Continental 757 Lands on Taxiway at EWR

[PlatinumFlyer]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10312006/news/regionalnews/airline_pilot_in_blunder_land_regionalnews_murray_weiss_and_ jeremy_olshan.htm

Note that this was about sunset, directly into the sun on the "cross wind" runway at the North end of the airport. As a SLF having landed at EWR hundreds of times, landing on 29 is rare, and only under extreme wind conditions, as existed on 10/28, with winds over 50 MPH. I would not be surprised if the guys involved had never used this runway. Still no excuse.....

To get this thing down on a 70' taxiway under the conditions that existed is good.

[PlatinumFlyer]

Actually, it the one on the RIGHT. The one on the left is near the terminals and is heavily utilized.

[seacue]

I should think the landing was intended for Rwy 29, at the top of the airport plate.
http://66.226.83.248/aptdiag/FAA/00285AD.gif
Your picture says it's of Rwy 1/19. It probably means 4/22.

[F4F]

Still no excuse.....

What about being a so called human being?
Are you one of the super hero who never does a mistake, or is this only the attribute of the airline pilot :}

[hobie]

Sorry Platinum ..... posted the wrong photo link so deleted .... :ok:

Peters said the plane should have landed on Runway 29, but landed on Taxiway Z, otherwise known as Taxiway Zulu, which is parallel to the runway


But rather than landing on the 6,800-foot-long, 150-foot-wide Runway 29, it touched down on the 70-foot-wide taxiway at 6:31 p.m., sources said.

[DOVES]

Did something similar happen to a same carrier's aircraft in december 1983 (but it was heavily snowing at that time)?
It seems to my memory that Frank Lorenzo was in the jump seat of a ship controlled by a brand new non striking captain.
Please FLY SAFELY
DOVES

[FLCH]

DOVES, you are correct, it happened going into Stapleton on a DC-9, I think Frankie boy was in the back though.

[akerosid]

There was a DC9 which crashed at old DEN in the late '80s; I think it was '87 or '88; however, I believe the taxiway incident was a DC10 at Houston; no damage, although captain and FO subsequently were dismissed.

[robdesbois]

What about being a so called human being?
Are you one of the super hero who never does a mistake, or is this only the attribute of the airline pilot :}
F4F agreed people do make mistakes, however some are acceptable and some are not; although there were no injuries or loss of life this was a potentially dangerous situation and as such the mistake IMHO is unacceptable.
Am I just being naive here?

[tom775257]

With the warning on the bottom of the page, I've decided to withdraw my story. It perhaps suggests I'm human...

[robdesbois]

Perhaps in this situation it would be more appropriate to request a crosswind runway if available? Obviously this has its drawbacks too, but it's easy to see from both accounts how easy it can be to get the wrong bit of tarmac into sun.

[SeniorDispatcher]

There was a DC9 which crashed at old DEN in the late '80s; I think it was '87 or '88; however, I believe the taxiway incident was a DC10 at Houston; no damage, although captain and FO subsequently were dismissed.

The DC-9 that crashed (COA1713, IIRC) and the DC-9 that landed on a taxiway with Frankie in the back -both- occurred at Stapleton, i.e. two separate deals...

[Human Factor]

Perhaps in this situation it would be more appropriate to request a crosswind runway if available?

It rather depends on the wind, the aircraft limits and whether an alternative is available. I've landed on 22L in the past on the limits of my aircraft (777) which has a 40kt dry crosswind limit. Given the choice on the day, I'd have gone for 29 but it wasn't available.

[PEI_3721]

We all make mistakes. The principles of threat and error management require us to use all available resources (CRM), but this does not eliminate human error.
Thus, for specific situations the human requires timely warning systems.

In this instance we should consider something like Runway Advisory Awareness System (RAAS). (http://www.honeywell.com/sites/aero/Egpws-Home3_CB54AACBB-D557-208D-8CE0-EC44CECAAB3B_HD821C499-7201-CF0B-5533-6EFD92534345.htm)

RAAS like its counterpart EGPWS, alerts crews to their errors just as much as alerting to a specific threat (terrain or landing on an inappropriate runway).
What we humans require is a threat and error detector, i.e EGPWS and RAAS.

[newarksmells]

Co-pilot flying. Pilot experienced but not necessarily on the 757. A miracle no other planes were taxying at the time not to mention the fact there were no service vehicles out there either.

Crew reportedly realized their mistake after landing and communicated that fact to ATC.

Glad to see nobody got hurt. Mistakes happen. Thr only people who don't make them are people who don't do very much in the first place.

Newarksmells

[BelfastChild]

Thr only people who don't make them are people who don't do very much in the first place.

Newarksmells


Well said!!!!!!!:D

[wileydog3]

What about being a so called human being?
Are you one of the super hero who never does a mistake, or is this only the attribute of the airline pilot :}

Have you ever flown into EWR?

[Two's in]

Curious why as there is no published approach for Rwy 29 there was not some heightened awareness that this was to all intents and purposes a non-standard approach. Was a visual approach advisable at at this time of the evening into either darkness or a setting sun? As for the "we all make mistakes" scenario, the only difference between landing on an empty taxiway Z to the North, or a fully loaded taxiway W to the south was manifest by a poorly written piece of sensationalist nonsense in the NY Post versus an all out tragedy of unthinkable proportions. Most people can understand the chain of events that led up to the Kentucky disaster and think of regional jets, small airports, and busy schedules as contributing factors. It is a sobering thought that this event happened to a major Part 121 Carrier at its home base.

[stilton]

There is an approach to 29, it is an RNAV/VNAV aaproach that places you
on a nice stabilized final to 29, it can be accessed from the database on the 757 in question.

Atc, though does not like us using this as it place us too far out on the base leg for their taste, however cutting inside the course is quite feasible ( you have to be visual anyway)

29 is not 'rarely used', it is used quite commonly, especially with strong winds out of the northwest.

[FIRESYSOK]

F4F agreed people do make mistakes, however some are acceptable and some are not; although there were no injuries or loss of life this was a potentially dangerous situation and as such the mistake IMHO is unacceptable.
Am I just being naive here?


Things like this happen to the best. Some simulator training and these guys will be back, albeit humbled. Landing into the setting sun can completely eliminate visual cues like runway markings and rubber deposits. If the runway didn't have an ILS to crosscheck, then the mistake was all but made.

[B73567AMT]

A blessing no one was hurt.
I have no idea what was going on in that flightdeck, so I'll try my best not to pass judgement.

I do find it hard to believe that BOTH flightcrew member missed this one. There is a site on the net that shows the flightpaths onf airplanes on approach into EWR. It looks like the guys actually sidestepped over the Turnpike.

Weird.

[worldpilot]

I'm happy that the pilots involved in this incident have been grounded and I seriously hope that their licenses will be revoked. No excuse for not paying attention and ignorance.

[Bus429]

Worldpilot,
A rather uncharitable view. As you will no doubt have learned in CRM classes, we all make mistakes and the best we can do is mitigate - or reduce - the negative impact of human behaviour. Seems that we are blaming the pilots without having all the facts. Sure enough, they may be grounded but only while the circumstances are investigated.:oh:

[FLCH]

I'm happy that the pilots involved in this incident have been grounded and I seriously hope that their licenses will be revoked. No excuse for not paying attention and ignorance.

It seems we have a judge, jury and executioner .....BUS 429, I seriously doubt this person even knows what CRM is unless it came along with his conversion course on the Cessna 150/172.

[F4F]

The ATPL's daily game:
- Starts with the check-in
- The aim is: To score as few as possible of the 1'001 possible mistakes per flight leg during the day. Of those possible mistakes, check, double check and even triple check those which you sure don't wanna score on (the bad ones)
- Repeat the game on every leg of the day (adding fatigue and routine as a wild card)
- Ends after the check-out

Then go home and ponder how close or how far you did from that ever sooo illusive perfect flight

The ATPL's career:
- To repeat the ATPL's daily game on a daily basis, year after year until retirement or the big mistake catches up with you... good luck to all of us :ok:



FIRESYSOK & Bus 429, thanks!

wileydog3, no sir, only seen the place once, as a PAX

And to all the crawlers, please refrain to judge people while strolling on their lawn :=

[JW411]

worldpilot:

Now that is a bit of a pretentious name for someone who is only rated on the Cessna 150/172.

However, if you have actually flown one of them around the world then we might listen to you!

[QCM]

I'm happy that the pilots involved in this incident have been grounded and I seriously hope that their licenses will be revoked. No excuse for not paying attention and ignorance.
Hey guys you're too nice with this worldpilot...no CRM for the ennemies of CRM,so IMHO this worldpilot is nothing else but a f****1ng a$$h0le.:yuk: :yuk: :ugh: ..God bless these guys who landed on the taxiway,good luck chaps you might feel very very lonely,but the sun will come back don't worry!:ok: :cool:

[robdesbois]

Ok since there's a lot of flaming going back and forth here I think we need to remember some things:

1. Despite the danger, thankfully nobody was injured

2. A mistake was made somewhere - yes we all make mistakes but it may be that someone has to take the rap for this in whatever form

3. Given that this mistake has occurred (twice including an account given here), something may need to be done to decrease the likelihood of it happening again - be it for ATC or crew.

/two pennies' worth :)

[Lou Scannon]

Well, Worldpilot, I have no desire to break you in mind and body with the sort of sarcastic reply that many will feel that you deserve, but perhaps I could pass on a little gentle advice:
In aviation there are a set of obvious errors that sit on the shoulders of every pilot waiting to bite him hard. They include landing at the wrong airport, taking off on the wrong runway, closing down the wrong engine, landing with the gear not lowered, clipping the undershoot, running off the end of the runway, landing on the wrong runway etc etc etc.
If you are very very lucky you may survive a lifetime of professional flying without ever falling in to one of those traps. That would then be an appropriate time to pontificate in the manner that you have.
In reality most of would remember the time that one did fall in to one of the traps or would have done without the help of the other pilot, flight engineer, air traffic controller etc etc etc.
A gentle sigh and expression of sympathy for someone who had would then be the normal reaction.

[SEAN911]

I'm retired now, but early in my career I was an F/E on a B-727 that landed on a taxiway. How's that done? Very easily.
To make a long story short what was supposed to be a visual approach was switched at the last moment to a VOR approach, because we were passing through a squall line. When we broke out we were at minimums, with the "runway" right on the nose; the real runway was not even within peripheral vision. The winds were very strong and gusting (very different from what was being reported) and the the C/P who was flying had his hands full just staying on centerline and keeping from falling out of the sky. The taxiway had recently been repaved and was as wide as most runways. C/P did a very good job of "greasing it on" under extreme wx conditions. It was only when we saw that the high-speed taxiway was at 135 degrees instead of 45 degrees that we realized what we had done. Remember the MD-80 that crashed in Little Rock about June '99? If I remember correctly they encountered windshear right about touchdown, and a headwind of 50 kts switched to a quartering tailwind of about 80 kts, leading to disaster. It's very easy to get so wrapped up in fighting the weather on approach that you miss some "small" item, especially in poor visibility. We had a clear view of the landing roll-out area, so there was no danger. It's very easy to get "sucked in", even for experienced crews. So, please don't be too quick to judge.

[jondc9]

one point of interest and possible source of confusion is this...all PAPI's/VASI at newark airport are on the pilot's left while approaching the runway, EXCEPT for runway 29...that runway has the PAPI on the RIGHT.

which would mean that someone expecting the runway to be to the right of the PAPI would land on the taxiway UNLESS they were well briefed on the 29 PAPI position.

while there are other lights to help a pilot find a runway, this papi business should be considered...think about it.

[forget]

There's an NTSB 'chase plane' animation of the Little Rock accident at;

http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2000/aa1420/anim_boardmtng.htm

[oliver2002]

I do find it hard to believe that BOTH flightcrew member missed this one. There is a site on the net that shows the flightpaths onf airplanes on approach into EWR. It looks like the guys actually sidestepped over the Turnpike.
Weird.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/COA1883/history/20061031/2126Z/KMCO/KEWR

[Hufty]

Worldpilot - your arrogance is breathtaking! :yuk:

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

Looks like a 360 orbit over Virginia - presumably because of delays building due to the high winds that evening....?

[worldpilot]

Worldpilot,
A rather uncharitable view. As you will no doubt have learned in CRM classes, we all make mistakes and the best we can do is mitigate - or reduce - the negative impact of human behaviour. Seems that we are blaming the pilots without having all the facts. Sure enough, they may be grounded but only while the circumstances are investigated.:oh:

I accept that my opinion is this respect is overstressed. I am not saying that Crew resource management (CRM) could not be an issue here. I was just pissed off with the report that the crew just worked away as if nothing happened. Anyway, I hereby withdraw my statement.

[FullWings]

I have to say I do have some sympathy for the perpetrators; I doubt that they did this deliberately.

I can only surmise that the picture out the front window looked OK... It's been a while since I used 29 at EWR, so I can't remember what the lighting looked like. It's possible that the runway was (un)lit in a similar way to the taxiway. Remember this is a visual approach - no LOC or VOR radial, etc.

I have noticed that many airports have added potentially confusing lighting details to some runways over recent years, whilst removing those that are fairly unique. It is not unusual to line up on a runway(?) that has:

a) No white CL lighting.
b) Green CL in places for turnoffs.
c) Red stop bars (LAHSO).

Contrast that with a taxiway(?) that has:

a) Areas of missing CL lighting.
b) Green CL for lead-in to entry/exit points.
c) Red stop bars (taxi limit).

At sunset you're especially vulnerable landing to the west, at any airport.

[worldpilot]

It seems we have a judge, jury and executioner .....BUS 429, I seriously doubt this person even knows what CRM is unless it came along with his conversion course on the Cessna 150/172.

:=:= FLCH. My rating on Cessna 150/172 does not reflect my aviation knowledge. You might be a faculty :mad:, but I'm not. I pretty much have a profound understanding of aviation and the workload involved in the cockpit. Anyway, I've withdrawn my statement.

[FLCH]

OK Worldpilot, the Captain of that flight is a good friend of mine, and severely dislike people that shoot first and ask questions later. Please think before posting absolute statements...lest you be jumped by others...

[ChristiaanJ]

It said sunset 5.58 pm and touchdown 6.31 pm.
At about half an hour after sunset, down to what altitude would they still have had the sun in their eyes?

[FlyVMO]

It said sunset 5.58 pm and touchdown 6.31 pm.
At about half an hour after sunset, down to what altitude would they still have had the sun in their eyes?

Evening civil twilight ended at 18:26L, so it was effectively full dark if the touchdown time from that site is correct.
I fly in and around EWR's airspace twice a day, and while RJs and smaller AC use 11/29 quite frequently (Im forced to work around them as they come down final), I do believe its fairly rare for heavier eqp such as a 757 to use 29.
For your entertainment-I live under the left base for 29, and a couple years ago on a windy day similar to the past weekend, scores of nervous twits called the newspaper to complain about "low flying jets that might have been hijacked".

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/RS_OneDay.html

[Nerik]

Some 12yrs ago an aircraft landed on a taxiway in Gatwick. As in this case there were no injuries or fatalities as luckily there was no other aircraft on the taxiway. The initial reaction by many people was to call the said pilots incompetent etc. etc. The subsequent AAIB report reached the conclusion that one of the main contributing factors was that with the ILS off the air on the main landing runway, the crew were asked to land on the other runway (Rwy08L) which has no ILS. The lighting etc. was confusing to the crew and they landed on the taxiway to the left of 08L.

Dunno what happened in this case, but before some people with profound knowledge of what goes on in a cockpit comment they'd better wait to see what led to this happening.

[jondc9]

FLCH

so, tell us the scoop...what is the truth...of course you can wait until after the investigation into your friend's mistake.

I also published my thoughts on how easily this could have happened.

And I have circled to land 29 from both sides (4 apch and 22 apch).

no one wants to chastise anyone, but by the same token no one wants pilots out there frequently making mistakes.

to be sure, circling to 29 at night, when full night vision has not been achieved is not a piece of cake.

[ATC Watcher]

My rating on Cessna 150/172 does not reflect my aviation knowledge. I pretty much have a profound understanding of aviation and the workload involved in the cockpit.

Well your knowledge obiously does not include Human factors. May I suggest for a start Proffessor S. De Dekker excellent articles ( do a search on Google) where you will learn that errors are extremely rarely done by individuals alone.


Nerik, very valid point, you may also add that the central taxi way they landed on in EGKK was also marked as an emergency runway , and it was an error waiting to happen.

[ChristiaanJ]

Somebody else's post about sunset time, hence lighting conditions, just got deleted, no idea why.

Anyway, we're all speculating, until some kind of preliminary report comes out.

All that's clear from this topic, is that it's been done before, and it will be done again.

Only, if some lessons can be learned this time, maybe it will happen one or two times less often?

[jondc9]

info I have was sunset time was 5:50 pm local, landing time 6:31 pm local.

one must recall that while aloft, there may be more light, and as you descend your eyes are not yet accustomed to handle night vision.

I also indicated that PAPI was on the right hand side of 29...all the other runways have it on the left...hmmm

[Airbubba]

Somebody else's post about sunset time, hence lighting conditions, just got deleted, no idea why.

It was probably mine. I had thought the incident was a couple of days later than it actually occured. My cogent analysis was somewhat flawed since EWR went from UTC-4 to UTC-5 over the weekend with the end of daylight savings time.:)

[ChristiaanJ]

It was indeed your message that disappeared, Airbubba.
I'm sure the time change will help to confuse the enquiry a bit more....

[stilton]

We used to land DC10'S and Classic 747's on 29 and I still see 777's and 744's land on it not infrequently.

You have to put it down in the touch down zone but with very strong Westerly winds it makes more sense sometimes to use the crosswind runway.

[Touch'n'oops]

Why didn't alarm bells ring?

I understand the difficulties of approaches into the sun and I brief this when expected. It just so happens that today I made an approach into BFS/EGAA on RWY 25 as the sun was sitting on the horizon. By 500ft RA I could not see the runway markings, but shortly after I could see all markings well enough to continue to landing.

Why did the pilots continue to land when there was no clear indication of WHERE they were landing?
If they had not seen the touch down markings, then you could assume the rest of the runway would not have been visible. The next question should naturally be 'How much of the 6800ft is left?'. Don't know! Well I wouldn't want to hang around when I have no idea at what point I touched-down.

Did the pilots review the airport diagram, so that they may have a good idea of what to expect? If the aircraft was able to make a visual approach then tarmac and airport structures should have been visible enough to orientate one's self.

Did the pilots suffer from 'Get-home-titis' after a long flight?
Was Confirmation Bias playing its usual role? (Confirmation Bias is when the brain manipulates facts, or ignores them, to achieve the desired conclusion.)

[ChristiaanJ]

I understand the difficulties of approaches into the sun ....So far, it seems as if the sun was down for at least half an hour. And from the CNN video, the taxyway didn't look very much like a live runway.

So I would think it's time to stop guessing what went on, and wait for some more concrete information (no pun intended).

We all know about people landing in places where they did not intend to land (Northolt, anybody?).

Until we know what happened and why, and what lessons are to be learned from that, let's give it a rest, maybe?

[jondc9]

I think it is important to talk about all possible aspects of this amazing incident...while we could wait for ONE YEAR while NTSB gives us the real story (as they see it), what is to say that just by chatting here someone will have gleaned enough info to be more careful with his/her own flying.

I would like to point out that there have been accidents within an hour of sunset or sunrise...does anyone recall the LAX cleared to land on top of another plane...pilots staring into the sun for hours on a transcon flight...and descending into the dark?

or the recent comair crash in kentucky, just before sunrise


these times of day demand special attention from pilots...and CONTROLLERS

[flown-it]

There is an approach to 29, it is an RNAV/VNAV aaproach that places you
on a nice stabilized final to 29, it can be accessed from the database on the 757 in question.
Atc, though does not like us using this as it place us too far out on the base leg for their taste, however cutting inside the course is quite feasible ( you have to be visual anyway)
29 is not 'rarely used', it is used quite commonly, especially with strong winds out of the northwest.
There is no excuse for leaving garbage on your nav display. Radar vectors, be it to an ILS, Rnav or visual approach should always mean that the PM pulls up an approach to that runway and "draws a line" from the runway to the OM. Coupla key strokes and you're done. If the visual turns you inside the OM make it the "from" point...again two or three key strokes. You then have an electronic referance to back you up. Too often we throw away the magic and go visual too soon.

[Airbubba]

If the visual turns you inside the OM make it the "from" point...again two or three key strokes.

Depends on the airline. Air Canada, for example, doesn't allow route mods in the Boeing below 10,000 feet from what I'm told.

And, using the primitive text based user interface in the 75, do you really want the PNF punching buttons inside the marker? Maybe the PNF was heads down trying to do what you suggested when the miscue occurred.

A non-GPS 75 probably wouldn't be able to accurately tell you were lined up on the taxiway instead of the runway until it was too late, especially with the course up display in a crosswind. You have to mentally rotate the picture on the HSI to try to make it match what you see out the window with a crosswind component. The dotted line would have enough error from map shift to make you disregard a minor displacement I would think.

[Earthmover]

Nerik, very good statement. the Captain of the EGKK 1-11 is a very fine pilot and instructor. He eventually became Chief Pilot of a UK airline, and I am one of those who benefited from his teaching some years ago (after the incident as it happens.)

If we had 'revoked his licence' as suggested happens to this crew, the UK aviation industry would have lost a very good trainer - and nothing would have been gained, other than revenge. Let's hope the US industry is as enlightened.

We learn from other's mistakes as well as our own.

[aardvark2zz]

Maybe color blindness was a factor.

I've seen myself an executive jet pilot fail a color blindness test in the US and the FAA inspector passed him anyway. :uhoh:

[Ignition Override]

The topic now is whether and how severe their punishment should be?
Many years ago, according to his book, world-famous (WW2 fighter pilot) aerobatic expert Bob Hoover took off in his Twin Commander with a few passengers. The fueler had somehow put jet fuel into his (recip.) plane, which caused a dual engine failure, at night.

Mr. Hoover made a good dead-stick landing.
He was told that the fueler was history (would be fired). Bob said no, keep the humiliated guy. The fueler would now be the safest, most careful fueler around.

These two CO pilots will probably be some of the safest pilots-until this incident, they might have already been quite careful. Suddenly they have a major 'glitch' on their record. They probably have no more 'room', from a career perspective, for a major mistake.
The actual danger might now still lurk inside the hundreds or thousands of superior ("Weltflieger" usw) , professional pilots-Pprune fans or otherwise-who feel that they could never :cool: make this type of serious mistake.:ouch:

Years ago being fairly new on the 757 on the visual approach into Orlando (MCO), a Captain asked me to quickly build him an artificial, let's just say "won ton" ;) glidepath. I was slow doing it, having very little time. I could have missed a mistake on his part. Possibly something in the 757's automation at EWR, or a last-minute landing checklist, prevented one of the pilots from catching a trend or normal maneuver, which was missed by the flying pilot. Also, pilots mostly have the HSI in MAP display, instead of VOR, which would give you a normal on- or off-course "localizer" indication, to supplement the flight director. Were the localizer and VASI or PAPI in operation?
The amateurs who read Pprune might not realize how hazardous a visual approach can be, not just with rough, turbulent strong winds which can be quite a challenge, even in a DC-9 or a 757. The 757 often increases your workload, despite some automation, because they take longer to slow to the required max gear and flap extension speeds, as you are constantly descending. Flying a C-172 etc into a large airport can not begin to compare.

[jondc9]

while I don't know the particular nav equipment aboard this particular 757, I do know that when making a circling apch to rw 29 in the past, I have used the back course of the ILS 11 localizer to assure line up on centerline.

a 757 pilot friend indicates that selecting this would be no problem.

thoughts?

jon

[FullWings]

There is no excuse for leaving garbage on your nav display. Radar vectors, be it to an ILS, Rnav or visual approach should always mean that the PM pulls up an approach to that runway and "draws a line" from the runway to the OM. Coupla key strokes and you're done. If the visual turns you inside the OM make it the "from" point...again two or three key strokes. You then have an electronic referance to back you up. Too often we throw away the magic and go visual too soon.
That makes sense - we call it "cleaning up the map". Three button pushes. It will tell you you're coming from the right direction and even if you're going to land on the right runway but you'd need a magnifying glass to see that you were lined up on a parallel taxiway, even when on the lowest map range...

[PlatinumFlyer]

In another one of those 'amazing things that you can find on the internet', go to the following site:

http://www4.passur.com/ewr.html

Input the date as October 28 and the time as 18:30. Then CLICK on START. It takes a few seconds to load.You will see the approach of the aircraft in question, and it appears to make a last minute correction toward Taxiway Z. If you click on the blue plane, it will give you ID and altitude, etc.

Note that the next plane landing appears to be a FeDex D10 landing on 22L, followed by multiple flights landing on 29.

[Touch'n'oops]

ChristiaanJ Had the sun been down for a while, then why couldn't the pilots tell the difference between blue and white lights?

I am not a perfect pilot, but there are some mistakes that should never be made!

Another big question!!! IF IT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, WHY DOES IT STILL HAPPEN???

I think it is time that Situational Awareness is re-addressed.
There have been times when I have flown with guys who have left it to the computers and ended up completely lost.

Could there be another Cali around the corner?

[Avman]

Nice site! Mind you, I questioned it's accuracy when the FDX landed on I 95 :eek: . In fairness though, all the other 29 arrivals had their noses bang on the 29 CL, unlike the incident CO a/c which does make that adjustment to the right and is shown as being lined up on the taxiway.

[ironbutt57]

Complex FMC inputs are discouraged below 10,000ft aal...

[stilton]

Yes, best to keeep your head out of the box down low, besides, even if you do cut inside the course on the rnav approach you will 'reintercept' the final.

[ernest gann]

here (http://www.fomento.es/NR/rdonlyres/E17AAC70-9B04-4F8B-8657-F8F6E092A959/21588/2005_005_IN_ENG.pdf) is quite similar incident with totally different acft and cerw. their were not the first and unfortunately probably not the last.
fly safely

[PlatinumFlyer]

here (http://www.fomento.es/NR/rdonlyres/E17AAC70-9B04-4F8B-8657-F8F6E092A959/21588/2005_005_IN_ENG.pdf) is quite similar incident with totally different acft and cerw. their were not the first and unfortunately probably not the last.
fly safely
Similar to the above, it is rumored (though unconfirmed) that since the CO 757 was kept in service, that data on the FDR was overwritten by subsequent use of the aircraft.

[Nerik]

Nerik, very good statement. the Captain of the EGKK 1-11 is a very fine pilot and instructor. He eventually became Chief Pilot of a UK airline, and I am one of those who benefited from his teaching some years ago (after the incident as it happens.)

If we had 'revoked his licence' as suggested happens to this crew, the UK aviation industry would have lost a very good trainer - and nothing would have been gained, other than revenge. Let's hope the US industry is as enlightened.

We learn from other's mistakes as well as our own.

Earthmover I agree with you but I think we may be talking about a different incident. The one I am talking about was a 737.

[Gipsy Queen]

Well, Worldpilot, I have no desire to break you in mind and body with the sort of sarcastic reply that many will feel that you deserve, but perhaps I could pass on a little gentle advice:
In aviation there are a set of obvious errors that sit on the shoulders of every pilot waiting to bite him hard. They include landing at the wrong airport, taking off on the wrong runway, closing down the wrong engine, landing with the gear not lowered, clipping the undershoot, running off the end of the runway, landing on the wrong runway etc etc etc.
If you are very very lucky you may survive a lifetime of professional flying without ever falling in to one of those traps. That would then be an appropriate time to pontificate in the manner that you have.
In reality most of would remember the time that one did fall in to one of the traps or would have done without the help of the other pilot, flight engineer, air traffic controller etc etc etc.
A gentle sigh and expression of sympathy for someone who had would then be the normal reaction.

Thank you, Lou; you have put this very well. We have all "been there and done that" and ultimately, given the nature of the job, it's a case of "there but for the grace . . . "

I find these madcap rushes to premature and ill-informed judgment of someone else's misfortune to be unpleasant and unecessary; particularly so when offered by people who should know a good deal better. I don't include the 150/172 spamcanman in the latter - his supposed level of experience does not qualify him to make any useful contribution in this regard.

[ChristiaanJ]

Ernest Gann,
Looks not TOTALLY dissimilar.
Onviously it's still a not totally uncommon occurence.

IMHO, these guys should have been hauled into a room somewhere ASAP, given a beer, and asked to recall as closely as possible what they did, and what happened in their opinion.

They were lucky.... nothing was on that taxiway.
Next time, somebody will meet a fully fueled LearJet halfway down the taxiway, and the resulting fireball will make ALL the papers....

If these guys could tell in all honesty what happened, without their names being mentioned in the official reports, and without their career being affected, we might learn something.

But then pigs might fly.

[averow]

I am a PPL, but am also an anesthetist. It occurs to me that there should be a simple way to use a GPS-oriented system to ensure takeoffs AND landings on the correct runway, at least at airports that are designated for jet service. We have similar "goof-proof" systems up and running in the operating theater, inspired by lessons learned from our aerospace colleagues. I do know that there is a lot of "clutter" and distraction prior to takeoff and landing, but perhaps a simple system could be designed to prevent these situations from arising.

[robdesbois]

Ok guys, you've all been very understanding to the poor pilot who made this mistake. Now how about giving worldpilot a break?
He's said he retracts what he said, so try accepting his mistake.

So actually assuming that a pilot cannot rely on tower for watching that the correct runway (or any runway at all :}) is being used, what measures can be put in place for this situation? RAAS - how widespread is it?
My feeling is that at decision height a missed approach should have been executed given that the pilot was not visual with the area on which he wished to land. Given that the runway could not be seen, an alternate runway could have then been used or land off instruments. Thoughts on this?

I'm not familiar with ops on this scale so please excuse the lack of knowledge.
--Rob

[ChristiaanJ]

averow,
As far as I know, such systems already exist.
But getting them qualified, certified, installed on all aircraft, and integrated in the SOP is another story.

Same way as some of the <"goof-proof" systems up and running in the operating theater> that you mention will not be available in small country hospitals for a long time yet.....

Even today, is everybody equipped with EGPWS and TCAS?

[SailorOrion]

Ok, from an engineer's point of view, I'm asking myself on how to prevent such incidents in the future. The only times I have seen a cockpit of a commercial airliner at night was in simulators (EDDF for example), so I'm trying to imagine.

From what I read here, 29 seems to be used if the crosswind component for a landing on 22 would be too high.

What I think contributed to the problem is that:
-The crew were rather busy with the "wind problem"
-They're coming after sunset
-They're flying a visual approach to runway 29
-So they have to find the runway among thousands of lights (taxiways, the turnpike, whatever). A runway that doesn't even have an ILS (probably because an ILS approach would interfere with KLGA approaches), no touchdown zone lighting and no approach lighting whatsoever.

So why does a runway, that is mostly used in adverse conditions, even lack a simple approach lighting?

SailorOrion

[PlatinumFlyer]

Ok, from an engineer's point of view, I'm asking myself on how to prevent such incidents in the future. The only times I have seen a cockpit of a commercial airliner at night was in simulators (EDDF for example), so I'm trying to imagine.
From what I read here, 29 seems to be used if the crosswind component for a landing on 22 would be too high.
What I think contributed to the problem is that:
-The crew were rather busy with the "wind problem"
-They're coming after sunset
-They're flying a visual approach to runway 29
-So they have to find the runway among thousands of lights (taxiways, the turnpike, whatever). A runway that doesn't even have an ILS (probably because an ILS approach would interfere with KLGA approaches), no touchdown zone lighting and no approach lighting whatsoever.
So why does a runway, that is mostly used in adverse conditions, even lack a simple approach lighting?
SailorOrion

I suggest adding to contributing factors:
-Short final approach
-Clearing the New Jersey Turnpike at about 100 ft. altitude, then having to get down near the beginning of the runway which is not probably more than 500 feet or so from the Turnpike.
-A big question is why did they make a quick correction to the right as they were crossing the Turnpike to align themselves with Taxiway Z, rather than continue straight and land on 29?

[SailorOrion]

I suggest adding to contributing factors:
-Clearing the New Jersey Turnpike at about 100 ft. altitude, then having to get down near the beginning of the runway which is not probably more than 500 feet or so from the Turnpike.


Maybe that's why there is a displaced threshold on 29..

SailorOrion

[Earthmover]

Earthmover I agree with you but I think we may be talking about a different incident. The one I am talking about was a 737.

Blimey Nerik, I didn't know it had happened at LGW twice.

So we have a regular-ish occurrence of aircraft landing on taxyways. So what's the common denominator folks? Incompetent pilots? ... Hmm. Or is it human factors combined with poor airport markings/design/procedures?

[eastern wiseguy]

The one I am talking about was a 737


Somewhere in the depths of my mind I seem to think it was Air Malta.....prepared to be shot down though

[Globaliser]

Somewhere in the depths of my mind I seem to think it was Air Malta.....prepared to be shot down thoughKM, 737-200, 20 October 1993 (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19931020-0&lang=en).

[jondc9]

Sailor Orion


If you don't respond to this I will think that either you are not reading this post or it has been electronically masked .

You asked about ILS on runway 29/ engineering standpoint and all that bit.

While there is NO ILS on RW29, RW 11 has an ILS which also project a BACKCOURSE which would allow line up on RW 29...WHILE not certified as an instrument approach, it would certainly do to help pick out the runway (29) from all the lights in New Jersey on a VMC evening.


Indeed the backcourse of an ILS is even more sensitive at the threshold than the front course for left/right orientation. (no glide slope of course).

And of course 11/29 is the same piece of concrete...(just for those who don't understand such things)


ALSO Sailor: The 29 runway does have REIL lights (runway end identifier lights) and while not a full ALSFII, they are quite helpful.

IT IS my considered opinion that since PAPI is installed on 29, but on the RIGHT SIDE unlike any other papi/vasi at EWR(all to the left of the other runways) , the pilots went to the right of the PAPI (perhaps not briefing this aspect of 29) and that could only lead to the taxiway.


Having flown circling appchs to 29 at EWR in evening hours, I can tell you that there are lots of lights all over the joint including the freeway which almost always causes some degree of confusion.

[misd-agin]

Complex FMC inputs are discouraged below 10,000ft aal...

LOL! We couldn't fly it that was followed.

[buscapt]

OK Worldpilot, the Captain of that flight is a good friend of mine, and severely dislike people that shoot first and ask questions later. Please think before posting absolute statements...lest you be jumped by others...

I am new to the forum and find the discussion facinating on many levels. I had heard the Captain on this flight was not new to the Capt seat but new to the 757. Is this true?

From a human factors point of view and my own experience, this has far reaching implications. I spent 6 years in the right seat of the A/319/320. When I upgraded to Capt I was overwhelmed with frustration because little things were dropping through the crack...unthinkable things that never would have been missed before. The cause was not stupidity but mental orientation readjustment. Switches you automatically know the location of must be placed in a "new mental location." I am not incinuating this Capt was preoccupied with switch location. I am saying that brain byte usage on changed "automatic" behavior prevents brain byte usage on what others would see as the obvious.

If in fact that is not the case with Capt experience on this particular incident, I would suggest filing this away for that upgrade or plane changes. It takes a tremendous amount of energy to properly focus "brain bytes"

[ChristiaanJ]

buscapt,
I do SO agree with your post.
And please, could anybody who was going to make hoohoo and heehee noises in answer to this post, first state formally that they HAVE NEVER switched on the windscreen wipers when intending to signal left.... shortly after having changed cars, or while driving an unfamiliar hire car abroad.

Oh, and.... captain? Never having flown anything with a sidestick, I can't even begin to imagine how you can suddenly swap at any time from a righthand sidestick to a lefthand one.
I would have thought it would take weeks, if not months to "reprogram" all your mental reflexes.....

[CargoOne]

Just a bit surprised that no one has yet mentioned the incident with SU at BCN:
http://www.fomento.es/NR/rdonlyres/E17AAC70-9B04-4F8B-8657-F8F6E092A959/21588/2005_005_IN_ENG.pdf

[oliver2002]

buscapt,
I do SO agree with your post.
And please, could anybody who was going to make hoohoo and heehee noises in answer to this post, first state formally that they HAVE NEVER switched on the windscreen wipers when intending to signal left.... shortly after having changed cars, or while driving an unfamiliar hire car abroad.
Oh, and.... captain? Never having flown anything with a sidestick, I can't even begin to imagine how you can suddenly swap at any time from a righthand sidestick to a lefthand one.
I would have thought it would take weeks, if not months to "reprogram" all your mental reflexes.....

I find it hard to believe that you just hop from one side to the other from one day to the next without doing some simulator practice to retrain your brain to use your other hand. :confused: This is not a rental car but a commercial airliner operation...

[hankmc]

On the light side. I was at the dentist the day after this happened and his assistant knows I am not a pilot but that I have an interest in aviaton.

She asked if I had heard about what had happened at Newark and went on to say she could not understand how a pilot could land on the taxiway, "the road where taxi cabs pick up passengers, it's right next to the terminal"...

[HowlingWind]

Just a bit surprised that no one has yet mentioned the incident with SU at BCN:
http://www.fomento.es/NR/rdonlyres/E...005_IN_ENG.pdfActually, Ernest Gann mentioned it back in post 65.

[PlatinumFlyer]

Initial NTSB report is now on their website:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20061101X01592&key=1

[jondc9]

does anyone have any thoughts as to PAPI positioning as mentioned in an earlier post?

[Check 6]

From another forum for the PPRune armchair aviation experts:
I'm not sure how many of you have flown the ILS 22 circle to 29 at night in gusting winds (winds were 290@30G40 that night). It isn't used that often at EWR.
Did you know that there aren't blue taxiway edge lights at EWR (just reflectors in the ground that you can't see at night from 1/2 mile final)?
Did you know that the PAPI for 29 is in a non-standard location on the right side of the runway?
Did you know that oftentimes one of the two REIL lights is inop (which makes things very confusing)?
Did you know that it is a more than 90 degree turn to final and when you roll out it is only about a 1/2 mile final if done right (not leaving a lot of time to correct errors) and you are staring at very distracting bi-directional heavy auto traffic (lots of lights going both ways) on the NJ Turnpike (which is right at the threshold to 29)?
Did you know that there isn't a charted visual procedure to this runway (although there should be)?

[SailorOrion]

Maybe, amidst all these lights the non-standard PAPI added up to the confusion; the crew trying to land somewhere to the right of the PAPI, if the crew had the 3rd or 4th leg that day, this could easily happen.....(is a nonstandard PAPI referenced in the charts anywhere?)

Celestar

[Check 6]

Maybe, amidst all these lights the non-standard PAPI added up to the confusion; the crew trying to land somewhere to the right of the PAPI, if the crew had the 3rd or 4th leg that day, this could easily happen.....(is a nonstandard PAPI referenced in the charts anywhere?)
Celestar
Yes, here is the chart (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0611/00285I22L.PDF), but this is non-standard and we are all used to seeing the PAPI on the left side.
You can see from the diagram that the PAPI sits on the left side of the taxiway (Z but not designated on this chart).

[jondc9]

sailor orion

the 10-9 chart, on the back side says that 29 has PAPI on RIGHT.


While most PAPI and abbreviated VASI are on the captain's side, one simply must read and brief all the info...the first suspicious thing I saw was PAPI-R

IN a briefing one might even say: PAPI on RIGHT side...so we better watch it and be sure to land to the left...

and once base to final turn has been made, one may check the glideslope before runway alignment...and then it might be too late...the mind sees what it wants to see.

[Taikonaut]

Nice to see a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks and armchair analysts go to bat on this one. The bottom line is, they both fu*ked up. Period. No excuses. All nicety aside, lets call it for what it is, those guys landed a commercial jet on the taxiway.

Yes, it could happen to anyone of us professional pilots and we all make mistakes. Welcome to our world. All those years on flying these magnificent machines around the world can all come to an end with a simple "Oops..."

Hopefully the crew will get a second chance ('cause I'd like one too if I ever botch one up) but if they get the walking papers instead, oh well, we knew to expect them anyway. Our certificates and two dollars will not buy us a cup of house Starbucks. Yes, we do eat our youngs.

As for my quals, I fly the whale into KEWR on a regular basis. ;)

[barit1]

Once upon a time airlines would make a pilot who survived an accident serve a time as chief of safety or the like, hoping to glean all they could in accident prevention. He had the voice of experience, and other pilots tended to pay attention. :ouch:

[SailorOrion]

Nice to see a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks and armchair analysts go to bat on this one. The bottom line is, they both fu*ked up. Period. No excuses. All nicety aside, lets call it for what it is, those guys landed a commercial jet on the taxiway.


Yes they did.

Accident/Incident investigations in the past were conducted to determine the course of action that lead to the problem. It was then the task of the investigations to make sure that this course of action will never happen again.

As soon as investigations try to find out whose fault it was, they're worthless.

It appears that such mishaps (landing on taxiway, take off wrong runway) happen rather frequently, sometimes with suboptimal consequences (SQ006 anyone); instead of blaming people, we ought to find out how to prevent it in the future.

Celestar

[BOAC]

Having looked at the Jepp, with the caveat that I have never been there, those terminal bits must have been a bit close!:eek:

Sailor - you are right. We will indeed, always have this sort of event. Do we look now to see, perhaps, flashing/occulting red obstruction lights on the end of each 'parallel' taxiway, bright by day and dimmer at night? I have seen all sorts of 'closed runway' lights, including red x's, flashing reds, alternating reds. Is this the answer? It would not be that expensive.

[SailorOrion]

I think a simple MALS (or maybe MALSR/MALSF) on the 29 would be plenty.

Sorry to mention a link from the "other side" :} , but I think it makes the point clear.
Properly lit runway (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1121829/L/)

ok this is not MALS but ALSF-II (if I'm not mistaken), but the idea remains.

I think not that anyone would accidently land on one of the two parallel taxiways without noticing :)
Celestar

[BOAC]

Agreed, but given a confusion of turnpike/shopping malls, street lights what-have-you ANYWHERE, would a system of 'barrier' lights not be a good/inexpensive idea?

[SailorOrion]

I'm not sure, better ask the pros :)

[jondc9]

article in boston hearld indicates taxiway Z is not illuminated with blue lights, though it does have green centerline lights...somehow this is OK by regs. banking right from base to final if the copilot caught sight of the HIRL and thought, well there is the left side of the runway, can't see the right side of the runway, somewhere down here...kind of thing

while yes, the pilots made a mistake and got lucky that no one was hurt, we must re think markings and lights as menitioned before.

it is amazing things like this don't happen more often.

[alf5071h]

... given a confusion of turnpike/shopping malls, street lights what-have-you ANYWHERE, ... See incident 5 in ‘TAWS Saves’ (http://uk.geocities.com/[email protected]/alf5071h.htm) as another example of where an aircraft attempts to land somewhere other than a runway. The presentation that accompanied the paper (not currently available) provided a very clear view of the possible confusion that can be created by street lights, but ... the aircraft had already deviated from the correct flight path before the crew were ‘visual’. Again it shows how error can result from a combination of factors; it is these factors which need to be identified and either eliminated or mitigated with threat and error management.

Final defenses usually reside with the crew – and don’t overlook the possibility that both crew members suffered (the same) error in this incident, or if they did not, then further error prevented intervention.

The appropriate use of modern technology can provide appropriate warnings – the use of RAAS (PEI post 14), particularly as an error detector might have prevented this incident. But this equipment also has benefit in other situations; RAAS might have prevented the KLEX incorrect runway takeoff and the KSEA incident.

The identification of ‘clusters’ of incidents/accidents, which appear to have a common cause (error) and/ or solutions must indicate something to us surely?

Instead of the Monday morning quarterbacks and armchair analysts seeking more negative aspects, please provide some positive, helpful safety advice, by determining how all of us can avoid making such an error until our aircraft are appropriately equipped.

[BOAC]

TAWS would not, I'm sure, have prevented this occurrence?
how all of us can avoid making such an error until our aircraft are appropriately equipped. - I don't think we can! What is wrong with having warning lights as an interim measure?

[alf5071h]

TAWS would not, I'm sure, have prevented this occurrence? …but RAAS would… RTFQ or something similar. TEM ? :) An error provoking situation? :p

[jondc9]

alf5071h

safety rec:

always place the localizer and course of runway for takeoff...tune and identify prior to taxi out...same for landing and in this case tune up ILS11, place front course in HSI and the back course would lead you to runway 29


last time I checked, you didn't need any special equipment for the above.

and if you are on a runway and the needle isn't centered, your not on the correct runway

this would have helped in the kentucky crash, the SEA alaska airlines wrong runway takeoff and the landing on the taxiway at EWR.


jon

[hangten]

nerik, eastern wiseguy, earthmover, others. yes, there were indeed 2 landings on the same taxiway at gatwick, the 1-11 and an air malta 737.
the issues have been somewhat addressed since then. some background - gatwick has parallel runways but only one can used at any one time since they are too close to each other. the northern most runway is shorter and is used as a contingency for when the main is unavailable due work, or an incident. there's no ils on the northern, it's visuals or sras only.
the main factor was airport layout/lighting. the lights visible from approach during northern runway 26R/08L were confusing when compared to the lights visible on main runway 26L/08R operations. it's a little difficult to explain here without a picture but essentially the picture to pilots was very similar when either runway was in use and it could easily be misconstrued (ironically, probably more so if you were familiar with gatwick) as to which set of lights was which. when the northern runway is in use the only lights visible now are those on the runway. the taxiway lights are unidirectional and hence suppressed in the landing direction.
we also now have a system in the tower called an 'approach monitoring aid' or AMA which uses the radar to monitor (!) the approach (!) of the aircraft. it can be set to either runway and emits a audible warning when an aircraft reaches two miles and is off the centreline. at this point ATC is to ask if the aircraft is established/visual, if the aircraft gets to one mile, regardless of the pilot response, if the alarm is still sounding, the aircraft is sent around.
as an aside, in the 1-11 incident there was a ba 737 on the taxiway at the time of the landing and the 1-11 stopped 80m short of them.
there's bound to be some resolvable issues in this incident too. that may involve the changing of the airport layout or lights, addition of equipment or addressing of some crm issues. most likely a combination of all, and more. let's allow the investigators to do their job and learn from what they discover.

[eastern wiseguy]

Hangten I agree totally my only input was for sake of clarity.Let the investigators do the work

EW

[PlatinumFlyer]

http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1166852337167290.xml?starledger?nnj&coll=1

From Today's NJ Star Ledger. The last paragraph mentions that the piolts involved in the incident underwent 'retraining' and have been returned to duty.

[Eboy]

"The National Transportation Safety Board's report concluded that "the flight crew's misidentification of the parallel taxiway as the active runway" led to the mistake, but added that night lighting conditions were a contributing factor."

http://wcbstv.com/local/newark.taxiway.landing.2.689698.html

[P7G]

Just to add an ironic codicil, after "retraining" the captain's first flight was to RSW (Fort Myers, FL ). Where the main runway was closed and the landing surface? You guessed it..... the taxiway. There but for the grace........:)

[squeaker]

I say "Well done, boys!" landing on a 70' wide taxiway, promote him!!
Seriously though, remember the BIA one-eleven landing on the taxiway at LGW one night? After the incident BIA became widely known as Bung It Anywhere.......

[DC2 slf]

"The National Transportation Safety Board's report concluded that "the flight crew's misidentification of the parallel taxiway as the active runway" led to the mistake, but added that night lighting conditions were a contributing factor."

http://wcbstv.com/local/newark.taxiway (http://wcbstv.com/local/newark.taxiway.landing.2.689698.html).landing.2.689698.html (http://wcbstv.com/local/newark.taxiway.landing.2.689698.html)


The report says the taxiway lights were green and brighter than the white runway lights. Ordinary colour blindness makes green indistinguishable from red (but white?). There is no mention of any check of the crew's vision before returning them to duty. The brightness of the lights has been readjusted.

[JuniorMan]

It amazes me how much brighter the green taxiway centerline lights are than the runway edge lights at Newark. Additionally, the fact that an airport as busy as Newark has NO taxiway edge lights is ridiculous. The New York/New Jersey Port Authority has to share some blame IMHO.