NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin
Clearance to land is simply one of many ATC clearances that are based on predictive conditions rather than current conditions. When ATC clears an aircraft to a waypoint or altitude, it doesn’t mean that point in space is clear at the time the clearance is issued. Instead it is based on what ATC predicts will be the conditions (e.g., adequate separation) when the aircraft arrives at that point in space.
Further complication is allowing for the go-around with the faster approaching aircraft catching the accelerating departure.
If the departure had been a heavy with a lighter on approach then wake turbulence separation is required to be applied in the event of a go around. In this case once the arrival is inside 10 miles there’s not enough time to get the departure away taking all the factors into account.
With one at 3 miles in low visibility conditions the door was shut long ago to getting one away
Pegase Driver
@ BFSGrad : I am sorry that you find my remark a bit silly (and arrogant) but I maintain it . But you make a very interesting point afterwards :
Maybe , you probably know the US culture better than I do, but there is something to remember: when I was first introduced to International phrasology long ago the instructor told us they were code words that tiggered pre programmed standard responses. I always remembered that. For instance here using the words " immediate take off" mean you should not stop and perform a rolling take off and ATC would expect this in return.. When the crew uses instead " we're ready" this is non standard, and the same when the controller clears him saying " a heavy 3 miles out" ( also non-satandard) without mentioning the word "immediate" , there is no pre-progerammed response from the SW , he knows the Fedex is 3 miles out but does not perform a rolling take off . I could go on with other non standard words used in the encounter but I guess you get my point.
Finally when you say :
so you have read his evaluation history and seen his training record, or are you basing your remark to the nasty rumors with racial undertones posted on Internet?
If the participants didn’t comply with existing U.S. standards, why would they be more likely to comply with ICAO standards?
Finally when you say :
I will go further to predict that the principal cause of this incident will be an ATC individual with known performance deficiencies that was allowed to continue to perform ATC duties,
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,813
Received 140 Likes
on
65 Posts
Trial by PPRuNe Jury continues!
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
Here is my animated video reconstruction of the event driven by ADS-B granular data provided by flightradar24 and audio from LiveATC. Please see the video details for specific information about the reconstruction, including the limitations (especially the inability to verify accurate synchronization of the audio track).
https://youtu.be/AtYa8fl51_s
https://youtu.be/AtYa8fl51_s
Appreciated the addition of the bottom-right window, as people seem to forget it was still dark... It's a pity MS Flight Sim doesn't have a model with an EVS HUD, would have been the proverbial cherry on the cake.
Regarding your question in the clip "Does tower think Southwest called out 'abort'? ".
The "roger" in TWR's response, very strongly indicates this.
And regarding "Did FedEx pilot call 'abort' before he could see the plane? Collision Avoidance System alarm?", my guess is that the EVS HUD played possibly a role, as the TCAS RA's, although shown on the HUD, are inactive at this low level.
For what it's worth (nothing really
), I did the same syncro exercise (on paper), but this time based on FDX's tx "...passing 5.4 ", which isn't a perfect marking point either, but my end-result was that the audio was 1.5sec. earlier than yours.So unless somebody comes up with a more accurate syncro point, you did a great job!!!
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Note: This is an updated version of my previously posted video with improved synchronization of the audio and video based upon a tip I received (which seems credible).
Here is my animated video reconstruction of the event driven by ADS-B granular data provided by flightradar24 and audio from LiveATC. Please see the video details for specific information about the reconstruction, including the limitations (especially the inability to verify accurate synchronization of the audio track).
Here is my animated video reconstruction of the event driven by ADS-B granular data provided by flightradar24 and audio from LiveATC. Please see the video details for specific information about the reconstruction, including the limitations (especially the inability to verify accurate synchronization of the audio track).
Last edited by airplanecrazy; 13th Feb 2023 at 22:07.
Trial by PPRuNe Jury continues!
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
And as an aside, what if the FedEx crew were not as switched on and, after receiving their landing clearance, then had r/t fail?
If HUD/EFVS was operational and in use I think FedEx would have seen the 737 engine plumes several seconds before the lights came visual. I'm a bit surprised the G/A was initiated so late.
It’s also enlightening, when the slightest mention of the Tower controllers history and poor performance is jumped on by the woke crowd. If what they are saying is true about his past, and his performance in this event tends to corroborate these rumors, then somebody will have a lot of explaining to do. This event was his fault, the Southwest crew could have helped, but didn’t, and FedEx was the last link in the chain, thank goodness the FedEx link was strong!
Last edited by Chiefttp; 14th Feb 2023 at 00:26.
Now it's only 2 - 3 sec. between the call and the (slightly) positive RoC.
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's why I prefer the first version of this clip (gone now), there the "SW abort" call was made over the red bars of the ALSF-2, giving it 6 - 8 seconds (but don't know anything about the 767 donks spool-up time) before the positive climb starts to appear, more or less above the aiming point.
Now it's only 2 - 3 sec. between the call and the (slightly) positive RoC.
Now it's only 2 - 3 sec. between the call and the (slightly) positive RoC.
Time to fix the CVR b/s
It's 2023 folks... not 1960. When, oh, when will we get CVR recordings for the last 25 hours?
My phone stores 512GB...that's four channels for 196 hours at 44.1kHz 16-bit PCM (CD quality) audio.
True, my phone isn't fire proof or G-rated to X Gs, but then again it cost $1200 and fits in my pocket - and doesn't help save anyone's life or debrief an incident.
- GY
My phone stores 512GB...that's four channels for 196 hours at 44.1kHz 16-bit PCM (CD quality) audio.
True, my phone isn't fire proof or G-rated to X Gs, but then again it cost $1200 and fits in my pocket - and doesn't help save anyone's life or debrief an incident.
- GY
Only half a speed-brake
BFSGrad I find your response in NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin well acceptable. The unnecessary edge was caused by not noticing the pre-condition statement "if everyone would have been trained to ......... standards" (my bold), and there's no metal or egos hurt because of that. And you are saying the same thing, R'n'B or country music make no difference to a deaf person.
Same as Chiefttp I found the information seeping from the other website relevant to the dynamic of the HF failure at hand. Perhaps the remarks ATC Watcher detests so much were no longer there when I read it.
The Atlas 767 death dive was caused by an individual holding a post without the required proficiency. Arguably it was insufficient resilience in the training system which failed to prioritize merit against commercial and social pressures.
Same as Chiefttp I found the information seeping from the other website relevant to the dynamic of the HF failure at hand. Perhaps the remarks ATC Watcher detests so much were no longer there when I read it.
The Atlas 767 death dive was caused by an individual holding a post without the required proficiency. Arguably it was insufficient resilience in the training system which failed to prioritize merit against commercial and social pressures.
Pegase Driver
Trial by PPRuNe Jury continues!
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
IMO, regardless of EASA/NATS/CAA/whatevers, it was fundamentally stupid to clear the SW onto the runway in low vis conditions with an aircraft at 3 miles … which was cleared to land. How the nuances of legislation, procedures, habits, language or whatever apply, that was such a fundamental error that I find impossible to excuse. You just don’t do that… simple 4-d logic. The rest is just background noise.
Pegase Driver
. Perhaps the remarks ATC Watcher detests so much were no longer there when I read it..
The Atlas 767 death dive was caused by an individual holding a post without the required proficiency. Arguably it was insufficient resilience in the training system which failed to prioritize merit against commercial and social pressures
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,813
Received 140 Likes
on
65 Posts
Indeed it is the ususal trilal by PPrune. I'm just trying to say that before hanging the guy based on rumors posted on another controversial web site one should perhaps wait for the real facts to emmerge . There might be some truth in it or not, we'll see. What I see in many posts here is we have found the ideal culprit, it was an individual ATC error. caused by a sub standard guy, and the Fedex saved the day : simple , problem solved. No need to change anything , The "backround noise" you refer to is however what will kill someone some day ..
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
It’s also enlightening, when the slightest mention of the Tower controllers history and poor performance is jumped on by the woke crowd. If what they are saying is true about his past, and his performance in this event tends to corroborate these rumors, then somebody will have a lot of explaining to do!