Serious airmiss near Manchester ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Fraggle Rock
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Serious airmiss near Manchester ?
Manchester evening News: Airliners seconds from disaster
Below is the transcript
TWO passenger jets came within seconds of a mid-air collision after a mistake by a trainee air traffic controller at Manchester Airport.
The near-miss happened at 11,000 feet as the two aircraft were travelling at speeds approaching 300 mph over north east Cheshire.
It is understood the trainee failed to spot the imminent disaster and the planes got so close their images started to merge on the radar screen.
A supervisor realised there was a major problem and tried to take action but the pilot of one of the planes had already spotted the other aircraft and manoeuvred to avoid a crash.
The aircraft, which can travel at 10 miles per minute, were on a collision course only 1.25 miles from each other. An air traffic control source said: "We have never seen a situation where both aircraft were so close without colliding."
Investigation
An investigation was under way today into the incident which happened at 7.20am last Tuesday - the peak of the morning rush hour for air traffic in and out of Manchester.
Both aircraft were narrow-bodied 50-seat Embraer 145 "pencil jets" - one on a British Airways flight from Birmingham to Aberdeen, the other a Swiss Air Lines plane approaching Manchester from Zurich.
According to one insider, the air traffic control panel layout used at Manchester does not allow mistakes to be corrected as quickly as elsewhere.
The insider said: "Although the training controller realised the trainee had made an error of judgement, she did not have sufficient time to accomplish the manoeuvre she wished to employ to achieve standard separation.
"Fortunately the situation was saved. The British Airways pilot saw the Swiss aircraft and avoiding action was taken."
The Manchester incident happened the day after a near-miss over the English Channel. Two Boeing jets - a 737 and a 777 - came close to disaster after a trainee controller at the new Swanwick national air traffic control centre in Hampshire ordered the larger aircraft to descend to a flight level occupied by the 737.
Last Tuesday's incident is the second major occurrence affecting flights in and out of Manchester in recent weeks.
On May 26, a Boeing 737 en route to Stanstead was involved in a near miss with a Piper light aircraft.
The M.E.N. revealed yesterday that air traffic controllers at Manchester are due to be balloted on strike action over a pay dispute with the National Air Traffic control Service.
Below is the transcript
TWO passenger jets came within seconds of a mid-air collision after a mistake by a trainee air traffic controller at Manchester Airport.
The near-miss happened at 11,000 feet as the two aircraft were travelling at speeds approaching 300 mph over north east Cheshire.
It is understood the trainee failed to spot the imminent disaster and the planes got so close their images started to merge on the radar screen.
A supervisor realised there was a major problem and tried to take action but the pilot of one of the planes had already spotted the other aircraft and manoeuvred to avoid a crash.
The aircraft, which can travel at 10 miles per minute, were on a collision course only 1.25 miles from each other. An air traffic control source said: "We have never seen a situation where both aircraft were so close without colliding."
Investigation
An investigation was under way today into the incident which happened at 7.20am last Tuesday - the peak of the morning rush hour for air traffic in and out of Manchester.
Both aircraft were narrow-bodied 50-seat Embraer 145 "pencil jets" - one on a British Airways flight from Birmingham to Aberdeen, the other a Swiss Air Lines plane approaching Manchester from Zurich.
According to one insider, the air traffic control panel layout used at Manchester does not allow mistakes to be corrected as quickly as elsewhere.
The insider said: "Although the training controller realised the trainee had made an error of judgement, she did not have sufficient time to accomplish the manoeuvre she wished to employ to achieve standard separation.
"Fortunately the situation was saved. The British Airways pilot saw the Swiss aircraft and avoiding action was taken."
The Manchester incident happened the day after a near-miss over the English Channel. Two Boeing jets - a 737 and a 777 - came close to disaster after a trainee controller at the new Swanwick national air traffic control centre in Hampshire ordered the larger aircraft to descend to a flight level occupied by the 737.
Last Tuesday's incident is the second major occurrence affecting flights in and out of Manchester in recent weeks.
On May 26, a Boeing 737 en route to Stanstead was involved in a near miss with a Piper light aircraft.
The M.E.N. revealed yesterday that air traffic controllers at Manchester are due to be balloted on strike action over a pay dispute with the National Air Traffic control Service.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again , tabloid journalism at its worst !
TWO passenger jets came within seconds of a mid-air collision - So just how many seconds was it then ?
It is understood - So it's based on hearsay is it ?
their images started to merge on the radar screen - The screens are 2D, so the images often merge !
only 1.25 miles from each other - As they say, a miss is as good as a mile, and in this case slightly more than that ! (Factually - what was the intercept angle, the aircraft speeds, the separation, i.e. Was it a line of 'Constant Bearing' ? )
An air traffic control source said - Uh, imho it's very unlikely that somebody from ATC would speak to a journo about this ( or maybe filthy lucre is involved, so would you believe them anyway ? )
not have sufficient time to accomplish the manoeuvre she wished to employ to achieve standard separation. - So there was separation then, just not the normal amount of it ?!
"Fortunately the situation was saved. The British Airways pilot saw the Swiss aircraft and avoiding action was taken." - Obviously a true British hero, and saving the day (uhm) had nothing what ever to do with TCAS ?! ( "Err, what's TCAS ?" I can hear the journos say )
I could go on and on, but why bother, it's just gutter press and all they want to achieve is 'column inches', and not accuracy or to education / enlighten their readers.
TWO passenger jets came within seconds of a mid-air collision - So just how many seconds was it then ?
It is understood - So it's based on hearsay is it ?
their images started to merge on the radar screen - The screens are 2D, so the images often merge !
only 1.25 miles from each other - As they say, a miss is as good as a mile, and in this case slightly more than that ! (Factually - what was the intercept angle, the aircraft speeds, the separation, i.e. Was it a line of 'Constant Bearing' ? )
An air traffic control source said - Uh, imho it's very unlikely that somebody from ATC would speak to a journo about this ( or maybe filthy lucre is involved, so would you believe them anyway ? )
not have sufficient time to accomplish the manoeuvre she wished to employ to achieve standard separation. - So there was separation then, just not the normal amount of it ?!
"Fortunately the situation was saved. The British Airways pilot saw the Swiss aircraft and avoiding action was taken." - Obviously a true British hero, and saving the day (uhm) had nothing what ever to do with TCAS ?! ( "Err, what's TCAS ?" I can hear the journos say )
I could go on and on, but why bother, it's just gutter press and all they want to achieve is 'column inches', and not accuracy or to education / enlighten their readers.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And in the airprox mentioned with 737 and 777 each was visual with the other throughout the incident 
Not the most exciting miss in the world.
What total, unadulterated crap. There have been airproxers closer than this! Can't see a controller saying this, so either a misquoate or, more likely a totally made-up quote. Would the press like ATC to meet journalists standards of professionalism?
Not the most exciting miss in the world.
We have never seen a situation where both aircraft were so close without colliding
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Earth (just)
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devils Advocate
Just to play "Devils advocate - advocate" here, just seperation doesn't quite cut it for me...... Seperation was obviously there or else we'd most likely be reading about another of aviations true tragedies. I for one would like to see at least thirty metres, else I might spill my beer with the very surprise of it all.........
not have sufficient time to accomplish the manoeuvre she wished to employ to achieve standard separation. - So there was separation then, just not the normal amount of it ?!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering but did those two aircraft come closer to each other than they should have?
""737 and 777 each was visual with the other throughout the incident Not the most exciting miss in the world"" OK so on that day they could see each other, what about tomorrow?
It either was an error or it wasn't.
A bit like the "Re-training required!" thread. In that one 411A
got nailed because he ignored a warning because he could see where he was going and flew on regardless (good on 411A in that example)
Make your minds up, should the SOPs, and separation rules be followed ridgidly all the time or adjusted depending on what you see out the window?
On a lighter note if every small incident in aviation was reported in the press then your "daily" wouldn't fit through the letter box, would it????
""737 and 777 each was visual with the other throughout the incident Not the most exciting miss in the world"" OK so on that day they could see each other, what about tomorrow?
It either was an error or it wasn't.
A bit like the "Re-training required!" thread. In that one 411A
got nailed because he ignored a warning because he could see where he was going and flew on regardless (good on 411A in that example)
Make your minds up, should the SOPs, and separation rules be followed ridgidly all the time or adjusted depending on what you see out the window?
On a lighter note if every small incident in aviation was reported in the press then your "daily" wouldn't fit through the letter box, would it????
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Death jet in 30000 feet horror plunge seconds from disaster. Thousands almost killed. My night of passion with sexy skipper says busty Bev Maker 22 from Manchester FWOAAH!
I suppose the parameters of this Prox are not available, not that we'd wan't to spoil a scoop with facts?
I suppose the parameters of this Prox are not available, not that we'd wan't to spoil a scoop with facts?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt H Peacock I take it you mean this "incident"
What is the big deal? he just ran into a cloud of dust which is to be expected any time you are flying above and around volcanoes, the engines all re-started and he landed safely..
Where is the story in that?
""The aircraft flew into a plume from a volcanic eruption at 37,000 feet during the night. While over the Pacific Ocean, all engines failed and the windshield lost transparency because of pitting from the volcanic ash. The first engine was restarted at 12,000 feet, followed by the other three and the plane landed safely at Jakarta.""
What DO you guys want the media to report?....
What is the big deal? he just ran into a cloud of dust which is to be expected any time you are flying above and around volcanoes, the engines all re-started and he landed safely..
Where is the story in that?
""The aircraft flew into a plume from a volcanic eruption at 37,000 feet during the night. While over the Pacific Ocean, all engines failed and the windshield lost transparency because of pitting from the volcanic ash. The first engine was restarted at 12,000 feet, followed by the other three and the plane landed safely at Jakarta.""
What DO you guys want the media to report?....
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, Kiteflyer, but had they not been visual I suspect they would not have come so close. Each had the other on TCAS, and under IMC would have given a wider berth I am sure.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: England
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And just what was the journo trying to imply by his remarks about pay dispute? Perhaps that less care will be taken until it's resolved? I DON'T think so Mr M.E.N.
Good grief!!!
RdR
Good grief!!!
RdR
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Bermuda Shorts and Cessna Caravans
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of things concern me over this.
1. The report identifies the sexes of the people involved, and a later report on the CNN website also quotes a 'female NATS safety spokesperson' who also speaks in the 3rd person about those involved. This erodes the anonymity of those involved.
2. There have been 2 incidents recently involving trainees, one at a unit where training boxes were allegedly faulty, and the other at a unit where training boxes weren't even available before this incident.
I hope if any good comes out of this, it's that proper training boxes are made mandatory and that proper appropriate counselling is given to trainee and mentor in both instances.
Learning this job is hard enough without trainees' misjudgements being plastered across the press, especially at a time when NATS is very much in the media spotlight.
160
1. The report identifies the sexes of the people involved, and a later report on the CNN website also quotes a 'female NATS safety spokesperson' who also speaks in the 3rd person about those involved. This erodes the anonymity of those involved.
2. There have been 2 incidents recently involving trainees, one at a unit where training boxes were allegedly faulty, and the other at a unit where training boxes weren't even available before this incident.
I hope if any good comes out of this, it's that proper training boxes are made mandatory and that proper appropriate counselling is given to trainee and mentor in both instances.
Learning this job is hard enough without trainees' misjudgements being plastered across the press, especially at a time when NATS is very much in the media spotlight.
160
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devils Advocate:-
""saving the day (uhm) had nothing what ever to do with TCAS ?! ( "Err, what's TCAS ?" I can hear the journos say ) ""
TCAS is the thingy that tells you you have seconds to live.....
from thread http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=58312
""One of our 737s returning from bjv was in the vicinity at the time.
The capt has told me that he heard an american voice suddenly
calling TCAS DOWN,and looking to their right,saw the fireball
at around 36,000 feet,lighting up the sky all around.
Presumably this was the 757 calling.
Both crew a little shaken to have seen it.""
Now, would it not be better if you DIDN'T have to RELY on a system like that?
""saving the day (uhm) had nothing what ever to do with TCAS ?! ( "Err, what's TCAS ?" I can hear the journos say ) ""
TCAS is the thingy that tells you you have seconds to live.....
from thread http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=58312
""One of our 737s returning from bjv was in the vicinity at the time.
The capt has told me that he heard an american voice suddenly
calling TCAS DOWN,and looking to their right,saw the fireball
at around 36,000 feet,lighting up the sky all around.
Presumably this was the 757 calling.
Both crew a little shaken to have seen it.""
Now, would it not be better if you DIDN'T have to RELY on a system like that?
