https://avherald.com/h?article=4f3b0864&opt=0

This occurred on 01/22/22. FAA classified incident, NTSB designated an accident.

Looks like a very close call that nearly resulted in a Mid-Air collision at an uncontrolled ski country airport in IFR conditions.

Reports are still very preliminary.

One thing to bear in mind for those wondering about the events immediately following: Tailstrikes aren’t always felt in the cockpit.

This industry is still extremely vulnerable. All praises due it wasn’t worse.

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

MTJ (Montrose, CO) is another non-towered JetBlue city.

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Not crazy common but it happens. A few of the Colorado mountain airports -- HDN, GUC, MTJ come to mind. Plus after hours arrivals at non-24 hour towers, like SAV.

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Many destinations served by regional carriers.

Something is screwy in the linked report. Weather shown at 1857Z (estimated time of incident) was 005 OVC, that’s ceiling at 500’ OVC. IF that’s true, it would seem the King Air was cleared for the approach to 28. JBU should not have been released by Center until the King Air reported on the ground “close my flight plan” or cancelled IFR which the KA could not due if the weather was 005 OVC. It’s possibke, if the JBU crew weren’t familiar with void time departure clearances they departed outside the void time. Secondly, someone was not announcing their position and intentions on the CTAF.

What’s really puzzling is how both aircraft should have been IFR and even at an untowered airport, this should never have happened, unless there was some major mix up in ATC/void/clearance instructions.

What seems most likely - is that the B6 crew frantically departed (and hit something or runway), the 350 did not spot them and therefore never reported anything, and the B6 crew was trying to keep it hush hush. I seriously doubt ATC cleared an opposite direction departure by mistake for B6, but I guess nothing is impossible

joeblow10 wrote:

What’s really puzzling is how both aircraft should have been IFR and even at an untowered airport, this should never have happened, unless there was some major mix up in ATC/void/clearance instructions.

What seems most likely - is that the B6 crew frantically departed (and hit something or runway), the 350 did not spot them and therefore never reported anything, and the B6 crew was trying to keep it hush hush. I seriously doubt ATC cleared an opposite direction departure by mistake for B6, but I guess nothing is impossible

Even in IFR, B6 would have to declare takeoff intentions on the common frequency for non-towered opps? Maybe they had the wrong frequency?

At a uncontrolled field, a departing flight can use any runway appropriate for the conditions. JBU would have been within their right to use 10. What they cannot do is depart until released by the Center and no later than the “void if not off by xxxxZ”. What clearance was the KA350 operating on? Presumably, a Center-issued approach. What clearance did JBU have, the void time and did they believe they’d been released? Finally, what was transmitted over the CTAF by each crew? All this is recorded and indisputable.

Video animation, looks like from Flightradar24.

https://youtu.be/YQLOwje4U9Y

phatfarmlines wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

What’s really puzzling is how both aircraft should have been IFR and even at an untowered airport, this should never have happened, unless there was some major mix up in ATC/void/clearance instructions.

What seems most likely - is that the B6 crew frantically departed (and hit something or runway), the 350 did not spot them and therefore never reported anything, and the B6 crew was trying to keep it hush hush. I seriously doubt ATC cleared an opposite direction departure by mistake for B6, but I guess nothing is impossible

Even in IFR, B6 would have to declare takeoff intentions on the common frequency for non-towered opps? Maybe they had the wrong frequency?

You’d be surprised how often airline crews mess something up on untowered comms - or at the very least, make it unclear what they’re trying to say. For many, it’s been many years since they ever had to do anything of the sort. And legally, unless there is some 121 specific rule I don’t know about, they don’t have to say anything at all.

joeblow10 wrote:

phatfarmlines wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

What’s really puzzling is how both aircraft should have been IFR and even at an untowered airport, this should never have happened, unless there was some major mix up in ATC/void/clearance instructions.

What seems most likely - is that the B6 crew frantically departed (and hit something or runway), the 350 did not spot them and therefore never reported anything, and the B6 crew was trying to keep it hush hush. I seriously doubt ATC cleared an opposite direction departure by mistake for B6, but I guess nothing is impossible

Even in IFR, B6 would have to declare takeoff intentions on the common frequency for non-towered opps? Maybe they had the wrong frequency?

You’d be surprised how often airline crews mess something up on untowered comms - or at the very least, make it unclear what they’re trying to say. For many, it’s been many years since they ever had to do anything of the sort. And legally, unless there is some 121 specific rule I don’t know about, they don’t have to say anything at all.

Uhhh…no.

In looking at ASRS there was almost a similar situation about a year ago at HDN. ACN: 1784371

"Event happened at Yampa Valley Colorado. Contributing factors were a weather pause for both incoming and outgoing traffic. As we were trying to take off Denver Center was trying to sequence arrivals and departures. The aircraft in front of us was cleared to take off by Denver Center. We were asked if we could take off and be airborne within 90 seconds due to an inbound aircraft. We had an aircraft in sight and believed that to be the aircraft which we were cleared in front of. Contributing factor was Pilot in command was on ATC frequency but not on CTAF frequency. First officer was on both frequencies, but VFR aircraft was not transmitting position in pattern. As we took the runway and began our takeoff roll, chatter on the CTAF frequency alerted us to the traffic conflict. First Officer began giving vectors to Pilot Flying to avoid possible conflict. Due to being on takeoff roll we did not have visual on conflict aircraft. After getting airborne and getting in a safe flight configuration we took a slight left turn to displace ourselves from the TCAS information. We did not receive an RA likely because we were too low. Situational Awareness of Pilot Flying was increased dramatically once on both frequencies. Both pilots were under the impression clearance to depart was given with the aircraft we had in view to be the called traffic."

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

A lot of AS 737s in Alaska. YAK JNU (after hours) CDV PSG WRG SIT KTN ADK DLG OTZ BRW SCC

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

PBG is non-towered. They have Allegiant and SkyWest service.

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Quite common, especially among smaller EAS-type airports. There are too many to list. Usually there is a way for ATC to talk directly to the pilot on the ground at these type of airports. Even more when you consider airports where the control tower is not a 24 hour operation.

What is less common, especially among Enroute facilities is this level of "airport control". ZDV's Area 1 (ski country) and ZMP's Area 1 (UP of Michigan and northern Wisconsin). Both get swamped in their respective seasons. I'm sure there are more facilities that get a good level of "airport control" but I think you'd be hard pressed to find any more Enroute facilities that push as much traffic to the ground without an underlying approach control. EGE and TVC are hands down the busiest towers overlayed by a "Z".

Peace

ytib wrote:

In looking at ASRS there was almost a similar situation about a year ago at HDN. ACN: 1784371

"Event happened at Yampa Valley Colorado. Contributing factors were a weather pause for both incoming and outgoing traffic. As we were trying to take off Denver Center was trying to sequence arrivals and departures. The aircraft in front of us was cleared to take off by Denver Center. We were asked if we could take off and be airborne within 90 seconds due to an inbound aircraft. We had an aircraft in sight and believed that to be the aircraft which we were cleared in front of. Contributing factor was Pilot in command was on ATC frequency but not on CTAF frequency. First officer was on both frequencies, but VFR aircraft was not transmitting position in pattern. As we took the runway and began our takeoff roll, chatter on the CTAF frequency alerted us to the traffic conflict. First Officer began giving vectors to Pilot Flying to avoid possible conflict. Due to being on takeoff roll we did not have visual on conflict aircraft. After getting airborne and getting in a safe flight configuration we took a slight left turn to displace ourselves from the TCAS information. We did not receive an RA likely because we were too low. Situational Awareness of Pilot Flying was increased dramatically once on both frequencies. Both pilots were under the impression clearance to depart was given with the aircraft we had in view to be the called traffic."

Based on that ASRS, it’s pretty easy to see how it happened again, even the terminology used is wrong. Center cannot “clear” one for take-off at an uncontrolled field, only the PIC can make that decision.

The flight asks for a clearance, center will ask your estimated time for being airborne. Best, to be started up, ready to taxi, when you say “ready to copy”. Take the clearance, agree to the void time. If it’s a busy airport or Center has an inbound, the controller will ask you to report ready for departure, meaning you’re number one. Both pilots taxi out on CTAF, Center has no part to play for the moment, making the required CTAF calls. At number one, inform Center you’re number one “waiting for release”. When Center has his traffic plan, he’ll state, “you’re released, report airborne, if not airborne by xxxxZ, remain on the ground and state your intentions. If you’re not airborne or call from the ground, the Center has to start a search.

The uncontrolled field means the crew works out traffic conflicts. Pilots that fly A to B under IFR clearances either never learned it or long forgot what aviation is like outside ATC. I witnessed a real mess one day at Muskogee, OK. Senior evaluator pilot in the C-5, took the clearance, the void time and got the release. I was shaking my head and he asked what’s the matter. I go, “you’ve really messed this up, do you know a void time is?” “Well, no”. “OK, you’ve agreed to depart in ten minutes and haven’t started the four engines yet.”

Yes, there’s usually a Center RCO, but in the old days, it was send the co-pilot into the building and call on the landline to Center. Too much traffic to do that at HDN, but there’s a phone number still in the book. The ski country airports have a special briefing out each year for the NBAA on how that winter will work.

Video of the event. More violent than I imagined, personally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TKAPAo602w

I assume this is the video taken by the reply on avherald (https://avherald.com/h?article=4f3b0864&opt=0) stating:

Passenger on plane
By Tangela Byrd on Thursday, Jan 27th 2022 05:02Z

I was a passenger on this aircraft. Being seated in the back of the plane this was a very frightening and horrific experience for myself, husband, 2 sons, granddaughter, and pregnant daughter in law. We felt the hit and was actually filming our granddaughter and how much fun she was having flying at 2.5 years old, when the tail strike happened. We knew something abnormal happened but had to wait 20 minutes for anyone to say anything. The pilot then told us it was an air strike due to avoiding collision with another aircraft. When told we were going to Denver to have the plane checked out, our anxiety intensified while we were flying in a plane with no idea the damage we had! Upon departing at Denver, no one checked to see if anyone needed medical attention. After all, this was more than a bump on the runway. There was no one from Jet Blue at Denver and when calling Jet Blue, no one could give us an estimated time before our next flight. We sat at Denver Airport over 9 hours.

If it was IFR, then one of those airplanes should not have been doing what they were doing. Given the positively massive number of mindblowing, boneheaded, downright dangerous things I’ve seen GA do over the years… I’m lookin’ at you, King Air.

That said, there isn’t a lot of info here. The report you cited doesn’t even mention a “near-miss” like your title suggests. In fact it seems to dismiss it.

N766UA wrote:

If it was IFR, then one of those airplanes should not have been doing what they were doing. Given the positively massive number of mindblowing, boneheaded, downright dangerous things I’ve seen GA do over the years… I’m lookin’ at you, King Air.

That said, there isn’t a lot of info here. The report you cited doesn’t even mention a “near-miss” like your title suggests. In fact it seems to dismiss it.

You blame one of the two planes while admitting you have no evidence either way?

The KA, given the weather, was on the approach and had the airspace until landed or on the missed approach unless Denver Center screwed up and released the JBU flight with the KA on final. CTAF is really irrelevant here because JBU could not have been released.

I have to say this all isn't quite adding up. There seem to be two events that are being connected by speculation on this board and on AvHerald. We have no proof that the tail-strike and near-miss were related to each other. Was the tail-strike really an "avoidance maneuver", or just something that happened at the same time? Likely that the two events added a lot to the crew's workload. It will be interesting to see the root causes which I am sure will come out after investigation and interviews with the crew.

And based on that video - the above post saying that the crew might not have felt the tail strike I find odd, but don't discount 100%. That was a decent shake. Perhaps they did the same thing the QR aircraft did in MIA? AA at JFK? Pretend it didn't happen? Maybe the KingAir that landed on the runway at HDN after them saw some debris? On the trackers it looks like they were past DEN to the east by the time they elected to divert.

Either way, a lot of unanswered questions.

'902

TWA902fly wrote:

I have to say this all isn't quite adding up. There seem to be two events that are being connected by speculation on this board and on AvHerald. We have no proof that the tail-strike and near-miss were related to each other. Was the tail-strike really an "avoidance maneuver", or just something that happened at the same time? Likely that the two events added a lot to the crew's workload. It will be interesting to see the root causes which I am sure will come out after investigation and interviews with the crew.

And based on that video - the above post saying that the crew might not have felt the tail strike I find odd, but don't discount 100%. That was a decent shake. Perhaps they did the same thing the QR aircraft did in MIA? AA at JFK? Pretend it didn't happen? Maybe the KingAir that landed on the runway at HDN after them saw some debris? On the trackers it looks like they were past DEN to the east by the time they elected to divert.

Either way, a lot of unanswered questions.

'902

If you watch the video it looks like a landing and not a takeoff though. It may be the diversion into DEN that was filmed and it was vaguely titled to suggest it was the tail strike on takeoff. If you slowly scrub between seconds 4-5 you can see objects the window indicative of a descent. The internet bats no better than .500 when it comes to reliability.

BlueBaller wrote:

TWA902fly wrote:

I have to say this all isn't quite adding up. There seem to be two events that are being connected by speculation on this board and on AvHerald. We have no proof that the tail-strike and near-miss were related to each other. Was the tail-strike really an "avoidance maneuver", or just something that happened at the same time? Likely that the two events added a lot to the crew's workload. It will be interesting to see the root causes which I am sure will come out after investigation and interviews with the crew.

And based on that video - the above post saying that the crew might not have felt the tail strike I find odd, but don't discount 100%. That was a decent shake. Perhaps they did the same thing the QR aircraft did in MIA? AA at JFK? Pretend it didn't happen? Maybe the KingAir that landed on the runway at HDN after them saw some debris? On the trackers it looks like they were past DEN to the east by the time they elected to divert.

Either way, a lot of unanswered questions.

'902

If you watch the video it’s clearly a landing and not a takeoff though. It may be the diversion into DEN that was filmed and it was vaguely titled to suggest it was the tail strike on takeoff. If you slowly scrub between seconds 4-5 you can see objects the window indicative of a descent. The internet bats no better than .500 when it comes to reliability.

From another board, a user stated:

We actually heard these guys on Denver center as we were climbing out of ASE. They told center they had a tail strike due to trying to avoid an incoming aircraft and needed to divert. So they definitely felt it and knew about it.

ALTF4 wrote:

BlueBaller wrote:

TWA902fly wrote:

I have to say this all isn't quite adding up. There seem to be two events that are being connected by speculation on this board and on AvHerald. We have no proof that the tail-strike and near-miss were related to each other. Was the tail-strike really an "avoidance maneuver", or just something that happened at the same time? Likely that the two events added a lot to the crew's workload. It will be interesting to see the root causes which I am sure will come out after investigation and interviews with the crew.

And based on that video - the above post saying that the crew might not have felt the tail strike I find odd, but don't discount 100%. That was a decent shake. Perhaps they did the same thing the QR aircraft did in MIA? AA at JFK? Pretend it didn't happen? Maybe the KingAir that landed on the runway at HDN after them saw some debris? On the trackers it looks like they were past DEN to the east by the time they elected to divert.

Either way, a lot of unanswered questions.

'902

If you watch the video it’s clearly a landing and not a takeoff though. It may be the diversion into DEN that was filmed and it was vaguely titled to suggest it was the tail strike on takeoff. If you slowly scrub between seconds 4-5 you can see objects the window indicative of a descent. The internet bats no better than .500 when it comes to reliability.

From another board, a user stated:

We actually heard these guys on Denver center as we were climbing out of ASE. They told center they had a tail strike due to trying to avoid an incoming aircraft and needed to divert. So they definitely felt it and knew about it.

Looking at the flight track on FlightRadar24, they made it East of DEN, and to 31,000 feet before deciding to divert. If they were aware of it immediately I don't think they would have gone that far, probably just enough to get over the mountains. My guess - they were aware of it, didn't say anything, and the KingAir found debris, which they reported, and then word got back to the JetBlue crew through their company. Or - simply through ATC. I find it hard to believe they had a tail strike and had full intention to divert and still climbed to FL310.

As for the youtube video - that makes a lot more sense, thanks for the explanation.

'902

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

UPS operates into uncontrolled Albany, GA (ABY) every evening and morning with A300 & B757 Aircraft….

The passengers that took the video were pretty definitive that it was taken on take-off from KHDN,

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

The passengers that took the video were pretty definitive that it was taken on take-off from KHDN,

It wouldve helped to solidify that claim had the video kept running. Instead it immediately pans away from the window and ends a few seconds later. I’m not saying one thing or another, only that in moments such as what was described as happening in that takeoff, passengers these days are known to document every detail, especially in an incident like this.

Watching the ground disappear and that aggressive right hand turn on climb out, would’ve better corroborated the authenticity.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

The KA, given the weather, was on the approach and had the airspace until landed or on the missed approach unless Denver Center screwed up and released the JBU flight with the KA on final. CTAF is really irrelevant here because JBU could not have been released.

Looking at the FlightRadar24 playback, it shows that King Air squawking 1200 (VFR) around 1854Z after having a discreet code assigned (1666) while enroute. They likely had the airport in sight and cancelled IFR with the center. Looks like they were several miles from the airport, but still fairly close. Assuming that data is correct, you have an IFR out and a VFR in, which is a legal operation and release. Safety depending on the appropriate use of CTAF and situational awareness by both pilots. Obviously something was missed there. I can't tell if this is being investigated? I consider this a little more of an imminent situation than the tailstrike.

Thousands of daily operations occur safely at CTAF airports, with jets and props, IFR and VFR. It is a perfectly acceptable form of operation at many, many airports. Even with pax service. However, this kind of situation is exactly what control towers are for. When you have enough of a mix in types of traffic, experience levels, and especially large jet operations, seems like a tower would be a good addition to the airport. There are plenty of much slower airports without the complexity and seasonality staffed with the world's most bored air traffic controllers. Doesn't make much sense a ski country airport with multiple 121 carriers doesn't deserve at least a seasonal tower. Imagine if this had been a little closer, what is the justification in not having a tower out there?

QXorVX wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

The KA, given the weather, was on the approach and had the airspace until landed or on the missed approach unless Denver Center screwed up and released the JBU flight with the KA on final. CTAF is really irrelevant here because JBU could not have been released.

Looking at the FlightRadar24 playback, it shows that King Air squawking 1200 (VFR) around 1854Z after having a discreet code assigned (1666) while enroute. They likely had the airport in sight and cancelled IFR with the center. Looks like they were several miles from the airport, but still fairly close. Assuming that data is correct, you have an IFR out and a VFR in, which is a legal operation and release. Safety depending on the appropriate use of CTAF and situational awareness by both pilots. Obviously something was missed there. I can't tell if this is being investigated? I consider this a little more of an imminent situation than the tailstrike.

Thousands of daily operations occur safely at CTAF airports, with jets and props, IFR and VFR. It is a perfectly acceptable form of operation at many, many airports. Even with pax service. However, this kind of situation is exactly what control towers are for. When you have enough of a mix in types of traffic, experience levels, and especially large jet operations, seems like a tower would be a good addition to the airport. There are plenty of much slower airports without the complexity and seasonality staffed with the world's most bored air traffic controllers. Doesn't make much sense a ski country airport with multiple 121 carriers doesn't deserve at least a seasonal tower. Imagine if this had been a little closer, what is the justification in not having a tower out there?

Thanks for that, I’m not expert at FR24, rarely use it except for following our blocked planes. That’s does put a different spin on it. Trying to figure out being VFR if the weather was as reported.

Having flown a variety of jets in-out of ski country airports and attended the NBAA briefings,I agree seasonal towers should be in place. Put some weather into the mix and it’s a mess.

BlueBaller wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

The passengers that took the video were pretty definitive that it was taken on take-off from KHDN,

It wouldve helped to solidify that claim had the video kept running. Instead it immediately pans away from the window and ends a few seconds later. I’m not saying one thing or another, only that in moments such as what was described as happening in that takeoff, passengers these days are known to document every detail, especially in an incident like this.

Watching the ground disappear and that aggressive right hand turn on climb out, would’ve better corroborated the authenticity.

Agreed, but it seems this person who provided the video also posted the following comment on Avherald (https://avherald.com/h?article=4f3b0864&opt=0)

Passenger on plane
By Tangela Byrd on Thursday, Jan 27th 2022 05:02Z

I was a passenger on this aircraft. Being seated in the back of the plane this was a very frightening and horrific experience for myself, husband, 2 sons, granddaughter, and pregnant daughter in law. We felt the hit and was actually filming our granddaughter and how much fun she was having flying at 2.5 years old, when the tail strike happened. We knew something abnormal happened but had to wait 20 minutes for anyone to say anything. The pilot then told us it was an air strike due to avoiding collision with another aircraft. When told we were going to Denver to have the plane checked out, our anxiety intensified while we were flying in a plane with no idea the damage we had! Upon departing at Denver, no one checked to see if anyone needed medical attention. After all, this was more than a bump on the runway. There was no one from Jet Blue at Denver and when calling Jet Blue, no one could give us an estimated time before our next flight. We sat at Denver Airport over 9 hours.

Timing seems to line up, as roughly 26 minutes into the FlightAware track, the plane begins descent to DEN. But plane isn't picked up immediately by FlightAware on takeoff... so giving 5-7 minutes for release -> track available on FlightAware. Passenger seems to indicate ~20 minutes after takeoff they were told what happened.

Ok sure, they say "tail strike" then "air strike". And filming the child enjoying flying... but then indicating they were on the ground / taking off (not flying per se)... but very clear in order of events.

To me the video could show odd angle of filming plus over-rotating making it look like the objects outside are corresponding with a descending motion. But I can see the view of it really seeming like just a very hard landing.

But given passenger account plus pilots saying they heard on Denver Center the Jetblue pilots indicate they had a tail strike on departure.... seems to line up.

Anybody have link to the FR24 playback, please?

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Anybody have link to the FR24 playback, please?

FlightAware: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N76 ... /KHDN/KDEN
FR24: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... b#2a93d417

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TKAPAo602w

Found a video. You can see a rather aggressive rotation when the exposure corrects itself and then.... BANG!

Boeing727 wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

UPS operates into uncontrolled Albany, GA (ABY) every evening and morning with A300 & B757 Aircraft….

To be honest with you, ABY is probably safer at night than during the day with the tower open, in my experience.

FLLspotter747 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TKAPAo602w

Found a video. You can see a rather aggressive rotation when the exposure corrects itself and then.... BANG!

That's what the several replies above are already discussing.

BlueBaller wrote:

If you slowly scrub between seconds 4-5 you can see objects the window indicative of a descent.

IMHO, your conclusion is incorrect.

During any takeoff the aft end of the fuselage 'descends' toward the runway during rotation. And that's what we are seeing in the video as the tailstrike occurs exactly when we would expect it to happen.

airplanedriver6 wrote:

BlueBaller wrote:

If you slowly scrub between seconds 4-5 you can see objects the window indicative of a descent.

IMHO, your conclusion is incorrect.

During any takeoff the aft end of the fuselage 'descends' toward the runway during rotation. And that's what we are seeing in the video as the tailstrike occurs exactly when we would expect it to happen.

I agree with you on that. The illusion you get out the window on takeoff is similar to what you see on landing. After viewing the satellite images of RW10 at HDN and RW35R at DEN, there’s a definite structure 3500’ down off the right side of the runway viewable from the aircraft that appears just south of the runway in HDN. No such obstacle exists east of runway 35R in DEN.

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Very common at lot of served by regional carriers with limited Tower hours of ops.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

CTAF is really irrelevant here...

Hope that's not what JetBlue were thinking as they taxied out to 10.

hivue wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

CTAF is really irrelevant here...

Hope that's not what JetBlue were thinking as they taxied out to 10.

That comment was based on both crews being under IFR, the post above using FR24 or Flight Aware, it appears the KA cancelled IFR close in to the airport and neither crew were aware of each other.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

hivue wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

CTAF is really irrelevant here...

Hope that's not what JetBlue were thinking as they taxied out to 10.

That comment was based on both crews being under IFR, the post above using FR24 or Flight Aware, it appears the KA cancelled IFR close in to the airport and neither crew were aware of each other.

For the non-pilots on the board, what does that mean, when the KA canceled IFR?

Pretty much, they cancelled IFR and proceeded as VFR traffic, no ATC clearance. Now, to cancel the clearance, you have to have visual weather conditions. In VFR flight, the pilot “clears” the flight visually without an ATC clearance, but you can request ATC traffic advisories and following.

bigb wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Very common at lot of served by regional carriers with limited Tower hours of ops.

At a Delta regional airline I flew regularly untowered into/out of MBS, GNV, CSG, BQK, ABY and EVV (if we were late) to name a few. BQK is completely untowered, the others were departures before tower opened or after it closed.

CRJ200flyer wrote:

bigb wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Very common at lot of served by regional carriers with limited Tower hours of ops.

At a Delta regional airline I flew regularly untowered into/out of MBS, GNV, CSG, BQK, ABY and EVV (if we were late) to name a few. BQK is completely untowered, the others were departures before tower opened or after it closed.

When does GNV go untowered? There’s some pretty late scheduled flights into the airport nowadays.

DN4CAAD wrote:

CRJ200flyer wrote:

bigb wrote:

Very common at lot of served by regional carriers with limited Tower hours of ops.

At a Delta regional airline I flew regularly untowered into/out of MBS, GNV, CSG, BQK, ABY and EVV (if we were late) to name a few. BQK is completely untowered, the others were departures before tower opened or after it closed.

When does GNV go untowered? There’s some pretty late scheduled flights into the airport nowadays.

Airnav.com shows 2230 now. My brain is a bit foggy with all the changes to tower hours during the pandemic, but I believe it had reduced hours at some point. Or maybe I’m just remembering some long nights from storms in ATL and we were the late ones…

CRJ200flyer wrote:

bigb wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

How common are commercial jet ops at non-towered airports in the US? I can't think of many besides HDN.

Very common at lot of served by regional carriers with limited Tower hours of ops.

At a Delta regional airline I flew regularly untowered into/out of MBS, GNV, CSG, BQK, ABY and EVV (if we were late) to name a few. BQK is completely untowered, the others were departures before tower opened or after it closed.

EVV, GNV, TLH, OAJ, JAN, EWN are some on top of my head.

If the video is showing a landing, I don't hear any reverse thrust after the thud, or get any impression of braking, although the video is of mostly nothing with a second of something to see and hear.

Absolutely chilling to watch that FR24 playback. Even more concerning knowing the pilots continued to 310 knowing they had a tail strike. Only once called out on it did they divert.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Pretty much, they cancelled IFR and proceeded as VFR traffic, no ATC clearance. Now, to cancel the clearance, you have to have visual weather conditions. In VFR flight, the pilot “clears” the flight visually without an ATC clearance, but you can request ATC traffic advisories and following.

ATC isn’t gonna keep anyone for flight following that close into the airport. I’d probably say. A320 will be departing shorting freq change approved.

Another thing for those here. Atc is never going to police or fact check the guy canceling IFR no matter what the METAR says. And the METAR doesn’t always reflect the actual conditions on the flight path of the aircraft flying.