"Close encounter between two simultaneously departing aircraft on crossing runways"
Thread Starter
"Close encounter between two simultaneously departing aircraft on crossing runways"
Zurich, last Tuesday morning (15th)
With the exception of AvHerald, this doesn't seem to have been picked up by any of the mainstream aviation press:
www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/airprox/SWR1326_SWR202W.pdf
Is this such a common occurrence nowadays that it's no longer newsworthy ?
With the exception of AvHerald, this doesn't seem to have been picked up by any of the mainstream aviation press:
www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/airprox/SWR1326_SWR202W.pdf
Is this such a common occurrence nowadays that it's no longer newsworthy ?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 62
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Dave,
relax...
wait and see what the incident report will say.
Until now there is nothing to brodcast.
Or do you want to read just more stupid headlines?
eg.
"It is possible that two aircraft flew on a close path but we do not know anything."
???
relax...
wait and see what the incident report will say.
Until now there is nothing to brodcast.
Or do you want to read just more stupid headlines?
eg.
"It is possible that two aircraft flew on a close path but we do not know anything."
???
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: up north
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It did make the Swiss Press, including the free papers. I saw one edition where one aircraft was reported to abort take off when the crew realised that another a/c had been given clearance at the same time.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not liking to speculate, but if there is going to be a crossing runway incident, or worse, ZRH is high up on my list of where it might occur.
Partly due to the terrain / buildings (28 for departure, you cannot see 16/34 thresholds and v-v)... but some human factors too
Partly due to the terrain / buildings (28 for departure, you cannot see 16/34 thresholds and v-v)... but some human factors too
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Danger - Deep Excavation
Posts: 338
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't a witness
But my source said
R/W 28 vs R/W 16 - one of them had to hit the brakes and needed some cool-down time before departing.
Slightly surprised it was 2 Swiss machines who obviously know the potential for this kind of incident better than most.
But on the other hand "familiarity can breed complacency"...
R/W 28 vs R/W 16 - one of them had to hit the brakes and needed some cool-down time before departing.
Slightly surprised it was 2 Swiss machines who obviously know the potential for this kind of incident better than most.
But on the other hand "familiarity can breed complacency"...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the one that hit the brakes is the one bound for MAD, I most likely know a PAX in this flight. She's a friend of a relative, and she told that they had to wait three hours and change some tyre. (This is second hand info relayed by my relative).
Thread Starter
If the one that hit the brakes is the one bound for MAD, I most likely know a PAX in this flight. She's a friend of a relative, and she told that they had to wait three hours and change some tyre. (This is second hand info relayed by my relative).
The departing flight on 16 was LX1326/SWR1326.
I suspect that as well as changing some wheels, new underwear might well have been required.
