Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

NTSB to probe Fedex/Southwest close encounter at Austin

Old 6th Feb 2023, 13:59
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: New jersey
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
In the US, it is implied that when the wx is below 800/2 or vis is low enough for Cat2/3 ops we hold short at the Cat2 hold short line painted on the taxiway. Also, for informational purposes, in the US when you overshoot a runway, it means that you’re airborne and rolled out off of runway centerline. Again, this may be a carry over from Military ops. At every US Pilot training base’s there are usually 3 runways, one for T-38’s, another for T-37’s (or T-6’s nowadays) and a longer center runway for emergencies etc. it was drilled into us in Pilot training to never “Overshoot” your runway as it sets up a conflict with jets flying to the other two, not much different from Any large airport with parallel approaches. So overshoot means a failed airborne line-up with your intended landing runway. If you land and roll off the end of the runway that is called overrunning the runway, not overshooting it. I recently read a book about The RAF in the fifties. I noticed the use of many different words for the same object than what us Yanks use. Examples are Bonnet vs Hood for your car, wings vs fenders on cars , reheat vs afterburner, etc etc…my favorite is the pronunciation of Al-you-minium, vs A-loo-min-um. Or Jag-gwu-are vs Jag-gwar.
Chiefttp is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 14:17
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,866
Received 156 Likes on 72 Posts
Only 30 years as a Mil ATCO in UK, so the concept of clearing an aircraft to land with an occupied runway ahead [especially in low-via conditions] strikes me as crazy. However, my experience of Civil operations is minimal. Your ball, play it as you will.
MPN11 is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 14:42
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Up
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did not see this posted above



Other images
Seat4A is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 14:43
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Far East
Posts: 315
Received 108 Likes on 76 Posts
Originally Posted by Chiefttp
40 years of using that phraseology, especially in the military, will be difficult to change, .
Back to entry level salary could drive changes, I say.

😋

​​​​​
waito is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 14:59
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 34 Likes on 24 Posts
Disappointing to see all the squabbling about “on the go” when this (non-standard) phrase likely had no impact on the incident. I think it very likely that all involved clearly heard “Fedex, on the go” and understood its meaning, improving situational awareness for both the local controller and SWA. The two phrases that likely degraded situational awareness at a critical time were Fedex’s highly inappropriate “Southwest abort” and SWA’s “negative” with no identifier.

Curious to know what was the trigger for Fedex to go around. Visual on SWA? Intuition?
BFSGrad is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 15:02
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Far East
Posts: 315
Received 108 Likes on 76 Posts
This was serious, a near miss with mostly blind participants. And avoidable.

I am curious about the findings regarding ATC and the Southwest Crew actions in LVP. And communication was substandard from all 3 of them. At some point they had little more than guessing who said what and who meant what.

And a crew that expects anybody else to know that they need >30s additional rwy time for runup? Serious?
waito is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 15:23
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wiggy
Must be honest I don't remember it that way (last there with BA just pre-Covid)...yes there was a least one gate where you had to call ground into addition to ramp because you infringed the inner on push, but other than that you pushed with solely company and then first spoke to ground for your clearance to exit the ramp...may be mis remembering, open to correction.
this is my recollection of JFK too, although it’s 8 years since I was last there.
Forestman is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 16:28
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Syd
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by MPN11
Only 30 years as a Mil ATCO in UK, so the concept of clearing an aircraft to land with an occupied runway ahead [especially in low-via conditions] strikes me as crazy. However, my experience of Civil operations is minimal. Your ball, play it as you will.
It is indeed.
The phraseology should be changed to "permission to land" as thats all you are getting.


Orange future is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 16:28
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Posts: 793
Received 109 Likes on 58 Posts
Originally Posted by BFSGrad
The two phrases that likely degraded situational awareness at a critical time were Fedex’s highly inappropriate “Southwest abort”.
I'm not sure I would agree with that - given that the controller didn't issue any instruction to SWA to stop / abort, the FedEx probably did the right thing in telling the SWA to abort thus preventing the SWA from continuing it's take off and climbing into the FedEx's path as it went around. Desperate measures...
Fly-by-Wife is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 17:17
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Metropolis
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fly-by-Wife
I'm not sure I would agree with that - given that the controller didn't issue any instruction to SWA to stop / abort, the FedEx probably did the right thing in telling the SWA to abort thus preventing the SWA from continuing it's take off and climbing into the FedEx's path as it went around. Desperate measures...
If FedEx knows SW is right beneath them, and possibly will climb up into them, TURN AWAY. In imc conditions, you won’t turn into a Cessna on downwind or any other traffic. Just fly parallel to the runway, start a climb and call the tower for a better heading and altitude.

To expect an ac to do a (possibly) high speed reject, based on another pilot’s command, when no runway hazard exists and the ac is capable of flying is not reasonable.
Rozy1 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 17:18
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: us
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by waito
This was serious, a near miss with mostly blind participants. And avoidable. I am curious about the findings regarding ATC and the Southwest Crew actions in LVP. And communication was substandard from all 3 of them. At some point they had little more than guessing who said what and who meant what. And a crew that expects anybody else to know that they need >30s additional rwy time for runup? Serious?
No doubt some serious training issues will be forced to surface.
sectordirector is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 17:30
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: EGSS
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As highlighted in post #63, The FedEx captain probably saw it all unfolding in the HUD/EFVS system (not installed on the F/O side)
Flightmech is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 17:54
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,986
Received 307 Likes on 158 Posts
Originally Posted by Fly-by-Wife
the FedEx probably did the right thing in telling the SWA to abort thus preventing the SWA from continuing it's take off
Though, as I'm sure you're aware, he wasn't successful in doing so.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 18:03
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 72
Posts: 911
Received 39 Likes on 15 Posts
CVRs??

Any word(s) yet on whether NTSB and/or FAA have obtained the CVR of either or both aircraft involved?

Recalling Air Canada 759 in San Francisco (2017), also a very close call, the CVR of the AC aircraft was not preserved, iirc, and some observers believed its contents would have aided the post-incident inquiry. (Wonder if FAA is going to issue a SAFO after this latest incident?)
WillowRun 6-3 is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 18:05
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,866
Received 156 Likes on 72 Posts
Originally Posted by Rozy1
If FedEx knows SW is right beneath them, and possibly will climb up into them, TURN AWAY. In imc conditions, you won’t turn into a Cessna on downwind or any other traffic. Just fly parallel to the runway, start a climb and call the tower for a better heading and altitude.
.
Which is why, in my former world, aircraft overhoot to the ‘dead side’ of the visual circuit. OK, big Civ airports don’t do that stuff, but just drilling down the centreline with somone seemingly taking off underneath you seems … err … hazardous?

Not sure that one Captain telling another Captain what to do with his aircraft is a great idea either, tbh. ATC should have had a much firmer grip on the whole scenario from when the FedEx was c. 8 miles out and anticipated the potential scenario.
MPN11 is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 18:12
  #76 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,739
Received 21 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by waito
This was serious, a near miss with mostly blind participants. And avoidable.

I am curious about the findings regarding ATC and the Southwest Crew actions in LVP. And communication was substandard from all 3 of them. At some point they had little more than guessing who said what and who meant what.

And a crew that expects anybody else to know that they need >30s additional rwy time for runup? Serious?
A very good resume of the situation .
@ BFSGrad
Disappointing to see all the squabbling about “on the go” when this (non-standard) phrase likely had no impact on the incident. I think it very likely that all involved clearly heard “Fedex, on the go” and understood its meaning, improving situational awareness for both the local controller and SWA.
So you asume everybody understood the Fedex was going around because they were all 3 locals Americans. Are you sure the Fedex would have used another phraseology if the SW had been, say Aromexico or Virgin ? The poor pharsology , or lack of even , is what we discuss , and "on the go" was the most obvious one , but : " Abort" and "Negative" are as bad. if not worse.
Where I agree with you is that this "on te go" did not have a major effect on this incident , the controller lining up with someone on a CATIII approach , and the SW taking 20-30 second to start knowing that there is someone 3 miles out are the real causes and am sure will get them tea and biscuits a some point.

That said, going around over a take off with both aircraft remaining on cente line is a known loophole , well identified, but still out there despite many incidents worldwide. .
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 20:24
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,494
Received 282 Likes on 101 Posts
Let’s face it, lining up an aircraft in Low Visibility Operations with another aircraft on 3 nm final is just dumb at the highest level and highly unusual. The RT calls are just shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 20:43
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Far East
Posts: 315
Received 108 Likes on 76 Posts
Are we sure about 3NM Final when Southwest passed the hold short position and entered the runway?

​​​​​​BTW, what are the current LVP regulations?
waito is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 20:54
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 3,120
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by waito
Are we sure about 3NM Final when Southwest passed the hold short position and entered the runway?

​​​​​​BTW, what are the current LVP regulations?
ATC told SW that FedEx was on 3NM final.
AerocatS2A is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2023, 21:11
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 259
Received 10 Likes on 3 Posts
Lake1952 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.