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

Aerolineas Argentina A340 runway incursion BCN video

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

Aerolineas Argentina A340 runway incursion BCN video

Old 7th Jul 2014, 01:11
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern Shores of Lusitania
Age: 49
Posts: 644
Quote:

AENA didn't notice any close call. The 767 was leared to land and the A340 to cross. There were plenty of time and separation distance. The UTair wanted to GA then it's his decision !
JanetFlight is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 07:47
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,163
The crew of the 767 MUST have seen the A340 approaching their active runway at high speed and they should have been watching them very closely, I fail to see why they left it so late to go around..........?

Anyway it's made all the news channels....
nitpicker330 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 07:49
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 730
Any reason for a HD camera to be positioned so accurately where this was at the time including having a complete pan and follow thru of the AA aircraft? Very well choreographed film with a human at the other end of the camera...just wondering if this is normal practice at BCN or any other airport.
Wannabe Flyer is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:00
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 55
Posts: 34
I am curious how someone was able to get all of those different views on video....
underfire is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:13
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: House
Posts: 403
Keen spotter
nike is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:35
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,924
To me it looks like they were filming on airport grounds, and their website looks like a semi-official site of the airport (Google Aerobarcelona). Might well have been a coincidence, doing a video shoot and then seeing this situation unfold.
172driver is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:49
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Slovakia
Age: 55
Posts: 143
As a photographer I can just say that using telephoto lens can dramatically change the perception of distances which is also the case in this great video.

Just from a curiosity my question to pro's: from what distance would a pilot decide to GA when observing a moving object blocking his runway which is about to vacate it? Or is it rather a rule of 500 or 1000 ft agl for stabilized approach?
Pali is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:53
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,107
Depends on company i guess. If the runway is in sight and we do not have a landing clearance by 50ft AGL it's a mandatory go around. If the runway is blocked it is the decision of the crew at the day, although as mentioned above on many airports it is quite normal that the runway is still occupied at 200ft with the previous traffic usually just leaving the runway.
Denti is online now  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 08:56
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,423
Hotel Tango, it didn't originate from K4/5 but most likely from the sea-side apron of the terminal 1, i.e @ K8/9 limit.
So taxi via K, then D, then M to 25R. Only D & M parts highlighted on the diagram, but you can see the K part at the beginning of the video.
I guess that makes sense. What doesn't (to me) make any sense is a taxy route which effectively crosses an active runway no less than 3 times when the route K, J, E and M would only necessitate 1 crossing. Seems a strange procedure, albeit without knowing all the facts of course.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:04
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Between Nippi and Pasro
Age: 42
Posts: 122
More than a distance we talk about an altitude...MDA , minimum decision altitude, where you decide to continue for landing or go around.
From the video they look very close but can be just an optical perception, things like this happen every day worldwide.
claser111 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:08
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 75
Posts: 1,037
Argentinas A343 at Barcelona on Jul 5th 2014, runway incursion | AeroInside

Aena, the airport operator and ATC service provider, stated that the UTAir Boeing could have continued the landing without any danger, the separation was sufficient. Neither company filed any safety report (editorial note: this statement, although not expressis verbis stating this, suggests that the Airbus was cleared to cross the runway).
patowalker is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:09
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 478
HT, the "route K, J, E and M" seems nice, but it's only one route.
What if you have two ways taxiiing traffic to manage?

(only a guess)
AlphaZuluRomeo is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:13
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 808
So, no possibility of:

"XXX expect late landing clearance, traffic crossing"

"YYY expedite crossing, traffic on short final"

"XXX Go around I say again go around acknowledge"

Or (given the recent thread about use of English) the Argentinian talking in Spanish to the controller and the aircraft on final not understanding the transmission and electing to go around as the safer option.
Jwscud is online now  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:28
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by Wannabe Flyer
Any reason for a HD camera to be positioned so accurately where this was at the time including having a complete pan and follow thru of the AA aircraft? Very well choreographed film with a human at the other end of the camera...just wondering if this is normal practice at BCN or any other airport.
How well does your tin foil hat fit?

There are thousands of spotter videos on you tube. The spotter was filming the A340, then the B767 on final, and panned out as the Airbus crossed the hold and entered the runway. It's been edited and snipped to make a shorter video. Much as I don't see the appeal in standing in a field watching aeroplanes, it's pretty clear there is no conspiracy or choreography here.
FlyOnTheWall2014 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:33
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,423
HT, the "route K, J, E and M" seems nice, but it's only one route.
What if you have two ways taxiiing traffic to manage?
Absolutely, and most likely the reason. Nevertheless it does beg the question about a procedure which requires a heavy jet to cross an active no less than THREE times at a busy international airport when there are other options, even if it does mean holding inbound traffic to the most southerly gates of T1.

Might be an idea to extend J to M for starters.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 09:37
  #36 (permalink)  
Beady Eye
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,498
Originally Posted by RAD_ALT_ALIVE View Post
Judging by the speed at which the A340 was taxying as it crossed the runway, together with the relatively late go-around of the B767, my take on it is that the A340 crew had been cleared to expedite the crossing, but in the end didn't do it as quickly as the controller had expected/hoped (especially considering the turn - if the taxy route is correct - from D onto M).

Had it been a completely unexpected incursion onto RWY02, I'd have thought that the B767 crew would have commenced the go-around earlier.

It was a dramatic-looking video, but I doubt it was a particularly dramatic event for either crew.
From an ATC perspective this sounds correct. Lander told to expect late landing clearance while the crosser was told to expedite the crossing. Did not look like the crosser was going to clear the runway in time so the lander went around. No dramas and not an unusual event at very busy airports.
BDiONU is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 10:45
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: close
Posts: 588
Aena, the airport operator and ATC service provider, stated that the UTAir Boeing could have continued the landing without any danger, the separation was sufficient. Neither company filed any safety report (editorial note: this statement, although not expressis verbis stating this, suggests that the Airbus was cleared to cross the runway).
This surprises me very much because in the video it seems that the UTair would have touched down before the A340 would have cleared the runway. So if the Aerolineas would have got stuck with some problem we would have had disaster.

My experience with Barcelona is that they never clear you to cross when an airplane is that close. One note though, BCN have reduced their seperation margins and now have something called like intense traffic or so. Therefore the margins are smaller, and runway 02 is a runway that needs to be crossed...
bobwi is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 11:17
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 730
Spotter Video

from the credentials of the video it seems to have originated from an avid spotter who is setup permanently at BCN.

AeroBarcelona: Toda la actualidad del aeropuerto de Barcelona

Answers my question of being at the right place at the right time with good equipment. Puts to rest any further queries on this issue from my end.
Wannabe Flyer is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 12:28
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Usually on Earth
Posts: 76
I'm sorry but that reply from AENA is nonsense to me.

It's one thing to issue a conditional landing clearance "land after", though I'm not sure if Barcelona are able to issue such clearances? it's a different thing entirely however to expect an aircraft to actually touch down with another still infringing the runway within his landing zone whether it's a km from the threshold or not. To me it is clear that the Utair would have touched down with the Argentinas still infringing had they continued.

I also can't comment for anyone else here, but I personally wouldn't cross a runway with the landing traffic that close to crossing the threshold whether ATC had cleared me or not!

Certainly not "ops normal" as they imply in my opinion, especially considering the amount of time I've wasted in my life taxiing the long way around 25R due to "insufficient separation" on the landing traffic.
rusty_y2k2 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2014, 13:31
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Aena, the airport operator and ATC service provider, stated that the UTAir Boeing could have continued the landing without any danger, the separation was sufficient. Neither company filed any safety report (editorial note: this statement, although not expressis verbis stating this, suggests that the Airbus was cleared to cross the runway).
So did they just go around for sh!ts and giggles? An honest mistake from ATC and dreadful airmanship from the Argentinian crew.
WhyByFlier is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.