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

NTSB Investigating Near-Miss @ Burbank (merged)

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

NTSB Investigating Near-Miss @ Burbank (merged)

Old 25th Apr 2010, 02:26
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,483
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
My opinion? Don't mix ab initio students with big jets
we do and we don't; a student pilot is allowed in Class B.... but not really.... is how the law is written, because most fields don't allow it; and if it's allowed it's only because the departure route may extend through class B and it must be specially endorsed,...

in the USA once your a PPL; you're a pilot in command...period!
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 02:28
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,483
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
I hate to do this, but here YouTube - ATC@FRG - "77F get off the rwy!" (by aldo benitez)

definitely a problem here!!!!

and yes I know this is in every CRM-course

http://www.pprune.org/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=5656866
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 07:48
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's different across the pond!

Lots and lots of municipal airports mix light aircraft and big jets. Gives a certain frisson when ATC asks you to expedite as you are tooling down the centre line in your Cessna, because there is a 737 right behind you....

Nevertheless some habits built up at an uncontrolled airfield can come in handy. Accept the instruction, AND verify! comes to mind. I did get told off at Ann Arbor, Michigan, after a long long solo flight from New Jersey in a clapped out 152 with a horrible overhead speaker. Thought ATC told me to cross the active, actually he had asked me to hold short.

I crossed. And was asked to please telephone the tower as soon as shut down. Said he, "I told you to hold short!" Said I, "I'm very sorry, I misunderstood. But I did look out carefully to make sure nobody was coming!!"
mary meagher is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:37
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<I crossed. And was asked to please telephone the tower as soon as shut down. Said he, "I told you to hold short!" Said I, "I'm very sorry, I misunderstood. But I did look out carefully to make sure nobody was coming!!" >>

That, Mary, is the best thing I've ever heard to reinforce my opinion that you never mix clockwork mice with big jets!!
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:57
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
<<I crossed. And was asked to please telephone the tower as soon as shut down. Said he, "I told you to hold short!" Said I, "I'm very sorry, I misunderstood. But I did look out carefully to make sure nobody was coming!!" >>

That, Mary, is the best thing I've ever heard to reinforce my opinion that you never mix clockwork mice with big jets!!
So a mouse pilot doesn't correctly hear a clearance and the controller doesn't hear/appreciate the wrong read back. It is not like there is no history of Jet pilots misinterpreting clearances, crossing active runways, getting their flight number muddled, loosing track of the aircraft they are visually separating from, etc.

The US has a long track record of a globally leading safety record while maximising the use of aviation assets for all parts of the aviation community. And in this particular case, there is no indication either the Jet or mouse pilot did anything incorrectly (not even sure there is anything actually wrong at all - but we will wait for the NTSB who has the facts to make that conclusion).
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 09:29
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
PA,
in the USA once your a PPL; you're a pilot in command...period!
Yes, same in the UK. Nevertheless, a busy airport operating jet transports is not the place for a relatively inexperienced PPL.

Yes, one or two very good CRM reminders in your: http://www.pprune.org/editpost.php?d...post&p=5656866

mm_flynn,
It is not like there is no history of Jet pilots misinterpreting clearances, crossing active runways, getting their flight number muddled, loosing track of the aircraft they are visually separating from, etc.
Yup to all! and as an easily frightened Brit in the US, I usually declined 'Follow the . . . ' and elected to stay with radar vectors
Basil is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 10:05
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
mm flynn OK, but still find it scary that a pilot who may have been unsure of an instruction thinks it OK to "look out carefully to make sure nobody was coming!" and do what they think may be right..
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 10:21
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
HD

I hope the point Mary was making was 'just because ATC says its OK to do something you should have a good look to make sure'.

I have on several occasions been clear to land behind crossing traffic and from my perspective it looked a lot more like 'cleared to t-bone the crossing traffic' In these cases I have been quite happy to go around rather than try and make a tight crossing.


If the point was 'if unsure of what ATC said, guess but take a look and see' then I am in exactly the same boat as you.
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 14:27
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mixology:

Mixology:

Dear Heathrow director...poster MARY has a good, simple (and hence better) concept.

ATC cleared me for takeoff...I looked out my front windshield to see a fuel truck (bowser to you) stopped right in the middle of the runway.

If I had blindly accepted the clearance, I would not be here to write THIS. Neither would my passengers.

Here, in the USA, going to a busy airport in a little airplane is a good way of gaining experience and confidence for the day you will be flying an airliner into the same airport. Certainly you must prepare. Certainly ATC should watch for proper response from all pilots.

Flying is open to all in the USA, and it seems to work darn well. Some of the european ways don't make sense to me at all...so that's the story.

The Burbank incident could easily have been two 737's rather than a cessna and a 737. It could have easily been two cessnas rather than a 737 and a cessna.

Now, the big question is what happened and how do we avoid what caused it without giving up flying freedom.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 18:50
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,483
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Now, the big question is what happened and how do we avoid what caused it without giving up flying freedom.
Which, like the right to arm bears, or bare arms, is of UTMOST importance to US pilots

There is obviously something amiss:

once cleared across an active RWY in front of a [landing or departing**] Gulfstream

** I blanked out and I can't actually remember whether it was a TO or landing wrt the Gulfstream reversers deployed???, nobody could say anyway????

further, I was on Grd and that other plane was on Twr

but I think that this time it's in the ATC I'm not questioning their competence since i can't do their job I'm questioning the FAA and the 'ATC-system'
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 19:27
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
To put it bluntly, there is no substitute for watching your ass!
BUT:
T/O - passing100kn in a 757 - van drives across runway (keeps going - fortunately).
T/O - passing100kn in an L1011 - notice Alpha Jet lining up at other end (continues turn and exits).
Flying through cloud in my favourite TMA - silhouette of B727 climbs past on starboard side.
Basil is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 20:38
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is quite easy to keep clockwork mice away from Heathrow, Gatwick, etc etc. The landing fees.

But I am happy that some heavy jet posters agree that it is a good idea to look out for yourself as well, assuming VFR, of course. I did get the IR in Texas, but one is so rarely welcomed into the system in the UK, that mine has withered on the vine. Seems to me downright sensible, if you have the time and the airspace, to monitor clockwork mice as well.

I tried 3 times to avoid cloud by entering Birmingham airspace a few years back. The enroute controllers did not seem particularly busy, however, "Permission denied!" And permission denied, and permission denied, whereupon a Speedbird on frequency chimed in - "You're not in America now, you know!"

......yes, they do it differently over there.
mary meagher is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 23:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have flown hundreds of miles in the US in corporate jets with two and four engines with no clearance. Just take off VFR and if convenient pick up the IFR clearance once airborn or just stay below 18,000 ft and enjoy the flight. I got a call just before the Super Bowl in the 70's asking how soon I could fly from SNA to LAS in a Citation jet. I told them an hour and a half so went to the airport, took off single pilot and picked up the passengers and FO on a mechanicalled Lear Jet an hour and a half later. Didn't call ATC until 100 miles out of Las Vegas.

We really like our system of flying here in the US. Mary should come back here. She seems to fit in perfectly with a system that uses a lot of common sense and doesn't get too wrapped around the axel with excessive control of airspace usage.

When we transitioned to airline flying we still respect the light aircraft that are enjoying the airspace.
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2010, 00:17
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think some of you are mixing the issue, or posting things irrelevant to the topic. Some are advocating differences that do not exist.

Both systems have good and bad sides - I would take some parts of American system any day, would make my job and life easier. But any system is only as good as it users, and sometimes it seems people try to squeeze and bend it to much, and such incidents happen
criss is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2010, 00:45
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The BUR incident was a 737 rolling out at low speed on the ground getting ready to turn into his gate off rwy 8. The Cessna was making a touch and go and if he was at 200 ft crossing 8 he probably wasn't concerned about the 737. I don't think either pilot was concerned about their safety under those circumstances. Why did this become a news event?

In the US most incidents go unreported because they aren't really safety related but maybe broke some rule. For some reason this one made the news.
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2010, 16:07
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Medically Grounded
Posts: 136
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
I think the major point to make here is that you should always keep situational awareness of traffic in either VMC or IMC. There have been several times when I was given a clearance to either take off or land by ATC and opted to either wait or to go around because I didn't like the margins I was given. ATC isn't responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft. You, the PIC, are. When in doubt ask for a different clearance.
Piper_Driver is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2010, 03:41
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Zealand
Age: 62
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

The BUR incident was a 737 rolling out at low speed on the ground getting ready to turn into his gate off rwy 8. The Cessna was making a touch and go and if he was at 200 ft crossing 8 he probably wasn't concerned about the 737. I don't think either pilot was concerned about their safety under those circumstances. Why did this become a news event?
Where I work, this would appear to be a loss of runway separation.
Either the B737 should have held short of the intersection until the Cessna had passed through (irrespective of height), or the Cessna should have landed and held short for the B737 to cross. Once the Boeing had vacated the intersection, the Cessna could have been allowed to continue.

I'm curious to know if US ATC procedure allows the events as they occurred or if the Controller was expected to arrange something similar to my suggestions.

Whilst, these pilots might have been unconcerned, what would be the outcome, if the Cessna had got airborne and then had an engine failure?

As far as looking for yourself, when a Controller clears you to proceed, I'm all for that, but proceeding because you didn't hear the clearance, but it looks OK to you is completely different.
Yankee_Doodle_Floppy_Disk is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2010, 11:30
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"For some reason this one made the news."....just a thought, but it's probably because currently, runway incursions are a 'hot button' item for the NTSB in their relentless 'turf war' with the FAA.....
PA-28-180 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.