NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin

[Chiefttp]

​​​​​​
Chiefttp

Do you also get the feeling that without the EVS, if just simply flying blind, the crew may have been able to abort the approach with an earlier decision?

Of course, but there was probably a delay in the cockpit as they digested the incredulous takeoff clearance given by Tower, and accepted by Southwest, while simultaneously trying to fly a Cat3 approach. My guess is there Was enough confusion, and uncertainty concerning the location of Southwest, and the FedEx crew decided to go-around to be safe. Our 767’s don’t have the “enhanced vision system” so I don’t know what the FedEx Capt can see. Hopefully it afforded him a view of the situation, which helped him arrive at his decision to go around.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by megan

TV news last night had this video purporting to show the event, given the reported weather some computer generated representation?

https://www.tiktok.com/@monster21_yt...00597493812485

Originally Posted by AerocatS2A

Come on, it’s obviously Microsoft flight sim or something, don’t give clicks to that garbage.

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

Quite cleverly done, if we ignore the fact that it features neither a SWA 737-700 nor a 767 of FedEx.

Oh, and the weather ...

Of course, computer generated and different livery, though this does not imply, it needs to be served off right away.

The bad thing of this emulation is, the 767 does seem to have (nearly) the same speed as the 737 just a couple of seconds in its ground-roll, which seems unlikely from the flying physics.

Or so to say, a close encounter, though maybe just a little less, as the TT video suggests.

Anyway, nice work, to get this put together. Even when not 100% correct, it gives the public a good impression how tight this happening was.

Maybe one for the JFK RW incursion too ?

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by WideScreen

Anyway, nice work, to get this put together. Even when not 100% correct, it gives the public a good impression how tight this happening was.

On the contrary, it's completely unrepresentative.

Note how the SWA rolls as soon as it enters the runway, for example. That's way different from what happened.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

On the contrary, it's completely unrepresentative.

Note how the SWA rolls as soon as it enters the runway, for example. That's way different from what happened.

Yes, the video is not a 100% correct representation of what happened, though it gives the general public (and politicians) a good but simplified idea, that this issue is not something theoretical, but a real-world example about things nearly going wrong. Nothing more, nothing less. This influences the public/political opinion, because the incident can't be shrugged off any longer and when used properly, it can be highly valuable to get the air-travel industry the things/funds needed to implement the proper measures (For example to obtain a ground radar at KAUS).

[Bergerie1]

There are systems which are reasonably mature which could assist both pilots and ATCOs. Worth a look:-
https://www.skybrary.aero/articles/a...e-systems-asas
https://www.asas-tn.org/workshops/5th-workshop/session-3/5_ATSA_SURF.ppt
https://www.asas-tn.org/workshops/final-seminar-paris-14-15-april-2008/session-3/1_Runway_incursions.ppt

[BFSGrad]

Originally Posted by WideScreen

Yes, the video is not a 100% correct representation of what happened, though it gives the general public (and politicians) a good but simplified idea, that this issue is not something theoretical, but a real-world example about things nearly going wrong. Nothing more, nothing less. This influences the public/political opinion, because the incident can't be shrugged off any longer and when used properly, it can be highly valuable to get the air-travel industry the things/funds needed to implement the proper measures (For example to obtain a ground radar at KAUS).

So a false narrative is OK as long a “greater good” is achieved? That’s how it works in politics. Let’s work hard to ensure that’s not how it works in aviation safety. Had SWA skedaddled as expected (or reported a delayed takeoff roll), there likely would have been no incident.

As for getting the needed funding, the annual budgets for the City of Austin, state of Texas, and U.S. Federal Government are $3.6B, $60B, and $6T. ASDE-X cost is in the neighborhood of $20M. Funding is not the issue.

[hitchens97]

Originally Posted by pattern_is_full

Might as well ask why the UK uses the £ and the USA the $.

The latter being probably one element - pressure from various parties to keep the traffic flow moving, and the pursuit of the amighty $, in the face of growing congestion. Or getting by with just one controller (and his/her salary) at zero-dark-30 by combining APPROACH and TOWER and only using the radio once ("Cleared to land" subsuming "Cleared for the approach" as well). And ultimately leading back to the: shareholders, executives, politicians, their donors, and voters-with-an-interest.

does the uk system any worse at traffic flow. Heathrow and Gatwick are pretty intense at peak

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by Chiefttp

​​​​​​Of course, ..... what the FedEx Capt can see. Hopefully, it afforded him a view of the situation, which helped him arrive at his decision to go around.

Bad wording on my side. I was aiming at the exact opposite, an ugly fringe of the technology interaction. Whether "by being able to see the traffic through EVS, the decision to abandon perhaps arrived somewhat later compared to a case when the other traffic position would have been clearly uncertain". I.e. the pilot being confused and analyzing how that was going to work actually brought him closer.

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by hitchens97

does the uk system any worse at traffic flow. Heathrow and Gatwick are pretty intense at peak

Ballpark figure perhaps not exactly at those airports, in-trail separation between arrivals goes from 2,5 NM to 6. Flow reduction of 50% is expected, but actually, the taxi becomes the real bottleneck namely when deicing the outbounds.

A-CDM and Eurocontrol flow control do a stellar job, IMO.

N.B. what seem to have happened in the discussed case apparently was not the approved way to handle <1/2 ops over there either.

[AerocatS2A]

Yes, the video is not a 100% correct representation of what happened, though it gives the general public (and politicians) a good but simplified idea, that this issue is not something theoretical, but a real-world example about things nearly going wrong. ​​​​​​​

I couldn’t disagree more. Either present facts or don’t present anything at all. Presenting some half-arsed made up visualisation of what might have happened doesn’t do anyone any favours. That kind of video should either be clearly labelled with a watermark to say that it is little more than fantasy or it should stay on the sim enthusiasts home computer where it belongs.

[DIBO]

SWA saved the day!!??

OK, to break this TikTok nonsense, let me play the devil's advocate...

Maybe it was SWA708 that saved the day after all....
If they has acted upon the "SouthWest abort" call and slammed the brakes, the fast shrinking horizontal separation at the beginning of the incident, would have shrunk dramatically faster at a moment when the vertical separation was almost non-existent.
SWA708 did not act upon the "SouthWest abort" call because:
* they simply missed the call
* they heard the call, but decided it was a bad idea to RTO with the FDX traffic right behind, and continued T/O with a rather shallowish initial climb profile
* they heard the call, but couldn't RTO because they were well beyond V1 (which I doubt)

A previous poster excluded the aspect "luck" being a part of the outcome of this incident, but even without knowing the exact separation details, I think that all involved were lucky SWA didn't slam the brakes for whatever reason...

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by DIBO

A previous poster excluded the aspect "luck" being a part of the outcome of this incident, but even without knowing the exact separation details, I think that all involved were lucky SWA didn't slam the brakes for whatever reason...

And, by the same token, all parties were lucky that SWA only spent 20 seconds stationary, running up, before rolling.

[WillowRun 6-3]

Okay, I'm withdrawing the previous comment which purported or attempted to assert that "luck" played no part here.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

So a false narrative is OK as long a “greater good” is achieved? That’s how it works in politics.

It's not a false narrative, it's somewhat off. Instead of humbug, feel free to create another one, closer to your reality and publish it on PP, large scale media will see and pick this up.

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

Let’s work hard to ensure that’s not how it works in aviation safety. Had SWA skedaddled as expected (or reported a delayed takeoff roll), there likely would have been no incident.

skedaddled ????

No incident: I think, you are wrong. The SWA clearance, with Fedex on 3 Miles out on a Cat III landing, was just off.

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

As for getting the needed funding, the annual budgets for the City of Austin, state of Texas, and U.S. Federal Government are $3.6B, $60B, and $6T. ASDE-X cost is in the neighborhood of $20M. Funding is not the issue.

Maybe not the absolute amount of funding, though the politically motivated distribution obviously is, otherwise KAUS would have had ground radar. Having a video like the by you despised TikTok one, 100% realistic or not, will certainly help to get politicians to move on this subject.

[mike current]

Originally Posted by sectordirector

A bit of internet surfing to ATC websites such as PointSixtyFiveDotCom will reveal some of the opaque background to your completely spot on assessment.

Thanks. Wasn't aware of that forum.
I'd like to say eye opener but in reality there are similar conversations at many ATC units around the world.

[AerocatS2A]

It's not a false narrative,

Absolutely a false narrative. It has no place on this website.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by AerocatS2A

Absolutely a false narrative. It has no place on this website.

When one is from the school, that only absolute and proven info can be posted at PP, of course, this is a false narrative. Though, that also implies, only official accident reports can be posted here, all other info is unproven and potentially wrong.

When one understands that items "develop" from something potentially partly wrong, into something correct, such a video is just the first step to come to a better result/understanding. It gives all readers the opportunity to "learn" what happened, based on the video and the comments about its correctness (keep in mind, I myself did write a note about the SWA speed compared to the Fedex still in the air). Most people will simply need something visual to understand the closeness of this call, not being able to create a mental picture of this happening.

So, feel free to provide a better video yourself ;-)

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by WideScreen

such a video is just the first step to come to a better result/understanding.

Why do we need a video at all ?

What does it contribute to our understanding of the event ?

Does the author have access to any information that isn't already in the public domain ?

[Lake1952]

Originally Posted by megan

TV news last night had this video purporting to show the event, given the reported weather some computer generated representation?

https://www.tiktok.com/@monster21_yt...00597493812485

Tower: "1432, you have our apologies. We appreciate your professionalism. "

[FlightDetent]

Must I say, this thread has been a nice information exchange. If you want to keep that memory, don't search the internet for

Spoiler

 

 

/xenforo/threads/austin-incident.5262/page-3




You have been warned.