Near miss on JFK runway
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really relevant, is it? Trains are directed by (unambiguous) lighted signals. And, last time that I checked, trains can only proceed or stop (and, very rarely, reverse course).
Poor Egypt Air was probably dealing with a complex airport chart as well as a language that he was only minimally qualified to understand. Note all the comments on this thread. It seems that even most Brit crews are quite unqualified to deal with the local language and procedures. Perhaps additional training is necessary before any non-US pilots attempt to operate into JFK.
Poor Egypt Air was probably dealing with a complex airport chart as well as a language that he was only minimally qualified to understand. Note all the comments on this thread. It seems that even most Brit crews are quite unqualified to deal with the local language and procedures. Perhaps additional training is necessary before any non-US pilots attempt to operate into JFK.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps additional training is necessary before any non-US pilots attempt to operate into JFK.
Hopefully, poor guy does not train his "American English" in Mississippi, Alabama, SC or even worse, Texas.....
Is there a training facility for "New York´ish"
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lady Grey, lets hope they dont take English training in Scotland,the Midlands, or for that matter any place in the UK! Of all the places on this Earth with local versions of English the UK has to top the list! Maybe data link is the way to go, but then we will get into spelling, {Tire or Tyre?}
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, training should deal with English PHRASEOLOGY.
Many English language natives forget that.
ATC is not having a cup of tea in a sofa with your old deaf Aunty. You've got to be clear. Grumbling a series of onomatopoeia from time to time isn't enough, even with a smile.
In the ground recording, have you noticed how the girl speaks slowly after the incident ?
She speaks slowly and, each time, she says "I need you to..." : this is not phraseology, this is Human Factors. Everytime she wants to be sure the pilot has listened and understood, she prepares him to receive the message, then she articulates and speaks slowly.
She does it when she feels it's important. Why not always ? Why not before the incursion ?
Even if one was able to speak twice the normal speed, one would still lose time in sending each message three times.
Data link is a good way to avoid mistakes but I don't think it could be faster than spoken language.
Instead of "CAN..CANCEL TAKE-OFF, CANCEL TAKE-OFF CLEARANCE !!!" (which saved everyone's day, however not phraseology), the emergency written message would have been : "You've got mail...", the pilot has to click twice on the mailbox.
"Dowloading, please wait." says the machine. Find the message in the list, open it then read it...
Many English language natives forget that.
ATC is not having a cup of tea in a sofa with your old deaf Aunty. You've got to be clear. Grumbling a series of onomatopoeia from time to time isn't enough, even with a smile.
In the ground recording, have you noticed how the girl speaks slowly after the incident ?
She speaks slowly and, each time, she says "I need you to..." : this is not phraseology, this is Human Factors. Everytime she wants to be sure the pilot has listened and understood, she prepares him to receive the message, then she articulates and speaks slowly.
She does it when she feels it's important. Why not always ? Why not before the incursion ?
Even if one was able to speak twice the normal speed, one would still lose time in sending each message three times.
Data link is a good way to avoid mistakes but I don't think it could be faster than spoken language.
Instead of "CAN..CANCEL TAKE-OFF, CANCEL TAKE-OFF CLEARANCE !!!" (which saved everyone's day, however not phraseology), the emergency written message would have been : "You've got mail...", the pilot has to click twice on the mailbox.
"Dowloading, please wait." says the machine. Find the message in the list, open it then read it...
Originally Posted by BrATCO
nstead of "CAN..CANCEL TAKE-OFF, CANCEL TAKE-OFF CLEARANCE !!!" (which saved everyone's day, however not phraseology)
From Ditchdigger's post...
per U.S. Aeronatical Information Manual:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...atc0309.html.9
3-9-10. CANCELLATION OF TAKEOFF CLEARANCE
Cancel a previously issued clearance for takeoff and inform the pilot of the reason if circumstances require. Once an aircraft has started takeoff roll, cancel the takeoff clearance only for the purpose of safety.
NOTE-
In no case should a takeoff clearance be canceled after an aircraft has started its takeoff roll solely for the purpose of meeting traffic management requirements/EDCT.
PHRASEOLOGY-
CANCEL TAKEOFF CLEARANCE (reason).
Cancel a previously issued clearance for takeoff and inform the pilot of the reason if circumstances require. Once an aircraft has started takeoff roll, cancel the takeoff clearance only for the purpose of safety.
NOTE-
In no case should a takeoff clearance be canceled after an aircraft has started its takeoff roll solely for the purpose of meeting traffic management requirements/EDCT.
PHRASEOLOGY-
CANCEL TAKEOFF CLEARANCE (reason).
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: S 51 N
Age: 84
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
phraseology
Crabman:
Are you joking ?? Special language training for an international airport ?? Much simpler to solve that problem by sticking to what ICAO has published !!
Clunkdriver:
Very correct what you say, but what´s about the different slangs in those 50 US states and the two languages used in your country ?
BrATCO:
I fully agree in what you wrote. The key to a safe and orderly conduct of air traffic is ICAO Standard Phraseology. Safety in aviation has no extra space for local practices.
MikeNYC:
Look here we go again. You refer to FAA papers, which should refer to the original ICAO standard phraseology. I intentionally say: SHOULD! The US was the driving power for that Convention of Chicago after WWII, that led to the founding of ICAO. I always have assumed the USA had adopted into their national laws and regulations those ICAO rules and regulations. Obviously I am wrong guessing ??
Just for the sake of clarification I add a brief copy of it.
www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/115.pdf
Hope it works, other wise suggest to Google "ICAO Phraseology" there the source is accessable.
Are you joking ?? Special language training for an international airport ?? Much simpler to solve that problem by sticking to what ICAO has published !!
Clunkdriver:
Very correct what you say, but what´s about the different slangs in those 50 US states and the two languages used in your country ?
BrATCO:
I fully agree in what you wrote. The key to a safe and orderly conduct of air traffic is ICAO Standard Phraseology. Safety in aviation has no extra space for local practices.
MikeNYC:
Look here we go again. You refer to FAA papers, which should refer to the original ICAO standard phraseology. I intentionally say: SHOULD! The US was the driving power for that Convention of Chicago after WWII, that led to the founding of ICAO. I always have assumed the USA had adopted into their national laws and regulations those ICAO rules and regulations. Obviously I am wrong guessing ??
Just for the sake of clarification I add a brief copy of it.
www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/115.pdf
Hope it works, other wise suggest to Google "ICAO Phraseology" there the source is accessable.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft has commenced take-off roll:
So it should be something like:
So it should be something like:
TWR: Big Jet 345 stop immediately, (Big Jet 345 stop immediately)!
A/C: Stopping, Big Jet 345
A/C: Stopping, Big Jet 345
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please help me to understand:
The ICAO standard phraseology (under the rubric "Cancelling Take-off Clearance") requires the controller to assess the aircraft's state (rolling down the runway or not) and then transmit the state-appropriate message using equivocal terms ('hold', 'position', 'stop' -- which can and play the role of adjectives, verbs and nouns), even though the desired effect (cancelling take-off clearance) is the same, regardless of state.
So, if during the time the controller screams "Cancel take-off", the aircraft starts to move, is the phraseology suddenly non-standard? Does it make a difference? Is the appropriate response suddenly, "Too late, I'm already rolling! See you in H*ll, suckers!"
The horrible US phraseology incorporates the ICAO phraseology for one of the two states, in fact, the state that uses univocal words, and extends them to the rolling state (to which it would be applied anyway); as a result, the phraseology is completely different for take-off than for taxi, and the controller need not vary the wording to account for something that has no effect on the desired outcome. For those at the pointy end, the meaning should be immediately clear, unless, of course, they're completely incompetent, as appears to be the case.
Is there an ambiguity here?
I'm sure there are plenty of examples of non-standard phraseology causing problems, but this isn't one of them.
The ICAO standard phraseology (under the rubric "Cancelling Take-off Clearance") requires the controller to assess the aircraft's state (rolling down the runway or not) and then transmit the state-appropriate message using equivocal terms ('hold', 'position', 'stop' -- which can and play the role of adjectives, verbs and nouns), even though the desired effect (cancelling take-off clearance) is the same, regardless of state.
So, if during the time the controller screams "Cancel take-off", the aircraft starts to move, is the phraseology suddenly non-standard? Does it make a difference? Is the appropriate response suddenly, "Too late, I'm already rolling! See you in H*ll, suckers!"
The horrible US phraseology incorporates the ICAO phraseology for one of the two states, in fact, the state that uses univocal words, and extends them to the rolling state (to which it would be applied anyway); as a result, the phraseology is completely different for take-off than for taxi, and the controller need not vary the wording to account for something that has no effect on the desired outcome. For those at the pointy end, the meaning should be immediately clear, unless, of course, they're completely incompetent, as appears to be the case.
Is there an ambiguity here?
I'm sure there are plenty of examples of non-standard phraseology causing problems, but this isn't one of them.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: S 51 N
Age: 84
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DingerX
In a stress situation - not to talk of it as an emergency yet - like the one that started the discussion, it doesn´t make sense to be "more Catholic than the Pope". Sure, any measure taken in due time to avoid the worst is okay.
I think the crux of the ongoing discussion about that event is furtelized by the diverging opinions about good r/t procedures. The opposition is attached to the "high speed litany" type of instructions and clearances obviously used excessively. Sure, those in the community that have English as their mother tongue have a big advantage over those that don´t. But just for these differences the ICAO standard phraseology was created.
Needless to state how well that worked in that BA 38 accident - see post # 62 - Probably we can come to common grounds if the "foreighners" accept that JFK is a very "extraordinary" spot, and the New Yorkers accept that around the globe there are many airports that handle much more traffic than JFK and ATC works well too.
I think the crux of the ongoing discussion about that event is furtelized by the diverging opinions about good r/t procedures. The opposition is attached to the "high speed litany" type of instructions and clearances obviously used excessively. Sure, those in the community that have English as their mother tongue have a big advantage over those that don´t. But just for these differences the ICAO standard phraseology was created.
Needless to state how well that worked in that BA 38 accident - see post # 62 - Probably we can come to common grounds if the "foreighners" accept that JFK is a very "extraordinary" spot, and the New Yorkers accept that around the globe there are many airports that handle much more traffic than JFK and ATC works well too.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you quibbling that ATC didn't give a (reason) for the cancelled takeoff clearance?
When a controller says "cancel take-off", pilot knows he's got to stop his ACFT ASAP, whatever the actual threat.
In MY (French) phraseology, "clear", "cleared", "clearance", and everything that could be a derivation from "clear" is reserved to TAKE-OFF and LAND clearances. I (French) wouldn't say "clearance" in order to abort a take-off.
But my point in the last paragraph of my previous post was that spoken language is faster (thus safer in this very case) than CPDLC. Phraseology or not, the goal was achieved : LH411 understood the message was for him and stopped in time.
Most of the times, phraseology can not be stuck to in emergency situations. Phraseology must be used to avoid misunderstandings, thus emergency situations.
(To answer your question : in my phraseo, a message includes a callsign... but, you're right, that's quibbling.
)When I control (with my French accent) a USofA or English-speaking-Canadian flight, my SOP is to give a direct and to spell the fix in the same message.
Not because I think the pilot's English is awful : because I know he comes from abroad, procedures are different on his continent and his ear is not used to my accent.
I can't easily change my accent, but I don't bother spelling, saying again and trying in other words when needed. Being clear and understood is part of my job. When I know this pilot has understood what I mean, I can move on to the next emergency message...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I control (with my French accent) a USofA or English-speaking-Canadian flight, my SOP is to give a direct and to spell the fix in the same message.
Seems to me we're barking up the wrong tree.
Whatever the controller may have said to the Lufthansa flight - there was no misunderstanding there. LH aborted their takeoff. So "Takeoff clearance cancelled" did the job.
It was EA (taxiing in, not taking off) that ended up in the wrong place. The real question is, what was it that EgyptAir did not understand, and what instructions were issued to EA (and in what words)?
Whatever the controller may have said to the Lufthansa flight - there was no misunderstanding there. LH aborted their takeoff. So "Takeoff clearance cancelled" did the job.
It was EA (taxiing in, not taking off) that ended up in the wrong place. The real question is, what was it that EgyptAir did not understand, and what instructions were issued to EA (and in what words)?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anex 14, You wont get any flak from me about our bilingual ATC in parts of Canada, even though I live in a French speaking area, and am considered to be fluent in both French and English, the problem is the whole issue became a political football so there is not a hope in Hell of it changing, thats the reality of Canada, but there are many places where operational logic is secondry to politics and emotion.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VOR names need quite a bit of effort to find (well, at least in my EFB-centered outfit)
Guest
Posts: n/a
This thread has gone very quiet. Does anyone know what will happen next? I tried to find an incident report to see if there was any more factual information available but can't find a report in any of the US reporting systems. Did it actually happen? More seriously, is it being properly investigated?
Did it actually happen?
The FAA did give this statement to at least one news organization:
"The pilot of Egypt Air 986 read back the taxi instructions correctly; however failed to turn as instructed. The aircraft crossed the hold 'short line' for Runway 22R. The hold 'short line' is 250 feet short of Runway 22R. Egypt Air 986 did not enter the runway. Air traffic control instructed Lufthansa 411 to stop its takeoff roll. Lufthansa 411 stopped before it reached the Egypt Air 986. The FAA investigation will determine the closest proximity of the aircraft.""
FAA Investigates Near Miss On JFK Runway - WPIX
- but I don't know why the incident doesn't show up on FAA or NTSB billboards. No-injury, no-damage incident involving non-US operators (one from a country in political turmoil)?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instinct
I think instinct played an important role here.
You know all that stuff about the primitive brain and all that?
I think the ATC's brain noticed the conflict at an insctintive level, you know, probably with a shiver in his spine, and then the "secondary" brain reacted promptly.
The tone he used was, inmho, perfect. Because probably activated the LH pilot's instinctive brain, too. I bet that they would have rejected take off exactly the same if the ATCo had said "coffe with milk, too sugar" using the same tone.
It is like the naughty kid who always ignores his mothers "don't do this, dont do that, get out of there, drop that..." but who instinctively obeys when the mother voice is genuenily alarmed.
that is communication, too.
On the side of the pilots, it looks very cool to be cool even in a very bad scenario, like an engine burning and severe hydraulic problems and stay calm with a professional, manly tone. But in other scenarios an alarmed voice can do a better job. Sully's "unable" and other communications had an excellent tone, he looked to be in control of the situation, managing it with an adequate stress level (a high one). JFKs ATCo averted a possible reedition of Tenerife, which would have occurred in a matter of seconds. His tone was just what it was required. they did great job, in that. they have to improve their communications, though, and be more international-minded. the macho attitude of "if you can't manage JFK comms, you don't have the right stuff" is a wrong attitude.
hopefully he saw, understood and averted the danger
by the way, i assume there was a take off clearance. Why are the recordings missing that? I will not trust any internet recording anymore
You know all that stuff about the primitive brain and all that?
I think the ATC's brain noticed the conflict at an insctintive level, you know, probably with a shiver in his spine, and then the "secondary" brain reacted promptly.
The tone he used was, inmho, perfect. Because probably activated the LH pilot's instinctive brain, too. I bet that they would have rejected take off exactly the same if the ATCo had said "coffe with milk, too sugar" using the same tone.
It is like the naughty kid who always ignores his mothers "don't do this, dont do that, get out of there, drop that..." but who instinctively obeys when the mother voice is genuenily alarmed.
that is communication, too.
On the side of the pilots, it looks very cool to be cool even in a very bad scenario, like an engine burning and severe hydraulic problems and stay calm with a professional, manly tone. But in other scenarios an alarmed voice can do a better job. Sully's "unable" and other communications had an excellent tone, he looked to be in control of the situation, managing it with an adequate stress level (a high one). JFKs ATCo averted a possible reedition of Tenerife, which would have occurred in a matter of seconds. His tone was just what it was required. they did great job, in that. they have to improve their communications, though, and be more international-minded. the macho attitude of "if you can't manage JFK comms, you don't have the right stuff" is a wrong attitude.
hopefully he saw, understood and averted the danger
by the way, i assume there was a take off clearance. Why are the recordings missing that? I will not trust any internet recording anymore
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: CLE
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's because the liveATC recordings are very often obtained on scanners. They make an effort, sometimes less successfully than others, to have an appropriate number of frequencies on a "feed," but you're always going to miss a lot. The upside is that there's not much dead air, but it can be confusing.
Got to say, I heard Tower give EgyptAir the number to call, I think after he was airbourne but it might have been in the queue. We both discussed how that's going to really focus your mind during the most critical part of a flight. Then went back to looking for robbers round the back of the cargo hangars... Anyway, I'd have already been ****ting myself and that is not going to help.
And.. back to the mechanics of the incursion. I know it was in daylight but that corner is a muddy fudger at the best of times. There is a morass of concrete, the marker boards are in the wrong place and, at night, no lights worth mentioning. There but for the grace of dog...
And.. back to the mechanics of the incursion. I know it was in daylight but that corner is a muddy fudger at the best of times. There is a morass of concrete, the marker boards are in the wrong place and, at night, no lights worth mentioning. There but for the grace of dog...
