Near Collision at BOS between Aer Lingus and US Air
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks SIDSTAR - I was wondering when this might get back to the topic being discussed.
I am neither pilot not ATC - just an enthusiast and infrequent traveller (many times to the US over the last 25 years)
Seems to me that someone with a headset on in a warm tower messed up big time, and all credit to the US Air crew for spotting the impending disaster and doing something about it. I hope their laundry service managed to get their uniform trousers cleaned.
I wonder if any of the poor self-loading cargo on either flight saw what was unfolding before their eyes? Scary.......
I am neither pilot not ATC - just an enthusiast and infrequent traveller (many times to the US over the last 25 years)
Seems to me that someone with a headset on in a warm tower messed up big time, and all credit to the US Air crew for spotting the impending disaster and doing something about it. I hope their laundry service managed to get their uniform trousers cleaned.
I wonder if any of the poor self-loading cargo on either flight saw what was unfolding before their eyes? Scary.......
Hi Bren, I was using AMF's own words but using them in the correct order. You are of course correct, it is "after the landing...."
(I've never really done tower)
Hope you're having fun in your retirement.
(I've never really done tower)
Hope you're having fun in your retirement.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is going way off topic, but anyway. I'm not a controller, just a humble ATP. I just checked with a very senior ATCO and he agrees with me that the correct phraseology is "behind", and this said as the first word and the last word in the transmission. Whether he is right or wrong, and whether this is safe or not, I can not judge. Maybe someone with current manuals can shed some light on this?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the UK CAP413 - Radiotelephony Manual
Having said that, as others have said, ATC should be failsafe, and it would appear that lessons have to be learnt at KBOS, the lessons may well be applicable USA-wide or even worldwide. The important thing is that the lesson is learnt by everyone and everywhere, 'cos we can't afford a repeat of a serious incident like this.
We (the system) got away with this one - just - thanks to alert pilot(s) and some very good luck - let's learn from it quickly and not be so pompous as to say that it couldn't happen where I work.
1.7.7 Conditional phrases will not be used for movements affecting the active runway(s),
except when the aircraft or vehicles concerned are seen by the controller and pilot.
Conditional clearances are to relate to one movement only and, in the case of landing
traffic, this must be the first aircraft on approach. A conditional instruction shall be
given as follows:
a) callsign;
b) the condition;
c) identification of subject of the condition;
d) the instruction.
The example given is:
ATC: Fastair 345, after the landing DC9, line up
except when the aircraft or vehicles concerned are seen by the controller and pilot.
Conditional clearances are to relate to one movement only and, in the case of landing
traffic, this must be the first aircraft on approach. A conditional instruction shall be
given as follows:
a) callsign;
b) the condition;
c) identification of subject of the condition;
d) the instruction.
The example given is:
ATC: Fastair 345, after the landing DC9, line up
We (the system) got away with this one - just - thanks to alert pilot(s) and some very good luck - let's learn from it quickly and not be so pompous as to say that it couldn't happen where I work.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H.Finn - Sorry your Very Senior Controller is wrong and you should tell him so. (Not surprising as most "Very Senior" controllers don't hold validations!)
I just checked the very latest Manual of ATC Services and the word "behind" is not used in any ATC instruction. For a conditional clearance the correct phrase is "After the departing..."
JW411 - I can only assume that you and your colleagues have some special dispensation at your unit, but be aware that saying "behind" is mega-dangerous!
I just checked the very latest Manual of ATC Services and the word "behind" is not used in any ATC instruction. For a conditional clearance the correct phrase is "After the departing..."
JW411 - I can only assume that you and your colleagues have some special dispensation at your unit, but be aware that saying "behind" is mega-dangerous!
HD:
I'm sorry but you are assuming that my home base is in UK. It is actually on the other side of La Manche and I am pretty sure that our controllers are operating EXACTLY in accordance with THEIR ATC manual.
In any event, "Behind the landing 747 line up and wait behind" is very self explanatory and I cannot see how it could be mis-interpreted.
Not everyone in the world operates in accordance with CAP 413 nor do I suppose that many of them have even heard of it.
I realise that you are shocked by my Concorde story but I think you just have to realise that things are handled quite differently in other parts of the world.
Things are very civilised in UK airspace but, believe me, if you decide to have a go at a JFK controller, then you had better be prepared to reap the whirlwind!
I'm sorry but you are assuming that my home base is in UK. It is actually on the other side of La Manche and I am pretty sure that our controllers are operating EXACTLY in accordance with THEIR ATC manual.
In any event, "Behind the landing 747 line up and wait behind" is very self explanatory and I cannot see how it could be mis-interpreted.
Not everyone in the world operates in accordance with CAP 413 nor do I suppose that many of them have even heard of it.
I realise that you are shocked by my Concorde story but I think you just have to realise that things are handled quite differently in other parts of the world.
Things are very civilised in UK airspace but, believe me, if you decide to have a go at a JFK controller, then you had better be prepared to reap the whirlwind!
Last edited by JW411; 28th Jun 2005 at 18:34.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bucks. UK
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The international standard phraseology uses the word "behind" at the start and the end of the line up clearance in the way described by H Finn. The UK has filed a difference with ICAO and uses the word "after" and only at the beginning of the line-up clearance.
brimstone:
Thank you for that; so it would appear that UK ATC is out of step with the rest of the world. So much for standardisation!
HD:
So could you just tell me now who exactly has got the special dispensation?
Thank you for that; so it would appear that UK ATC is out of step with the rest of the world. So much for standardisation!
HD:
So could you just tell me now who exactly has got the special dispensation?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you brimstone & JW411. So my kidneys, or whatever I have between my ears, still work at least partly.
Talking about standardisation, flying into Luton, which I used to do a lot, I wondered why they always told me to "descend with the glide", never cleared me for the ILS approach. Another UK difference?
BTW, this is not intended in any way to give a bad impression of the UK or London ATC. I think they are doing a great job in a busy enviroment. Just a question.
Talking about standardisation, flying into Luton, which I used to do a lot, I wondered why they always told me to "descend with the glide", never cleared me for the ILS approach. Another UK difference?
BTW, this is not intended in any way to give a bad impression of the UK or London ATC. I think they are doing a great job in a busy enviroment. Just a question.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sigh………..much more heat than light being generated here on a very serious topic. Looks like this was very close to being Tenerife II.
A possible (cockpit based) solution to prevent such mishaps in the future? Surface map and ADS-B. Technology is already there. But, unfortunately, in today’s airline economic climate, few safety devices will be added to aircraft without mandates (or lots of bodies - or both).
A possible (cockpit based) solution to prevent such mishaps in the future? Surface map and ADS-B. Technology is already there. But, unfortunately, in today’s airline economic climate, few safety devices will be added to aircraft without mandates (or lots of bodies - or both).
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411. Sorry - your profile suggests you are in the UK.
The word "behind" was changed to "after" in the UK many years ago following a very serious incident. A small a/c was told "Behind the departing line up". The pilot promptly taxied straight on to the runway and nearly ended up dead as the preceding jet opened up the taps. The phrase was changed in the hope that "After" suggested "after that aircraft has gone".
H.Finn. "Cleared for the ILS" has been done to death on here a million times. It's not used in the UK because pilots were descending to minimum height miles from touchdown - like the guy heading f0or Heathrow who went down to 1200 ft over Central London. At many UK airports (probably including Luton) there is a lot going on under the ILS and if pilots are going to shove straight down to 1200 ft at 12 miles out there will be a bang.
All of this is to do with SAFETY, which is all to do with trying to avoid the sort of situation which started this thread. I worked with these "UK eccentricities" for 90% of my working life and had no problems..
The word "behind" was changed to "after" in the UK many years ago following a very serious incident. A small a/c was told "Behind the departing line up". The pilot promptly taxied straight on to the runway and nearly ended up dead as the preceding jet opened up the taps. The phrase was changed in the hope that "After" suggested "after that aircraft has gone".
H.Finn. "Cleared for the ILS" has been done to death on here a million times. It's not used in the UK because pilots were descending to minimum height miles from touchdown - like the guy heading f0or Heathrow who went down to 1200 ft over Central London. At many UK airports (probably including Luton) there is a lot going on under the ILS and if pilots are going to shove straight down to 1200 ft at 12 miles out there will be a bang.
All of this is to do with SAFETY, which is all to do with trying to avoid the sort of situation which started this thread. I worked with these "UK eccentricities" for 90% of my working life and had no problems..
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Heathrow Director. Makes sense. But in this part of the world, Northern Europe, when cleared for ILS approach we don't descend to anything but initial approach altitude, while in USA when cleared for the ILS approach you are supposed to maintain the last cleared altitude until GS intercept. Used to cause problems for U.S. carriers in Helsinki, when cleared for ILS approach on a 30 degree intercept heading at 4000 ft, while the initial approach altitude is 2000 ft. Ended up on the localizer way above the GS. I guess we alll agree that there is generally room for global standardisation.
With the little experience I have from 30-odd years of flying, the problem areas of ATC lie not in the UK or USA, some other countries in the old continent as well as the new come to mind first. Unfortunately, some of them in Europe, partly due to language problems, but that is another topic.
With the little experience I have from 30-odd years of flying, the problem areas of ATC lie not in the UK or USA, some other countries in the old continent as well as the new come to mind first. Unfortunately, some of them in Europe, partly due to language problems, but that is another topic.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: England
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TO ALL AMERICANS HERE:
I amazed that noone has bothered to explain to you why the Europeans are having a go at your ATC. Please let me try.
Over here, we fly across many countries in a single sector, all of whom speak different languages. So, in order to be safe, it is DRILLED into us that standardised RT is mandatory. Anyone who deviates is considered UNSAFE.
For many of us, the only connection with our US counterparts is listening to them on the RT. And in one transmission, we can often hear enough errors to fail an entire sim ride.
"London, this is XXX123 passing flight level four fife climbing flight level niner zero radar heading zero niner zero degrees" becomes " 'merican twenny three forty five four nine oh goin' east" and we all just cringe.
So, on this basis alone, many assume "all US RT is dangerous".
Of course I'm not suggesting this, and I'm going to guess that other factors were in play in this incident, but this I think is the reason for the animosity.
Just so you know.
Stu
I amazed that noone has bothered to explain to you why the Europeans are having a go at your ATC. Please let me try.
Over here, we fly across many countries in a single sector, all of whom speak different languages. So, in order to be safe, it is DRILLED into us that standardised RT is mandatory. Anyone who deviates is considered UNSAFE.
For many of us, the only connection with our US counterparts is listening to them on the RT. And in one transmission, we can often hear enough errors to fail an entire sim ride.
"London, this is XXX123 passing flight level four fife climbing flight level niner zero radar heading zero niner zero degrees" becomes " 'merican twenny three forty five four nine oh goin' east" and we all just cringe.
So, on this basis alone, many assume "all US RT is dangerous".
Of course I'm not suggesting this, and I'm going to guess that other factors were in play in this incident, but this I think is the reason for the animosity.
Just so you know.
Stu
HD:
So you are telling me that just because some idiot in a PA28 took the runway immediately behind a 747 20 years ago and then got blown over the entire UK ATC system will continue to ban the use of the word "behind" despite what the rest of the world is doing?
I find that rather sad I'm afraid.
As to the ILS bit: when I am cleared for the ILS (for example in Gothenburg) that means that I am cleared to leave my assigned level and descend to the platform height (in this case 3000 ft) then intercept and capture the localiser and, when I have done that, follow the glide.
Who in their right mind would immediately descend to 200 feet apart from Ariana at Gatwick donkey's years ago before the days of approach bans?
If it is not too an impertinent question, when exactly did you retire for you seem to be a bit unwordly or out of touch?
So you are telling me that just because some idiot in a PA28 took the runway immediately behind a 747 20 years ago and then got blown over the entire UK ATC system will continue to ban the use of the word "behind" despite what the rest of the world is doing?
I find that rather sad I'm afraid.
As to the ILS bit: when I am cleared for the ILS (for example in Gothenburg) that means that I am cleared to leave my assigned level and descend to the platform height (in this case 3000 ft) then intercept and capture the localiser and, when I have done that, follow the glide.
Who in their right mind would immediately descend to 200 feet apart from Ariana at Gatwick donkey's years ago before the days of approach bans?
If it is not too an impertinent question, when exactly did you retire for you seem to be a bit unwordly or out of touch?
foxtrot xray
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H FINN
You are wrong about altitudes to be maintained in the USA relative to an ILS approach or any other published approach procedure.
Once cleared for an approach the last assigned altitude is maintained until established on a segment of the published approach at which time a descent is (can be) made to the charted altitude for that segment. GSIA occurs on the final segment and defines the FAF (usually but not always at or near the OM)
You are wrong about altitudes to be maintained in the USA relative to an ILS approach or any other published approach procedure.
Once cleared for an approach the last assigned altitude is maintained until established on a segment of the published approach at which time a descent is (can be) made to the charted altitude for that segment. GSIA occurs on the final segment and defines the FAF (usually but not always at or near the OM)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Staines
Age: 42
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"So you are telling me that just because some idiot in a PA28 took the runway immediately behind a 747 20 years ago and then got blown over the entire UK ATC system will continue to ban the use of the word "behind" despite what the rest of the world is doing?"
That is like saying that the only reason there is a cover over the evac alarm switch is that some "idiot" pressed it once when they shouldn't have. No, it's there so it can't be pressed accidentally in a momentary lapse of concentration. As has already been said, the phraseology is written to be "fail-safe". It just happens that the UK adapted to a flaw in the system and no-one else did. Changing the word "behind" to the word "after" is not a big deal, costs nothing and could save lives.
That is like saying that the only reason there is a cover over the evac alarm switch is that some "idiot" pressed it once when they shouldn't have. No, it's there so it can't be pressed accidentally in a momentary lapse of concentration. As has already been said, the phraseology is written to be "fail-safe". It just happens that the UK adapted to a flaw in the system and no-one else did. Changing the word "behind" to the word "after" is not a big deal, costs nothing and could save lives.
Guest
Posts: n/a
hey guys...you mentioned italian airports..well flying into MXP is no any different then CDG..if any the italian ATC will be polite and english speaking.
beside the respect that all those scared pax and crew deserve I just want to point out that regardless what you fly,I will never accept to fly an approach the way the ATC wants it if I feel unconfortable with it.
I fly the plane you fly the radar...
I slow down and I inform you,I take heading and I inform you...trying when I can do please them but my ars is on the deck while theirs is on the screen.
to bad that still too many of us keep thinking about manhood when is time to G/A or too slow down.
beside the respect that all those scared pax and crew deserve I just want to point out that regardless what you fly,I will never accept to fly an approach the way the ATC wants it if I feel unconfortable with it.
I fly the plane you fly the radar...
I slow down and I inform you,I take heading and I inform you...trying when I can do please them but my ars is on the deck while theirs is on the screen.
to bad that still too many of us keep thinking about manhood when is time to G/A or too slow down.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been flying in the USA for the last fifteen years in singles, twins, turbo props and now jets. I was based in JFK for three and a half years.
I've never had any of these problems, and I was born and raised and trained to fly in Australia.
I really don't see what the fuss is all about. The Logan controllers admitted an error, I'm sure the situation has been remedied.
I've never had any of these problems, and I was born and raised and trained to fly in Australia.
I really don't see what the fuss is all about. The Logan controllers admitted an error, I'm sure the situation has been remedied.