Near Collision at BOS between Aer Lingus and US Air

[SaturnV]

On June 9th, an Aer Lingus A330 and a US Airways 737 took off nearly simultaneously on intersecting runways at Boston's Logan airport. How close they came to colliding is still to be determined, but it was close enough that the EIN flight crew "contacted Logan's control tower just after the incident ''to report the close proximity of a second aircraft." The crew also called the airline's safety unit in Ireland, which reported it to Irish aviation authorities and to the NTSB."

Full story in today's Boston Globe (free registration now required for the Globe).

http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas..._logan/?page=1

The Globe reports that the control tower was very busy that night and understaffed, and that the controllers "got distracted and forgot about the task at hand and the error happened".

[Shore Guy]

Does anyone know......?

At this time of night, with this runway alignment, does KBOS use different tower frequencies?

Communication box on airport diagram implies separate freq\'s....

Also, initial part of takeoff roll off both runways involved....the other aircraft would not be visable - blocked by terminal complex and/or (referred to in article) aircraft parked on taxiways.


http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0506/00058AD.pdf

[cwatters]

and to think that road traffic lights were invented in 1868 to prevent collisions at intersections.

[downthebay]

Shore Guy - It sounds (from an archived scanner recording) as if separate tower frequencies were in use for the two runways at the time.

[Idunno]

I have to say I'm disgusted with the atrocious standards of American ATC. I hadn't heard of this incident - but it doesn't surprise me in the least. The regular use of 15R at KBOS for T/O's while using 04R and 04L for departures/arrivals is pure craziness. You get clearances telling you to (for instance) "set t/o power now and when I call you - commence immediate take-off'.
I've had aircraft vectored straight at me on approach leading to TCAS RA's. Last minute runway changes. Thrown at approaches from impossible angles or heights or speeds. Ordered to observe ridiculous restrictions to keep speed too high on the ILS. Back course approaches, NDB and VOR approaches where they vector you inside the initial approach point and abandon you to your fate. The Canarsie approach at JFK is criminal - widebody heavies doing finals turns at 200' (saw a G/A from 200' last night by a BA 747 because the controller lined up an American Eagle commuter and couldn't release him in time - the American had to abort his take-off to avoid the BA jumbo going round!).
Mix all that with argumentative and petulant controllers who always sound as if they're on the brink of losing it - what a madhouse the US has become.

[Idunno]

London Heathrow is one of the worlds busiest airports, and it is positioned in some of the busiest airspace in the world.
I've never heard a London ATC'er lose his/her rag, indeed all one ever seems to receive from them is a great service done with the greatest of grace under pressure. They are never aggressive or petulant, and they use proper RT terminology at all times. The worst I've ever heard from a UK controller is a slightly exasperated tone when people won't listen out at peak times.

I've NEVER been put into a position at LHR where I felt seriously uncomfortable with the controlling - only admiration for the professionalism of those guys and girls.

On the other hand, in the US - on a daily basis - I feel that ATC in terminal areas are trying to kill me (I'm not exagerating). I find I have to treat every clearance they issue as yet another part of that effort. Its the only way to stay alive there. Yet, when I'm thrown at an approach from a great height or speed I know that if I complain or reject a crazy clearance the likeiehood is I'll be told to turn around and get out of their area.

The problems that ATC may have from airport authorities or the FAA is being passed directly onto pilots by them. Daily they foist us into downright dangerous situations - then expect us to bail them out by complying with their crummy buck passing controlling.
And if you do it - next time they'll squeeze you harder.
If you don't do it - go to the penalty box.

US ATC is totally discredited in my view if the people in that profession can't demand better standards. Lets face it - when the union was broken by Reagan that was the end of professionalism in that job in the US.

You do 800 a year there? God help you - but since you know no better, why would you expect anything else.

PS. Regarding KORD. When using RWY09 - coming in over the lake they hold you at 7,000' until you pass north of the field, then they tell you to reduce speed from 250 to 180 and descend to 3,000'. You may not know this, but large aircraft don't slow up too well, and they don't descend well while slowing up - nor do they give good descent rates at 180 knots. And yet - even at slack times of the day - ATC will turn you onto a 7 mile base and finals above the g/slope, often with a tailwind.

They do this consistently and for no apparent good reason even in slack times. The only way to get in off this kind of approach is to take the gear at 7,000' - which is a bull**** way to operate a heavy jet.

Thats what I think of KORD ATC.
Bull****.

[West Coast]

They don't have a rwy 9, they have 9L and 9R. Review your airfield diagram before your arrival please.

When you fly in to KORD you need to bring your A game. Sounds like you don't. Its truly one of the busiest airports in the world, if not the busiest. Not sure where KATL sits on the list.

"London Heathrow is one of the worlds busiest airports"

Not even the busiest in Europe let alone the world. However, it is busy.


"I feel that ATC in terminal areas are trying to kill me (I'm not exagerating)"

Again, just DON'T COME HERE. Bid around it if you find it so bad. If you honestly think it soo dangerous, you have a responsibility to your pax not to fly them to the USA.

[West Coast]

You whine about operational issues. If you seek to discredit US ATC, then judge them on moving traffic. Passenger enplanements are what landside types, bean counters, whiners and politicicians use. Look at number of operations and tell me where the busiest airports are. How many of the top 10 airports are in the US, how many of the top 20?

Have you had a chance to review your airport diagram and see there is no rwy9 at KORD. One reason I have to believe you don't bring your A game. When you fly in to the busiest airport in the world in terms of operations, you need to know the runway and taxiway layout.

Still waiting for your response about DHL.

[PPRuNe Radar]

You whine about operational issues. If you seek to discredit US ATC, then judge them on moving traffic.

Or alternatively look at accidents caused by ATC ........ much more relevant than red neck rhetoric (from whatever side)

[Ralph Cramden]

I agree with West Coast. Too many pilots? who can't fly their aircraft. There is more to flying than pounding away on a MCDU and pushing or pulling knobs on the FCU. If you are not comfortable with your ability to deal with the proceedures at your destination then you have no business flying there. Bid a route more suitable to your skills. LHR Nice might be good. You would even get the odd July off when French ATC go on strike.

I have flown all over the world and IMHO ATC in the US is by far the best I have had to deal with. They can move far more traffic per hour than any European agency I know of.

Idunno...LHR is far down the list of busy airports in terms of total movements. ATC just makes it seem like they're busy.

[West Coast]

PPRuNe Radar

I agree, is that data captured anywhere in a coherant form that allows for comparison?
I someow don't think you will find much if any operational difference between US ATC and other modern ATC units.

[ChewyTheWookie]

West Coast, have you ever been to LHR?

I flew in there tonight (no, I am not a pilot by the way) and when I left the aircraft there were SIX sets of lights on the g/s for 9L with a/c landing at the rate of one every 90 seconds. Are you saying that is not busy? As Idunno's facts correctly show, it is by far the busiest airport in Europe.

As crew for a large British airline, every now and then I am able to get hold of a copy of the air safety reports relating to our fleet. I have just counted the number of ATC related incidents in the copy I have to hand, there are more from the USA than from LHR. Considering the amount of company traffic which uses LHR, there are very very few reports of problems caused by their mistakes.

WC, you should really consider the impression you're giving of American flight crew. You're acting more like a jealous child than a professional pilot.

[PPRuNe Radar]

I agree, is that data captured anywhere in a coherant form that allows for comparison? I someow don't think you will find much if any operational difference between US ATC and other modern ATC units.

UK is zero (air or ground), so that's a pretty good comparison ..... and apart from the DHL accident over Uberlingen, then Europe is relatively comparable too if you are looking at the last 20 years or so (ground collisions are the common demoninator.)

The problem when people cock and crow ... is the evidence

[West Coast]

ChewyTheWookie

What am I jealous of? Please do tell.

"As Idunno's facts correctly show, it is by far the busiest airport in Europe"

You speak of operational items with the landing rate you saw. Then you quote dunno's enplanement rate which is not operational in ATC terms. In terms of how many planes take off and land, LHR isn't the busiest in Europe, CDG is. I have not denigrated LHR ATC at all. I simply point out that it isn't nearly as busy as the top airports out there when judged in terms of annual operations.

"WC, you should really consider the impression you're giving of American flight crew"

Perhaps you do, but I don't concern myself with what others think of me.

"UK is zero (air or ground), so that's a pretty good comparison ..... and apart from the DHL accident over Uberlingen, then Europe is relatively comparable too if you are looking at the last 20 years or so (ground collisions are the common demoninator.)"

I would have to think the US is in that general area, can you show otherwise?

[minuteman]

And while everybody gets in a spin slagging off country X's ATC vs country Y's ATC, nobody wants to comment on the incident in BOS...

Was it an isolated incident or not?
Are these sorts of clearances a regular occurrence at BOS?

The EI skipper must have got a bit of a surprise at least!

[Geffen]

Egll may not be the busiest airport out there, but we still shift approximately half the traffic of KATL on two runways. Other airports busier in europe have more runways.

[GOLF-INDIA BRAVO]

Charles de Gaulle has 4 runways against Heathrow`s 2 and Gatwick with only 1 is the world`s busiest single runway operation and like Manchester uesd to do before their second runway regularly get
between 50+ movements per hour, but does not air space also have effect
ie having Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted
Luton plus several other smaller field in a very small area

G-I-B

[SaturnV]

apparently as close as 171 feet

excerpts from today's Boston Globe:

Two air-traffic controllers involved in a near-collision of two passenger jets at Logan International Airport this month are being retrained and will not direct takeoffs and landings until they have been recertified, the Federal Aviation Administration said yesterday.

FAA spokesman Jim Peters said yesterday that after controllers witnessed the near-collision from the tower, a supervisor immediately relieved the two employees who were responsible for directing departures and arrivals.

''The two controllers in this incident were decertified and are undergoing retraining as part of this investigation," Peters said. ''They are allowed to work certain positions in the facility until their refresher training is completed. They will not be allowed to work what we call the 'local control' position at the tower."

When a plane is ready to leave the gate and begin its trip, the pilot must clear his intended flight path with one controller. Then before entering the taxiway, he must obtain clearance from a second controller, who guides the plane to the runway for take off.

A third controller, in the position called local control, then clears the plane to take off and watches as other aircraft land.

Logan's tower operates with two sets of these controllers, one for the east side and one for the west side. They are supposed to ensure that planes on intersecting runways do not approach each other. That night, one controller was in charge of the Aer Lingus jet and another was monitoring the US Airways plane.

Electronic snapshots taken of the event by Logan's ground radar system and obtained by the Globe yesterday indicate the two planes came closer than the 200 feet to 1,000 feet described previously by sources familiar with the incident.

Information from the Airport Movement Area Safety System, which captures radar images of planes on the runways and taxiways every second, describes the US Airways jet coming within 171 feet of the runway intersection where the Aer Lingus plane was taking off. The images suggest both planes were still on the ground, though officials have said the Aer Lingus plane had just lifted off.

According to the radar data, which Peters did not dispute, the US Airways plane was traveling 167 miles per hour as the Aer Lingus jet passed directly in front of it at 198 miles per hour.

Peters said the FAA turned over the radar snapshots and other records to the NTSB, whose investigation includes examining their accuracy before a final determination is made on how close the planes came to each other and who was at fault.

Spokesmen for both airlines and for the Massachusetts Port Authority, which operates Logan, declined to comment yesterday, saying they are waiting for the safety board's conclusions.

The safety board has conducted an initial investigation and is expected to soon release a preliminary report. .....
The FAA, however, doesn't wait for the NTSB's analysis before taking action.

''If it's warranted, we can decertify the controllers involved in these kind of operational errors," Peters said. ''They undergo retraining in specific areas found to be contributing factors that led to this operational error."

The retraining is expected to take 15 work days, he said, at which point supervisors will decide whether to recertify the two controllers.

By my crude math, at the US Airways acceleration speed, they missed by about 1.5 seconds.

[Tom the Tenor]

Have a good look at the face of your Breitling and see how close less than 2 seconds is!

Now, stop mouthing off at each other Yanks, Brits and Europeans and consider what would have been the fate of the EI and US passengers and crew if the difference had been 0 seconds.

Those passengers deserve better than the babyish whining being displayed here?

[PPRuNe Radar]

West Coast,

I concede that things are 'generally' comparable on both sides of the pond. It depends on how you take the cut and whether you compare regions or individual countries. In the interests of getting back on track, let's agree things are similar on a wider scale. Disregard my previous comments on that basis