A320 - Loss of Separation departing KMSP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 - Loss of Separation departing KMSP
Press Release by NTSB
On September 16, 2010, about 6:49 a.m. CDT, US Airways flight 1848 (AWE 1848), an Airbus 320, was cleared for take off [Minneapolis] on runway 30R en route to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, carrying five crew members and 90 passengers. At the same time, Bemidji Aviation Services flight 46 (BMJ46), a Beech 99 cargo flight with only the pilot aboard, was cleared for takeoff on runway 30L en route to La Crosse, Wisconsin. Weather conditions at the time were reported as a 900-foot ceiling and 10 miles visibility below the clouds.
Immediately after departure, the tower instructed the US Airways crew to turn left and head west, causing the flight to cross paths with the cargo aircraft approximately one-half mile past the end of runway 30L. Neither pilot saw the other aircraft because they were in the clouds, although the captain of the US Airways flight reported hearing the Beech 99 pass nearby. Estimates based on recorded radar data indicate that the two aircraft had 50 to 100 feet of vertical separation as they passed each other approximately 1500 feet above the ground.
On September 16, 2010, about 6:49 a.m. CDT, US Airways flight 1848 (AWE 1848), an Airbus 320, was cleared for take off [Minneapolis] on runway 30R en route to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, carrying five crew members and 90 passengers. At the same time, Bemidji Aviation Services flight 46 (BMJ46), a Beech 99 cargo flight with only the pilot aboard, was cleared for takeoff on runway 30L en route to La Crosse, Wisconsin. Weather conditions at the time were reported as a 900-foot ceiling and 10 miles visibility below the clouds.
Immediately after departure, the tower instructed the US Airways crew to turn left and head west, causing the flight to cross paths with the cargo aircraft approximately one-half mile past the end of runway 30L. Neither pilot saw the other aircraft because they were in the clouds, although the captain of the US Airways flight reported hearing the Beech 99 pass nearby. Estimates based on recorded radar data indicate that the two aircraft had 50 to 100 feet of vertical separation as they passed each other approximately 1500 feet above the ground.
mm43
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the captain of the US Airways flight reported hearing the Beech 99 pass nearby
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That had to be close if he heard the other AC. I have had some close ones within 100 ft and never heard it. The closest two were within 50 ft, one when I was head to head with an aircraft in my Cessna 340 and rolled inverted over Long Beach keeping my wings parallel to his to clear him and the other as a passenger on an MD80 in the front right seat in back watching a commuter twin coming right at us off LAX and passing less than 50 ft below our nose. As it passed the left side a passenger jumped seeing it barely miss the left wing. I knew the captain of that flight and had already warned my daughter flying with me how he would report traffic in sight so he didn't have to level out. If he heard the aircraft he is lucky to be alive.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hard to beleive, but if that is true, (presurized a/c , during take off power and pilots on headsets) it must have been really close indeed.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere else
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KMSP has three separate gound control sectors and three separate tower frequencies. They are usually consolidated during low volume times.
At the reported time of the incident, just before the morning rush, I would think all facilities would have been split to their individual operations, each with its own controller.
I can only speak for my airline, but we must wear headsets below FL 180 on the A320.
At the reported time of the incident, just before the morning rush, I would think all facilities would have been split to their individual operations, each with its own controller.
I can only speak for my airline, but we must wear headsets below FL 180 on the A320.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Headsets - boom mike's required below 18,000'. Dave Clark style headsets covering your ears? No. Almost every guy has a custom molded ear piece(hearing aid type) that mounts to a thin boom mike.
Heard a plane go overhead once. Even with ear plugs and a helmet on. 1 v. 1 against an F-15. Granted he was in full afterburner so it's a bit louder. 1000+ knot closure. Seperation criteria? "We'll be level, don't hit us."
Heard a plane go overhead once. Even with ear plugs and a helmet on. 1 v. 1 against an F-15. Granted he was in full afterburner so it's a bit louder. 1000+ knot closure. Seperation criteria? "We'll be level, don't hit us."
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Many years ago the military were evaluating fighter-evasion tactics for helicopters (yes, really), which involved the second pilot of the helicopter recording a running commentary onto a tape recorder. At one debrief the crew just set their recorder to "play". You could clearly hear the sound of the jet, as picked up by the throat mic. Now that's close!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They were on separate frequencies, but a different problem.
off the Liveatc Scanner (KMSP Twr 16 Sep. 2010 1130Z -- it records 26:24 of time, so I suppose something's wrong with the encoding or my file player). Anyway, at about 12:18 on my player I hear this.
(clipping makes it hard to get the airborne part of the last few conversations, and for all I know that could be bemidji with the "I've got traffic" call)
TWR1: Cactus 1848, runway 30 Right position and hold
AWE1848: Position and hold on uh 30 Right Cactus 1848
TWR1: Cactus 1848 requesting base and tops and you can pass to us on the departure RWY 30 fly runway heading cleared for takeoff
AWE1848: runway heading cleared for takeoff give you the base and the tops Cactus 1848
TWR1: Bemidji 66 heading 300 contact departure
TWR2: Bemidji 46 turn left heading 180 runway 30 left cleared for takeoff
BMJ46: 30l cleared for takeoff
~2.5 minutes later
TWR2: Bemidji 46 are you in the turn?
BMJ46: Say again, the turn?
~1 minute
AWE1848?: Guys, that ain't cool, I've got traffic
~40 seconds
BMJ46: Tower Bemidji 46 going to departure.
TWR2: departure
BMJ46: Roger uh I just (got an airprox*)
TWR2: Okay, um, why didn't you start the turn when you were airborne?
BMJ46: Tower, I got ** sorry about that.
TWR2: Okay, Bemidji 46 contact departure
BMJ46: *
off the Liveatc Scanner (KMSP Twr 16 Sep. 2010 1130Z -- it records 26:24 of time, so I suppose something's wrong with the encoding or my file player). Anyway, at about 12:18 on my player I hear this.
(clipping makes it hard to get the airborne part of the last few conversations, and for all I know that could be bemidji with the "I've got traffic" call)
TWR1: Cactus 1848, runway 30 Right position and hold
AWE1848: Position and hold on uh 30 Right Cactus 1848
TWR1: Cactus 1848 requesting base and tops and you can pass to us on the departure RWY 30 fly runway heading cleared for takeoff
AWE1848: runway heading cleared for takeoff give you the base and the tops Cactus 1848
TWR1: Bemidji 66 heading 300 contact departure
TWR2: Bemidji 46 turn left heading 180 runway 30 left cleared for takeoff
BMJ46: 30l cleared for takeoff
~2.5 minutes later
TWR2: Bemidji 46 are you in the turn?
BMJ46: Say again, the turn?
~1 minute
AWE1848?: Guys, that ain't cool, I've got traffic
~40 seconds
BMJ46: Tower Bemidji 46 going to departure.
TWR2: departure
BMJ46: Roger uh I just (got an airprox*)
TWR2: Okay, um, why didn't you start the turn when you were airborne?
BMJ46: Tower, I got ** sorry about that.
TWR2: Okay, Bemidji 46 contact departure
BMJ46: *
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wythenshawe
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poor airmanship. Single-pilot commercial ops in busy airspace. This happens a lot. Nearly lost myself and 345 others near Daytona. RA. 250 feet vertical and lateral separation estimated by colleague looking. (Not myself, obviously). Similar amateur flying by a small a/c.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That morning the ground controller for that side and tower for 30L was the same controller.
The 99 did not comply with the left turn to 180, but then his readback did not mention the turn. Why he did not turn ? is pure speculation at this time. ( did not ear, forgot,malfunction of some sort, waiting to reach a certain altitude before turning,...???)
What is sure is the controller was busy giving instruction to different A/C on the ground after the 99 T/O. And therefore did not realise that the 99 did not comply to his instructions and reissued the turn clearance.
Who is to blame ?
Pilot maybe ? ( did not turn why ? )
Controller maybe ? ( fail to catched wrong read back, did not realised that 99 did not turn ?
MSP at 0650am is already a very busy airport, having ground & tower and some time metering done by the same controller, is in my opinion is a perfect set up for the controller to miss something at one point or an other ( task saturation...).
Proper staffing is the guilty one, just my 2 cents.
The 99 did not comply with the left turn to 180, but then his readback did not mention the turn. Why he did not turn ? is pure speculation at this time. ( did not ear, forgot,malfunction of some sort, waiting to reach a certain altitude before turning,...???)
What is sure is the controller was busy giving instruction to different A/C on the ground after the 99 T/O. And therefore did not realise that the 99 did not comply to his instructions and reissued the turn clearance.
Who is to blame ?
Pilot maybe ? ( did not turn why ? )
Controller maybe ? ( fail to catched wrong read back, did not realised that 99 did not turn ?
MSP at 0650am is already a very busy airport, having ground & tower and some time metering done by the same controller, is in my opinion is a perfect set up for the controller to miss something at one point or an other ( task saturation...).
Proper staffing is the guilty one, just my 2 cents.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only fly westbound out of MSP and we normally are given a left turn to 270 off of 30L. Right side (30R) traffic is runway heading or if we get a left turn it is because there were not any simultaneous departures.
All the controller had to do to ensure separation would have been to give a left turn to the 30L departure and a right turn to the 30R departue. Normally MSP tower gives you the turn along with the T/O clearance. Chances are both would comply but if one did not then there would still be separation.
Single pilot IFR is common in the US, especially in light cargo ops. That is the best flying you will ever do and you will learn a hell of a lot more than sitting in a observer seat as a cadet for years before you get to fly a jet on autopilot. Don't apply EU perceptions to US operations.
All the controller had to do to ensure separation would have been to give a left turn to the 30L departure and a right turn to the 30R departue. Normally MSP tower gives you the turn along with the T/O clearance. Chances are both would comply but if one did not then there would still be separation.
Single pilot IFR is common in the US, especially in light cargo ops. That is the best flying you will ever do and you will learn a hell of a lot more than sitting in a observer seat as a cadet for years before you get to fly a jet on autopilot. Don't apply EU perceptions to US operations.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KKoran. I do not agree. Depends how long the runway is, a/c type, rate of climb, etc. I've seen aircraft reach 6000 ft before the end of the runway so such a general statement is wrong.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow Director:
6,000 feet before the end of the runway? It must have been a military fighter.
For a controller to assume what height a transport aircraft will achieve by the departure end of the runway is the height of folly; that is, unless the controller has the weight & balance information for each flight transmitted to the tower, has precise performance data available for the aircraft, and has some mystical assurance there won't be an engine failure after V1.
That is what it would take to remove the ass-umption factors.
KKoran. I do not agree. Depends how long the runway is, a/c type, rate of climb, etc. I've seen aircraft reach 6000 ft before the end of the runway so such a general statement is wrong.
For a controller to assume what height a transport aircraft will achieve by the departure end of the runway is the height of folly; that is, unless the controller has the weight & balance information for each flight transmitted to the tower, has precise performance data available for the aircraft, and has some mystical assurance there won't be an engine failure after V1.
That is what it would take to remove the ass-umption factors.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6,000 feet before the end of the runway? It must have been a military fighter.