Alaska Lands on Taxiway in SEA..
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USA Today had an interesting presentation involving use of a SIM here:
Plane lands on taxiway instead of runway in Seattle
Of course, I have no idea as to how up to date the SIM's software was and whether the representation of the approach is currently accurate.
Plane lands on taxiway instead of runway in Seattle
Of course, I have no idea as to how up to date the SIM's software was and whether the representation of the approach is currently accurate.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This photograph from May 2012 indicates that whilst there are no "X" marks at the end of the taxiway, it is still somewhat self evident that it is not a runway.
Of course the 2015 reconstruction of runway 16C may have caused some degree of ambiguity if the new surface, lacking the accumulation of rubber and general wear and tear, bore a closer cosmetic look to the taxiway.
That being said, the white markings on the new runway should still be readily visible, and it's pretty hard to miss those big chevrons.
Of course the 2015 reconstruction of runway 16C may have caused some degree of ambiguity if the new surface, lacking the accumulation of rubber and general wear and tear, bore a closer cosmetic look to the taxiway.
That being said, the white markings on the new runway should still be readily visible, and it's pretty hard to miss those big chevrons.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This photo from is from the website of the airport's owner, the Port of Seattle...
See https://www.portseattle.org/Environm...-Use-Info.aspx
It doesn't really help matters!!!
See https://www.portseattle.org/Environm...-Use-Info.aspx
It doesn't really help matters!!!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This photo from is from the website of the airport's owner, the Port of Seattle...
See https://www.portseattle.org/Environm...-Use-Info.aspx
It doesn't really help matters!!!
See https://www.portseattle.org/Environm...-Use-Info.aspx
It doesn't really help matters!!!
https://www.portseattle.org/Environmental/Noise/Pages/Runway-Use-Info.aspx
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Power point rangers strike again
RE the owners of SEATAC and the neat picture. Prey teel which is the taxiway ?
granted pilots do not usually look at the site, but it do0es help to put things in perspective for the sometimes private pilot new to the area.
IOW there is NO for king excuse for such misinformation to be published on the the ' owners' site.
Your quasi- government at work. Note the Port of seattle gets a fair share of taxpayer money and is run like a fifedom.
granted pilots do not usually look at the site, but it do0es help to put things in perspective for the sometimes private pilot new to the area.
IOW there is NO for king excuse for such misinformation to be published on the the ' owners' site.
Your quasi- government at work. Note the Port of seattle gets a fair share of taxpayer money and is run like a fifedom.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First, I don't see the relevance of the half-mislabeling of a taxiway on a photograph intended to inform the public about how aircraft noise is distributed over a large part of Washington State. Sure, in both cases you probably had someone in their office, working to a deadline, making a quick decision and getting it wrong. But that photo is not intended to be used for any safety-critical task, and the person who did it was probably alone.
Second, The Aviation Herald is a valuable internet resource that provides unmatched coverage of aviation events thanks to the tireless work of one individual. Yet that individual (Simon Hradecky) isn't always explicit about his sources, nor does he have unlimited resources. But we can reconstruct his work. In this case, he posted 2239Z on 29 December. The only news item I can find that predates this posting is a piece in the so-called Puget Sound Business Journal, stamped "1:59 PM, PST", on 29 December, aka 2159Z. The only person cited in that piece is an airport spokesperson.
So, either the airport sent out a press release, or some similar public information came out on 29 December, or (less likely) the PSBJ writer heard about it from his contacts at SEATAC (AvHerald calls it an "incident", but the FAA does not). All the hard information the PSBJ writer (Steve Wilhelm) had was Aircraft type, flight number, date and approximate time, and that it landed on the taxiway rather than 16C.
Now Simon goes to work. He calls his contacts at AS and the FAA, and gets confirmation; he collects the METARS, and he digs up the information on Flightaware, getting the registration number, more precise arrival times, and even the ADS-B track where you can see the sidestep gone wrong.
The last step is to listen to the audio, which is archived on LiveAtc.Net. Here's where he went wrong. He states:
First, he reported that the Tower offered 16C; in fact, as you can hear from the recording posted above, AS27 requested the side-step.
Second, it is true that Tower later cleared the aircraft to cross 16L, but that's not the whole story either. Simon's carefully-worded statement sounds like AS27 landed, acted like nothing happened, and, at the moment they were cleared to cross 16L, they realized their mistake. Some have even drawn the inference that AS27 crossed an active runway (16C) without clearance.
In fact, that's not at all what happened.
LiveAtc's Seattle "Tower" feed is actually two frequencies, East (16L, 119.9) and West (16R/C, 120.95); On the feed, East has priority over West, and in scanner fashion, the beginning of each transmission is not recorded. If you listen to the recording posted above, you'll note that the controller on 119.9 is female and 120.95 is male. If you follow the recording to the next half-hour, you'll hear at 01:28 in the recording "27 left turn on November cross 16C hold short 16L", shortly thereafter (01:50) West hands AS27 off to East, and then (02:05) is instructed to cross 16L.
The "Ground" feed does not have archived recordings for this period, so we have no record of AS27 copying a phone number.
In short, AS27 was cleared for 16R, requested, changed to and was cleared to land on 16C; it then landed on T, and the mistake was known immediately (well, immediately after landing on the taxiway) to all involved.
Second, The Aviation Herald is a valuable internet resource that provides unmatched coverage of aviation events thanks to the tireless work of one individual. Yet that individual (Simon Hradecky) isn't always explicit about his sources, nor does he have unlimited resources. But we can reconstruct his work. In this case, he posted 2239Z on 29 December. The only news item I can find that predates this posting is a piece in the so-called Puget Sound Business Journal, stamped "1:59 PM, PST", on 29 December, aka 2159Z. The only person cited in that piece is an airport spokesperson.
So, either the airport sent out a press release, or some similar public information came out on 29 December, or (less likely) the PSBJ writer heard about it from his contacts at SEATAC (AvHerald calls it an "incident", but the FAA does not). All the hard information the PSBJ writer (Steve Wilhelm) had was Aircraft type, flight number, date and approximate time, and that it landed on the taxiway rather than 16C.
Now Simon goes to work. He calls his contacts at AS and the FAA, and gets confirmation; he collects the METARS, and he digs up the information on Flightaware, getting the registration number, more precise arrival times, and even the ADS-B track where you can see the sidestep gone wrong.
The last step is to listen to the audio, which is archived on LiveAtc.Net. Here's where he went wrong. He states:
An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737-900, registration N477AS performing flight AS-27 from Chicago O'Hare,IL to Seattle,WA (USA), was 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. Tower, maintaining routine communication, cleared the aircraft to cross runway 16L, the crew read that clearance back after a slight hesitation and maintained routine communication, too.
Second, it is true that Tower later cleared the aircraft to cross 16L, but that's not the whole story either. Simon's carefully-worded statement sounds like AS27 landed, acted like nothing happened, and, at the moment they were cleared to cross 16L, they realized their mistake. Some have even drawn the inference that AS27 crossed an active runway (16C) without clearance.
In fact, that's not at all what happened.
LiveAtc's Seattle "Tower" feed is actually two frequencies, East (16L, 119.9) and West (16R/C, 120.95); On the feed, East has priority over West, and in scanner fashion, the beginning of each transmission is not recorded. If you listen to the recording posted above, you'll note that the controller on 119.9 is female and 120.95 is male. If you follow the recording to the next half-hour, you'll hear at 01:28 in the recording "27 left turn on November cross 16C hold short 16L", shortly thereafter (01:50) West hands AS27 off to East, and then (02:05) is instructed to cross 16L.
The "Ground" feed does not have archived recordings for this period, so we have no record of AS27 copying a phone number.
In short, AS27 was cleared for 16R, requested, changed to and was cleared to land on 16C; it then landed on T, and the mistake was known immediately (well, immediately after landing on the taxiway) to all involved.
@DingerX
Can you explain how you come to this conclusion?
Transcript (my own) from the LiveATC recording linked in post 32.
26:34 TWR: "Alaska 27, Seattle Tower, Wind 1-1-0 at 8, Runway 1-6 Right, cleared to land."
26:38 AS27: "Alaska 27, Cleared to land, 1-6 Right."
28:16 TWR: "Alaska 27, if you have the field in sight and would like the Center, it's available."
28:22 AS27: "Alaska 27, Ah...roger, thank you! We'll take, uhh, 1-6 Center."
28:25 TWR: "Alaska 27, Change to runway 1-6 Center; cleared visual approach 1-6 Center, cleared to land."
28:29 AS27: "Alaska 27, cleared visual approach 1-6 Center, cleared to land."
Where do you hear AS27 "request" 16C, before ATC raises the subject - i.e. offers the change? AS27's voice tone expresses surprise at the idea.
First, he reported that the Tower offered 16C; in fact, as you can hear from the recording posted above, AS27 requested the side-step.
Transcript (my own) from the LiveATC recording linked in post 32.
26:34 TWR: "Alaska 27, Seattle Tower, Wind 1-1-0 at 8, Runway 1-6 Right, cleared to land."
26:38 AS27: "Alaska 27, Cleared to land, 1-6 Right."
28:16 TWR: "Alaska 27, if you have the field in sight and would like the Center, it's available."
28:22 AS27: "Alaska 27, Ah...roger, thank you! We'll take, uhh, 1-6 Center."
28:25 TWR: "Alaska 27, Change to runway 1-6 Center; cleared visual approach 1-6 Center, cleared to land."
28:29 AS27: "Alaska 27, cleared visual approach 1-6 Center, cleared to land."
Where do you hear AS27 "request" 16C, before ATC raises the subject - i.e. offers the change? AS27's voice tone expresses surprise at the idea.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SEA is infamous for changeups on final between L C R....
All 3 rwys have been operational for years, so landing on the taxiway, well, no excuse, and Alaska is not new to SEA.
They had plenty of time on visual to notice the wrong approach, and did not GA.
They gave the taxiway a good pounding.
They were lucky.
All 3 rwys have been operational for years, so landing on the taxiway, well, no excuse, and Alaska is not new to SEA.
They had plenty of time on visual to notice the wrong approach, and did not GA.
They gave the taxiway a good pounding.
They were lucky.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two's in:
is the holding of two or more contradictory views at the same time
I think you mean Confirmation Bias where the brain seeks evidence to prove an established belief, such as the 'fact' that the strip of concrete in front is in fact a runway, despite the lack of correct markings.
How about identifying a way to avoid the error to begin with? (e.g.that will be the 3rd strip in from the right) or trap - there are no runway markings, let's line up with another next bit of concrete, and finally mitigate - not happy here, go-around.
Sometimes, identifying the threat is the key part - e.g. there are lots of parallel strips at SEA, how will we identify that we are lining up on the correct one, especially if offered a late switch?
Cognitive Dissonance.
I think you mean Confirmation Bias where the brain seeks evidence to prove an established belief, such as the 'fact' that the strip of concrete in front is in fact a runway, despite the lack of correct markings.
Simple solution would be to put a lighted, yellow, X at the north end of Taxiway T.
How difficult could this be??
How difficult could this be??
Sometimes, identifying the threat is the key part - e.g. there are lots of parallel strips at SEA, how will we identify that we are lining up on the correct one, especially if offered a late switch?
Last edited by overstress; 3rd Jan 2016 at 09:52.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pattern_is_full: you're right, I'm wrong. Musta misheard it.
Anyway, the key point I wanted to make is that the recording in question is incomplete, and no doubt there was some observation after landing that AS27 was on T, not 16C; but since the feed gives priority to EAST, instead of that discussion, the recording has Delta 2210 lining up on 16L with a passenger going to the bathroom.
Anyway, the key point I wanted to make is that the recording in question is incomplete, and no doubt there was some observation after landing that AS27 was on T, not 16C; but since the feed gives priority to EAST, instead of that discussion, the recording has Delta 2210 lining up on 16L with a passenger going to the bathroom.
Originally Posted by kbbt
This happened once at Paphos, so they had 'TAXI' markings painted on the parallel taxiway's 'thresholds'. I wonder how effective that might be when a crew's missed all other cues.
Although a bit more costly, putting a big yellow, lighted X on this slope would make it complete. Not visible on the ground, so not confusing anybody on the ground that the twy is closed (as would be the case with a big X painted on, or placed next to the twy as some suggest)
Originally Posted by overstress
How about identifying a way to avoid the error to begin with?
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The crew were most likely using Jeppesen charts, not some website chart not intended for navigation. This chart is in the physical or electronic manual. That doesn't necessarily mean it was being used:
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ijatta
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As opposed to this:
http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1513/00582ad.pdf
Sorry. I don't know how to post it as an image.
http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1513/00582ad.pdf
Sorry. I don't know how to post it as an image.
Last edited by wanabee777; 3rd Jan 2016 at 14:42.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... Can someone enlighten me as to where the touchdown zone is located on a taxiway? From 200' 1/3 of a mile from the end of the taxiway would be obvious to a student pilot that this is not a runway, and a go-around would be warranted thus ewsulting in a non event for the crew. There are no reamifications from a go-around versus landing on a taxiway...