• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Gallbaro
Banned
(07-12-2017, 11:55 PM)

Originally Posted by FrankCanada97

Anyways, this is what the approach to 28R looks like at night:



The column of green lights to the right indicate a taxiway. I don't know how the pilot could have thought he was aligned with the runway.

An airport that only San Fransisco could design.

28L and 28R are too close together for anything but perfect conditions.
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:25 AM)
Johnny Cage In The Shower's Avatar


Photo of pilot in question, yup, this dude's getting suspended for sure.
1st off all why wasn't he using ILS to line up the runway?

2nd approach lights are impossible to miss, wtf. Dude shouldn't be near a cockpit again
DavidDesu
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:40 AM)
DavidDesu's Avatar
Just let the autopilot do it all, pilot can liaise with traffic control and punch in commands and that's about it.
Maximus.
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:41 AM)
Maximus.'s Avatar

Originally Posted by torre_avenue

Oh hey.

I'm taking Air Canada.

From SFO.

And back there.

Great.

Yea so much to worry about. I'm sure you'll have the same pilot and wrong thought process!
pestul
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:47 AM)
pestul's Avatar
This Air Canada crew just moved up passenger flight automation by like a few years.
rec0ded1
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:59 AM)
rec0ded1's Avatar
He probably didn't get the best training money could buy
RobotsAnger
Member
(07-13-2017, 12:59 AM)
RobotsAnger's Avatar

According to the Transportation Safety Board summary, after missing the first two planes by 30 metres, the Air Canada flight overflew the third and fourth aircraft by 60 metres and 90 metres respectively. The report says the “closest lateral proximity” of the Air Canada jet to one the planes on the taxiway was roughly nine metres.

Nine metres, yikes.
Amirnol
Member
(07-13-2017, 01:03 AM)
Amirnol's Avatar
Thankfully no one was hurt, and at least one thing to be positive about with events like this is knowing that airline safety is about to get that much better because of it.
FrankCanada97
Roughly the size of a baaaaaarge
(07-13-2017, 01:08 AM)
FrankCanada97's Avatar
Here's a short visualization of what happened overlaid with the ATC audio:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW-ETmZU0u8
Curler
Member
(07-13-2017, 01:18 AM)
Curler's Avatar

Originally Posted by FrankCanada97

Here's a short visualization of what happened overlaid with the ATC audio:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW-ETmZU0u8

That's absolutely frightening...
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
(07-13-2017, 01:28 AM)
Stumpokapow's Avatar
Some reports suggest 28L was closed and darkened, which may have confused the pilot into thinking that 28L and 28R were 28R and Taxiway C visually -- but that doesn't explain why a guy who had visual couldn't tell the difference between the normal white lights and the taxiway blue-green lights. Also he should have received communications to the effect that 28L was closed. And apparently the airport did have a blinking X light signal indicating the closure.
Graphics Horse
graphics horse
graphics horse
does whatever a
graphics horse does
(07-13-2017, 01:30 AM)
Graphics Horse's Avatar
If taxi ways were curvy instead of straight, this wouldn't happen
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
(07-17-2017, 09:28 PM)
XiaNaphryz's Avatar
Updates:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/L...f-11291357.php

Investigators looking into the frighteningly close call involving an airliner that nearly hit planes on the ground at San Francisco International Airport will try to determine why the pilots made such a rookie mistake and nearly landed on a busy taxiway instead of the runway.

The Air Canada plane with 140 people aboard came within 100 feet of crashing onto the first two of four passenger-filled planes readying for takeoff.

Runways are edged with rows of white lights, and another system of lights on the side of the runway helps guide pilots on their descent. By contrast, taxiways have blue lights on the edges and green lights down the center.

"The lighting is different for good reason," said Steven Wallace, a former director of accident investigations at the Federal Aviation Administration. "Some of these visual mistakes are hard to believe, but a crew gets fixated with thinking 'That's the runway,' and it's not."

Then there is the radio transmission in which one of the Air Canada pilots sounded puzzled about seeing what appeared to be the lights of other planes on the runway. Safety experts said that should have prompted the crew to abort their approach long before they did.


Pilots said so-called glide slope technology in modern airliners also should have helped the crew find the runway unless they failed to set it up as they approached the airport.

"This was a clear crew error with many facets, I suspect," said Alan Price, a former chief pilot for Delta.

When investigators interview the pilots, they will focus on understanding how mistakes occurred "and why they did not realize the sequence of errors," said John Cox, a safety consultant and former airline pilot. Investigators will look at the pilots' use of automated-flying systems, their manual flying skills, and how they interacted with each other as uncertainty set in, he said.

Canada's transportation safety board said the Air Canada jet skimmed just 100 feet over the tops of two planes waiting for takeoff. After an air traffic controller ordered them to abandon their landing, the pilots pulled up their Airbus A320 just in time, circled and landed correctly on the runway. No one was injured.

The Canadian agency's summary was the first official account of just how dangerous the situation was.

...

A recording of the radio calls between pilots and the control tower captured uncertainty in the Air Canada cockpit as the plane approached shortly before midnight on July 7. One of the pilots radioed to the tower that he saw lights — presumably other planes — on the runway. An air traffic controller assured him the runway was clear.

After a pilot apparently in one of the planes on the ground said the Air Canada jet was heading straight for the taxiway, a controller ordered the Air Canada crew to abort the landing.


From the vantage point of the Air Canada crew, four parallel surfaces appeared below them — from left to right they were taxiway F; runway 28L, which was closed; runway 28R, on which they were supposed to land, and taxiway C, where the other planes were waiting their turn to take off.

"I could see where you get lined up incorrectly, but once you start seeing lights on the runway you're not necessarily looking at a runway," said William Waldock, a professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. He said investigators will look at "all the visual cues that might have confused them."

Chris Manno, an American Airlines pilot, said the Air Canada crew should have stopped their approach while they figured out why they were seeing lights from other planes on what they thought was the runway.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/articl...m-11287266.php

The preliminary report by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada found that the Air Canada jet, an Airbus A320 with 140 people aboard, was approaching Taxiway C instead of the adjacent runway when the pilot was ordered to pull out of the landing.

The plane, which had been cleared for landing on Runway 28R by air traffic controllers, was about 100 feet from the first two planes on the taxiway, 200 feet from the third plane in line for takeoff and 300 feet from the last jet waiting to depart when the landing was aborted.

The aircraft was also determined to be about 29 feet off to the side of the planes at the front of the line on Taxiway C waiting to takeoff, investigators said.

The report also stated that the air traffic controller who was instructing the pilot was “coordinating another facility” at the time of the landing when a crew member from one of the sitting aircraft intervened and asked where the Air Canada jet was going.


The National Transportation Safety Board is planning to send investigators to San Francisco in the next few days to look at what was going on at the time of the incident, said Keith Holloway, a spokesman for NTSB.

“One of the things that I know investigators will probably do is try to talk to air traffic controllers as well as the crew of the incident aircraft,” Holloway said.

The Federal Aviation Administration declined to comment further on the investigation.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/I...F-11294120.php

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal investigators confirmed Monday that an Air Canada jet was descending toward a taxiway holding four other planes rather than the assigned runway and narrowly avoided disaster at San Francisco International Airport.

The National Transportation Safety Board said it interviewed the captain of the Air Canada plane, will talk to the co-pilot Tuesday and finish talking to air traffic controllers by Wednesday.

The NTSB said the Air Canada Airbus A320 was cleared to land on runway 28R but instead lined up its approach for a parallel taxiway, which four other airliners were using to get in position to take off.

The NTSB said the Air Canada jet descended to less than 100 feet above the ground and flew over another plane before aborting the landing on July 7.

Air Canada declined to comment, citing the investigation.


The Air Canada jet, with 140 people on board, was arriving from Toronto. The NTSB statement adds details to the first official description of the close call, a summary released last week by Canadian safety authorities.

Canada's Transportation Safety Board has given the flight data recorder, one of the so-called black boxes from the Air Canada plane, to the NTSB, which is leading the investigation.

The NTSB said it has security-camera video of the late-night incident and will release it in the coming months.

NYCmetsfan
Member
(07-17-2017, 09:33 PM)

was about 100 feet from the first two planes on the taxiway, 200 feet from the third plane in line for takeoff and 300 feet from the last jet waiting to depart when the landing was aborted.

YIKES.

That would make tenerife look mild
PandaShake
Member
(07-17-2017, 09:54 PM)
PandaShake's Avatar
I wonder how loud it was for the passengers when Canada flew overhead.
MJPIA
Member
(07-17-2017, 10:38 PM)
My previous comment was based on early reports that said the airliner was still 1000 feet up when it aborted its landing.
I take back what I said, this really could have been a disaster and they should have aborted long before they got that close.
I'd bet they didn't have enough sleep and we'll be seeming some new rules and regulations following this.
superdeluxe
Member
(07-17-2017, 10:47 PM)
superdeluxe's Avatar
Another visualisation using flight simulator with ATC:

https://youtu.be/3sEOwMfF7MA
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
(07-17-2017, 10:54 PM)
Suikoguy's Avatar
Good on the pilot on the ground who figured out what the fuck was going on and told the tower. He probably saved many lives.
LakeEarth
Member
(07-17-2017, 10:55 PM)
LakeEarth's Avatar
Wait, it's 100 feet now? Holy shit this really was an incredible near miss.
Shaanyboi
Member
(07-17-2017, 11:05 PM)
Shaanyboi's Avatar
Jesus christ this somehow keeps sounding worse and worse....
Orbis
Member
(07-17-2017, 11:05 PM)
Orbis's Avatar

Originally Posted by NYCmetsfan

YIKES.

That would make tenerife look mild

Indeed, potentially 5 planes with well over 100 people on each. Reading about Tenerife scares the shit out of me so it's incredible that something as bad or worse could happen by pilot error in clear conditions.
truestatic
Member
(07-17-2017, 11:18 PM)
truestatic's Avatar

Originally Posted by superdeluxe

Another visualisation using flight simulator with ATC:

https://youtu.be/3sEOwMfF7MA

Pretty terrifying and kind of unbelievable. Sent this on to my dad who JUST sold his plane due to fear of losing his ability in his old age. ATC is serious business.
Chumly
Power Girl's bosom
gives me strength
(07-17-2017, 11:45 PM)
100 feet seems really fucking close.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
(07-19-2017, 07:45 PM)
XiaNaphryz's Avatar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydUqfhNqUIc



Last edited by XiaNaphryz; 07-19-2017 at 08:04 PM.
KHarvey16
hopelessly misguided
(07-19-2017, 07:47 PM)
KHarvey16's Avatar
Yikes.
Slayven
gimme some o dat God-crafted alabaster greatness
(07-19-2017, 07:49 PM)
Slayven's Avatar

Originally Posted by XiaNaphryz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydUqfhNqUIc

My butt clenched looking at the GIF, i can't imagine how how they felt in plane
georaldc
Member
(07-19-2017, 07:50 PM)
georaldc's Avatar

Originally Posted by XiaNaphryz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydUqfhNqUIc

Jesus Christ. Were they landing with their eyes closed?
Last edited by georaldc; 07-19-2017 at 08:51 PM.
TemplaerDude
(07-19-2017, 07:52 PM)
TemplaerDude's Avatar
Certainly mistakes happen but I was always under the impression that this is one mistake that they always tried really hard not to make. That GIF is fucking scary as hell.
ClosingADoor
Member
(07-19-2017, 07:52 PM)
ClosingADoor's Avatar
Damn, 15 meter from crashing into that other plane.
kmfdmpig
Member
(07-19-2017, 07:53 PM)
kmfdmpig's Avatar
That's some awful piloting. The pilot's career is over, right? I don't see how you can come back from this.
louiedog
Member
(07-19-2017, 07:57 PM)
louiedog's Avatar
I assume some United and Philippines Airline pilots needed some emergency replacement uniform pants.
Amory
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:00 PM)
Amory's Avatar

Originally Posted by XiaNaphryz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydUqfhNqUIc

hoooly shit.
Pagusas
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:00 PM)
Pagusas's Avatar
Read the original OP and was like "Huh, doesnt sound that bad, 1000 feet is a lot, i imagine this happens alot"


Read further: Huh... this sounds kinda scary, still seems a bit extreme to be talking so much about it now, just an accident.

Read even futher and watched the Flight Sim video: Holy shit...

Read further and saw the graphical animation with new numbers: HOLY FUCKING SHIT
frontovik
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:10 PM)
frontovik's Avatar
Well, that's terrifying. I'm glad that a huge aviation disaster was averted, and the pilot reacted quickly. Still .. a thorough investigation needs to ensure elements for the scenario would not happen again.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
(07-19-2017, 08:11 PM)
XiaNaphryz's Avatar

Originally Posted by Pagusas

Read the original OP and was like "Huh, doesnt sound that bad, 1000 feet is a lot, i imagine this happens alot"


Read further: Huh... this sounds kinda scary, still seems a bit extreme to be talking so much about it now, just an accident.

Read even futher and watched the Flight Sim video: Holy shit...

Read further and saw the graphical animation with new numbers: HOLY FUCKING SHIT

Yeah, I forgot to post the updated findings from NTSB:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...owded-taxiway/

The National Transportation Safety Board said Monday that the Airbus A-320, which originated in Toronto, had been cleared to land on runway 28R in San Francisco just before midnight July 7, but instead descended on a parallel taxiway with four aircraft lined up on it.

After overshooting the first plane, a Boeing 787, the A-320 plunged below 100 feet, the federal report said, before abruptly climbing and avoiding the three other aircraft in its path.

The other planes awaiting takeoff clearance were an Airbus A-340 and two Boeing models: another 787 and a 737, NTSB said.

After the near miss, the plane with 140 people aboard safely landed “without incident,” an Air Canada spokesman said last week. The airline declined to comment on the new revelations about the botched landing attempt, citing its own investigation into the incident and ongoing investigations by authorities.

The Bay Area Mercury News reported Monday on how the botched landing may have been even worse than initially thought. The plane flew as low as 81 feet, the paper reported, and at that altitude could have come as close as 26 feet from the tail of the third airplane lined up on the runway, a Boeing 737 standing 55 feet tall.

LakeEarth
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:12 PM)
LakeEarth's Avatar
It just keeps getting worse...
Smiles and Cries
back to my old
nipples and tits
(07-19-2017, 08:22 PM)
Smiles and Cries's Avatar

Originally Posted by XiaNaphryz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydUqfhNqUIc



that's too close
turtle553
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:28 PM)
turtle553's Avatar

Originally Posted by Diprosalic

This guy never flies again right?

At a conference I was at recently, one of the keynote speakers was Jeff Skiles, co-pilot of the flight that landed on the Hudson. If a pilot reports a mistake within 24 hours of it happening, they are immune from punishment.

The point is to let others learn from mistakes instead of trying to cover them up. Of course this is for US pilots, not sure about Canada.

This system has greatly improved air safety in the US.
gatling
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:33 PM)
Imagine being oblivious in one of those planes and on the ground then finding out later what really went on.

Bring me my brown pants.
TetraGenesis
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:33 PM)
TetraGenesis's Avatar

Originally Posted by cameron

"You absolute fucking bellend", the air controller followed up, off mic.

I totally get what you're going for here but it's really funny imagining an American ever calling someone a "bellend".
FelixOrion
Poet Centuriate
(07-19-2017, 08:36 PM)
FelixOrion's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

Ah, the 'ol Harrison Ford manuever.

Originally Posted by FyreWulff

Harrison Ford redeemed

Originally Posted by NullPointer



Also, holy shit

For those out of the loop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzy9jCFk0Iw
xkramz
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:39 PM)
xkramz's Avatar
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amer...nes_Flight_587


This one was that plane heading to DR everyone died in the plane plus 5 bystanders. Basically co pilot incompetence killed all those ppl.

Also there's been a few instances where pilot reverse thruster too early and gets into an accident.

Do pilot gotta recertify their licenses? Or whatever or it's a one deal thing like driving a car ( which is far easier than a plane of course) you get your license even if u are a shittyy driver and that's it u don't gotta take a driving test ever again and cap.
RinsFury
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:40 PM)
RinsFury's Avatar
Pilot error terrifies me so much more than mechanical failure. Everytime you fly you're putting your life in the hands of someone that might be tired, hungover, or just plain inexperienced. Just the thought of it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
(07-19-2017, 08:42 PM)
andthebeatgoeson's Avatar

Originally Posted by turtle553

At a conference I was at recently, one of the keynote speakers was Jeff Skiles, co-pilot of the flight that landed on the Hudson. If a pilot reports a mistake within 24 hours of it happening, they are immune from punishment.

The point is to let others learn from mistakes instead of trying to cover them up. Of course this is for US pilots, not sure about Canada.

This system has greatly improved air safety in the US.

Their system is much better than most systems that are responsible for people's lives and nobody is immune from mistakes. I can understand people's concern but maybe some retraining or monitoring is on order. Worse than a mistake is trying to hide the mistake. You don't want to fire everyone who makes a mistake. And he has a lot of reason to correct himself: his life.


Originally Posted by RinsFury

Pilot error terrifies me so much more than mechanical failure. Everytime you fly you're putting your life in the hands of someone that might be tired, hungover, or just plain inexperienced. Just the thought of it makes me feel sick to my stomach.

But they have strict rules about when you can fly, how long, how much rest you need.
kmfdmpig
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:47 PM)
kmfdmpig's Avatar

Originally Posted by andthebeatgoeson

Their system is much better than most systems that are responsible for people's lives and nobody is immune from mistakes. I can understand people's concern but maybe some retraining or monitoring is on order. Worse than a mistake is trying to hide the mistake. You don't want to fire everyone who makes a mistake. And he has a lot of reason to correct himself: his life.



But they have strict rules about when you can fly, how long, how much rest you need.

Those are valid points. In this case, however, the entire incident was going to be public whether the pilot admitted the error or not (the other pilots and ATC were well aware of the pilot's mistake). Also, the magnitude of this mistake is so significant that I'm not sure the pilot deserves a second chance. His incompetence came within ~50 feet of killing hundreds of people.
turtle553
Member
(07-19-2017, 08:59 PM)
turtle553's Avatar

Originally Posted by kmfdmpig

Those are valid points. In this case, however, the entire incident was going to be public whether the pilot admitted the error or not (the other pilots and ATC were well aware of the pilot's mistake). Also, the magnitude of this mistake is so significant that I'm not sure the pilot deserves a second chance. His incompetence came within ~50 feet of killing hundreds of people.

A mistake he is extremely unlikely to make again once he experienced it this time.

It's been more than seven years since a US flight fatality. The system is remarkable considering there used to be a plain crash nearly every year.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielr.../#3b606849428a
Last edited by turtle553; 07-19-2017 at 09:02 PM.
Micael
Member
(07-20-2017, 10:24 AM)
Micael's Avatar

Originally Posted by RinsFury

Pilot error terrifies me so much more than mechanical failure. Everytime you fly you're putting your life in the hands of someone that might be tired, hungover, or just plain inexperienced. Just the thought of it makes me feel sick to my stomach.

That's not how any of this works, no one is putting a 100 million $ piece of machinery with 100 and something people inside it (aka another couple hundred million $ in settlements), in the hands of an hangover inexperienced pilot, even if laws didn't exist, it would still be the height of folly for companies to do that.
FutureLarking
Member
(07-20-2017, 10:35 AM)

Originally Posted by kmfdmpig

His incompetence came within ~50 feet of killing hundreds of people.

And you know sure as shit he's going to make sure he never makes that mistake again. Even better for him to fly :P
Kinyou
Member
(07-20-2017, 10:35 AM)
Kinyou's Avatar
It's just crazy how many people could have died there.

Thread Tools