Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Latest LAX ATC Error Reported on 29 Dec

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Latest LAX ATC Error Reported on 29 Dec

Old 29th Dec 2007, 13:36
  #1 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
Latest LAX ATC Error Reported on 29 Dec

Reported that a Mexicana 319 was cleared for Take Off after an arrived AA MD-80 had (incorrectly) read back they were about to cross the active while taxi-ing back in.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071229/D8TR16UO0.html


...The runway incursion Wednesday night involved an American Airlines plane arriving from Mexico and a Mexicana Airlines plane preparing for takeoff. The arriving plane, an MD-80 from San Jose del Cabo, had just landed on the outer runway and was about to cross the inner runway, where an Airbus A319 was about to take off for Morelia, Mexico, according to Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Ian Gregor.

The traffic controller told the American Airlines pilot to stop before crossing the inner runway, Gregor said. The pilot apparently misheard the direction and read back that he would go ahead and cross the runway. The controller did not catch the pilot's statement and cleared the Mexicana flight for takeoff before realizing that the American Airlines jetliner was about to roll onto the runway, the FAA said.

The controller immediately told both pilots to stop. No injuries were reported...
Two's in is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2007, 17:55
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wasn't this sort of thing sorted out close to a century ago at the average crossroad by means of traffic lights?

Sure, people ignore traffic lights.

But in this case it would seem there weren't any......
Apart from a missed R/T call.
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2007, 20:07
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No an excuse ... BUT ... It doesn't help that LAX will not tell you your landing runway until very close in, often evolving a complex RNAV step descent over high terrain from the east (that's is different for each runway), and they often change the landing runway once on the STAR ..

Makes briefing taxiing almost impossible, and confusion will inevitably occur ...
noblues is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2007, 20:57
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
noblues...you are brilliant

you said it...LAX...give me a break...tell me which runway I get before I leave 10,000' so I can brief it and the taxi route

below 10,000 I want to be heads up looking for traffic, established on the localizer and at safe altitudes.


I think the FAA should monitor this website.
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2007, 23:53
  #5 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What difference does knowing which runway you will receive in regard to a runway incursion?
Dream Land is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 00:18
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it allows you to refresh your knowledge of the airport, expecting a certain turnoff is easier if you know which runway you will land upon...knowledge is power

I've seen many pilots do a great landing in difficult conditions and then go blank at the idea of finding a taxi route that is unexpected.
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 01:04
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: home
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Never was a big believer in spending much time briefing expected taxi routes, especially at LAX where it's always different. Causes one to go "blank" if you don't get what you briefed. Look at your chart and just do what the tower tells you to do. Regards getting the runway assignment early in LAX, how will that prevent incurrsions? Why not just brief that when landing on the outer, stop before crossing the inner unless both are absolutely sure they heard the command to cross. Better to get yelled at for stopping than the alternative.
portquartercv67 is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 01:45
  #8 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why not just brief that when landing on the outer, stop before crossing the inner unless both are absolutely sure they heard the command to cross. Better to get yelled at for stopping than the alternative.
Exactly.

And the Mark I eyeball needs to scan to the left prior to crossing. Problem is - it's on an angle so the first officer is blind in that direction.
Huck is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 02:34
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If the information supplied is correct, then the coverage of the event is not, at least from our favorite sources. Assuming we are talking about something happening at LAX 27 Dec 07 at ca. 0442Z, the exchange might have gone something like this:
(I make no claims as to the accuracy of this transcription. It certainly isn't complete, since two tower frequencies step on each other, and I don't include the other traffic, except for the fun with Alaska. So the critical read at the start is fragmentary)Anyway, knock yourselves out. You know where to find the recording.
12:46 TWR: ... cross runway 25right, remain on this frequency
12:48 AA260: Cross runway (mumbles 25) right, remain on this frequency (this whole call has been reduced to a handful of syllables) American 260
12:58 TWR: Mexicana 129 wind 340 to 12 gusts 23, caution wake turbulence departing heavy MD10, runway 25R cleared for takeoff.
13:05 MX128: cleared for takeoff 25R Mexicana 129
13:08 TWR: alaska 225 *(say again?)
13:10 ALaska225: Alaska 225 still with you
13:13 TWR: Alaska 225 wind now 340 to 11 gusts 23
13:16 225:Alaska 225 cleared to land, correct?
13:18 TWR: Affirmative cleared to land runway ... run... 25 Left Alaska 225
13:34 TWR: Mexicana 129 cancel takeoff clearance
13:36 MX129: Stopping Mexicana 129
13:38 AA260: American 260 we're crossing right?
13:43 mx129:TWR: American 260 you can cross runway 25 right now, contact ground .75
13:45 AA260 Ground .75
14:24 TWR: Mexicana 129 wind 340 to 11 gust 22 runway 25R cleared for takeoff
14:28 MX128: cleared for takeoff 25R Mexicana 129
15:31 TWR: Mexicana 129 thanks for the help good job contact SoCal departure so long sir
15:34 contact departure Mexicana 129 good day

Last edited by DingerX; 30th Dec 2007 at 10:19. Reason: reread article: 8000 feet was the separation.
DingerX is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 03:27
  #10 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dinger,

Brilliant intervention! Thanks.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 03:59
  #11 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, an apparent non event, still don't understand why stop bars wouldn't work for the FAA in certain areas such as the high speed between 24 L and R.
Dream Land is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2007, 09:19
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Issuing a crossing clearance to an active runway and a take-off clearance for the same runway, all within 10 seconds - I wouldn't call this a non-event, albeit from a different perspective than originally posted
threemiles is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2007, 15:33
  #13 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,264
Received 180 Likes on 106 Posts
And bear in mind that the t/o clearance had been issued for 25 odd seconds before it was canx.... quite a lot of time!
PPRuNeUser0211 is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 09:46
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting that this thread is titled Latest LAX ATC error....my reading of the text is that the Mexicana pilot failed to comply with an ATC clearance. Why ATC should have to take a fall for a pilot that cannot understand English would keep my local "kerosene corner" bar going all night!

OK it's about the read-back but I would contend that relying on read backs for clearance compliance in the runway/taxiway environment at airports such as LAX belongs with the DC4's it grew up with...on the scrap heap. If we are to rely on radio then pilots have to first listen (For Wilbur's sake this is LAX!!) and secondly be able to understand what they are being told.

On the constructive side, as someone points out, we solved this problem years ago at rail/road crossings and road intersections. Barriers and lights at these high risk areas (hotspots?) have the same effect that stop lights would have at LAX, they slow operations down! They leave the car driver and the train driver in no doubt about who has right of way. LAX runway crossings are no different to your local really busy crossroad when all the Mums are taking the kids to school. (We all know one.) Would you be happy if the local laws allowed a policemen to control the intersection by radio, relying only on read backs to ensure safety?

On paper the controllers are motivated solely by safety, in practice they are the keepers of the airport movement rate, mess with that and you will quickly find yourself back on clearance delivery. Once upon a time powerful ATC and Pilot Unions backed their members up but since R.Raygun, western governments have turned us all in to profit centres, where the needs of the consumer, airline AND airport are paramount.

Take the bus!
MrApproach is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 10:56
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Limbricht
Posts: 2,193
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
MrApproach, how the heck do you figure that the MXA had failed to comply with an ATC clearance or that the pilot had failed to understand the clearance? Or have I missed something?
Avman is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 11:17
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Backabeyond
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What am I missing here? All I see are two conflicting clearances.
Yossarian is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 12:27
  #17 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yossarian,

I can't see that you're missing anything.

I guess someone took a little longer than the controller was expecting at a particular point in time, so the controller amended a clearance to resolve the conflict. Isn't this just what controllers do every day at work? No right, no wrong, 100% routine.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 14:07
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Backabeyond
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PBL, glad to hear it. Amazing that so much can be made of so little. Almost as bad as the newspapers,.

Hope no-one dropped their I-phone when they braked.
Yossarian is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 15:16
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a controller, I find it quite worrying that there are so many replies to this thread saying that there was nothing wrong here and that it should be considered routine.

If that were to happen in the UK, then it would be considered far more seriously - and i say that not in a "We're superior" way but as a comment on how to improve runway safety. There are a lot of elements that lead to an incident like this, no single one being attributable to either side, but there are learning points here that could prevent it escalating into something far more serious - and to write it off as a routine event is, for me, the most disturbing part of this thread.

P7
Point Seven is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2008, 15:49
  #20 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Point Seven,

I'm happy to stand corrected; you're there, I'm not. On the other hand I flew for over a decade in the U.S. West (but not into LAX, Runway-Incursion Capital of the World), so I likely have some experience which you don't.

Would you care to elaborate on your view of what went on and what would happen if this happened in the U.K.?

PBL
PBL is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.