NTSB Investigating Near Midair Collision at JFK
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Thread Starter
NTSB Investigating Near Midair Collision at JFK
NTSB Advisory
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
July 8, 2008
NTSB INVESTIGATING NEAR MIDAIR COLLISION IN NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating a near midair collision in New York City in which two airliners came in close proximity to one another.
On July 5, 2008, 8:36 pm eastern daylight time, Cayman Airways flight 792, a Boeing 737-300, and a Linea Aerea Nacional de Chile flight 533, Boeing 767-300, almost collided at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), according to initial reports.
The Cayman Airways flight, on approach to runway 22L, was executing a missed approach and conflicted with the Linea Aeroea Navional de Chile flight that was departing runway 13R. Tower controllers intervened to attempt to resolve the conflict, assigning both aircraft diverging headings. The closest proximity of the two aircraft has not yet been determined. At the time of the incident, the weather was VFR with 6 miles visibility and haze.
There were no reported injuries or damage to the aircraft.
A preliminary report of the incident will be available on the Board's web later this week.
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
July 8, 2008
NTSB INVESTIGATING NEAR MIDAIR COLLISION IN NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating a near midair collision in New York City in which two airliners came in close proximity to one another.
On July 5, 2008, 8:36 pm eastern daylight time, Cayman Airways flight 792, a Boeing 737-300, and a Linea Aerea Nacional de Chile flight 533, Boeing 767-300, almost collided at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), according to initial reports.
The Cayman Airways flight, on approach to runway 22L, was executing a missed approach and conflicted with the Linea Aeroea Navional de Chile flight that was departing runway 13R. Tower controllers intervened to attempt to resolve the conflict, assigning both aircraft diverging headings. The closest proximity of the two aircraft has not yet been determined. At the time of the incident, the weather was VFR with 6 miles visibility and haze.
There were no reported injuries or damage to the aircraft.
A preliminary report of the incident will be available on the Board's web later this week.
Some additional from AP (edited to remove duplication with original post):
"Federal Aviation Administration officials said Monday the planes came no closer than 300 feet vertically and no more than a half-mile horizontally. But air traffic controllers said the planes came within 100 feet vertically and there was no observable distance horizontally between them, sending the controllers scrambling to put the planes on divergent headings.
“Tower controllers intervened to attempt to resolve the conflict, assigning both aircraft diverging headings,” NTSB said. “The closest proximity of the two aircraft has not yet been determined.”
A spokesman for Cayman Airways said the company is disputing the classification of the incident as a near airborne collision.
“We’re treating it as a non-issue,” said Olson Anderson, the airline’s vice president of flight operations.
According to Anderson, the pilot of Flight 792 said the plane’s Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, or TCAS, did not issue a warning. TCAS analyzes the projected flight path of approaching aircraft to alert pilots to potential collisions.
But Doug Church, a spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said the three controllers in Westbury, N.Y., who observed the incident told him they saw the two planes converge from two blips to a single blip on their radar.
The planes “passed on top of each other ... There was nothing discernible in terms of any space,” Church said. “It sank the hearts of every one of them. It was something they had never seen in 70 combined years of experience.”
"Federal Aviation Administration officials said Monday the planes came no closer than 300 feet vertically and no more than a half-mile horizontally. But air traffic controllers said the planes came within 100 feet vertically and there was no observable distance horizontally between them, sending the controllers scrambling to put the planes on divergent headings.
“Tower controllers intervened to attempt to resolve the conflict, assigning both aircraft diverging headings,” NTSB said. “The closest proximity of the two aircraft has not yet been determined.”
A spokesman for Cayman Airways said the company is disputing the classification of the incident as a near airborne collision.
“We’re treating it as a non-issue,” said Olson Anderson, the airline’s vice president of flight operations.
According to Anderson, the pilot of Flight 792 said the plane’s Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, or TCAS, did not issue a warning. TCAS analyzes the projected flight path of approaching aircraft to alert pilots to potential collisions.
But Doug Church, a spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said the three controllers in Westbury, N.Y., who observed the incident told him they saw the two planes converge from two blips to a single blip on their radar.
The planes “passed on top of each other ... There was nothing discernible in terms of any space,” Church said. “It sank the hearts of every one of them. It was something they had never seen in 70 combined years of experience.”
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
The Cayman Airways flight, on approach to runway 22L, was executing a missed approach and conflicted with the Linea Aeroea Navional de Chile flight that was departing runway 13R
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen and been involved with similar situations at Heathrow between traffic landing on 23 and 27L.... No problem. Controllers don't "scramble" to sort out problems. Providing the aircraft can be clearly seen by the controller(s) concerned there is no laid down separation standard and clear instructions are issued to resolve any conflict. Surely experienced pilots know this?
I don't understand the bit about the controllers seeing the flights merge on radar. It was daylight and "VFR" so were these tower controllers or radar controllers downstairs in the dark? Tower controllers simply look out of the window to see that aircraft are safe - the fact that they may merge on radar is irrelevant.
Sounds so much like the "4 seconds from disaster" situation I was involved with at Heathrow. Nobody knew about it until the trash papers' 6 inch headlines next day.
I don't understand the bit about the controllers seeing the flights merge on radar. It was daylight and "VFR" so were these tower controllers or radar controllers downstairs in the dark? Tower controllers simply look out of the window to see that aircraft are safe - the fact that they may merge on radar is irrelevant.
Sounds so much like the "4 seconds from disaster" situation I was involved with at Heathrow. Nobody knew about it until the trash papers' 6 inch headlines next day.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: cloud 9
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same 'close proximity' happened in the 90's when a BA 747 -100 went around from the VOR 22L and conflicted with a departing a/c from 13R. That was not 70 years ago! Some people have short memories.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: on safari
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But Doug Church, a spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said the three controllers in Westbury, N.Y., who observed the incident told him they saw the two planes converge from two blips to a single blip on their radar.
The planes “passed on top of each other ... There was nothing discernible in terms of any space,” Church said. “It sank the hearts of every one of them. It was something they had never seen in 70 combined years of experience.”
The planes “passed on top of each other ... There was nothing discernible in terms of any space,” Church said. “It sank the hearts of every one of them. It was something they had never seen in 70 combined years of experience.”
Who cares what the radar controllers thought? A radar blip can measure up to half a nautical mile wide depending on the range of the display.When these nasty situations happen, it's the tower controllers who have to resolve it by looking out the window. Been in the tower, done that.
Of course I don't want to take anything away from the seriousness of an incident like this, but that comment really makes me wonder...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is all a bit silly - I remember before fully processed radars were introduced (not that long ago at some military establishments) that when the book stated for certain situations that we had to provide 5000' separation between aircraft and blips could not merge we often wound in from a 40 or 60 mile range to a 5 or 10 mile one and turned the gain down - to prove the required gap... obviously we had to be bored to be bothered to do it... it's down to interpretation and knowing the relevant rules...
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
too much news
this "news" is symptomatic of how these days there is too many news channels trying to fill too many radio slots, podcasts,web pages,24hour tv etc etc!
I'm in amazement with the BBC right now about the "child thrown out of wedding story". Okay so a wedding someplace 2 weeks ago, a screaming child was asked to leave as he was disrupting a service. Why is this news?!
So far the BBC has had this as a call in item on Radio 2, has had on news.bbc.co.uk and has started a "have you say" chat thing on the web. It's ridiculous how much rubbish they have to persue to fill the space they've created (at our demand I suppose).
All these near misses and so forth are merely symptomatic of this, and I suppose it's going to get worse. Almost as bad as watching American TV with ad's every 2 minutes.
G
I'm in amazement with the BBC right now about the "child thrown out of wedding story". Okay so a wedding someplace 2 weeks ago, a screaming child was asked to leave as he was disrupting a service. Why is this news?!
So far the BBC has had this as a call in item on Radio 2, has had on news.bbc.co.uk and has started a "have you say" chat thing on the web. It's ridiculous how much rubbish they have to persue to fill the space they've created (at our demand I suppose).
All these near misses and so forth are merely symptomatic of this, and I suppose it's going to get worse. Almost as bad as watching American TV with ad's every 2 minutes.
G
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Too far from the equator
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ho hum , another near miss after a go around at JFK , not the first , certainly not the last . Still the airport I fear most - the scene of my worst RA thanks to the controllers.
Almost as bad as watching American TV with ad's every 2 minutes.
I would suggest tatthe majority of contributors to this thread so far have not operated into or out of JFK.
This airport is without doubt the biggest shambles in the western world. Their management of runway changes is laughable!
Their management of multiple runway ops is a joke!
Anyone recently timed their departure rate? - pathetic!
The comments of - well it was daylight, never mind that the blips merged is perhaps based on an assumption of service that is sadly lacking at JFK.
This airport is without doubt the biggest shambles in the western world. Their management of runway changes is laughable!
Their management of multiple runway ops is a joke!
Anyone recently timed their departure rate? - pathetic!
The comments of - well it was daylight, never mind that the blips merged is perhaps based on an assumption of service that is sadly lacking at JFK.
Flaps62...Yep, it is not without some degree of irony that JFK is now known to many of our outfit's Eastern Seaboard regulars as "Lagos-West".
I can accept it's a busy place and know that the ATCers are under a hell of a lot of pressure but whenever somebody decides using 13R for departure and the 22's for arrival they are setting themselves up for the sort of "event" described in the first post (and I accept that decision is probably buried in the midsts of time or whenever it was the preferential runway allocation was decided).
Standing by to be flamed by the "come to the States then you should bring your A game" brigade.
I can accept it's a busy place and know that the ATCers are under a hell of a lot of pressure but whenever somebody decides using 13R for departure and the 22's for arrival they are setting themselves up for the sort of "event" described in the first post (and I accept that decision is probably buried in the midsts of time or whenever it was the preferential runway allocation was decided).
Standing by to be flamed by the "come to the States then you should bring your A game" brigade.
Last edited by wiggy; 9th Jul 2008 at 22:24.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ditto flaps 62.
jfk = amateur hell hole.
recently heard of an American Airlines asking for a ground controller change as the guy sounded like he was either on crack or in the middle of a nervous breakdown!
as for their idea of controlling the merging of AC on to the CRI when it's busy, poor weather and getting dark...... do they use darts or a horoscope? track miles, u must be kidding, i doubt they even know till your over the lead in's!
if it wasn't for the wonderful friendly TSA staff, the ease of the road journey into town and the warm welcome that new yorkers keep for visitors i'd avoid it at all costs!
jfk = amateur hell hole.
recently heard of an American Airlines asking for a ground controller change as the guy sounded like he was either on crack or in the middle of a nervous breakdown!
as for their idea of controlling the merging of AC on to the CRI when it's busy, poor weather and getting dark...... do they use darts or a horoscope? track miles, u must be kidding, i doubt they even know till your over the lead in's!
if it wasn't for the wonderful friendly TSA staff, the ease of the road journey into town and the warm welcome that new yorkers keep for visitors i'd avoid it at all costs!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: ingerland
Age: 42
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard it on the archives and it didnt seem too bad...they had lots of time to say their stuff even before headings were given...the cuban maintained 1000ft as atc instructed...the tower had time to tell him about 3 secs later that they need a hard left turn...
he talks to the other aircraft explains
"traffic is on missed approach off of 22L he's turning south start your right turn to 170 now...Aircraft "starting 170 now"...
That's it...there was a little tremour going in his voice but it seemed ok especially if they had a 6 sec gap from talking to cuban and the other
he talks to the other aircraft explains
"traffic is on missed approach off of 22L he's turning south start your right turn to 170 now...Aircraft "starting 170 now"...
That's it...there was a little tremour going in his voice but it seemed ok especially if they had a 6 sec gap from talking to cuban and the other
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the record, the ATC tape is here: http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kj...2008-0030Z.mp3
The incident is at about 6 minutes into the tape.
It gives me the impression that at JFK they just sequence the traffic in minimum possible spacing for each runway not taking into account what would happen in case of a go-around. Can this sort of near midair potentially happen anytime there is a go-around with this runway configuration or there must have been another factor in this case?
The incident is at about 6 minutes into the tape.
It gives me the impression that at JFK they just sequence the traffic in minimum possible spacing for each runway not taking into account what would happen in case of a go-around. Can this sort of near midair potentially happen anytime there is a go-around with this runway configuration or there must have been another factor in this case?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: canberra
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What separation applied
Why were the tower controllers not applying crossing runway separation standards? I know the black stuff (the physical runways) does not actually intercept, but the OLS and the PANS OPS areas for the two runways would definitely intercept. This would make them crossing runways as far as ICAO is concerned, so why not the FAA?
If you apply the ICAO crossing runway standards then you take into account go-rounds. I understand that the FAA has its own rule book but.........
If you apply the ICAO crossing runway standards then you take into account go-rounds. I understand that the FAA has its own rule book but.........
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To set the record strait the BAW 747 that went around on ry 22l was a 400 and the reason he went around was that the ac recieved and a ccepted a frequency change to the tower, never checked on the frequency and went around due not having a landing clearance, The 13r departure was a Tower Air 747-200 going to the west coast.
To Flip62 I'm sure that Lagos doesn't run 1400 flights a day with another airport 8 miles away called LaGuardia perhaps you've heard of it. If you would like to share some of your runway and traffic management suggestions I'll be more than happy to listen them face to face while giving you a tour of the tower and showing you first hand the operation.
Just to give you that happy feeling next time you fly into the states remember that the atc system has lost almost 3,000 atco's in the last few years and at JFK 40% of the atco's are trainees.
To "the heavy heavy" the same invitation apply's to you I would welcome the oppportunity to show you the game from the other side of the glass an I even promise not to tell everyone that you think we are all a bunch of amateurs.