Runway incursion at Burbank
Per CNN, the NTSB announced today that it is investigating a Wednesday evening (22 Feb) runway incursion at Bob Hope Burbank Airport in California, involving a landing Mesa CRJ9 and a departing Skywest E175.
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/artic...all/index.html |
Rough ADS-B eyeball on both aircraft at 02:57:00Z looks like both at same altitude and 0.25 to 0.5 nm lateral separation, with the ERJ being at about 2 o’clock from the CRJ. Comms were a mess.
|
|
Thanks, I'd forgotten that Burbank has WebTrak:
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....7694869a57.jpg Departing E75L in blue, inbound CRJ9 in green. |
A bit more from today's WSJ. Skywest was operating as UA Express to SFO.
Close Call at Airport Near Los Angeles Under Investigation |
|
Can someone finfs the R/T audio and post it here ? thanks
|
R/T Audio clip here: https://forums.liveatc.net/atcaviati...5707/#msg75707
|
Maybe, just maybe, the "Swiss cheeseholes..." started here, taking TWR's attention away from SKW5326 -not visible on FR24- still in position rwy33 (and ASH5826 closing in rapidly):
N1547C was landing on 26, thus preventing SKW5326 from taking off on 33, so TWR G/A'd it with an interesting left crosswind turn in an almost reciprocal course towards ASH5826 (and ~2000ft lateral), which probably (and understandingly) drew TWR's attention to these two aircraft, unfortunately a bit too long.... https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ee3636168b.jpg ...thereby losing track of SKW5326 not yet having been cleared for T/O. Given the urgency, this T/O clearance was given by stepping over another aircraft's transmission (which most likely was well received by TWR). But, especially with hindsight, a G/A for ASH5826 was the only good option (and keeping SKW5326 in position on the threshold). And from there on, compared to the KAUS incident, it will be hard to blame any pilot for any contributing factor: * even a 'third party' (was it N1547C?) with better SA stepped in with "is he off the runway yet" * ASH5826 G/A'd and was subsequently instructed by TWR to climb on RWY heading (with SKW taking off!!), so no blaming here that the pilot did not side-step * then TWR "ASH5826 turn right two-seventy" ... "left two-seventy" * soon after "SKW5326 continue on the SID" which is in fact also a left turn towards ~270° !!!! * TWR "ASH5826 do you have the Embraer in sight" - ASH "Negative we got an RA complying with it" (maintaining a super relaxed voice given the circumstances :D) * TWR "ASH5826 roger, turn right thirty degrees..left thirty degrees' (second time in a few minutes that L & R are mixed up :hmm:) |
Originally Posted by DIBO
(Post 11391668)
Maybe, just maybe, the "Swiss cheeseholes..." started here, taking TWR's attention away from SKW5326 -not visible on FR24- still in position rwy33 (and ASH5826 closing in rapidly):
N1547C was landing on 26, thus preventing SKW5326 from taking off on 33, so TWR G/A'd it with an interesting left crosswind turn in an almost reciprocal course towards ASH5826 (and ~2000ft lateral), which probably (and understandingly) drew TWR's attention to these two aircraft, unfortunately a bit too long.... ...thereby losing track of SKW5326 not yet having been cleared for T/O. Given the urgency, this T/O clearance was given by stepping over another aircraft's transmission (which most likely was well received by TWR). But, especially with hindsight, a G/A for ASH5826 was the only good option (and keeping SKW5326 in position on the threshold). And from there on, compared to the KAUS incident, it will be hard to blame any pilot for any contributing factor: * even a 'third party' (was it N1547C?) with better SA stepped in with "is he off the runway yet" * ASH5826 G/A'd and was subsequently instructed by TWR to climb on RWY heading (with SKW taking off!!), so no blaming here that the pilot did not side-step * then TWR "ASH5826 turn right two-seventy" ... "left two-seventy" * soon after "SKW5326 continue on the SID" which is in fact also a left turn towards ~270° !!!! * TWR "ASH5826 do you have the Embraer in sight" - ASH "Negative we got an RA complying with it" (maintaining a super relaxed voice given the circumstances :D) * TWR "ASH5826 roger, turn right thirty degrees..left thirty degrees' (second time in a few minutes that L & R are mixed up :hmm:) |
Originally Posted by fdr
(Post 11391737)
The ATC officer was dealing with a lousy setup, where was the supervisory oversight looking at the flow control and the potential for this to get entertaining?
Regarding the “is he off the runway yet” transmission, I think that was from the CRJ. To me it sounded like someone in the CRJ inadvertently keyed the mic transmitting the dialogue between the CRJ PF/PM; i.e., “is he off the runway yet, no, we’re going around.” One other observation. When the LC issued the go-around to 47C, she called the CRJ at 2 miles. Another 30 seconds elapsed before she issued the takeoff clearance for the ERJ immediately followed by the landing clearance to the CRJ. That means the CRJ was well inside of 1 mile when she issued those clearances. Within 2 minutes after this incident, there was a change in LCs. |
Wow...such a confusing mess in all those comms...:ooh:
|
Indeed , lousy set up and "inventive and flexible " way of working to optimize and expedite traffic while pleasing everyone. . Listening to the audio, any experienced cotroller would detect that she's up the limit ,:i.e. the speed of talking , contradicting clearances ,non-standard phraseology . the tone of the "Stand-by " given to the transit request, etc... Not sure if this is "standard Burbank day " or an exception though..
. The heli crossing at the threshold did not help ( standard procedure in burbank,?) ,, The " Fly runway cetreline on the go around was unfortunate , etc.. and ,just like the Austin case on the other thread, procedures on go around above or just behing a take off needs to be revisisted. . And this is not a US problem , happens everywhere. |
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher
(Post 11392240)
Indeed , lousy set up and "inventive and flexible " way of working to optimize and expedite traffic while pleasing everyone. . Listening to the audio, any experienced cotroller would detect that she's up the limit ,:i.e. the speed of talking , contradicting clearances ,non-standard phraseology . the tone of the "Stand-by " given to the transit request, etc... Not sure if this is "standard Burbank day " or an exception though..
. The heli crossing at the threshold did not help ( standard procedure in burbank,?) ,, The " Fly runway cetreline on the go around was unfortunate , etc.. and ,just like the Austin case on the other thread, procedures on go around above or just behing a take off needs to be revisisted. . And this is not a US problem , happens everywhere. |
That area of Southern California (LA Basin) is very challenging airspace. Both large, and very large airports, and numerous small airports as well as military. Compounding this congested airspace is a large amount of general aviation aircraft, as witnessed by the audio tape. The weather is usually very nice, which generates all the aerial activity. It is the only airspace that I fly in, where I’ll put the autopilot on ASAP because it’s vital to have eyes and ears open. I will always brief my F/O to keep any extraneous chatter to a minimum and make short, crisp, transmissions on the radio.
|
Originally Posted by Chiefttp
(Post 11392513)
as witnessed by the audio tape
On another matter, I hesitated and refrained from posting, but now I'm at it, I might as well post it as a matter of discussion. Similar to the sterile flight deck concept: Distractions occur frequently in operation rooms or at the controllers working positions (CWPs). Air Traffic Control Officers (ATCOs) are facing these distractions day to day apart from performing their duties. The detrimental effect of distractions poses considerable threats to the safe operation of the air traffic management (ATM) system which may cause significant safety issues. * on several TWR transmissions, voices in the background can be heard (which of course is not uncommon) * at least on two transmissions, one could draw the (premature) conclusion that one was suppressing some form of laughter while speaking. One transmission was preceded with a few short unmodulated transmissions, possibly indicating hesitation or inability to state what needed to be stated. * on one exchange the callsign of the carrier was incorrect, the flightnumber was correct (can happen to the best) * on one ATC handover, an incorrect and totally different frequency was given, and upon the aircrew's acknowledgement which was 1 digit off, TWR gave the completely different, but correct frequency (can also happen to the best) All small, almost meaningless events, that leading up to the incident, makes one wonder how sterile the working environment was...
Originally Posted by BFSGrad
(Post 11391974)
Regarding the “is he off the runway yet” transmission, I think that was from the CRJ. To me it sounded like someone in the CRJ inadvertently keyed the mic transmitting the dialogue between the CRJ PF/PM; i.e., “is he off the runway yet, no, we’re going around.”
|
A new more "detailed" clip »»»
BTW, is it only me having a great difficulty understanding such rapid english non-standard comms or the ATC lady gave the SKW clr for TO run even before the light N47C crossed their path from right to left, in front of them on the GA procedure!!??? Tks |
Originally Posted by JanetFlight
(Post 11392971)
BTW, is it only me having a great difficulty understanding such rapid english non-standard comms or the ATC lady gave the SKW clr for TO run even before the light N47C crossed their path from right to left, in front of them on the GA procedure!!???
In contrast, the official FAA ATC tapes are time stamped and can be synchronized with ADS-B data allowing for an accurate video/audio recreation, but are available only to FAA and NTSB investigators. Most of these video creators will include such a disclaimer regarding aircraft positions and will also caption when audio is edited (or not edited). |
Originally Posted by JanetFlight
(Post 11392971)
BTW, is it only me having a great difficulty understanding such rapid english non-standard comms
Originally Posted by JanetFlight
(Post 11392971)
or the ATC lady gave the SKW clr for TO run even before the light N47C crossed their path from right to left, in front of them on the GA procedure!!??
|
Many tks for your wise and important Inputs and feedbacks, dear Dibo & BFS.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:41. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.