RUNWAY INCURSION

[topgun b737]

i just wanna know about "Conditional line-up clearances"
last time i had a flight , we was taxing to the holding point of the runway 03 at the airport of nantes atlantique. the ground controller told us to switch with the tower. i will write down all the communication between us and the tower, and i need to know if we were mistaken or the controller was?

TAN :tower, bonjour TAN224 ready for departure on sequance
TOWER: TAN224 do you have the TB10 en final in sight?
(just to give more details there was one light traffic en final 300 ft en final which it was in sight but we didn't know if it was a TB10 or no)
TAN: traffic en final in sight
TOWER: TAN224 behind the landing traffic en final , line up and wait behind
TAN224: behind the landing traffic en final , we line up and wait behind rwy 03
(after the traffic was landed, we enter the active runway . after switching the TCAS to TA/RA , we saw that there was one traffic 500ft , looking out side it'was a light a/c turning final)
TOWER:to the traffic whose landed: XYZ XYZ vacate the runway by the first right and expidite vacting
TOWER: to the traffic turning final ABC ABC go around go around
TOWER:TAN224 i told you to line up behind the TB10 not the BEECHCRAFT
TAN224: tower we are sorry about that but there was just one traffic en final

TOWER: TAN224 cleared for take off rwy 03 wind.....i will transmit a report to our management
TAN224: cleared for take off rwy 03 ,roger about the report

thank's

[mebur_verce]

Now that's extremely weird, although we only have a few details of what actually happened.

Besides being explicitly forbidden by the sacred texts (ICAO Doc 4444, para 12.2.7 "The aircraft or vehicle causing the condition in the clearance issued shall be the first aircraft/vehicle to pass in front of the other aircraft concerned"), giving a conditional line-up clearance behind the second landing traffic would be nothing but looking for trouble. Also, the need to specify both a/c types and positions seems to defeat the purpose of a conditional clearance, ie. making things more efficient and optimise RT use. Not to mention that your mind would have to remain focused on the holding point longer than normal, possibly overlooking other items in your priority list.

I once issued a conditional line-up clearance to a Falcon 2000, at night, CAVOK, with a sequence of 3 aircraft on the localiser, well visible from the holding point. I had a pretty good picture of the situation, but the crew didn't (which is absolutely normal: they don't have a radar, and it's not easy to evaluate distances at night), and they showed good airmanship by challenging my clearance and asking "Confirm it's a lineup behind the first landing traffic?". Even though a line-up behind the second aircraft would've been forbidden by the rules, they had a very valid point, IMHO.

[hangten]

Correct, in summary to the OP's question, the controller was incorrect to issue that clearance in the first place.

[topgun b737]

thank you for your replies,

i'm agree that the flight crew must develope good airmanship, but it'was the first time to happen for me"conditionel line up clearence" behind two traffic, that's way i am posting this event, otherwhise it's more clear now

[LoserGill]

Conditional clearance like that is a no-no :=.
Some countries don't allow conditionals at all.

[whitelighter]

Poor controlling. Conditional should only be given on the first aircraft.

Maybe occasionally in a taxing situation you might give after the 2nd conditional if both in sight and it's clear but for the runway it's just asking for trouble.

To be fair if you didn't know what a TB10 looks like (and I don't) then you perhaps should have sought confirmation, but I reckon even given that it 80% down to poor controlling

[mebur_verce]

i'm agree that the flight crew must develope good airmanship, but it'was the first time to happen for me"conditionel line up clearence" behind two traffic, that's way i am posting this event, otherwhise it's more clear now

Just to clarify: I didn't mean to imply that you did anything wrong, especially as you had no idea that there was more than one aircraft on final :ok:

As others have already said, that conditional clearance shouldn't have been issued, full stop.

[LEGAL TENDER]

...and the icing on the cake, takeoff clearance with report to management added in to the same transmission! :D

(Would the French investigators establish the fault was with the manufacturer of the headset microphones?)