Mid-air collision over Brasil
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe just being given a wrong frequency could cause the communications problem. Being familiar with normal freqs and expected clearances would help out but these guys didn't normally fly there. Flying over Cuba was a hassle for a while but once you figured it out it was easy. When they gave you the wrong freq, you just tried the normal one and it worked.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin , do not jump to conclusions and put words in the mouth of people you do not know . It is offensive.
I doubt any Controller in his right mind would do such a thing," my guess ( and it is only a guess ) is that someone beleived the 737 was a 390 .
Why it was maintaining 37 or passing 37 climbing to 390 , or whatever , is one of the key points the ATC tapes/CVR/FDR will reveal .
I would also not be surprised if more holes in the cheese pop up, like a guy alone on the position ( like in Ueberlingen) or a bad shift change, or a system outage ot some kind, or a system decorrolation, or a wong ACT/estimate passed/received , that sort of things.
And unless I know more of the facts, and one or the other scenario is confirmed, I will not put words on the mouth of anyone and certainly presume blame .
Even if ATC did fail, it could even be the system ( similar to the Honeywell Xponder going to SBY on its own.. ) and not necessarily people.
I doubt any Controller in his right mind would do such a thing," my guess ( and it is only a guess ) is that someone beleived the 737 was a 390 .
Why it was maintaining 37 or passing 37 climbing to 390 , or whatever , is one of the key points the ATC tapes/CVR/FDR will reveal .
I would also not be surprised if more holes in the cheese pop up, like a guy alone on the position ( like in Ueberlingen) or a bad shift change, or a system outage ot some kind, or a system decorrolation, or a wong ACT/estimate passed/received , that sort of things.
And unless I know more of the facts, and one or the other scenario is confirmed, I will not put words on the mouth of anyone and certainly presume blame .
Even if ATC did fail, it could even be the system ( similar to the Honeywell Xponder going to SBY on its own.. ) and not necessarily people.
I said "I'm not saying it happened this way"... The officials are declaring that there is evidence of altitude deviations and lost communication problems. IF true why would they allow the flights to come anywhere near each other?
Yes, we should await the investigation. But the remarks by officials seem pretty pointed towards the Legacy pilots. Let's pretend the allegations are true. Why in the world would you let another flight near an erratically moving aircraft that you believe has suffered comm failure?
I don't know where you get the idea I'm not perfectly calm. Believe me, I am. And happy. 
However, I refuse to become a "grownup"! 
My critisism of your statement had nothing to do with hostility. It was intended to ask you not to make suppositions which are based upon unfounded and possibly spurious information. Nothing more. My use of sarcasm may have left you with a different impression than that which was intended by me. As one who claims to be a grownup, I'm sure you have gotten over it by now.
Referring to the rest of your post addressed to me, I have nothing else I wish to disagree with concerning the accident. I have not taken up the issue of who is to blame, nor will I do so until such time as some investigatory findings are released. This may or may not be before the final report. I have no way to know.
Until there IS something factual to discuss, there is very little which can be stated with certainty, yet many people wish to do so for some reason. That's all I wished to point out. Once again, I have no animosity toward you or anyone else here, whether I agree with all of your, or anyone else's contentions or not. So relax and have a cold one!
Best regards,
Westhawk
However, I refuse to become a "grownup"! My critisism of your statement had nothing to do with hostility. It was intended to ask you not to make suppositions which are based upon unfounded and possibly spurious information. Nothing more. My use of sarcasm may have left you with a different impression than that which was intended by me. As one who claims to be a grownup, I'm sure you have gotten over it by now.
Referring to the rest of your post addressed to me, I have nothing else I wish to disagree with concerning the accident. I have not taken up the issue of who is to blame, nor will I do so until such time as some investigatory findings are released. This may or may not be before the final report. I have no way to know.
Until there IS something factual to discuss, there is very little which can be stated with certainty, yet many people wish to do so for some reason. That's all I wished to point out. Once again, I have no animosity toward you or anyone else here, whether I agree with all of your, or anyone else's contentions or not. So relax and have a cold one!
Best regards,
Westhawk
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do a lot (actually most) of my flying in non-English speaking countries and am always appalled by calls being made in Spanish, French, Italian.... thankfully I speak a few languages, and this has already saved my - and others' - bacon a couple of times. Do these crews and controllers not realize that they deprive non-native speakers of situational awareness ??
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UAE
Age: 45
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know where you get the idea I'm not perfectly calm. Believe me, I am. And happy. However, I refuse to become a "grownup"!
My critisism of your statement had nothing to do with hostility. It was intended to ask you not to make suppositions which are based upon unfounded and possibly spurious information. Nothing more. My use of sarcasm may have left you with a different impression than that which was intended by me. As one who claims to be a grownup, I'm sure you have gotten over it by now.
Referring to the rest of your post addressed to me, I have nothing else I wish to disagree with concerning the accident. I have not taken up the issue of who is to blame, nor will I do so until such time as some investigatory findings are released. This may or may not be before the final report. I have no way to know.
Until there IS something factual to discuss, there is very little which can be stated with certainty, yet many people wish to do so for some reason. That's all I wished to point out. Once again, I have no animosity toward you or anyone else here, whether I agree with all of your, or anyone else's contentions or not. So relax and have a cold one!
Best regards,
Westhawk
However, I refuse to become a "grownup"! My critisism of your statement had nothing to do with hostility. It was intended to ask you not to make suppositions which are based upon unfounded and possibly spurious information. Nothing more. My use of sarcasm may have left you with a different impression than that which was intended by me. As one who claims to be a grownup, I'm sure you have gotten over it by now.
Referring to the rest of your post addressed to me, I have nothing else I wish to disagree with concerning the accident. I have not taken up the issue of who is to blame, nor will I do so until such time as some investigatory findings are released. This may or may not be before the final report. I have no way to know.
Until there IS something factual to discuss, there is very little which can be stated with certainty, yet many people wish to do so for some reason. That's all I wished to point out. Once again, I have no animosity toward you or anyone else here, whether I agree with all of your, or anyone else's contentions or not. So relax and have a cold one!
Best regards,
Westhawk
Ok,
Sometimes the language can be a problem...English is not my native language, so...sorry about that.
Regards
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been my bugbear for a long time. Why is it not possible for ALL R/T to be in English - worldwide I do a lot (actually most) of my flying in non-English speaking countries and am always appalled by calls being made in Spanish, French, Italian.... thankfully I speak a few languages, and this has already saved my - and others' - bacon a couple of times. Do these crews and controllers not realize that they deprive non-native speakers of situational awareness ??
I do a lot (actually most) of my flying in non-English speaking countries and am always appalled by calls being made in Spanish, French, Italian.... thankfully I speak a few languages, and this has already saved my - and others' - bacon a couple of times. Do these crews and controllers not realize that they deprive non-native speakers of situational awareness ??Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SP,Brasil
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My two cents:
No matter under which rules you are flying (FAR or ICA 100-12) if you lose comm under VMC, you shall maintain visual flight and land as soon as practicable. In other words, the see and avoid rule applies.
I believe VMC prevailed at the time.
Mork
No matter under which rules you are flying (FAR or ICA 100-12) if you lose comm under VMC, you shall maintain visual flight and land as soon as practicable. In other words, the see and avoid rule applies.
I believe VMC prevailed at the time.
Mork
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: South Africa
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin , do not jump to conclusions and put words in the mouth of people you do not know . It is offensive.
I doubt any Controller in his right mind would do such a thing," my guess ( and it is only a guess ) is that someone beleived the 737 was a 390 .
Why it was maintaining 37 or passing 37 climbing to 390 , or whatever , is one of the key points the ATC tapes/CVR/FDR will reveal .
I would also not be surprised if more holes in the cheese pop up, like a guy alone on the position ( like in Ueberlingen) or a bad shift change, or a system outage ot some kind, or a system decorrolation, or a wong ACT/estimate passed/received , that sort of things.
And unless I know more of the facts, and one or the other scenario is confirmed, I will not put words on the mouth of anyone and certainly presume blame .
Even if ATC did fail, it could even be the system ( similar to the Honeywell Xponder going to SBY on its own.. ) and not necessarily people.
I doubt any Controller in his right mind would do such a thing," my guess ( and it is only a guess ) is that someone beleived the 737 was a 390 .
Why it was maintaining 37 or passing 37 climbing to 390 , or whatever , is one of the key points the ATC tapes/CVR/FDR will reveal .
I would also not be surprised if more holes in the cheese pop up, like a guy alone on the position ( like in Ueberlingen) or a bad shift change, or a system outage ot some kind, or a system decorrolation, or a wong ACT/estimate passed/received , that sort of things.
And unless I know more of the facts, and one or the other scenario is confirmed, I will not put words on the mouth of anyone and certainly presume blame .
Even if ATC did fail, it could even be the system ( similar to the Honeywell Xponder going to SBY on its own.. ) and not necessarily people.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions....main/3041736/
reply 3 reads:
According to an article in Veja magazine published this weekend and entitled "Did ATC fail?" this is what happened over BSB based on [disclaimer] unnamed sources:
The Legacy transponder failed for the first time before crossing BSB. The data block displayed to the controller was: "3?0 = 370", where the "?" indicates loss of info, "=" cruise, and the right "370" what was in the flight plan. A little later it was working again "370 = 370". Unfortunately, there was an ATC shift change at the same time the Legacy was crossing BSB. The controller being relieved informed his substitute about the transponder problem. However, by the time this new controller got to his or her station, the transponder wasn't working again and the data block read "3?0 = 360", since the flight plan called for this altitude after BSB. And apparently, he or she wasn't informed that the Legacy was flying at FL370 a few minutes before.
Moreover, after losing radio contact with the Legacy soo after, Cindacta 1 FAILED to warn Cindacta 4 about the possible conflict. All primary radar returns were good and no lateral separation was provided between the aircraft.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 61
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all know that the first statement in any lost comm procedure is to maintain VFR if practical and land. Unfortunately the key statement here is; "If Practical". Considering that in the flight levels we are experiencing closure rates of over 900 knots, not to mention a blind spot that covers approximately 90% of our surrounding enviroment, is using a "see and avoid" procedure ever really "Practical"?
Further more, consider this, virtually every Mid Air Collision has occured in VMC. (I'm sure there are some exceptions). In fact, the event that caused the creation of the US domestic air traffic control program was a mid air collision in visual conditions between two transcontinental airliners over the Grand Canyon.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
astra driver
"and land"
everything you say about closure rates etc is right on. but if the LEGACy crew didn't land, why not? out of com , over the capital of Brazil...hmmm
and if they changed transponder to 7600 and it went to stby, and this took out their onboard TCAS (while blinding themselves to others), why didn't they notice?
Every time i've had a tcas failure or change of status, some sort of warning is issued.(granted I've never flown a legacy)
by the way, that grand canyon collision story may be made into a movie, according to some trade publications.
until then, I think we could all be well served by either reading or viewing the movie version of "the crowded sky". timely 45 years ago, timely now.
"and land"
everything you say about closure rates etc is right on. but if the LEGACy crew didn't land, why not? out of com , over the capital of Brazil...hmmm
and if they changed transponder to 7600 and it went to stby, and this took out their onboard TCAS (while blinding themselves to others), why didn't they notice?
Every time i've had a tcas failure or change of status, some sort of warning is issued.(granted I've never flown a legacy)
by the way, that grand canyon collision story may be made into a movie, according to some trade publications.
until then, I think we could all be well served by either reading or viewing the movie version of "the crowded sky". timely 45 years ago, timely now.
Pegase Driver
"I believe VMC prevailed at the time", Precisely and the aircraft hit each other anyway.
We all know that the first statement in any lost comm procedure is to maintain VFR if practical and land. Unfortunately the key statement here is; "If Practical". Considering that in the flight levels we are experiencing closure rates of over 900 knots, not to mention a blind spot that covers approximately 90% of our surrounding enviroment, is using a "see and avoid" procedure ever really "Practical"?
Further more, consider this, virtually every Mid Air Collision has occured in VMC. (I'm sure there are some exceptions). In fact, the event that caused the creation of the US domestic air traffic control program was a mid air collision in visual conditions between two transcontinental airliners over the Grand Canyon.
We all know that the first statement in any lost comm procedure is to maintain VFR if practical and land. Unfortunately the key statement here is; "If Practical". Considering that in the flight levels we are experiencing closure rates of over 900 knots, not to mention a blind spot that covers approximately 90% of our surrounding enviroment, is using a "see and avoid" procedure ever really "Practical"?
Further more, consider this, virtually every Mid Air Collision has occured in VMC. (I'm sure there are some exceptions). In fact, the event that caused the creation of the US domestic air traffic control program was a mid air collision in visual conditions between two transcontinental airliners over the Grand Canyon.
Visual climbs and descent are being abolished in more and more countries in Europe above FL195 and rightly so.
Your statement that almost every mid air collison occurred in VMC is probably correct. I never realised it and it even proves my point even more.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know ATC Watcher must know the difference between VFR and VMC.
Being in VM conditions and losing com would preclude staying at an IFR altitude wouldnt it?
Lose com, in VMC, proceed VFR...doesn't mean stay at IFR altitude and NOT land.
Certainly look out the window and try not to hit anythig is a good idea...but if you are VMC and can land using VFR why not? just for the convenience of getting to your destination? I hope not.
Being in VM conditions and losing com would preclude staying at an IFR altitude wouldnt it?
Lose com, in VMC, proceed VFR...doesn't mean stay at IFR altitude and NOT land.
Certainly look out the window and try not to hit anythig is a good idea...but if you are VMC and can land using VFR why not? just for the convenience of getting to your destination? I hope not.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FACT: the laws that govern our airways use were drafted in a time when tracking was done with VAR/radio range, ADF or VORs.
FACT: the vast majority of jet aircraft using today's airways are equipped ith some form of precision tracking aid like INS, IRS or GPS.
FACT: the human element is still in there somewhere, and humans, even the most professional, make mistakes.
FACT: in the days of VAR and ADFs, two aircraft flying on reciprocal tracks at the same level on the same airway had a better chance of BOTH being struck by lightning at the same instant in time than of hitting (or even seeing!) each other.
FACT: with GPS navigation, the same no longer applies. Two aircraft flying at the same level on opposite tracks will fly within a wingspan of each other and their altimeters now HAVE to be so accurate (to be allowed to fly within RVSM airspace) that they WILL be within 50' of each other (ie, they won't miss vertically either). They WILL hit each other unless timely (ie, very rapid and juts as importantly, CORRECT) avoiding action is taken by BOTH pilots. The tragic midair between the DHL freighter and the CIS passenger aircraft over southern Germany some years ago proved that that cannot be relied upon.
These lead me to a final FACT: it's well past the time that someone in authority bit the bullet and accepted that technology has overtaken the rules we work under. We simply HAVE to accept that even with all the high tech safeguards that have been introduced, all the holes in the cheese can still tragically align, as they seem to have done so in this case.
It's time we re-design our airways to accommodate a small right offset, at least in the cruise phase.
... and 'someone in authority' will only act after there's an outcry from the professional pilot group that is so loud and long lasting it cannot be ignored.
FACT: the vast majority of jet aircraft using today's airways are equipped ith some form of precision tracking aid like INS, IRS or GPS.
FACT: the human element is still in there somewhere, and humans, even the most professional, make mistakes.
FACT: in the days of VAR and ADFs, two aircraft flying on reciprocal tracks at the same level on the same airway had a better chance of BOTH being struck by lightning at the same instant in time than of hitting (or even seeing!) each other.
FACT: with GPS navigation, the same no longer applies. Two aircraft flying at the same level on opposite tracks will fly within a wingspan of each other and their altimeters now HAVE to be so accurate (to be allowed to fly within RVSM airspace) that they WILL be within 50' of each other (ie, they won't miss vertically either). They WILL hit each other unless timely (ie, very rapid and juts as importantly, CORRECT) avoiding action is taken by BOTH pilots. The tragic midair between the DHL freighter and the CIS passenger aircraft over southern Germany some years ago proved that that cannot be relied upon.
These lead me to a final FACT: it's well past the time that someone in authority bit the bullet and accepted that technology has overtaken the rules we work under. We simply HAVE to accept that even with all the high tech safeguards that have been introduced, all the holes in the cheese can still tragically align, as they seem to have done so in this case.
It's time we re-design our airways to accommodate a small right offset, at least in the cruise phase.
... and 'someone in authority' will only act after there's an outcry from the professional pilot group that is so loud and long lasting it cannot be ignored.
In 'Estado de Sao Paulo' today
http://www.estado.com.br/editorias/2...61017.31.1.xml
Free translation:
"Four minutes prior to the point at which the Legacy was to [descend to 36,000 ft], Legacy pilot Joe Lepore contacted Cindacta 1 and asked, in English, "Confirm if I can descend or maintain altitude".
With 30 miles to go to the point at which the aircraft would have to descend, the controller's reply was
"OK, maintain".
-------------
Note wording will not be exact, being based on a transcript allegedly seen by the reporters, translated from English to Portuguese and, above, back to English.
http://www.estado.com.br/editorias/2...61017.31.1.xml
Free translation:
"Four minutes prior to the point at which the Legacy was to [descend to 36,000 ft], Legacy pilot Joe Lepore contacted Cindacta 1 and asked, in English, "Confirm if I can descend or maintain altitude".
With 30 miles to go to the point at which the aircraft would have to descend, the controller's reply was
"OK, maintain".
-------------
Note wording will not be exact, being based on a transcript allegedly seen by the reporters, translated from English to Portuguese and, above, back to English.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chile
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 'Estado de Sao Paulo' today
http://www.estado.com.br/editorias/2...61017.31.1.xml
Free translation:
"Four minutes prior to the point at which the Legacy was to [descend to 36,000 ft], Legacy pilot Joe Lepore contacted Cindacta 1 and asked, in English, "Confirm if I can descend or maintain altitude".
With 30 miles to go to the point at which the aircraft would have to descend, the controller's reply was
"OK, maintain".
-------------
Note wording will not be exact, being based on a transcript allegedly seen by the reporters, translated from English to Portuguese and, above, back to English.
http://www.estado.com.br/editorias/2...61017.31.1.xml
Free translation:
"Four minutes prior to the point at which the Legacy was to [descend to 36,000 ft], Legacy pilot Joe Lepore contacted Cindacta 1 and asked, in English, "Confirm if I can descend or maintain altitude".
With 30 miles to go to the point at which the aircraft would have to descend, the controller's reply was
"OK, maintain".
-------------
Note wording will not be exact, being based on a transcript allegedly seen by the reporters, translated from English to Portuguese and, above, back to English.
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/...5-5598,00.html
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today, the defense minister W. Pires denied this dialogue.
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/...5-5598,00.html
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/...5-5598,00.html
These are official words:
The defense minister W. Pires told that the Legay pilot should have followed the flight plan, even if there was no contact. "if the pilot didnīt reach the tower, more than ever he should have followed rigurously the flight plan. There is a non fulfilment of the flight plan.."
According with the minister, the primary radar of the Legacy indicated that the airplane was at 36 thousand feet when approaching from Brasilia.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Food for thought:
Just because you have a ton of hours and are type rated in a jet, does that mean you are qualified to fly across Africa, or for that matter, ferry an aircraft North to the US from S. America?
I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it's just my "food for thought"...
Just because you have a ton of hours and are type rated in a jet, does that mean you are qualified to fly across Africa, or for that matter, ferry an aircraft North to the US from S. America?
I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it's just my "food for thought"...
D3G,
Don't think that's the case; at least one of the Legacy crew had been there before. What's filtering in from flight crew with experience in that area is a) there are occasional comms blackouts and b) atc quality seems to vary.
What's happening now is a flutter of bits of news seeping out, some corporative back-covering, conflicting objectives between the judiciary (a prosecutor intent on establishing blame and, perhaps, a name for himself) and aeronautical authorities who, in this case, are primarily Brazilian airforce and who combine accident investigation responsibility with that of overseeing ATC.
Not easy to discern fact from fabrication.
In the meantime, 737 CVR bits haven't been found and hopes for doing so appear to be fading.
Don't think that's the case; at least one of the Legacy crew had been there before. What's filtering in from flight crew with experience in that area is a) there are occasional comms blackouts and b) atc quality seems to vary.
What's happening now is a flutter of bits of news seeping out, some corporative back-covering, conflicting objectives between the judiciary (a prosecutor intent on establishing blame and, perhaps, a name for himself) and aeronautical authorities who, in this case, are primarily Brazilian airforce and who combine accident investigation responsibility with that of overseeing ATC.
Not easy to discern fact from fabrication.
In the meantime, 737 CVR bits haven't been found and hopes for doing so appear to be fading.