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

KoreanAir ATC violation

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

KoreanAir ATC violation

Old 14th May 2016, 06:29
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Phileas Fogg.....lets just clear that one up. Not in the history of professional aviation has ATC ever been "in charge" of an aeroplane.

Every single ATC instruction whatever it may be is OPTIONAL for the Captain who is the only person legally in charge of an aircraft.
8che is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 13:16
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've read a few AIP's where they'll behead you and drop you in the sea if you don't follow instructions from ATC
jmmoric is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 16:13
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 8che
Phileas Fogg.....lets just clear that one up. Not in the history of professional aviation has ATC ever been "in charge" of an aeroplane.

Every single ATC instruction whatever it may be is OPTIONAL for the Captain who is the only person legally in charge of an aircraft.
And as has been stated above...better to adhere to the instructions of someone with the FULL knowledge of what is occurring on the maneuvering area and sort it out later. ATC KNOWS that you are in command. I know that the AIRFIELD is mine and you would be bloody foolish to disregard my instructions.

Teamwork.
eastern wiseguy is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 16:53
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Phileas Fogg.....lets just clear that one up. Not in the history of professional aviation has ATC ever been "in charge" of an aeroplane.

Every single ATC instruction whatever it may be is OPTIONAL for the Captain who is the only person legally in charge of an aircraft.
8CHE - Not every instruction. By law, ATC instructions must be obeyed except in emergencies. As per 14 CFR 91.123 - Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions:

"Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.123
eppy is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 16:59
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,428
Received 111 Likes on 60 Posts
Originally Posted by eppy
As per 14 CFR 91.123 - Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions
Though of course 14 CFR (aka FARs) only applies to the US.

YMMV.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 18:15
  #26 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's Sean's turn
Posts: 1,834
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by eastern wiseguy
And as has been stated above...better to adhere to the instructions of someone with the FULL knowledge of what is occurring on the maneuvering area and sort it out later. ATC KNOWS that you are in command. I know that the AIRFIELD is mine and you would be bloody foolish to disregard my instructions.

Teamwork.
Whilst I agree with the sentiment I have to disagree that you have "FULL" knowledge of what's going on on the MA - you can't see into the flight deck.

Would I still be foolish if I didn't stop above V1 when you ask me to?

Teamwork - you do the strategy, I'll do the tactics.
Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 14th May 2016, 22:48
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Moved beyond
Posts: 1,144
Received 59 Likes on 39 Posts
19 HR delay. Ridiculous on the part of SQ.
Really? I don't think so. As parabellum said, it would have taken some time to source a significant number of wheel units, plus time to move the aircraft, plus time to wait for the wheels to cool, plus time to change the wheels, etc, etc. By the time all that was done, the crew had probably run out of duty time to get to SFO, so off to the hotel for min rest before continuing. Not ridiculous at all.
BuzzBox is offline  
Old 15th May 2016, 15:00
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: sfo
Age: 70
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
19 HR delay. Ridiculous on the part of SQ.
Not to mention that since there are 180 transit pax with no home to go to, they were hopefully put up in hotels near the airport. When you have to round them all up after repairs, you're probably going to need to set a departure time that is quite conservative, and lets them get some rest as well.

Edit to say that there may have been some ICN-originating pax, have no idea how many

Last edited by sb_sfo; 15th May 2016 at 17:18. Reason: clarity
sb_sfo is offline  
Old 15th May 2016, 16:44
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: On SBY next to my phone
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Damage assessment, source and supply possibly 12 new wheels, transport to Korea, ( 6 hours), and fix, 19 hours sounds fair to me, what is your gripe Geebz?
Just towing the A/C back, cooling brakes, deboarding, unloading etc could take some time. If more fuel uplift or even worse, defuelling before replacing tires was needed, the delay sounds fair to me as well.

As a pilot, if the ATC tells me to stop immediately, I can count on the reason being a runway incursion.
With speeds of up to 300 feet per second, a p1ss1ng contest of who's in charge would be the last thing on my mind
TypeIV is offline  
Old 16th May 2016, 21:21
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
P1ss1ng contest ? I haven't for 1 second suggested it was wrong to follow ATC instruction in this case. My issue is the thought that some ATC's think they are in charge of aircraft. The point is that its always a choice for the Captain to follow ATC or not.

EPPY you must be a career FO......By international law the Captain has sole responsibility for the safety of the aircraft period.

As per 14 CFR 91.123....... You have to be kidding.. So when ATC make a mistake and try and vector you into a mountain after departure because they forgot about a runway change, your just going to do what they say ??? When ATC use your callsign by mistake your just going to follow14 CFR 91.123 ??

A concerning lack of self preservation.

Last edited by 8che; 16th May 2016 at 21:34.
8che is offline  
Old 16th May 2016, 23:13
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
.By international law the Captain has sole responsibility for the safety of the aircraft period.
Umm! Yes but certainly some Australian ATC officers think other wise. Along with other rather set minded nations.
IcePack is offline  
Old 17th May 2016, 00:55
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,377
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
At the end of the day, all I want is to get to my days off without having to fill out paperwork and get the whole "tea no biscuits" chat, and I want to do everything in my power to help pilots do the same.

We all eff up, whether it be something relatively small like giving the wrong freq and spotting it in the read back-hear back or whatever to something larger. Thankfully one side of the conversation or the person plugged in next to me or other pilot up there with you spots our mistakes more often than not. We watch each other's backs, that's why it works.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 18th May 2016, 11:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Phileas Fogg.....lets just clear that one up. Not in the history of professional aviation has ATC ever been "in charge" of an aeroplane.

Every single ATC instruction whatever it may be is OPTIONAL for the Captain who is the only person legally in charge of an aircraft.
Thanks to others for your support ...

It's some 37 years since I did ATC, so I don't take it personally any longer, but let's just make this clear 'bche' ... If there is an aircraft already on the active runway and I instruct you to perform a 'go around' then you do the damn hell as I tell you or you can foxtrot oscar to some type of Ryanair airfield that might accept your "I am god" type attitude!

Amen
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 18th May 2016, 14:09
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well its been 24 hours since I last commanded a wide body jet and you clearly are taking it personally, you can paint a warped picture of god like attitudes if you wish too but its a simple fact of international law and a fundamental basis of self preservation that the guy sat in the cockpit has the final say. There is only one person in command of an aeroplane and unlike ATC whatever decision the Captain takes he/she literally lives or dies by that decision.

Bula's post 14 says it all.

The fact you might get upset by our choice to follow instruction or not is frankly irrelevant to our decision making process and irrelevant to the law.

Yes we are team and both ATC and pilots get things wrong and hopefully catch each others mistakes but lets be crystal clear the buck always stops with the Captain both on a legal and mortal basis. Ultimately Captains have to sit down and justify every decision/action they take....if were lucky enough to be still be alive.

Last edited by 8che; 18th May 2016 at 18:04.
8che is offline  
Old 18th May 2016, 18:35
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is daft. It is teamwork. I don't know why the Skygods are at it. Who legally puts their legal risk on the line when they sign a DGR check/NOTOC/Loadsheet etc. Best pilots I know are the ones who say "What do you think"
Ex Cargo Clown is offline  
Old 19th May 2016, 02:53
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This reminds me of the story of a Birdseed B747 on approach to LHR.

ATC had, more than once, asked the B747 to reduce it's speed and the B747 had complied, when ATC once more asked the B747 to reduce it's speed the somewhat pompous reply came back, something to the effect, "My dear chap, are you aware of the stalling speed of a B747?" ... As quick as anything the controller replied "No sir, but if you ask your First Officer I'm sure that he'll be able to tell you"
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 23rd May 2016, 13:24
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please everybody. I am just sitting behind you. Maybe I am crammed in the aisle seat. I have no idea what is going on on the runway, I am just thinking of my nice vacation, visiting a dear friend. I have listened to your safety instructions and put my seat belt on. In the cupboard above my head lays a gift I made in pottery class, glazed in royal blue.

So have this in mind, if ATC hollers at you to STOP! RIGHT! NOW!

That is not the time, nor the place to rattle around how many stripes you have on your shoulders. I trust you to stop. I trust you to save my life. I know the dangers of runway collisions, but I trust you to adhere to the ATC emergency call. Because I want to visit my friend. And I am sure you as a pilot have your own friends you want to visit.

I don't care about your stripes. I care about my life, and yours - because you are the one responsible for mine in this situation. So just stop the plane if possible (have you reached V1 just do what's necessary to avoid trouble). Please. I beg you.

Last edited by MrSnuggles; 23rd May 2016 at 13:25. Reason: because spelling that's why!
MrSnuggles is offline  
Old 23rd May 2016, 14:01
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,502
Received 54 Likes on 35 Posts
Well said, Snuggles. I see we have a few "Captain Americas" here...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 23rd May 2016, 14:41
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Seriously, I find it hard to fathom a reason why one would not stop if ATC say "stop stop stop"? Above V1 would just about be it, technical malfunction with a go decision, tyre burst with no engine abnormal approaching V1.

I can quite honestly say during the task off roll I'm fairly task saturated , so to be able to perceive all elements to maintain complete airfield situational awareness is sometimes just not possible. I know my limits, though we sometimes need a little reminder that we are there when we reach them.

As PIC, my job is safety, which includes using all available resources. ATC being very high on the input level.

Those who are flouting the SkyGod concept need to realise the above, that the PIC has complete responsibility. In saying that, one would be selling tickets on themselves to not stop without true safety reasons that ATC may not be aware of.
Bula is offline  
Old 23rd May 2016, 14:55
  #40 (permalink)  
CCA
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Up there
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Incident: Korean A332 at Seoul on May 5th 2016, runway incursion forces SQ-16 to reject takeoff

QAR data indicates that the ground speed at the time of the RTO was 139kts (CAS 146kts). Reverse thrust was not used during the maneuver as in the crew’s opinion, the rate of deceleration was high and there was sufficient runway remaining.
CCA is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.