NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 737 appears to have been stationary for approximately 20 seconds between lining up and starting to roll
Just llistened to the audio , SW was clear to line up and take off with the mention there was a heavy 3 miles out , if SW was not ready for an immediate take off he should have advised ATC. At 140 Kts you are doing 2,5 NM a minute .so from the time youreceive the instruction to line up until Vr you,ve got just over a minute , doable routinely by good professionals but you cannot taxi slow and waste 20 seconds standing still in this configuration .. That said this is a very tight clearance from ATC , not really to be done in LVP Ops. I would say.as the arriving aircraft cannot monitor where the departure is on the runway,
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR24 have now released (slightly) more granular data which provides more detail around the SWA's runway entry and line up.
The 737 appears to have been stationary for approximately 20 seconds between lining up and starting to roll (stated purely as a matter of record, no judgement implied).
The 737 appears to have been stationary for approximately 20 seconds between lining up and starting to roll (stated purely as a matter of record, no judgement implied).
With that weather (Eng anti ice on and cold) the 737 was probably doing a static run up iaw adverse weather procedures. I don’t know the timing for the 737, but 757 is 10s and 767 is 30s.
Join Date: Sep 2022
Location: Perpetually circling LAM for some reason
Posts: 109
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Audio
Incredible. Listen carefully. Who was the controller? Who told SW to abort? I can’t post links yet so add prefix to below.
forums.liveatc.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=16950.0;attach=11576
forums.liveatc.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=16950.0;attach=11576
which is just that, and a completely incorrect animation
While on twy B northbound and even turning east and crossing the holding point, it did not record once, a speed less than 8kts with 6 second recording intervals.
Only in the middle of the pianokeys it recorded a reducing speed of 3kts, followed by an interval of about 25 seconds, with the next update just 100ft down the rwy, on the bottom of the 'L' (of 18L) at 19kts rapidly increasing.
While on twy B northbound and even turning east and crossing the holding point, it did not record once, a speed less than 8kts with 6 second recording intervals.
Only in the middle of the pianokeys it recorded a reducing speed of 3kts, followed by an interval of about 25 seconds, with the next update just 100ft down the rwy, on the bottom of the 'L' (of 18L) at 19kts rapidly increasing.
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the beginning of the recording, FedEx checks in as a Cat III arrival.
https://forums.liveatc.net/atcaviati...sion/msg75658/
https://forums.liveatc.net/atcaviati...sion/msg75658/
UPDATE: it seems LiveATC archives are NOT perfectly clock synchronized, so an up-to-the second synhro with FR24 is unreliable
* 12:39:06 SWA "cleared for takeoff, copy the traffic" doing 9kts almost at the end of the eastward turn towards the holding point line
* 12:39:21 FDX "TWR confirm cleared to land" about 2.5nm out
* 12:39:52 SWA FR24 recording 3kts in the middle of the pianokeys
* 12:40:02 TWR "SW confirm on the roll"
* 12:40:05 SWA "rolling now"
* 12:40:19 SWA FR24 recording 19kts at the bottom of the 'L' (of 18L)
* 12:40:21 FDX FR24 recording 139kts over the middle of the approachlights (520ft from the pianokeys)
* 12:40:24 FDX "SW abort "
* 12:40:25 SWA FR24 recording 48kts about 400ft more down the rwy
* 12:40:27 FDX "Fedex is on the go" at 138kts just in front of the rwy at 100ft (unadjusted)
* 12:40:31 SWA FR24 recording 74kts 200ft beyond the aiming point
* 12:40:33 FDX FR24 recording 140kts over the aiming point at 75ft (unadjusted)
* 12:40:37 TWR "SW708 roger, turn right when able" <<=== makes me believe that TWR interpreted the "SW abort" call as coming from the SWA
* 12:40:42 SWA "Negative" doing 119kts down the rwy
Last edited by DIBO; 6th Feb 2023 at 21:17. Reason: adding some more timestamp events
Regarding the static engine run-up requirement, if 737 procedures require such a delay in take-off, it seems inappropriate to accept a take-off clearance knowing the arriving aircraft is called on a 3-mile final.
After listening to the audio a few more times, a couple of additional observations:
1. ATC doesn’t query SWA status until a full minute after issuing takeoff clearance, which was coincident with calling FDX on a 3 mile final. At the status query, FDX would have been within 1/2 mile of the runway threshold. This query also seems to confirm that the local controller has no visual contact on SWA and had no other surface detection capability such as ASDE that could establish the SWA position/status.
2. I think it likely that the local controller thought that the “southwest abort” call was from SWA and indicated a RTO. The subsequent “you can turn right when able” is much more typical of an instruction to an aircraft on landing rollout or RTO rollout. If the instruction was intended for SWA after takeoff, it would have been inappropriately vague and made no sense given that SWA was to fly 170 after departure.
1. ATC doesn’t query SWA status until a full minute after issuing takeoff clearance, which was coincident with calling FDX on a 3 mile final. At the status query, FDX would have been within 1/2 mile of the runway threshold. This query also seems to confirm that the local controller has no visual contact on SWA and had no other surface detection capability such as ASDE that could establish the SWA position/status.
2. I think it likely that the local controller thought that the “southwest abort” call was from SWA and indicated a RTO. The subsequent “you can turn right when able” is much more typical of an instruction to an aircraft on landing rollout or RTO rollout. If the instruction was intended for SWA after takeoff, it would have been inappropriately vague and made no sense given that SWA was to fly 170 after departure.
2. I think it likely that the local controller thought that the “southwest abort” call was from SWA and indicated a RTO. The subsequent “you can turn right when able” is much more typical of an instruction to an aircraft on landing rollout or RTO rollout. If the instruction was intended for SWA after takeoff, it would have been inappropriately vague and made no sense given that SWA was to fly 170 after departure.
It definitely seems as if ATC mistook FedEx’s “Southwest Abort” transmission as coming from SWA.
A massive stuff up by ATC but SWA should’ve queried the takeoff clearance, or told ATC they could not roll fast enough, and given FedEx a clear signal to go around.
I can’t help but wonder if lax US ATC and radio added to this, a habit of issuing landing clearance before a takeoff clearance to an aircraft that hasn’t even entered the runway yet is bad enough in VMC, in LVO it’s just dangerous. Plus FedEx’s transmission “FedEx is on the go” - unclear what their intentions were with that, and then telling SWA to abort which confused everyone and wasted valuable seconds.
It’ll probably be written off as an isolated incident but to me it’s symptomatic of an undisciplined culture.
First of all, Austin’s airport isn’t busy enough to clear a 737 to takeoff in front of a 767 on 3 mile final, flying a Cat 3 approach no less. Actually no airport is that busy! The Tower controller either reverted back to calls and sequencing he normally makes in VFR conditions. Good on the FedEx crew to realize the spacing wasn’t correct. The Southwest crew may have some explaining to do when they’re sitting at the end of the big table. I had a similar situation a few months ago when an approach controller gave us a tight turn to base and we rolled out 2 miles in trail of the preceding aircraft. When we queried him about our spacing, he discontinued our approach. Accidents and mistakes happen, but clearing another jet to takeoff at a small airport, while another jet is on 3 mile final in Cat 3 Wx is inexcusable.
Dr Dre,
FedEx’s call of “on the go” is clear to me? It means he’s executing a go-around. It’s common terminology, perhaps a carryover from the US Military, because we said it every time we executed a go-around, curious what you would prefer he say? As far as an undisciplined culture, that’s your opinion. How’s the air at the heights you dwell in?
Dr Dre,
FedEx’s call of “on the go” is clear to me? It means he’s executing a go-around. It’s common terminology, perhaps a carryover from the US Military, because we said it every time we executed a go-around, curious what you would prefer he say? As far as an undisciplined culture, that’s your opinion. How’s the air at the heights you dwell in?
Last edited by Chiefttp; 6th Feb 2023 at 01:45.
What a fright. Seems from first impression that there was a 'confirmation bias' strong withe the controller re: SW , in that that outfit is 'usually' fastest around the field and so 'should' have been off and away in plenty of time before the FDX heavy was over the keys? Day in - day out ops and it seems small biases creep in which are only brought to light in cases and challenging conditions such as these.
Btw, I think the SW was far faster than 48kts some are quoting from FR24. The FR24 data is a good 20 - 30 seconds behind the audio, so am certain SW was just on or past V1 even by the time the FDX called abort.
Btw, I think the SW was far faster than 48kts some are quoting from FR24. The FR24 data is a good 20 - 30 seconds behind the audio, so am certain SW was just on or past V1 even by the time the FDX called abort.
When would TCAS come into play? I'm guessing it's suppressed until SW lifts off, but what would it be showing in the two cockpits once SW is in the air and between a rock and a hard place?
Only half a speed-brake
Low altitude TCAS is restricted to 'traffic advisory' no matter how close they get (good reasons behind this).
If the airport was not running active LVPs, which is unclear, it would be interesting to know how the FDX came to declare a cat III approach.
If the airport was not running active LVPs, which is unclear, it would be interesting to know how the FDX came to declare a cat III approach.
TCAS is automatically set to TA below approx 800R so both A\C would probably have got a TA once Southwest was airborne. Once one A/C climbs above 800R they might possibly get an RA unless the manoeuvring to avoid had already created enough lateral or vertical separation.
