Alaska Lands on Taxiway in SEA..

[HighAndFlighty]

Originally Posted by KBPsen

It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?

Wow. Did somebody pee in your cornflakes this morning?

Given that this is Rumours and News, just how would it help if "...EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up"? Half the point of this forum is that everyone...comment[s] on stuff they know nothing about.

[cooperplace]

to KPBsen:

"It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?"

I wasn't going to make an inane comment, but seeing this, I have to:

this is an internet forum: what do you expect?

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

"They were cleared for approach to 16R, offered sidestep to 16C (closer to terminal), accepted it, landed on taxiway T which is halfway between 16R and 16C."

Thanks Pattern is Full, that was a piece of the puzzle.

Also thanks KPBsen:

"It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?"

That would make a great sticky. Or better yet, plaster it in the white space at top, next to the PPRuNE banner. It's a refreshing change from the usual "shut up and wait for the official report", though it's more than a bit "over the top" for this innocuous little thread. Is there is an interesting story behind it...? The way it is worded makes me wonder if you know a lot about landing on taxiways.

[framer]

The way we fly hasn't changed that much, the amount we fly has, the rest between the flying has, how much we can fly has...

I agree 100% with what Kirk says.off topic; The comment did remind me of a book I started reading last week about a WWII DC3 pilot who logged 100hrs airborne in a week running cargo and troops around the South Pacific. Crazy.
Back to landing on taxiways;
Don't accept a runway change after turning base and you'l be good as gold.

[Kal Niranjan]

It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?

What hypocrisy?

Had it been a third world, not western airline you would be the first to join in the chorus!

[Boeing Country]

"It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?"

This forum wouldn't be called Rumors & News.

"They were cleared for approach to 16R, offered sidestep to 16C (closer to terminal), accepted it, landed on taxiway T which is halfway between 16R and 16C."

This is just a guess, unless you can attach the ATC recording to prove this is what actually happened.

I fly out of KSEA several times a week. Everyone knows this is a taxiway; including all Alaska pilots who are based in KSEA. Yes, runway 16C was closed all summer for construction. It now has beautiful LED lights and I know, because I used that runway last week. That taxiway does not have any runway lights, runway markings, or even an approach lighting system. It has large illuminated X's on both ends and the atis has been broadcasting for over 10 years not to land on it; since American Airlines was the first to do so when 16R was brand new.

I simply don't buy the explanation from the local article, the pilots were confused and were cleared to land 16c and then purposely landed on an active taxiway with aircraft on it. If I was offered a clearance to side step to 16c, I would not land on a taxiway, because I was not issued a clearance to do so. If there was any confusion, then I would have gone around and asked for clarification. Gas is cheap, the weather is good, I get paid by the hour, so Go Around!

[Phantom Driver]

gys

So, after all that complaining about too much automation, it seems that too little automation can shoot you in the foot as well…
I feel for those guys, probably got a few runway changes and were finally cleared visual approach, easy pitfall, especially with nice weather, to choose a low level of automation.
Sometimes it's just better to stay on AP, intercept the ILS (was it on?) watch what's it doing and click it off when you are stable at 1000'.

Yes indeed . Unfortunately, even old timers can fall into the traps , so it always helps to load the dice in your favour, especially in these days of ANP, RNP, RVSM and Big Brother FDAP watching your every move and reporting instantly back to Chief Pilots office. Not much room for the "fun " we used to have in the good old days....

[chucko]

The photo attached to the BizJournal article is an old one, likely shot before 16R/34L was opened a few years ago, as there doesn't appear to be any markings or tire marks on that runway (on the right). Also, 16/34C was "re-cycled" over the summer and looks brand new (at least it did yesterday).

[pattern_is_full]

This is just a guess, unless you can attach the ATC recording to prove this is what actually happened.

A guess? Perhaps - but not mine:

".....on an ILS approach to runway 16R cleared to land on runway 16R, when tower offered a visual swing over to runway 16C, the crew opted to accept runway 16C but aligned with taxiway T in between runways 16R and 16C and continued for a safe landing on taxiway T at 08:31L (16:31Z), no other traffic was on taxiway T at that time."

Incident: Alaska B739 at Seattle on Dec 19th 2015, landed on taxiway

[Yeelep]

Here's your ATC proof. Between 26:30 and 28:30, flt #AS27
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ks...2015-1600Z.mp3

There are no lighted X's on taxiway tango. There used to be painted X's but that didn't stop the problem.

[ZFT]

Quote:
It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?
What hypocrisy?

Had it been a third world, not western airline you would be the first to join in the chorus!

Now isn't that the unfortunate truth? At least there are no attacks on the competence of the operator, their training or the crew so far. Makes a pleasant change.

[woodpecker]

Our school was lined up with the approach to Northolt, so when during break time this Pan Am 707 drifted overhead our playground us aircraft spotters were rather confused. The rest a history, the gasometer at South Harrow aligned with Northolt and the one at Southall aligned with the then runway 23 at LHR. Easy mistake to make. The 707 managed to stop on Notholt's rather short runway, and, a few days later minus all the seats and anything else that could be removed it positioned to Heathrow.

The resulting painting of "NO" (Northolt) on the South Harrow gasometer and "LHR" on the other was most certainly not full proof as a few years later, sitting P3 in a Trident, I tapped the Captain and fellow copilot on their shoulders and pointed out the error of their ways.... "Heathrow is over there on our left, that's Northolt ahead and there's my school"

[CommanderRiker]

ZFT
N4790P

Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,466
Quote:
Quote:
It would be a fantastic help if EVERYONE not involved would just shut the f---- up. Why it that everyone have to comment on stuff they know nothing about?
What hypocrisy?

Had it been a third world, not western airline you would be the first to join in the chorus!
Now isn't that the unfortunate truth? At least there are no attacks on the competence of the operator, their training or the crew so far. Makes a pleasant change.

We are blessed that we do not have hordes of third world pilots logging in and casting aspersions that our western pilots suck!

Or they may make bold and direct comments that we cant tell a taxiway from a runway. " Hey, it is a visual maneuver! Eyeball the runway; taxiway has no threshold markings, no touchdown zone markings, etc "

[Boeing Country]

Thank you for finding the ATC recording of the side step to 16C. It was interesting to note that no one pointed out the error on the ATC tape. Maybe it was on the next recording. I still don't understand why they landed on taxiway Tango. The Alaska flight after AS27 refused the side step offer from Seattle Tower. This should be a very important lesson for all of us, if your not sure, don't land. Go around and short it out. My point was, there could have been another aircraft on that taxiway, but there is a FBO on the end of Tango with a ramp of parked airplanes, equipment and people. As for the illuminated X's, I have seen them on that taxiway. Are there currently, I don't know. I'm senior enough to have the holidays off. Happy New Year!

[Two's in]

I still don't understand why they landed on taxiway Tango.

Cognitive Dissonance.

The mind is a wonderful thing, as it struggles to eliminate the visual inconsistencies (lighting, markings, position, color, size) until they eventually match the mental perception that the big long strip of concrete in front of you is the runway. It's more common that most people imagine.

[RAT 5]

The photograph provided in the first post is very confusing, and it made it difficult to understand the whole scenario. I checked the airports charts and this confirmed the confusion. In the photograph the only strips marked as runways are 16L & 16C. Taxiway T 7 RW16R are both bare of conspicuous markings. How old is this photo? I can't believe RW16R could have been in use when that photo was taken.
However, what it does show is the significant difference & contrast between the markings of taxi T & RW16C. . What I remember, when this happened at LGW, is that the taxiway was sometimes used as an 'emergency runway' and had some runway markings on it. It was NOTAM'd as in use as taxi or runway. But, on the day, Murphy was awake.
In this case I also see that sunrise is at 07.56 and the landing was 08.33. Variation is 16 degrees. Would that have caused any sun effect?
I suspect the only people who can answer the curious are the pilots. What always surprises us all in these type of "why did they do that" discussions is that 2 people made an error. This was not a high pressure/stress moment where a cockpit gradient could have been in play. I assume this change was actioned with time to spare in good visibility. Hm????? What was the crew's roster before this landing?

[pattern_is_full]

The photograph provided in the first post is very confusing,.....How old is this photo?

Click on it to get the enlarged version, and you can see the date is recorded in the lower left corner.

August 2008, on which date 16R/34L was still under construction and three months short of becoming operational.

[Arfur Dent]

Woodpecker Man!!
Your comments are brilliant! I had a good belly laugh wondering what "Sir" said next - do tell.
Wonderful………………..

[aterpster]

No doubt there is a human-factors problem by having three closely spaced parallel runways. For many years the airport had only two runways.

[FoxHunter]

We now know two pilots that will never do that again.