Originally Posted by
Mookiesurfs
It’s possible that:
1. Fedex assumed SWA aborted and that’s why Fedex flew straight ahead over the runway.
2. Tower assumed SWA aborted and that’s why they gave them a right turn instruction, typically a runway turn off call.
3. SWA assumed Fedex went around and that Fedex knew SWA took off and that Fedex had made a sidestep maneuver for lateral separation.
No one should have had to make these assumptions. There was unclear and non standard phraseology from all parties involved which led to confusion and a lack of clear control of the situation.
'Assume' should not be in the aviation dictionary, except for 'assume your responsibilities'
1. Fedex assumed SWA aborted and that’s why Fedex flew straight ahead over the runway. ==> if FDX was not 100% confident about what was going on around them, they should at least have added to their 'is on the go', a clarification such as 'standard missed', 'climbing to xxx', 'sidestepping left',... which would have improved the SA of all involved
2. Tower assumed SWA aborted and that’s why they gave them a right turn instruction, typically a runway turn off call. ==> TWR understood the 'Southwest abort' as an action report from SWA and acknowledged it with a 'roger'. The subsequent 'negative' to TWR's 'turn right', could have been very usefully complemented with 'lifting off', 'too low', .... improving again the SA for all
3. SWA assumed Fedex went around and that Fedex knew SWA took off and that Fedex had made a sidestep maneuver for lateral separation. ==>Three assumptions in a row.... what else do we need for the Swiss cheese holes lining-up. Given the climb-out profile of SWA just after lift-off, they were pretty unsure what was going on above them, if you ask me