Near miss on JFK runway
My two cents:
It was just before 1900L I think. I was sat on the gate and saw the Lufty slowing to a stop. I must admit my first though was he'd landed pretty briskly on 22R as he was just past G when he halted. But that's well short for a landing so we flicked up 123.9 in case it was an abort and heard "Lufthaaansa (sic) just stay there no need to comment on what you see in front". Then we saw the EgyptAir pulling on to J from B. It certainly didn't look like he'd crossed at J. But I'm not too sure.
ATC were telling Lufty he could vacate at his leisure, whatever he needed, everyone was really mellow. "Ve just need some time to check the brakes, but ve are fine". I have no idea what time he needed but he was still floating around JFK when we left an hour later. I reckon we would have needed about 45 minutes if we'd aborted at 100 knots, and I'm pretty sure he was slower than that.
I have to say in defence (defense?) of the JFK ATCers, and TRACON, they know what they want, they tell you so and if you tell them what you want in plain English, they accommodate. What they can't handle is "Err errr". You don't need to be standard, just short. I'm 5'6. (Worst case you wind up going via FC for 22R).
It was just before 1900L I think. I was sat on the gate and saw the Lufty slowing to a stop. I must admit my first though was he'd landed pretty briskly on 22R as he was just past G when he halted. But that's well short for a landing so we flicked up 123.9 in case it was an abort and heard "Lufthaaansa (sic) just stay there no need to comment on what you see in front". Then we saw the EgyptAir pulling on to J from B. It certainly didn't look like he'd crossed at J. But I'm not too sure.
ATC were telling Lufty he could vacate at his leisure, whatever he needed, everyone was really mellow. "Ve just need some time to check the brakes, but ve are fine". I have no idea what time he needed but he was still floating around JFK when we left an hour later. I reckon we would have needed about 45 minutes if we'd aborted at 100 knots, and I'm pretty sure he was slower than that.
I have to say in defence (defense?) of the JFK ATCers, and TRACON, they know what they want, they tell you so and if you tell them what you want in plain English, they accommodate. What they can't handle is "Err errr". You don't need to be standard, just short. I'm 5'6. (Worst case you wind up going via FC for 22R).
Shore Guy wrote...
Just amazing when you think about it....take delivery of a new transport aircraft and fly anywhere in the world with navigation accuracy measured in meters, autoland in virtual zero visibility, and then the guidance for surface movement is a piece of paper and a compass.
Airlines are sooooo cheap!
Equipment to prevent runway incursions is already available from Honeywell!
- All our aircrafts are equipped with 2 class III EFBs with moving map display,
one for each pilot station.
- To augment the moving map display, our aircrafts are equipped with
Honeywell's "RAAS" system (Runway Awareness and Advisory System)
which works in conjunction with the EGWPS and the GPS to give you real
time warning of an approaching runway.
Some additional info on "RAAS"...
A product that improves situational awareness by providing timely aural advisories - with new advisories and now graphical alerts to the flight crew and advises them of their position during taxi, takeoff, final approach, landing and rollout.
Positioned for growth, SmartRunway will also utilize Automated Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) as it is adopted.
Why airlines don't have this in every aircraft they fly is beyond me.
There are a few things that would/will help in the incursion issue.
(1) I believe all transport aircraft should be equipped with a surface moving map display. Current FAA regulations only allow this on a Class III EFB, an expensive proposition. Approval for Class II units (much less expensive) was to have been accomplished on the FAA "Fast Track", but, to my knowledge, has not occurred.
(1) I believe all transport aircraft should be equipped with a surface moving map display. Current FAA regulations only allow this on a Class III EFB, an expensive proposition. Approval for Class II units (much less expensive) was to have been accomplished on the FAA "Fast Track", but, to my knowledge, has not occurred.
Airlines are sooooo cheap!
Equipment to prevent runway incursions is already available from Honeywell!
- All our aircrafts are equipped with 2 class III EFBs with moving map display,
one for each pilot station.
- To augment the moving map display, our aircrafts are equipped with
Honeywell's "RAAS" system (Runway Awareness and Advisory System)
which works in conjunction with the EGWPS and the GPS to give you real
time warning of an approaching runway.
Some additional info on "RAAS"...
A product that improves situational awareness by providing timely aural advisories - with new advisories and now graphical alerts to the flight crew and advises them of their position during taxi, takeoff, final approach, landing and rollout.
Positioned for growth, SmartRunway will also utilize Automated Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) as it is adopted.
Why airlines don't have this in every aircraft they fly is beyond me.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it a possibility that the Lufthansa flight crew had already seen the impending disaster and stepped on their brakes just right before the warning from ATC came? Mere speculation but I wonder.....
If they're like the rest of they have enough fuel for the usual JFK taxi dick-dance but not enough for an hour's cooling their heels. Once they've eaten into contingency fuel they're back to the gate. It often happens at JFK, esp if there's weather within 500 nm and taxi delays start.
BTW, I took part in Ground Metering that night and it worked a treat. No sitting at the end of the ramp turning and burning waiting to get a word in, bang on time Ground called us and gave us our marching orders. Sadly not so much marching as bimbling the long way round B...
BTW, I took part in Ground Metering that night and it worked a treat. No sitting at the end of the ramp turning and burning waiting to get a word in, bang on time Ground called us and gave us our marching orders. Sadly not so much marching as bimbling the long way round B...
Last edited by Dunhovrin; 24th Jun 2011 at 20:15. Reason: Gwammar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they're like the rest of they have enough fuel for the usual JFK taxi dick-dance but not enough for an hour's cooling their heels.
What fraction of an engine idle consumption does an APU use up; I'm curious.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK needs to get organised.
Pushback & start should not be given until there is a clear run to takeoff.
How hard can it be to get some ground traffic management sorted.
Even LHR can get aircraft 90 seconds apart down the taxiway at busy times.
Pushback & start should not be given until there is a clear run to takeoff.
How hard can it be to get some ground traffic management sorted.
Even LHR can get aircraft 90 seconds apart down the taxiway at busy times.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 47
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These threads can be really pathetic as are obviously mainly people who have no idea about the industry giving their uneducated opinion.
Everyone seems to have done a good job. The aircraft at fault is the Egypt Air, the guy in the left seat of that 777 should not be in that seat anymore for making such a catastrophic mistake.
Those going on about standard RT, get a life. During situations like this you say what is needed fast. The guy who posted the BA audio??? Is that standard? "Mayday, mayday, speedbird, speedbird, 95, 95" No its not but did the job.
How about the Lufthansa call:
"Lufthansa 411 heavy is rejecting take-off"
Again not standard.
WHO GIVES A
Everyone seems to have done a good job. The aircraft at fault is the Egypt Air, the guy in the left seat of that 777 should not be in that seat anymore for making such a catastrophic mistake.
Those going on about standard RT, get a life. During situations like this you say what is needed fast. The guy who posted the BA audio??? Is that standard? "Mayday, mayday, speedbird, speedbird, 95, 95" No its not but did the job.
How about the Lufthansa call:
"Lufthansa 411 heavy is rejecting take-off"
Again not standard.
WHO GIVES A
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<Pushback & start should not be given until there is a clear run to takeoff.
>>
Not possible at busy airfields; there are too many variables. You need a fair few at the holding points to enable expeditious departures by taking advantage of departure separation standards. Too many heading in one direction may cause delays.
Sloppy Joe..... some people, especially those involved in training pilots and controllers, DO care about R/T standards. It's the way we communicate with people of many different languages and standardisation is essential. Sloppy R/T makes for possible incidents. Short, clearly enunciated, standard phrases are far more effective that spouting a mouthload of rubbish at speed.
>>
Not possible at busy airfields; there are too many variables. You need a fair few at the holding points to enable expeditious departures by taking advantage of departure separation standards. Too many heading in one direction may cause delays.
Sloppy Joe..... some people, especially those involved in training pilots and controllers, DO care about R/T standards. It's the way we communicate with people of many different languages and standardisation is essential. Sloppy R/T makes for possible incidents. Short, clearly enunciated, standard phrases are far more effective that spouting a mouthload of rubbish at speed.
This incident could have happened anywhere, however, it's more likely to happen at 'Lagos West' than most places i operate to.
I have filed numerous ASRs concerning operations into and out of JFK (EWR not much better). One point I always make is that flight safety organisations always talk about 'breaking the chain'....JFK are obsessed with adding links.
I have filed numerous ASRs concerning operations into and out of JFK (EWR not much better). One point I always make is that flight safety organisations always talk about 'breaking the chain'....JFK are obsessed with adding links.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 47
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree but what I am talking about is in this high stress very time critical situation and also the BA incident as it was brought up. To be critical of the JFK controller about what he said to get the plane to stop is ludicrous. In high stress situations people revert to basic language even to the point of sometimes speaking in their first language if it is not English. I expect the Lufthansa pilot knew the correct call to be made about stopping but reverted to something he learned a long time ago. It is quite common to revert to previous states when you are stressed, even to the point that a guy who flies an Airbus but used to fly a Boeing may revert to asking for flaps 25 or whatever it would be during a go-around in very high stress such as engine fire at the same time even though he should be asking for flaps 3.
Yes RT should be standard but exceptions have to be made when it is times like this as to be honest who cares as long as the message gets across.
The article states that the 777 took a wrong turn. He would have had to read back a runway crossing and obviously did not as was not cleared to do so. So the guy went past the big red sign, the hold line, probably a stop bar without clarifying an instruction he never got or read back. Even the non standard RT used in the US is no excuse. It is plain and simply bad airmanship on his part.
Yes RT should be standard but exceptions have to be made when it is times like this as to be honest who cares as long as the message gets across.
The article states that the 777 took a wrong turn. He would have had to read back a runway crossing and obviously did not as was not cleared to do so. So the guy went past the big red sign, the hold line, probably a stop bar without clarifying an instruction he never got or read back. Even the non standard RT used in the US is no excuse. It is plain and simply bad airmanship on his part.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,671
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sloppy joe, you speculate. Before starting to apportion blame ( e.g. the MS pilot) I would like to hear the instruction he got and the read back he gave ( if any). As to crossing stop bars, ( if that was a factor here ) this is another important issue as in too many airports you are still cleared to cross/disregarding red stop bars.
Bad phraseology still kills people today. Training on it is without stress, and we all know that when stress jumps in , as you correctly say, people do very different things. You will notice that on the tape shown the controller did not use any call sign , I suspect the LH saw the intruder and did not question the order. Luckily it was daylight CAVOK. At night or IMC , a few extremely important seconds could/ might have been lost by PF/PNF questions or even a read back " was that for us LH 211 ? " and we would have a very different discussion now.
Never underestimate phraseology.
Bad phraseology still kills people today. Training on it is without stress, and we all know that when stress jumps in , as you correctly say, people do very different things. You will notice that on the tape shown the controller did not use any call sign , I suspect the LH saw the intruder and did not question the order. Luckily it was daylight CAVOK. At night or IMC , a few extremely important seconds could/ might have been lost by PF/PNF questions or even a read back " was that for us LH 211 ? " and we would have a very different discussion now.
Never underestimate phraseology.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 47
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it was complete speculation but having taught some guys bound for Egypt Air because there Dads were Captains there it would not surprise me if they got it wrong.
Ah, a short search on youtube brings up this!
Pretty clear cut if you ask me, clear instructions, and clear read backs. Twice in fact.
Looking at a JFK chart it would seem they entered the runway as the next instructions were right on 22R hold short of J.
The diagram on the youtube clip is I think not correct. Expect they entered at either G or H.
Ah, a short search on youtube brings up this!
Pretty clear cut if you ask me, clear instructions, and clear read backs. Twice in fact.
Looking at a JFK chart it would seem they entered the runway as the next instructions were right on 22R hold short of J.
The diagram on the youtube clip is I think not correct. Expect they entered at either G or H.
Last edited by SloppyJoe; 25th Jun 2011 at 18:22.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<Pushback & start should not be given until there is a clear run to takeoff.
>>
Not possible at busy airfields; there are too many variables. You need a fair few at the holding points to enable expeditious departures by taking advantage of departure separation standards. Too many heading in one direction may cause delays.
>>
Not possible at busy airfields; there are too many variables. You need a fair few at the holding points to enable expeditious departures by taking advantage of departure separation standards. Too many heading in one direction may cause delays.
It would take very little computing power to generate the timings to have each flight arrive at the threshold holding point on time for its slot with a nice orderly line correctly spaced out to follow.
I agree that it is nice to have the next one holding ready but it is inexcusable to have a logjam of aircraft sitting still on the ground with engines running. It is even worse to have aircraft leaving a stand when it will only be joining a logjam.
Some airports are just plain disorganised.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<the time from pushback from each stand to a taxiway entrance for each aircraft type will be a constant, as will the time spent on each taxiway.>>
Not a chance in hell!!!!!
Ancient Geek.. your profile reveals nothing but I suspect that you are not an aviation professional. Your suggestion of having timings to get every aircraft to the runway at a particular time is simply impossible. You surely understand that there is much more going on than just aircraft taxying? Vehicles moving around, work in progress possibly closing sections of taxiway, inbound aircraft waiting for a stand, sudden runway closure, weather factors, runway changes, etc, etc. I did GMC at Heathrow for 22 years and no two sessions were the same.
Not a chance in hell!!!!!
Ancient Geek.. your profile reveals nothing but I suspect that you are not an aviation professional. Your suggestion of having timings to get every aircraft to the runway at a particular time is simply impossible. You surely understand that there is much more going on than just aircraft taxying? Vehicles moving around, work in progress possibly closing sections of taxiway, inbound aircraft waiting for a stand, sudden runway closure, weather factors, runway changes, etc, etc. I did GMC at Heathrow for 22 years and no two sessions were the same.