BA pilot at it again at Dublin
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFUZ6oHBft4 Here we are again, BA being extremely rude to a controller at Dublin all the other pilot's reaction are absolutely hilarious! :D

Controller f**cked it up. Gave Push/start with no conditional on the speed bird, just to the Aer Lingus (atr??). All she was going after that was covering her own ass and still went on to contradict herself. No need for the BA pilot to discuss it on the RT though - file an MOR and let the investigators sort it out

Many years ago, I "messed up" badly with vectoring an AUR SH360 to what I had hoped would be a short final. The idea being to save him time & get me out of vectoring problems with following a/c. He had to go round, so no one gained, & my problems increased. I was embarrassed by this, but the only course of action was to make an abject apology - which was graciously accepted. (In actual fact, I think the Captain was a little surprised to have received it). There was, in my opinion, nothing to be gained by an investigation. I learned plenty from the experience & I never did it again; & the Captain was satisfied to have me accept culpability & to have made the apology.
Nowadays, would we inevitably have been into an official enquiry & disciplinary action? I don't think it was necessary, although I suppose you could say that other ATCOS would have gained from analyzing this event.

Despite having listened to the recording several times, I can't hear any words or sentiments from the BA pilot that could remotely be described as rude, which is more than can be said for some of the other comments on frequency.

That may be so, but their somewhat sycophantic expressions of support are directed to a ground controller who has just cleared a flight to push back into the path of another aircraft, prevented only by a vigilant tug crew.

Anyone used to Dublin knows only too well this kind of chaos is SOP. I'm the first to say that they are a little la de da at times but absolutely well done to the BA crew for remaining professional - the courtesy shown by informing the ATCO of their intention to file a report was lost on many.

The playground mentality shown by these eejits is pretty typical of an industry now increasingly populated by 121.5 dwelling man-babies. The flying career is being strangled by businesses that treat aircrew like muppets and you don't have to look far to see why.

Sort it out you lot - before the professionals all leave and you're left sucking your thumb. :ok:

100% agree with you Dave. Maybe Shannon ACC has an agenda here?

that's not quite true, they were both given conditional clearances and both of them had to wait on the same ryanair plane to park up on stand 125. If you look up dublin chart, you will see that technically BA should have been clear of conflict sooner than stobart and begin his push before him, but for some reason he didn't push. Once Stobart was cleared from conflict, it started pushing and our BA chap got upset for no reason whatsoever. It wouldn't have affected safety as the point Bravo is before point Charlie and once the push would have finished, It wouldn't have affected BA in any way..

also please keep in mind that we have a recording that's edited and originating from liveatc which hosts some 5-6 frequencies on the same feed. It's more than likely that we don't have a full conversation here, so making any sort of conclusions based on this alone is a bit silly

Well done the ATCO,fairly well done the BA....the other dicks I would have told to maintain R/T discipline.I'd expect better.

Funny how it's always BA at DUB :}

Does it really take both members of the flight deck to communicate with the ground crew??

One should be monitoring ATC at all times. I repeat, at all times. :ugh:

Well done that ATCO

BA Captain trying to throw his weight around.

If he was higher up the tree he would not be flying short taxi hops out of Dublin.

In opinion a gold plated arrogant star P*ll*ck.

Often found in supermarket car parks in the Thames valley on a Saturday morning:ok:

Just like a controller should never miss a call....like, maybe, because they're on a landline!

Let's get real! Maybe someone screwed something up. Maybe more than one person screwed something up. We all have a job to do and we all have priorities, some of which change with the situation. It was a good outcome - nothing got harmed except a bit of pride or whatever, maybe justifiably, maybe not. And everyone can screw something up, even on a good day! And on a less good day, little things can get to us all and we can behave in ways that are less than perfect.

It's hard to tell exactly what happened just from that recording - it could have been edited, who knows - but there were crossed transmissions that were not necessarily obvious to either the controller or crew (note to UK controllers - not everywhere do controllers have the luxury of off-air sidetone). And I don't know the layout of the aprons, or the comms between flightdeck and ground crew, so I'm not going to try to second guess what actually happened.

A report is going in - there's no reason to imagine that it will not be professionally investigated to find out what happened and to try and find ways to prevent a recurrence.

Controllers don't usually have any back up. Maybe an ATSA/ATCA if they're lucky and plugged in.

Flight deck by the nature of most modern airliners require two personnel at all times, therefore should be far less excuse to miss a call. In this instance, both pilots appear to have been caught out for not monitoring ATC. Do not need both to communicate with ground crew.

The recording makes it clear that the tug crew had already prudently aborted the pushback by the time the controller tried unsuccessfully to contact the BA crew, so by that stage the damage had been done (or, rather, avoided in this instance).

Well apart from clearing the pushback into the path of another aircraft, that is. :ugh:

So a pilot doing his job is now being abused online for commenting on a **** up by someone else and some muppet deems it necessary to post it online......
Shannon ATC .. if you are actually a controller and who I think you are you are an embarassment to our profession posting this ****......bullying a guy online for just doing his job.....and finding the unprofessional behavior and mobbing mentality of a group of idiots 'hilarious'

1:33
'I wasn't listening out because we were talking to the ground crew.'

Doesn't take 2 pilots to do that.

Whether the ATCO did or didn't actually tell or attempt to tell the BA crew about the other traffic (we don't know if video has been edited), the fact remains that the flight crew should but were not listening to ATC.

What if the ATCO did actually tell the BA to cancel push and they still didn't hear due to not listening. Hardly the ATCOs fault if crew can't maintain radio discipline.

A growing problem this summer!

Nobody is going to argue with that, but in this instance it's irrelevant to the sequence of events that unfolded, which would otherwise have been:

Ground: "Speedbird 81D, stop pushback due aircraft passing behind you"

BA: "Ground, we have already stopped thanks to the vigilance of the tug crew"

Ground: "Ah, OK"

Sorry Dave but you keep saying that and I disagree with you. I see it exactly as presented in Martin 123's post. Circumstances contributed more than the actual clearances given. One thing is for sure, the BA was not cleared to push into the Stobart. The BA was cleared to push BEFORE the Stobart. When Stobart got their push clearance they were given traffic information regarding the BA. What happened in actual fact is that BA pushed late and by this time Stobart had already started their push.

Pretty basic stuff, really.

Saying, in effect, "I couldn't hear you 'cos I wasn't listening to you" is ever so slightly pathetic. Quite a lot pathetic, actually.

Cazalet33,

Assuming you're a pilot, have you never missed a call?

You're a brave man, calling my wife pathetic...

PDR

Sorry Gonzo - I missed your post because I was talking to Cazalet.

PDR

I'm way out of currency here (and only ever as a PPL at that) but on a safety-related call isn't the ATCO supposed to get a readback, or at least an acknowledgement, before proceeding to anything else?

PDR

I've never admitted to not having listened when I have missed a call on a mandatory frequency.

I've certainly never filed a voyage report on the basis of not having listened to a call I did not hear.

How about you, Gonzo?

Hee hee!
:D

Edited to add: Are we allowed to laugh on this frequency?

Eyethenkyew...

PDR

Ah, so it's more the fact they said that they were talking to the ground crew rather than the fact they were?

I don't think this crew were going to file on that basis either. The pushback manoeuvre was stopped due to conflicting traffic, that's the basis for the report.


How about me, what? Have I missed a call? How would I know? I don't think I have. However, I have frequently ignored calls from aircraft (and co-ordination attempts from other ATCOs) intentionally because I was dealing with something else that, at that time, was a priority.
Much like, one might think, a ground crew telling flight crew that they were stopping the pushback because of traffic going behind. That might take priority over listening to Ground.

And what's your definition of a 'mandatory frequency'?

Good for you.

This erse (he wasn't Irish but I need to get around the autocensor) actually admitted that he wasn't even listening when he subsequently made an arse (dunno how I got away with that one!) of himself by bitching that he wasn't told.

Then we have to agree to differ. Based on the transcripts (which I acknowledge may be incomplete), the BA still had a valid clearance to push, conditional only on the RYR having passed behind, at the point in time when the ground crew stopped the pushback. However long he took to move off the stand doesn't alter that.

So in the absence (so far) of any recording of the controller instructing the BA to stop, or at least advising him of the conflict at the time she cleared the Stobart to push, I stand by my view.

No. The two should be synonymous, if the Nigel has any cred.


I don't feel any urge to make such a definition, but I'm quite sure that listening to Ground when manoeuvring on the ground would fit it. Aren't you?

It's stuff like this that makes me wish we had the same laws against putting ATC recordings on facetube and it's ilk that they have in the UK.

This is a partial recording, and even if it wasn't, we all have off days. I could make a mare of something and go home to find it all over the internet. Imagine dealing with that? Your kids getting stick in school because "your mummy/daddy nearly directed/flew an airplane into another airplane"

Bullsh*t

Una,

Doesn't stop them doing so though. However, it might stop news outlets embedding/playing the clips.

I agree, it would also stop the embarrassing speculation and judgement we can see in this thread.

Let's be honest, nobody has the full picture here. To have that right n ow you'd need to have been in the VCR, and in the cockpit.

Nobody was, therefore reports should be filed so it can be investigated.

It's not rocket science.

Shannon's remarkably gone quiet since stirring the pot!

:p
Bwahaha!

Can I say that on this frequency without being given 'time out'?

Embarrassing, innit?

Judging by the heavily edited version on youtube and the slightly longer version on the LiveATC.net archive there doesn't appear to have been any attempt by the controller to call the Speedbird before the push was stopped by the ground crew. Perhaps the BA crew should have been more honest and said "We weren't listening because we were too busy talking to the ground crew dealing with the screw up".

Actually depending on the circumstances, it could well require two pilots talking to the ground crew.


A new pilot in their early line training, operating the sector as PF, (meaning they're the one talking to ground, whilst PNF talks to ATC), may have never been to Dublin before so unfamiliar with the airfield, unfamiliar with what was going on around them, confused by another aircraft seemingly in conflict and the ground crew stopping the push when they weren't expecting it.

Training captain would be very wise to take up the communication with pushback crew, thus leaving ATC ground un-responded to.

I'm not saying that was the case here, but it is easily a possibility, and BA have been recruiting like mad, they have their FPP scheme with pilots who are fresh out of CPL training, plus a load of direct-entry type-rated pilots onto short haul with maybe not much more than 500 hours. Lots of training going all the time there.



Thing is, unless you're actually on a runway at the time, if you're on the ground and not moving, then listening to ATC and replying promptly are usually not (as) critical, when compared to other things (such as talking to the ground crew who just stopped your pushback before an accident occurred).

Just had a listen to the archive and I have come down on the side of the controller.
It took BA the best part of 4 mins to get moving. That was the problem. The ryanair they should have pushed behind was long gone and had been on the stand long enough for the ATR to push back and move behind the BA. The clipped warning call from ATC probably came about the same time that the BA started to move.

I have no axe to grind with BA, I think their crews are generally excellent but this wasn't their finest moment.

I'm not sure that's a valid conclusion based on the layout of Dublin. The BA is on stand 20something, the ATR is on 125 and I think the Ryanair is going to 200. That means the Ryanair is only going to pass behind the BA about 10 seconds before he passes behind the ATR. When the ATR gets his conditional push clearance he is still waiting for the Ryanair to pass behind. It's entirely plausible that the BA is still then waiting for the Ryanair to pass behind. There's only two minutes between the ATR getting his push clearance and the BA stopping. Add a minute for the Ryanair to pass behind the BA and you can easily get two aircraft pushing within the space of a minute, with a clear statement from the controller that the ATR was supposed to give way to the BA in the subsequent dialogue.

If the BAW is told the traffic is passing behind right to left and the Stobart is told in the amended conditional clearance( which they seem to have ignored) that the BAW is to their left then the RYR passes behind the Stobart first and the BAW has to wait.....or have I heard that incorrectly?

The BA would have been facing south and the Stobart facing north. Stand 125 is east of the BA and the inbound Ryanairs stand is south east of 125. So the inbound Ryanair would have passed behind the BA from their right shoulder to their left, then behind the Stobart from their left shoulder to their right. The BA would always have been on the left of the Stobart if the stands are correct.