PPRuNe Forums - SWA lands at wrong airport.

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- North America (https://www.pprune.org/north-america-43/)

- - SWA lands at wrong airport. (https://www.pprune.org/north-america/531795-swa-lands-wrong-airport.html)

GG: Ref choice of words. Reminds me of the change from PNF to PM. Redefining the job description without redefining the job (the guy/gal not flying should always monitor, regardless of their title). Whatever works for you...as long as you don't screw the pooch.

I would rather select the FAF or straight-in IAF for an approach to a familiar or unfamiliar airport, day or night, and use that as a confirming reference for intercepting final to the correct airport. Especially important at night...

Glendalegood - Excellent post. Here's another trap that I have come across a few times:

APP: XYZ123, field is at 2 o'clock 15 miles.
PNF looks out the window: XYZ123, field in sight.
APP: XYZ123, cleared visual approach.
PF: Wait, what? Where is it?

Let's at least make sure I can see AN airport, and preferably THE airport before WE call it in sight.

Quote:

From the latest taxonomy categories this and other WRONG rwy / wrong airport mishaps will be logged as NAV coding -- but that code seems deceptive, since such wrong-Rwy cases don't fit naturally as a "navigation" err; seems more of a mis-perception.

Ending up somwhere other than where they thought they were doesn't constitute a navigation error?

Interesting argument.

they were used with cat iii autoland

and yes I remember when 727's for a certain airline with a face on the tail allowing for hand flown landings.

Quote:

I can't speak for southwest airlines. But with our HUD equipped planes the HUD is only used for CATll/CATlll ILS approaches.

You are saying that currently the HUD is used for lower than CATI. There was no mention of the past or MD80s.

So why aren't they now being used for other phases such as low vis takeoffs or visual approaches?

Let me clarify for you rozy. My airline has gone through 3 mergers recently.

Some planes from some part of the combined new airline are equipped with new HUDS.

Others have been retired with older huds. OUR OPS SPECS for the older planes (and they are the only planes with HUDS on our ops specs since our mergers have not been completed to the point of the operations side) req'd the use of HUDS for the approaches I've mentioned.

Now, I can understand if this is a bit too complicated to really understand. We basically have three airlines, now all called the same name, but three different pilot contracts, different OPS SPECS, different Planes and equipment.

IF Southwest uses their HUD for everything. Great. OUr old ops specs didn't allow for this.

I am offering this as southwest may not have used their hud to land at the wrong airport.

DO YOU know if the HUD is always used at airports without ILS by southwest?

Quote:

they were used with cat iii autoland

and yes I remember when 727's for a certain airline with a face on the tail allowing for hand flown landings.

We currently do hand flown CATIII with the HUD, 737-8.

The HGS at WN can be used for any phase of flight, any airport. The use is only mandated for CATII or III or takeoff below 400 RVR.

The HUD is required for takeoff and landing at Alaska Airlines in the -800, -900, and -900ER because it provides symbology to help avoid tail strikes. It is encourage or at least not discouraged for all other models. We also use the HGS for Low visibility ops in conjunction with the auto land system. Either or both can be used for low vis ops. But auto land used with the HGS gives us the lowest minimums which vary by airport.

The HUD is left side only in the 737, or?

The HUD (HGS) is only on the left side of SWA 737.

Thanks jpjp, someone correct me if wrong, but I seem to recall that HUDs are only certified on the LH side in B737s. So according to Alaska procedure, the Capt either needs to do all takeoffs/landings in -800/-900 or monitor them throught the HUD? Kinda awkward? Or maybe not. Never used a HUD.

I found this article in the Las Vegas Review journal today. Thought it was pertinent to this thread.

The last sentence of the article especially tickled a little :rolleyes:

Report: Pilots often head to wrong airports | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Why... it was written by a reporter, and the alleged quote from the captain is just that.

Quote:

The last sentence of the article especially tickled a little

Quote:

In some reports, pilots said they were saved from making a wrong airport landing by an alert controller. That was the case for an MD-80 captain who nearly landed his mid-sized airliner at Page Field, a small airport in Fort Myers, Fla., used mainly by private pilots, instead of the much larger Southwest Florida International Airport nearby. A controller caught the mistake in time and suggested the captain explain the detour by telling passengers the flight was “touring downtown” Fort Myers.

“I was pretty shaken as to what could have happened and was very glad to have an understanding, helpful (controller),” the captain said. “They (controllers) said there would be no problem with (the FAA) and that this was a common occurrence.”

Quote:

Why... it was written by a reporter, and the alleged quote from the captain is just that.

The crew quotes in the AP article seem to all come from anonymous NASA reports. The idea is that you will candidly share your misadventure with others and help prevent future mistakes. As an incentive, you are offered some protection from FAA enforcement actions:

Quote:

c. Enforcement Restrictions. The FAA considers the filing of a report with NASA concerning an incident or occurrence involving a violation of 49 U.S.C. subtitle VII or the 14 CFR to be indicative of a constructive attitude.

Such an attitude will tend to prevent future violations. Accordingly, although a finding of violation may be made, neither a civil penalty nor certificate suspension will be imposed if:

1.The violation was inadvertent and not deliberate;

2.The violation did not involve a criminal offense, accident, or action under 49 U.S.C. § 44709, which discloses a lack of qualification or competency, which is wholly excluded from this policy;

3.The person has not been found in any prior FAA enforcement action to have committed a violation of 49 U.S.C. subtitle VII, or any regulation promulgated there for a period of 5 years prior to the date of occurrence; and

4.The person proves that, within 10 days after the violation, or date when the person became aware or should have been aware of the violation, he or she completed and delivered or mailed a written report of the incident or occurrence to NASA.

ASRS - Aviation Safety Reporting System

The anonymity is very questionable in the case of a major incident like the Southwest landing at PLK. News crews have harvested new details of a mishap from NASA reports and used 'sources have told Eyewitness News' to cover their tracks. The union safety folks always say file ASAP and NASA reports, 'it will protect you'. However in a couple of cases I'm familiar with the crew felt like details given in voluntary submissions were used to generate additional lines of attack from the feds.

Happens too often.

[url=http://www.independent.ie/world-news/pilots-landing-gaffes-29996934.html]Pilots' landing gaffes - Independent.ie[/url

Runway condition is also a worry when a plane makes a mistaken approach. When an air traffic controller clears a plane to land on a specific runway, “you know you pretty much have a clear shot at a couple of miles of smooth concrete,” said Rory Kay, a training captain at a major airline. “If you choose to land somewhere else, then all bets are off. There could be a bloody big hole in the middle of the runway. There could be a barrier across it. There could be vehicles working on it.” ....Lucky.