Heathrow Near Miss Report
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well. S'cuse me if I sound a bit cynical here, but I wonder how long that arrangement would last, if all the above were provided for journos. ...probably until the first time some tabloid hack witnesses a relatively minor incident and the next day's headlines read "PLANE IN NEAR DISASTER".
But of course, that would never happen would it ?
But of course, that would never happen would it ?
Guest
Posts: n/a
True that you can't expect journos to get it right all the time - and let's be honest we don't really want them to know all the jargon and be able to report aviation incidents from an aviators point of view. They write article for Joe Public to be able to understand.
However "An air traffic controller - blamed in a damning report for allowing the potentially tragic situation to develop". I am sure we are all very impressed by the ability of the greaseball hacks at The Sun to aportion blame - but I would like to see one of them trying to do the job of a Heathrow tower controller.
However "An air traffic controller - blamed in a damning report for allowing the potentially tragic situation to develop". I am sure we are all very impressed by the ability of the greaseball hacks at The Sun to aportion blame - but I would like to see one of them trying to do the job of a Heathrow tower controller.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Its not just the quality of reporting, using paraphrasing and losing the meaning entirely that leaves a lot to be desired, but the graphics as well.
I saw several of yesterday's papers efforts and none were great, but The Mirror managed to have the two aircraft concerned pointing at each other!
What else do they get so very, very wrong?
I saw several of yesterday's papers efforts and none were great, but The Mirror managed to have the two aircraft concerned pointing at each other!
What else do they get so very, very wrong?
Guest
Posts: n/a
the crew of 'Midland One November Zulu' saw an aircraft indicating on TCAS at about two miles range from their position; they did not have visual contact with the aircraft
Would you have accepted the line up instruction with another aircraft less than 30 seconds from touchdown ?
------------------
"How can we soar like eagles when we're surrounded by turkeys"
Would you have accepted the line up instruction with another aircraft less than 30 seconds from touchdown ?
------------------
"How can we soar like eagles when we're surrounded by turkeys"
Guest
Posts: n/a
"the pilot wasnt doing anything wrong..he was just following company procedure"
This is a classic case of good airmanship playing second fiddle to piddling company SOP's.I hope the AAIB take BM to town on this oversight.You take an active runway,you put your strobe light on.
Suppose the BM had lined up without clearance and visibility had been even worse than 6k..now only the BA pilots can retrieve the situation..and without the strobe light,the catastrophe would have been inevitable.
This is a classic case of good airmanship playing second fiddle to piddling company SOP's.I hope the AAIB take BM to town on this oversight.You take an active runway,you put your strobe light on.
Suppose the BM had lined up without clearance and visibility had been even worse than 6k..now only the BA pilots can retrieve the situation..and without the strobe light,the catastrophe would have been inevitable.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wedge,
I think you give Sun reporters too much credibility, in suggesting that they have the intelligence to "apportion blame".
I think you will find that this was actually done by the AAIB report - see 3(b) - Causes.
The "best" headline I saw was something like - "Pax in runway terror". Now correct me if I am wrong, but would any of the pax in either aircraft have known exactly what was happening "at the time of the incident", to put them in a state of "terror"?
[This message has been edited by newswatcher (edited 14 June 2001).]
I think you give Sun reporters too much credibility, in suggesting that they have the intelligence to "apportion blame".
I think you will find that this was actually done by the AAIB report - see 3(b) - Causes.
The "best" headline I saw was something like - "Pax in runway terror". Now correct me if I am wrong, but would any of the pax in either aircraft have known exactly what was happening "at the time of the incident", to put them in a state of "terror"?
[This message has been edited by newswatcher (edited 14 June 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'd like to agree with/ expand on Hotdogs comments earlier.
Isn't there something in the UK ANO (or whatever has replaced it these days!) regarding the fact that the PIC of an aircraft can disobey/overule an ATC instruction if there is a risk of injury or death?? In this case, as the viz was quite good why did the BA pilot not initiate a go-around earlier, as soon as it became obvious that runway seperation was going to be comprimised? Perhaps he was apprehensive at having to try and justify his actions to management after spending a few quid on a go-around?? Or on the other hand did he just not make the right decision? I wonder if he would have still landed if the controller had not told him to go around? If he had landed and the BM a/c had aborted its T/O, would the 747 have piled into the back of it?? Not just the controller who needs a bit of "retraining"!!!
Isn't there something in the UK ANO (or whatever has replaced it these days!) regarding the fact that the PIC of an aircraft can disobey/overule an ATC instruction if there is a risk of injury or death?? In this case, as the viz was quite good why did the BA pilot not initiate a go-around earlier, as soon as it became obvious that runway seperation was going to be comprimised? Perhaps he was apprehensive at having to try and justify his actions to management after spending a few quid on a go-around?? Or on the other hand did he just not make the right decision? I wonder if he would have still landed if the controller had not told him to go around? If he had landed and the BM a/c had aborted its T/O, would the 747 have piled into the back of it?? Not just the controller who needs a bit of "retraining"!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
The report makes good reading, much better than the Sun or the Mirror, and addresses just about all the questions asked here.
The report refers to comments on the RT from the BM Captain just after Nigel roared over his head dangling the Dunlop's.
What could possibly be judged "inappropriate" in the circumstances? The mind boggles, a lovely bit of British stiff upper lip understatement.
Has this incident had any effect on Nigel requesting or getting 09R's since?
The report refers to comments on the RT from the BM Captain just after Nigel roared over his head dangling the Dunlop's.
What could possibly be judged "inappropriate" in the circumstances? The mind boggles, a lovely bit of British stiff upper lip understatement.
Has this incident had any effect on Nigel requesting or getting 09R's since?
Guest
Posts: n/a
The AIB report does not seem to make any comment with repect to the conspicuity of the Midland aircraft on the runway other than the fact that strobes were not switched on.
I wonder whether a different colour scheme would have made the aircraft more conspicuous?
Having read the report I think it is quite understandable that the BA crew were under the impression that the other departing LH traffic was the traffic that was relevant to them. We should also remember that BA crews fly worldwide to other destinations which are just as busy as LHR, etc.
------------------
I wonder whether a different colour scheme would have made the aircraft more conspicuous?
Having read the report I think it is quite understandable that the BA crew were under the impression that the other departing LH traffic was the traffic that was relevant to them. We should also remember that BA crews fly worldwide to other destinations which are just as busy as LHR, etc.
------------------
