Close call + ATC link at JFK

[CYTN]

https://simpleflying.com/delta-757-jfk-collision/

[KelvinD]

I had seen/heard this on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI2rJhdvguc

[fox niner]

Jfk atc think they are doing a hell of a job, but in reality I regularly have “issues” with them. Too much chatter, too much non-standard RT. They snap at you, although operating in your WOCL, as if you are a beginner. Quite insulting really..
Dont have that experience anywhere else, not even in China.

[double_barrel]

In this case, it seems tough to blame just the pilot for that dreadful ATC procedure. They tacked an irrelevant question onto the end of a critical hold-short instruction and ignored the lack of a read-back.

[the_stranger]

Jfk atc think they are doing a hell of a job, but in reality I regularly have “issues” with them. Too much chatter, too much non-standard RT. They snap at you, although operating in your WOCL, as if you are a beginner. Quite insulting really..
Dont have that experience anywhere else, not even in China.
The biggest issue I encounter at JFK is that the controllers almost never listen to what a pilot is saying back after a clearance.

Numerous times I hear a readback which is clearly wrong but there never is a correction until the airplane goes the wrong way.

To balance this, I had many times where I was impressed by a controller during the chaos of snow/storm, but if they just slow down a bit and listen if their instructions are actually recieved (correctly), things would be soooo much better.

[Avman]

Because these ATC links generally monitor two or more frequencies, I don't think that the clip above provides the entire exchange between all parties involved.

[AndoniP]

so delta 300 heard "cleared to cross" and supposedly read back this instruction? neither happened. big error there

[Avman]

AndoniP Read my post above yours. That may well be why.

[CW247]

They snap at you, although operating in your WOCL

The day when a major accident occurs is unfortunately just around the corner. And the two biggest contributors will be a hasty and bad tempered ATC and European/Asian pilots operating at their bedtime-o'clock.

[jmmoric]

In this case, it seems tough to blame just the pilot for that dreadful ATC procedure. They tacked an irrelevant question onto the end of a critical hold-short instruction and ignored the lack of a read-back.

I don't know if the question is irrelevant, since I don't know the operations at the airport.

If anything, stressing "hold short of XXX...." before asking a question, should keep the crew attention on the taxi of the aircraft, while answering the question, is not that bad a tactic.

The ICAO and the EASA action plan for the prevention of runway incursions, both have good pointers, they both stress that ATC clearances should be given before taxi, and if any changes, (indirectly) wait until the aircraft is at the holding point before giving them, using the "hold position" first, again to stress it.

https://www.icao.int/safety/RunwaySafety/Documents%20and%20Toolkits/ICAO_manual_prev_RI.pdf
https://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/4093.pdf

So you can argue for both, since the question was not a clearance.

The ATCO did not challenge the lack of readback.

On another note, 2 aircraft operating on the same runway on 2 different frequencies..... I personally don't like that, cause beside looking down the runway before crossing, it also givesthe pilots the option of hearing what is going on on said runway.

[jmmoric]

so delta 300 heard "cleared to cross" and supposedly read back this instruction? neither happened. big error there

My guess is the pilots are talking about a previous instruction, whereas the controller is talking about the one we can hear from the tape.

We are missing the part from where the aircraft was given it's initial taxi instruction after landing, so.... bad youtube video not showing the entirety of the communication.

It also sounds like 2 different voices replying to the controller, so maybe there's a change in communication from one pilot, to the other at some point... but we cannot hear that without the entirety of the communication.

[Jcmcgoo]

As a balanced observation id agree with the standard of control relating JFK. Notwithstanding it is a very busy field, with numerous runways, with other airfields in close proximity. that said and generally speaking from my own experiences operating in and out of JFK that there does seem to be a bit of a gung ho attitude going on.

An oft observed comment being that it would be a good idea to second elements of the JFK team into the London TMA and stints at Gatwick and Heathrow to try to encourage a more balanced and tolerant operation amid a busy and congested zone and airfields

I do understand ther JFK controllers have a very busy and difficult job but there certainly room for improvement in some areas of the overall operation.

In this particular case, ultimately the fault lies with the crew. however the controller side certainly was a factor.

[golfbananajam]

I can't answer for the pilot, but I had to replay the original call from ATC several times before I understood it. Her speech was so quick it was hard to hear just what was said. If I had been the crew of the subject aircraft I'd have probably responded "say again" and then maybe even "say again slowly".

All that said, there was definitely no "cleared to cross" in the video/audio in post 2.

[jack-daw]

Because these ATC links generally monitor two or more frequencies, I don't think that the clip above provides the entire exchange between all parties involved.
Yes, there are comments below the video on Youtube that criticise the deceiving editing of the video.
Any comments here on 'non read-back' are now irrelevant.
Link to full recording from Youtube commenter:
"Larry Keene:
He actually DID readback the "Hold Short" instructions. Someone above posted this link to an extended version of the recording. The readback is right around 3:45"
I can't post a link so search the comment above for his link.

[Good Business Sense]

Used to brief crew before TOD - "they talk quicker than I can listen"

[jmmoric]

All that said, there was definitely no "cleared to cross" in the video/audio in post 2.

Like I said in my previous post, it could be in the initial taxi instruction given after landing. That part is not included in the youtube video, hence.... bad video.

[MikeSnow]

Like I said in my previous post, it could be in the initial taxi instruction given after landing. That part is not included in the youtube video, hence.... bad video.

I listened to the full recording on the liveatc site. The quality is quite poor, so I'm not entirely sure this is what was said, but this is what I've heard about a minute earlier:


Tower: Delta 300 exit Juliet hold short of runway two two right remain on this frequency.
Delta 300: OK Alpha and Juliet hold short of two two right Delta ... 300


I should mention that this exchange was in the middle of a sequence of clearances to cross 22R given to 5 other Delta aircraft that were holding short of 22R.

[Intrance]

Yes, there are comments below the video on Youtube that criticise the deceiving editing of the video.
Any comments here on 'non read-back' are now irrelevant.
Link to full recording from Youtube commenter:
"Larry Keene:
He actually DID readback the "Hold Short" instructions. Someone above posted this link to an extended version of the recording. The readback is right around 3:45"
I can't post a link so search the comment above for his link.

The suggested full recording;

https://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjfk/KJFK-Twr-Jan-10-2020-2330Z.mp3?fbclid=IwAR0-4Za_wxmWsnvJcO3NC4n9Jmfvuwth0HQ4zqyGM5rb3_Fvu_qyJsHYyJ0

However, this part is missing the whole “what gate do you have” transmission.

So 22L controller clears Delta 300 to proceed on Juliet, I assume after vacating the runway, then hold short of runway 22R. This is read back correctly by Delta 300. The next part in the “full recording” is where they are getting yelled at for already crossing.

So the “hold short and what is your gate” transmission would be a repeat of an already given and acknowledged clearance if my timeline is correct. Possibly not read back because of that. Also possibly the trigger for one of them to be sure that they’re cleared to cross as you kind of expect clearances in a certain sequence. After a hold short clearance you are naturally primed to expect a cleared to cross clearance.

Human factors and the rapid fire non-standard ATC... bad combination. I’m sure the controllers can manage a bunch but it would be great if they could do so in a standardized manner at an airport like JFK. I’d also expect a handoff to the 22R controller for the crossing, seems like the smarter way to handle that.

[Sobelena]

Sorry, but the above live ATC link posted by Intrance is not the full uninterrupted transcript of a single frequency. It is, as mentioned by Avman, a combination of frequencies.

[Intrance]

Just to be clear, I did not suggest anywhere that it was a single frequency recording. It is simply the archived LiveATC combined recording that does feature a readback by Delta 300 to hold short, but somehow does not feature the "hold short and what is your gate" transmission from the 22L controller. If the Delta did get a clearance to cross like they said they received and read back, it would have been in a rougly 1 minute gap between their read back of the hold short clearance and the actually crossing.

[Uplinker]

KJFK is large and busy but so is EGLL, and EGKK is busy, yet the controllers are calm and clear. Ditto LFPG and EHAM, to name two other large airports.

Some US controllers talk as if their hair is on fire - like the lady on the tape from 3 mins in and the guy from about 10 mins - and I never really know if this is because they are stressed or are trying to impress someone. Indeed, they even abbreviate frequency readouts to “tower point one” or whatever to save time, but if they really need to speak so quickly, somebody needs to reorganise the way they operate the airfield.

In this case though Delta 300 is clearly heard being instructed to “hold short”, and he clearly reads back the hold short restriction.

[Goth]

One human factor influence I'm wondering about is that he's asked for his gate number and it happens to be 22 - and whether that mentally becomes permission to cross runway 22?

[wiedehopf]

There are recordings for 123.9 (departure runway 22R) and 119.1 (arrival runway 22L) available in the archives at: https://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=jfk

119.1: https://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjfk/KJFK-Twr-1191-Jan-10-2020-2330Z.mp3
123.9: https://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjfk/KJFK-Twr-1239-Jan-10-2020-2330Z.mp3

119.1 is the frequency where the hold short instructions were given.
The first hold short after exiting the runway was read back correctly.
The 2nd hold short instruction, followed by the question as to the gate, was answered by a single word transmission without callsign: "22".
The controller did not challenge the missing readback.

As usual more than one mistake is necessary, luckily the 3rd hole didn't line up and the plane on takeoff roll was instructed to abort (123.9).

This is obviously not the full picture, there could still be pieces missing from what was said.
Maybe the pilot even let go of the button, one can't say for certain without the CPR and the tapes from the tower.
But this is not the NTSB, so speculate is all that we can do.

[RoyHudd]

A ground collision will happen before long at JFK/KJFK. Likely in the dark. Reasons will be unintelligible and rapid-fire ATC, non-U.S pilots, badly marked taxiways, multiple frequency changes, and 2 crew a/c monitoring and transmitting/responding on 2 separate frequencies at the same time. Non-standard is standard at that place. The airport is a shambles. FAA should be ashamed, as should the airport authorities. KORD is not much better. Whereas KLAS, KSFO, and even KLAX are streets ahead. My thoughts, having narrowly avoided a ground collision due to a 747 taxiing across us at high speed incorrectly, due to a wrong clearance from Ground.

[Uplinker]

Quite agree. A very dangerous practice is the aircraft having to call Ramp on box two to find their gate, while they have just vacated the runway and are reconfiguring and taxiing around a very large and complicated airport - instead of ATC Ground simply looking it up.

So one pilot has to taxi and deal with the rapid fire radio calls - and doesn't have a spare hand to write anything down - while the other pilot is away on box two trying to find out the gate number. Absolute madness, and frankly very dangerous at a big busy airport.

Ground control must, or should, have access to a screen displaying the gate numbers, and they really should stop asking the aircraft to get this information.

Also what is Ramp all about?? I know it is owned by a different authority, but Ground should deal with that.

[misd-agin]

I've flown out of JFK for 40 yrs. The controllers speak to fast, especially to foreign carriers. Years ago at some airports it seemed like it was a contest to see how fast they could speak on the ATIS recording. Nothing like having to listen multiple times to get all the information. Ridiculous. JFK ground appears to be of the same mindset. If they slowed down slightly they'd have less "say again".

[atr-drivr]

How about when you get to a parallel rwy, regardless what was said on the radio, LOOK OUT THE F_ING WINDOW AND SEE IF THERE IS PLANE POINTED AT YOU!!! Pilot since 1978 and a controller for 17 yrs. Yes, JFK talks fast, as do many places so it is no different. You land on 22L, turn off the runway the TWR controller will say “ABC123, right turn on JULIET, hold short of 22R”. When you are actually given an INSTRUCTION to cross 22R the phraseology will be ‘ABC123, CROSS 22R, right on BRAVO monitor ground .9”. PERIOD!! The controller will NEVER say ‘’ABC123 you are CLEARED to cross 22R, right on BRAVO monitor ground .9”. It is the difference between a CLEARANCE and an INSTRUCTION. All of you who say ‘Ok, ABC123, cleared to cross 22R, right on Bravo monitor ground” are part of the problem. “CLEARED TO LAND”, CLEARED FOR TAKEOFF” are the only times you will get a “clearance” from TWR. ANY runway crossings will be an INSTRUCTION, big difference. One word, TENERIFE.

[Uplinker]

How about when you get to a parallel rwy, regardless what was said on the radio, LOOK OUT THE F_ING WINDOW AND SEE IF THERE IS PLANE POINTED AT YOU!!! .

Oh, I never thought of doing that !

Seriously though, at night, or in poor vis; a large unfamiliar airport, multiple long runways, aircraft and lights in the far distance, it is not always easy to be sure*, hence why we rely on ATC. You are ATC, so it all makes a lot more sense to you, but not all pilots are familiar with airports they fly to. Add the totally unnecessary machine gun delivery of some controllers, the requirement to separately speak to Ramp on box two and it is a confusing and difficult place to be. As some have pointed out, having to discuss your gate as you leave the runway is potentially dangerous, since more numbers and radio calls and read-backs are being added to the mix. Get rid of all the gate number conversations and the frequency would be much less cluttered, and probably a lot safer.

I personally think the instruction "Stop" should be introduced, and the designation of the stop point. So something like; "Taxi Bravo, Delta, Stop at Delta Seven". The runway designation itself should perhaps only be mentioned when you are being instructed to cross it or line up on it.




*Do you remember the decapitation of a pilot at CDG by the wing of an aircraft taking off, and they most certainly WERE looking to check if there was an aircraft on the runway.

[nike]

Having landed at JFK after 15 hours...looking out to the right into a sea of lights, darkness and rain and spotting what might be an aircraft rolling 1-2kms distance away means I have to rely on ATC & my FO...."LOOKING OUT THE F@$!ING WINDOW"......yes it's done.....but it ain't the magic elixir you're selling.



Someone mentioned earlier....removing the requirement to contact ramp on box 2 would be a step in the right direction.

Get the port authority to give the gate info directly to ATC would be one less distraction after landing.

At the very least ATC might delay the gate info request from us until after crossing an active runway.

Here's hoping any lessons learnt result in positive changes to JFK ATC.

[jmmoric]

Let your company give ramp a call, get the number and forward it on the company frequency 30 miles out?

[misd-agin]

SOP - don't contact other frequencies (ramp, company) until clear of ALL crossing runways. It's been that way for decades. Obviously some ASSUME ing going on when you cross an active runway after being told to hold short. When in doubt ask. Almost every incident has some of these factors involved.

[back to Boeing]

SOP - don't contact other frequencies (ramp, company) until clear of ALL crossing runways. It's been that way for decades. Obviously some ASSUME ing going on when you cross an active runway after being told to hold short. When in doubt ask. Almost every incident has some of these factors involved.

you ever been at JFK and air traffic asks you what gate you’re going to and you answer “dunno”. Added to that they’ll expect you to tell them if the gate is free or not. Again what do you think will happen if you answer “dunno”

[chuboy]

For an airport like JFK to not be using RT that is perfectly ICAO compliant is simply indefensible. That's the bottom line. It's the same "Yanks do it better, put up or shut up" attitude that has landed Boeing in very hot water.

Not to mention, the aircraft involved in this event were not even foreign. It's only a matter of time.

[Skipping Classes]

For an airport like JFK to not be using RT that is perfectly ICAO compliant is simply indefensible. That's the bottom line. It's the same "Yanks do it better, put up or shut up" attitude that has landed Boeing in very hot water.

Not to mention, the aircraft involved in this event were not even foreign. It's only a matter of time.

Not to mention nobody is even bothered anymore that here's no call-sign in every call, which is not optional.

[pilotmike]

regardless what was said on the radio, LOOK OUT THE F_ING WINDOW AND SEE IF THERE IS PLANE POINTED AT YOU!!! ..... One word, TENERIFE.
That almost worked out perfectly, didn't it??!! :suspect:

[Sobelena]

LOOK OUT THE F_ING WINDOW AND SEE IF THERE IS PLANE POINTED AT YOU!!!

That, as was the case in Tenerife by the way, depends on the visibility at the time.

[Uplinker]

Almost every pilot crew room I have ever worked in, and every terminal of every airport have screens showing which flights are on which gates.

KJFK : please get a screen the Ground controller(s) can see so they know where to send us without having to ask.

Our company forbids active pilots making non vital radio calls after TOD, and this includes calls to agents and Ramp. So unless we are a heavy crew we have to wait until on the ground, unless we get an ACARS message, (which we don't).

Both pilots are required to closely monitor the taxi phase, especially at large, complicated and confusing airports, so having one pilot leaving box one to talk on box two is potentially dangerous.

[atr-drivr]

Almost every pilot crew room I have ever worked in, and every terminal of every airport have screens showing which flights are on which gates.

KJFK : please get a screen the Ground controller(s) can see so they know where to send us without having to ask.

Our company forbids active pilots making non vital radio calls after TOD, and this includes calls to agents and Ramp. So unless we are a heavy crew we have to wait until on the ground, unless we get an ACARS message, (which we don't).

Both pilots are required to closely monitor the taxi phase, especially at large, complicated and confusing airports, so having one pilot leaving box one to talk on box two is potentially dangerous.

UP, problem with that is at least for our airline is, that a gate change could make the entry point at different locations. I have had plenty of times a change after we cross 22R and are on BRAVO where we had to call GND and let them know so they can manage the traffic flow. I personally now on initial contact with TWR let them know of our intended entry point. They make a note and it saves extra transmissions when on the ground....that’s just me.

[Uplinker]

Yeah, there are things we all try to do to mitigate problems as much as possible. If you radio Ramp at 30nm or more out to find your gate and you tell Tower which entry point on landing, by which time the gate has changed.........you are back to square one.

If Tower and Ground had a screen they could glance at* when you vacate the runway and see where your gate is, they could simply issue taxi instructions without the extra "which is your gate" question and answer. clogging up the airwaves. Many other airfields manage to do this, and I assume that KJFK have very experienced ATCOs, so surely not beyond their capability ?

My point is ATC should be directing us, not the other way round.

I usually find KJFK difficult, and assumed it was me being thick, but others are saying they find it difficult too.

*Actually, isn't the gate written on the strip, electronic or otherwise?

[WHBM]

I've flown out of JFK for 40 yrs. The controllers speak to fast, especially to foreign carriers. Years ago at some airports it seemed like it was a contest to see how fast they could speak on the ATIS recording. Nothing like having to listen multiple times to get all the information. Ridiculous. JFK ground appears to be of the same mindset. If they slowed down slightly they'd have less "say again".
It's not only busy places. I have to cross a fairly quiet USAF base zone from time to time, nothing else on frequency but such rapid staccato gabbling to me, as if they are practicing for a Speed Dating contest, and for some reason in a monotone as well.

[atr-drivr]

Yeah, there are things we all try to do to mitigate problems as much as possible. If you radio Ramp at 30nm or more out to find your gate and you tell Tower which entry point on landing, by which time the gate has changed.........you are back to square one.

If Tower and Ground had a screen they could glance at* when you vacate the runway and see where your gate is, they could simply issue taxi instructions without the extra "which is your gate" question and answer. clogging up the airwaves. Many other airfields manage to do this, and I assume that KJFK have very experienced ATCOs, so surely not beyond their capability ?

My point is ATC should be directing us, not the other way round.

I usually find KJFK difficult, and assumed it was me being thick, but others are saying they find it difficult too.

*Actually, isn't the gate written on the strip, electronic or otherwise?

UP, no because ATC has no control over terminal gate assignment. In JFK the IAT will assign gates usually based on what is available at the time as i understand it. The less they have control over the the better they like it. If the terminal is pretty much one airline, Ramp control for said airline runs that, not to say that is the best operation. I have sat on the ramp waiting for the ‘assigned gate’ for over 50 minutes with more than a dozen open...🙄. Unless you can get right in to your ramp area, GND will drive you around the airport to keep traffic moving. So when they ask your gate assignment after you land, they can work out the best/efficient way of getting you in while getting the outbounds to the RWY.

[CW247]

Yep, that's precisely the point...Time to change those rubbish ways. For safety's sake:
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1032x578/dontreinventthemap_6ba62b8ba05d4957d2ed772584d7e4cd_9e288ad0 336fa2a108b4568ea9acc942d7344121.png

[Uplinker]

@atr-drivr

Hi, I think we are talking at cross purposes. I am not talking about who controls gate assignments, I am talking about how that information gets to the Ground controller.

Everything you are talking about could be done much more safely by ATC Ground either looking on a screen or by the ATC Ground assistant phoning Ramp on the landline or intercom.

I am simply saying that the taxiing aircraft crews themselves should not have to contact Ramp on box 2 during a high workload situation at a challenging airfield that requires a very good lookout with both pairs of eyes, and both pairs of ears listening to the taxi instructions.

[Loose rivets]

After twenty years of flying on a UK licence, I finally took my ATP. I'd lived in the US for chunks of my life but still found ATC a very real problem. It struck me they were vying for a Joe Cool award - with extra points for quantity.


Uplinker.
. . . Some US controllers talk as if their hair is on fire . . . and I never really know if this is because they are stressed or are trying to impress someone . . .

[Bergerie1]

Trying to impress!

[HM79]

The reason for the question of gate assignment is to be able to provide a taxi instruction towards the appropriate ramp entrance. The introduction of a taxi instruction that will point the aircraft away from the entrance will lead to ac stopping in the intersection and questioning the ground controller. There was a certain large foreign flag carrier that would routinely land on 31R, exit at the taxiway which connected to the primary entrance to their terminal and stop, not clear of the runway. The crew was talking to the ramp as the following aircraft was sent around.

[Dan Dare]

It just seems rather tail-wagging-dog to ask the pilots where they’re going. Would it be too complex to create a system where the controllers already KNOW where the aircraft need to Park? Perhaps some sort of data transfer system between the airlines, airport and ATC*. Seems to work in other parts of the world.

*that’ll be $2m in consultancy fees please payable in Bitcoin

[Uplinker]

Ahem, I thought of it first ! see posts #25 and #39 :)

However, as you say, at every other airport in the Northern hemisphere (I have ever operated to or from): Ground knows where my gate is without having to ask, and they send us the right way.

[anson harris]

Ahem, I thought of it first ! see posts #25 and #39 :)

However, as you say, at every other airport in the Northern hemisphere (I have ever operated to or from): Ground knows where my gate is without having to ask, and they send us the right way.

"But the company owns the ramp!". Guess what: nobody cares who owns the ramp.
And Northern Hemisphere? It's the entire world isn't it? If they can manage it in Mumbai, I'm pretty sure they can in New York too.

[BRUpax]

Going back nearly 50 years: a British-registered B707 is descending into LAX. The Capt is a Polish war veteran who flew in the RAF so English is not his first language. LAX Approach are giving them (and many other flights) a continual stream of vectors and altitude changes, all delivered in machine-gun staccato in non-ICAO English. Exasperated Capt turns to F/O and plaintively says: "Chris, what is happening?"

Sounds like Capt Jeziorski. Nice guy!

[ATC Watcher]

It just seems rather tail-wagging-dog to ask the pilots where they’re going. Would it be too complex to create a system where the controllers already KNOW where the aircraft need to Park? Perhaps some sort of data transfer system between the airlines, airport and ATC*. Seems to work in other parts of the world.

*that’ll be $2m in consultancy fees please payable in Bitcoin
In Europe it exists , it is called SWIM .( a Eurocontrol tool )
The main issue as I see it , is that , in many large airports nowadays , ATC manages only the maneuvering area (runways-taxi ways) , and a separate (private) company manages the apron and the gates. In a very large airport ( like JFK) gate management is complex and ATC tries to get rid of it. Sending an aircraft to the wrong gate or worse, a gate already occupied and you can block everything. ATC got rid of than problem and in my view is unlikely to ask for it back.
As to US controllers speaking too fast and in slang, I witnessed once an Iberia A340-600 subjected to this who just stopped taxing, when the controller asked him why he stopped, he replied ." If you can speak slower I can taxi faster."..

[Bergerie1]

If a few more pilots did that, maybe US ATCOs might learn!!

[Capt PPRuNe]

Thankfully, I rarely have to operate in and out of JFK these days as that route is on a different fleet. However, every time I have operated in and out of JFK I still start a 'threat and error management briefing' with "third world* ATC, including Ground Control" and that it needs mitigating.

Fully agree with all the comments above that point out how absurd it is for pilots to have to go to another frequency immediately after landing in order to tell ATC what gate they're expecting to park on and whether that gate is occupied or not. I just wonder how many times that problem and the associated danger has been highlighted to the FAA or other authorities. No doubt when a major accident occurs, this will be one of the major holes that lined up as a causal factor.

* Apologies to third world ATC where I doubt it is ever quite that bad although accents can be troublesome at times.