case as to how the 737 would have been better (when you say you’re glad theyre swapping it makes you sound like your blaming the A320 for some inherent problem). Look, Airlines go through spurts of these kind of hiccups, all the United fans who’ve come on here and complained about both AC incidents need to remember how many 737s Continental/UA skidded off runways. Air Canada has been operating the A320 series for almost 30 years, with some of the oldest still flying.

In fact, just the other day we had a UA crew make complete idiots of themselves here at YYC because they got vectors which they were slow to respond to each time there was an instruction by Arrival. Then when they landed, they proceeded to whine to our ground controllers on frequency about the “bad vectors they got” when our airport isn’t even located at the same place where the Arrival controllers are.
Flown: C172-M/N/P/R/S , P2006T, PA-34-200T, DH8A/C Been on: DH8A/C ERJ-145, CRJ-100/200, DH8D, CRJ-700/705/900, E-175/190, A319/320/321, 737-200/300/400/600/700/800/900ER, MD-82/83, 757-200/300, 767-300, 777-300ER, F28-4000.
 
zippy
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 9:46 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:03 pm

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A ... 302071.php

When the commands went unanswered, the traffic controller used a flashing red light gun to alert the crew to go around, which officials said is standard protocol for an unresponsive air crew. The move also failed to get the crew’s attention.


Looks like more than just the radio was out.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1358
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:47 pm

CFM565A1 wrote:
This has ZERO to do with the A320 vs 737 Max so don’t even bother to go there. When it comes to comm systems or mistaking a runway for a taxiway, I dare you to cite the case as to how the 737 would have been better (when you say you’re glad theyre swapping it makes you sound like your blaming the A320 for some inherent problem).


:checkmark:

Although, of course, it could have been that the AC 320 was installed with faulty sensor-computational units on the two cockpit seats. I daresay in both incidents some of the sensors may have been shut off; perhaps the units were in sleep mode. But I think those units can also be equally well installed on the 737s, so no difference there.
 
User avatar
iseeyyc
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:07 pm

2nd strike AC. I'll stick to westjet!
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 856
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:50 pm

iseeyyc wrote:
2nd strike AC. I'll stick to westjet!

Really? Do you by any chance remember WS's incident in SXM a few months ago or their 767 issues they had at one point. But no, our airline is perfect and the east's is bad. Typical Albertan/Calgarian response...
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:06 pm

767333ER wrote:
iseeyyc wrote:
2nd strike AC. I'll stick to westjet!

Really? Do you by any chance remember WS's incident in SXM a few months ago or their 767 issues they had at one point. But no, our airline is perfect and the east's is bad. Typical Albertan/Calgarian response...


While I agree the "I'll stick to Westjet" comment is uncalled for, and I work there.....I disagree the SXM or the B763s should have anything to do with any of this.

I also disagree with media bringing up the previous SFO incident, one has nothing to do with the other!
 
ACDC8
Posts: 7697
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:56 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:10 pm

How visible is a light gun from the control tower when you're not looking for it? I've used it during training, but in that scenario, one is focusing on seeing it - but in normal circumstances, I would think it would be something that could easily be overseen.
A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:46 pm

bmacleod wrote:
Yet another incident involving a AC A320.

Nothing against the A320 - very reliable safe aircraft but you have to wonder about the cockpit instrumentation:

First there was a near disaster in July when AC759 mistook the taxiway for the runway. It was at night but still puzzling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

Now you have the second incident where the crew alleges to blame radio problems for not hearing control tower's instructions to enter into holding pattern.

And not to mention the crash at YHZ in March 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_624#Investigation

Maybe it was inadequate crew training in A320 simulators; but I for one am glad the A320 is being replaced by the 737MAX.


How is the pilot landing on the taxiway the A320s fault?
@DadCelo
 
hivue
Posts: 1703
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Another Air Canada incident at SFO

Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:47 pm

zippy wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Air-Canada-being-probed-for-another-runway-12302071.php

When the commands went unanswered, the traffic controller used a flashing red light gun to alert the crew to go around, which officials said is standard protocol for an unresponsive air crew. The move also failed to get the crew’s attention.


Looks like more than just the radio was out.


So what is the next step? Send up a flare? This is something the MSM might make a big deal out of, but in the 21st century how many air crew are going to be looking at the tower cab unless they know they are NORDO and also don't know what to do next?
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.

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