UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

djcoax · Thu May 15, 2014 12:24 pm

This makes for some interesting reading. Can't figure out if this is sensationalist or if there was a real issue.

Someone sitting on UAL 1205 out of Hawaii to LAX reported a quick and unexpected dive in order to avoid an oncoming plane and in the article you can see the result of his investigation.

You can read about it here : http://bit.ly/1iX5lCE

He of course explains TCAS and TCAS probably saved the planes in that instance. If true, someone certainly made a pretty grave error.

[Edited 2014-05-15 05:27:15]

[Edited 2014-05-15 05:27:41]

tjwgrr · Thu May 15, 2014 1:00 pm

Kevin Townsend
Pittsburgher San Franciscan.
Economic consultant and writer.
Loves politics, economics, comedy,
poetry, and Stanford football.

Add 'aviation expert" to that........

"On United 1205, after the alarm went off, the captain looked out the windshield, exclaimed “Holy s***, there it is!” and immediately took the plane into a sharp dive...."

How could the author possibly know this? Was he in the jump-seat? Meh.

[Edited 2014-05-15 06:04:42]

United1 · Thu May 15, 2014 1:17 pm

I'm impressed that UA managed to fit 289 passengers onto a 753. Reasonably certain there is a LOT of poetic license in this guy's blog...

PanHAM · Thu May 15, 2014 1:24 pm

That has made the News here as well and it is always impressive that a 787 is shown while they talk about a 757-300.

It is a casual Story by someone who knows Little to knothing about aviation. I am not a Pilot of course but I could imagine that the first reaction of pilots on getting a TCAS Resolution would be to execute the Resolution and not exclaiming "Holy s...t, there she is".

I could also imagine that the captain informs the passengers after they did their work and settled back into normal flight.

CALTECH · Thu May 15, 2014 1:30 pm

Weightless in a steep dive but a coffee pot somehow clatters to the floor and rolls down the aisle. Drama Queen, or Attention Wh*re.

codc10 · Thu May 15, 2014 1:51 pm

Incredibly unnerving, yes, but the upshot of this episode is that TCAS worked as advertised.

commavia · Fri May 16, 2014 1:38 pm

Quoting tjwgrr (Reply 1):
Add 'aviation expert" to that........

Yeah. Compelling writing and certainly a topic worthy of reporting and discussion, but the writer probably should have done slightly more research, at least on this point:

On United 1205, I was one of 289 passengers. With the five or six crew members, the total count for our flight was around 295. We were six miles over the middle of the Pacific, so it’s safe to assume two things: 1) The US Airways flight coming at us was a passenger jet of similar size and 2) Everyone on both flights would have died. Had there been a collision, it would have been the new record, with an estimated 590 deaths, one of them mine. (emphasis mine)

Not sure why being "six miles over the middle of the Pacific" would necessarily make it "safe to assume" that the "US Airways flight coming at us was a passenger jet of similar size" - a conclusion that anyone who looked online could easily say was very likely wrong. In the sense that the other jet was also almost certainly a 757, and not, say, a CRJ or 747, I guess that means it was roughly of "similar size." But of course it was at least ~100 seats smaller, which means that his dramatic conclusion that this collision would have "been the new record" - with "an estimated 590 deaths" - is almost certainly wrong.

Again - not saying that such a collision would be any less a horrific tragedy, nor that this doesn't certainly warrant investigation - but it does appear this writing needs some fact-checking.

[Edited 2014-05-16 06:47:27]

FlyHossD · Fri May 16, 2014 2:35 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 6):
On United 1205, I was one of 289 passengers

No, he wasn't one of "289 passengers". The UA 757-300s seat about 213, as I recall. The US 757-200 would seat less, so if there was a midair collision, the maximum fatality count would have been about 400. Since the author didn't do some basic research, it seems clear that his intent was to sensationalize.

[Edited 2014-05-16 07:57:23]

tjwgrr · Fri May 16, 2014 3:02 pm

Great, now the mainstream media is jumping all over this guy's article.... Time, ABC, etc.

FlyDeltaJets · Sat May 17, 2014 1:43 am

So apparently this incident did occur and there was an announcement to customers to advise them of what occurred. Apparently some passengers may have even seen the aircraft. That is all that I can share about the incident.

charlienorth · Sat May 17, 2014 1:50 am

little over dramatic...BTW what is a near miss??? It is on the same line as unthaw, and irregardless almost the same as being kind of a virgin!

777Jet · Sat May 17, 2014 1:53 am

I would mourn the loss of a 753 - they are rare enough as it is...

bcoz · Sat May 17, 2014 2:33 am

The writer inserts graphs from FlightAware as evidence, but if you look his "top of dive/bottom of dive" screengrabs, the only thing that decreases is the airspeed, something I wouldn't think would happen in a rapid descent. The altitude seems to remain almost constant.

Also -- he mentions in the blog (and CBS News has reported it as fact here: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-a...-hawaii-likely-due-to-human-error/ ) that they dropped 600 feet in 60 seconds. Uhhh... the rate of descent is greater on their approach into LAX than that. 600 fpm for a 753? FlightAware seems to support that with them going from FL330 to FL324 over a minute's time... but still...

I'm not saying this incident isn't an issue, but man.... Let's stand down with the hype just a little bit.

I've got a journalism degree and would be happy to report on commercial aviation if anyone was looking for some actual knowledge-based reporting.

bcoz

LONGisland89 · Sat May 17, 2014 7:09 am

I agree with most that the sensationalism is over the top, however, it is definitely worth attention and investigating if a flight acts on an RA. The location of the incident is near the edge of radar/VHF coverage. The news was quick to mention the "control tower" in Honolulu but there could have been an issue with coordination with Oakland Center/SFO Radio.

Flightmedic82 · Sat May 17, 2014 8:02 am

The media is (unfortunately) having a field day with this story and quite frankly they can't enough of the very wrong "over 500 passengers were seconds from certain death" type headlines and lead in stories. Not to mention the authors claims of being "weightless" at a decent rate of a meager 600 fpm! The absurd claims of passengers screaming for their lives (and then supposedly returning to normal conversation after a "steep dive") and a coffee pot crashing and/or rolling down the aisle is a nice over hyped touch though! I'm sure the media will hype this as much as they can for ratings, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few lawsuits (or "500" as the media reports) result. The saddest thing is the story that WON'T be reported, and that is... That TCAS did exactly what it is supposed to do, the pilots did exactly what they are supposed to do and regardless of cause the pilots skill and technology available to them may have a averted disaster. Instead what will be reported is a passengers made up and greatly exaggerated "terrifying" account of what happened. I'm willing to bet the pilots of BOTH aircraft have already forgotten about the incident and are sleeping peacefully at night!

RubberJungle · Sat May 17, 2014 8:55 am

Sensationalism aside, it's worth having a look at the replay around 23:20UTC.

The two other flights he mentions in the blog were actually quite a distance north at the time of the incident.

But there is evidence of another aircraft (US432) which, having been undisplayed, makes a sudden appearance just as it passes UA1205. It's interesting that US432 appears to be shown travelling at the same altitude, FL330, on the opposite track to UA1205.

[Edited 2014-05-17 01:57:20]

ua2162 · Sat May 17, 2014 8:55 am

“Here's a phrase that apparently the airlines simply made up: near miss. They say that if two planes almost collide, it's a near miss. Bulls**t, my friend. It's a near hit! A collision is a near miss."

One of George Carlin's best.

I actually had a friend on the flight; they left from KOA around 11. He said that around 30 minutes into flight they did a "slight descent". Although not normal for a plane at cruising altitude, nobody on board seemed worried and that the media made it out to be way more than it actually was. After, my friend said the Captain made an announcement that TCAS notified them of the traffic thus causing the change in altitude. He said nobody screamed. They continued onto LAX where all landed safely.

Another example of UA's brand decaying hahaha

[Edited 2014-05-17 02:29:15]

markak · Sat May 17, 2014 12:10 pm

What happened to the even / odd rule?

washingtonflyer · Sat May 17, 2014 12:40 pm

Could be an issue of a east west versus a north south or south north resulting in a conflict.

spacecadet · Sat May 17, 2014 1:40 pm

Quoting charlienorth (Reply 10):
BTW what is a near miss??? It is on the same line as unthaw, and irregardless almost the same as being kind of a virgin!

Near miss is the official term, and it is correct English. They were near each other and they missed each other.

D L X · Sat May 17, 2014 3:24 pm

My guess is that 1) Kevin Townsend was sitting in the very last row of the plane, so a quick change in the plane's attitude may have had more effect on him where he was sitting, and 2) Kevin Townsend is an attention-monger.

FlyHossD · Sat May 17, 2014 5:22 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):
My guess is that 1) Kevin Townsend was sitting in the very last row of the plane, so a quick change in the plane's attitude may have had more effect on him where he was sitting, and 2) Kevin Townsend is an attention-monger.

More like an attention whore. Check his Twitter account; he's loving the attention. So one wonders, what will he report next, after the inevitable decline of this story?

D L X · Sat May 17, 2014 5:30 pm

The Atlantic takes on this stupid post:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...hould-you-be-afraid-to-fly/371093/

Quote:

3) How close were the planes, anyway? The premise of this story was a hair's-breadth escape from death. Eg "Two jetliners six miles over the Pacific don’t come within scraping distance of each other without something going amiss." And "the FAA is in the dark on a near miss that could have taken more lives than any air accident in history."

To put this in perspective, the closest the planes appeared to have come to each other is at least 5 miles, and perhaps 8 miles

aftgaffe · Sun May 18, 2014 6:01 am

The current headline on CNN.com is "Jet dropped 600 feet in 1 minute."

It's almost like CNN has an airplane sensationalism void they are trying to fill....

[Edited 2014-05-17 23:02:06]

7673mech · Sun May 18, 2014 7:42 am

I am disappointed with the responses.
The was a true near miss and could have been disastrous to those on board.
When planes get close enough that they can see each other (head on) and one must react quickly - it should be a news story.
The fact that a controller has been sent for retraining is also significant.
But everyone here is an expert, so its easy to mock those that were onboard.

TWA902fly · Sun May 18, 2014 8:43 am

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 23):
"Jet dropped 600 feet in 1 minute."

A jet descended at an unexceptional rate??? CNN - You have more of a news story continuing to look for the Malaysia 777.

Next!

'902

SKC · Sun May 18, 2014 12:58 pm

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 24):
I am disappointed with the responses.
The was a true near miss and could have been disastrous to those on board.
When planes get close enough that they can see each other (head on) and one must react quickly - it should be a news story.
The fact that a controller has been sent for retraining is also significant.
But everyone here is an expert, so its easy to mock those that were onboard.

Absolutely could have been a disaster, but onboard equipment and the flight crews did exactly as trained and were able to avoid it. The situation should definitely be looked into and any retraining needed handled quickly.

That being said, the writer was a sensationalist. Many items were blown way out of proportion (i.e. psgr counts were vastly inflated beyond aircraft capacity, etc) and flat out incorrect. A simple walk down Google lane would have proven that.

D L X · Sun May 18, 2014 3:00 pm

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 24):

Okay. You're an aviation enthusiast. Can you read his article with a straight face?
http://medium.com/medium-long/c2f8d68a917c

Quoting SKC (Reply 26):
That being said, the writer was a sensationalist. Many items were blown way out of proportion (i.e. psgr counts were vastly inflated beyond aircraft capacity, etc)

This is what really made me hate this guy. (Hate's too strong of a word, but I hope you get what I mean.)

His whole article was about making this out to be MUCH bigger than it was, and he did so purposely. He knew what kind of plane he was on, and it's simply impossible that he did not notice that the plane had a first class section. So, why would he go on wikipedia and cite the capacity of an all-economy layout?

Because otherwise, he wouldn't be able to make his headline: "Two Weeks Ago, I Almost Died in the Deadliest Plane Crash Ever"

This dude is a self-aggrandizer, pushing his story to whatever news outlets would pick him up, and insisting that it is because of his heroic writing that the FAA finally decided to conduct an investigation. He makes MH370 and NH214 about him, saying that things that caused those crashes nearly killed him too. Really?

He said he was weightless. False. He said passengers were screaming. Exaggerated. (Other passengers have said no such thing.) Two planes came within "scraping distance." Laughable. And his post is littered with plane crash photos to hype up his claim some more. There's simply no effort at all to state what is true, because the truth isn't very interesting.

I'd expect more from a Stanford grad.

[Edited 2014-05-18 08:09:31]

spacecadet · Sun May 18, 2014 7:47 pm

The guy seems to be angling for a writing job, and this is how he thinks modern copywriting is. The sad truth is he's not really that far off, in this age of "click bait" headlines and editorializing in supposedly factual news reports. Let's see if he starts changing the title of his story to make it *more* sensationalist (and trick people into thinking it's a new post) as traffic drops off, like CNN routinely does.

Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 25):
A jet descended at an unexceptional rate???

Yeah, I laughed when I saw that one. Just shows how little CNN understands about aviation, though. 600 feet per minute is actually a pretty shallow descent. You're descending faster than that from cruise to come in for a landing.

But, they'll probably change this headline to "Jet dropped like a stone" or something pretty soon.

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 24):
could have been disastrous to those on board.

Mistakes were clearly made. But pretty much anything "could be disastrous". Planes land on runways that another plane just landed on or took off from. Planes routinely fly at the same altitude through congested airspace. Planes fly near thunderstorms. Any of these things "could be disastrous" probably dozens of times per day. But they aren't, because we have systems in place (human, technical and procedural) to prevent them from becoming disasters. And that's just as true in this case. The system worked the way it was designed to.

PSAjet17 · Sun May 18, 2014 8:06 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 28):
Just shows how little CNN understands about aviation, though. 600 feet per minute is actually a pretty shallow descent

CNN didn't send Martin Savage to a B757 simulator to try it this scenario out?

I found it a little strange that if an incident like this occured (rapid decent to a lower altitude, people and things being tossed around the cabin, etc.) that only one of the approximate 200 passengers on UA 1205 actually talked about it. I would have expected the media to be out at LAX trying to interview anyone on the flight.

CALTECH · Sun May 18, 2014 9:35 pm

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 24):
I am disappointed with the responses.
The was a true near miss and could have been disastrous to those on board.
When planes get close enough that they can see each other (head on) and one must react quickly - it should be a news story.

You should ride in the cockpit jumpseat in the New York Area at rush hour with clouds in the area sometime. That is something to see. Remember once flying out of Newark heading to Orlando after a trip to Europe, there was a tropical storm impacting the NYC area. ATC took us out over the ocean, and we were advised of traffic, opposite direction, 1,000 feet above. The traffic was flying right at us, flew right over the top of us . The closure rate was amazing.

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 24):
The fact that a controller has been sent for retraining is also significant.

Where do you get that ? From the 'story' writer ?

There were no stories of this 'incident' until his 'story' was picked up by some 'news' outlets. Could research it more but it is not worth the time.

One time going HNL-LAX on a Continental 767-400, as the pilot advanced the throttles, I watched as Engine Number One spooled up towards it's Maximum N1 of 117% or so, threatening to tear the turbine apart or let the fan blades come apart. The Captain also had said that we were weight restricted to 31,000 feet for a portion of the flight, so we were heavy. The plane had left Honolulu with every seat and jumpseat filled in the back. There was a lot of water at the end of that runway.

Luckily, the EEC and FADEC did their jobs and the Number One Engine stabilized and our takeoff run was normal.

UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

RE: UAL 1205 - April 25th 2014 - Report Of Near Miss

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net