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

Almost a repeat of Tenerife at Shanghai!

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

Almost a repeat of Tenerife at Shanghai!

Old 18th Oct 2016, 04:37
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tower: "SBA maintain runway heading, climb to 4000 ft, cleared for takeoff"
SBA read back and commenced opening throttles
Unknown: "foxtrot"
SBA: "confirm we are cleared for takeoff"
Tower: Negative, hold your position

Turned out our clearance was cancelled and TFF (an F27) was cleared for takeoff opposite direction runway. Due to a large hump in the runway, limited vis from either end. The "foxtrot' was the last letter of TFF acknowledging takeoff clearance. We did not copy that because of reading back SBA (DC3) clearance.

In 1943, my father was bumped from a DC3 observation flight and the aircraft collided with another with no survivors. In 1970 I was again lucky (and vigilant) at the same place - the old Port Moresby airport.

Who out there in pprune land delay takeoff for a single "foxtrot"?
autoflight is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 09:51
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was taught to always look, never assume that crossing runway/taxiway is clear.

I am always amazed, in the pedestrian world, to watch people waiting for the green light at the crossing and then step of the safety of the pavement into the danger area, where sharks lie in wait for the unwary, without looking. The green says you are cleared to cross, but is it safe? Surely they know of red-light jumpers. It sounds so easy to say, but observation of the real world suggests some guys just don't do it.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 13:14
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middle East
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RAT 5
And no-one has brought up the question of "why didn't they extend the flaps a little more?"
I did wonder if the timely application of a further stage of flaps might get you in the air quicker and indeed posted the question, but the moderator deemed it inadmissible and it was quickly vanquished. No idea why, as the skipper pulled in a notch of flap in the BA 777 crash to stretch the glide so I don't see why the opposite might be useful in a situation like this.

Hence why I spend about 10 minutes a month browsing this site as opposed to hours each week, but that's a discussion for another day...
reverserunlocked is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 13:23
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Somewhere hot, hot, hot
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by reverserunlocked
I did wonder if the timely application of a further stage of flaps might get you in the air quicker
It probably would, but by the time you'd spotted the threat, selected TOGA and puckered up your butt cheeks there probably wouldn't be time to do it, plus the flaps would need time to travel.
Maxrev is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 13:24
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I find the thread title is problematic.

Hongqiao has nothing to with what happened in '77 at Los Rodeos except for an apparent ground conflict situation where ATC seemingly plays a role.

In '77 two aircraft followed each other in fog on the same runway after being imprisoned at Tenerife for hours. A bit different compared to this case..
readywhenreaching is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 15:50
  #46 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@readywhenreaching - it was almost a repeat of Tenerife insofar as there were two fully laden passenger aircraft which could so very easily have collided on a runway. Death toll here would likely have been very high. Fortunately, in this case, there was no collision. That last hole in the cheese didn't line up. A thread title is a bit like a newspaper headline, it's there to grab the attention of the reader.
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 17:15
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You did of course note my 'smiley' that accompanied my flap comment. It was attached to the 'monday quarter-backing' comment of another poster. I do not expect every a/c to have an ace of the base sky god of the right stuff to be upfront.
They did a darned good job with what they had.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 18:06
  #48 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 4,112
Received 201 Likes on 56 Posts
ace of the base sky god of the right stuff
I rather think he was/they were.
Herod is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 18:14
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rented clapped out C152, relying on the ceiling mounted speaker because no headset, three hour flight into Ann Arbor Michigan. Very tired. Permission to land, so did so, and taxied back to cross the end of the runway to fuel up and park. Brain dead by this time, I didn't hear/or understand that ATC had told me to hold short for a landing aircraft. However always have a good lookout, I saw the approaching aircraft and judged plenty of time to scoot across and get out of its way.

At the fuel depot I was informed that ATC wanted a word....

I apologised, told them I didn't have a headset and hadn't absorbed the hold short instruction, but that I had a jolly good lookout before crossing...and after a strict telling off was forgiven and decided hence to always fly with a headset.
But I still always have a jolly good lookout no matter what ATC tells me, you never know, do you?
mary meagher is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 23:12
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by bradandwhitney
Anyone else on here also under the impression that PVG ATC is even more "interesting" than typical chinese RT? Especially early morning when TWR still does CLR and GND while traffic is picking up continuously.
I remember a little language incident (wrong taxi clearance) whereafter a British accent came on the air saying something along the lines of "...you need to use proper english or someone will be seriously f...ed" (he did drop the f-bomb! - rightfully so it seems).
The only time I've said THE WORD on air was due runway incursion; story re-posted as food for thought:
Taking off from Malé, Maldives, circa 100kn, Luton van drove across in front of us. I observed that, if it maintained heading and speed, it would be well clear and continued t/o. It did and we missed.
Subsequent rethink suggested that, had it, for some reason, stopped on the runway, an instant abort would have meant we'd have hit it less hard.
My finding at the cerebral Board of Inquiry was that I should have rejected.

On another occasion I was considering rotating early due Alpha Jet entering runway with intention of taking off towards us. (He noticed and continued turn and cleared r/w)
Basil is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2016, 23:45
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Derfred
No, the A330 was cleared to cross. So it would have crossed the stop bar, automatically.
All UAS will be equipped with Detect And Avoid (DAA) systems which unlike flight crew do not make the assessment that cleared to cross means no danger as they are a separate safety system. The DAA would identify the potential collision and not cross the runway.
Ian W is offline  
Old 19th Oct 2016, 00:07
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
China Eastern to Reward Captain for Preventing Collision at Airport

People's Daily Online | Oct. 17, 2016

China Eastern Airlines has announced plans to offer a reward
to the captain whose quick thinking recently helped to prevent a
collision between two planes at a Shanghai airport.


The captain, He Chao, was credited by China's Civil Aviation
Administration with "making a great contribution with his precise
and correct decision at a critical moment," Nanjing Daily reported.

The critical moment came on Oct. 11 when He's Airbus A320 jet,
carrying 147 passengers, was preparing to take off from the
Shanghai-Hongqiao International Airport.

...

China's Civil Aviation Administration suggested that the control
center be held accountable, in addition to the crew members of
the A330 who failed to maintain proper communication with the
controller, China Radio International reported.

The airline (sic), however, has yet to punish controllers, Nanjing Daily
reported.
Full article: China Eastern to Reward Captain for Preventing Collision at Airport
peekay4 is offline  
Old 19th Oct 2016, 02:54
  #53 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,100
Received 57 Likes on 47 Posts
Bedder believeit. Thanks for the link, an absolutely fascinating read. Most interesting to see how use of CVR has progressed but the dogged investigators unearthed great information with voice matching. The report seems scrupulous in setting out the background of the operators and crews, then the sequence.

The collective mis-hearing of the key tx from the tower must be talked about to this day!

I note that the SYD tower did not record internal discussions between controllers, only the transmissions. Is this something that has changed around the world?
PAXboy is offline  
Old 19th Oct 2016, 11:45
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Uk
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is it just me or does it feel like the number number of incidents where the "wrong breaker" was pulled, thus rendering the CVR useless is greater than one would statistically expect...
Snyggapa is offline  
Old 19th Oct 2016, 23:54
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saigon SGN/VVTS
Posts: 6,610
Received 45 Likes on 37 Posts
where the "wrong breaker" was pulled
I had exactly the same thought! Cynical, moi?

The Sydney report makes fascinating reading about an earlier era. Publishing the all of the crews' names. Flying with a inop FDR. Not reading back ATC instructions.
India Four Two is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2016, 01:17
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: world
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i was in atl in line for to in a moderate rain event (haha) when two delta dc 8's were on the same runway, one taking off, one landing, both pretty much in the same aspect, with their noses in the air. it was pretty erie.

then once in lauderdale we were holding in position for to when a cessna 150 landed over the top of us.


and thats all im going to share about similar events from my 34 year career.
costalpilot is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2016, 15:08
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whilst certainly advocating a constant and vigilant look out policy anyone who's ever operated out of Boston, JFK, Newark etc... especially at night, will know that it is commonplace to have an aircraft lined up on the departure runway as you cross.

The trick is to get yourself and your mucker to watch like a hawk to see if the bu**er is moving or not!!!

A very lucky bunch all told!
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2016, 16:15
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seattle
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Non pilot here with a question. From the Av Herald article link in the original post:

"the A320 crew had not yet been on frequency and therefore had not heard the crossing clearance.

There is a frequency switch somewhere between taxiing and takeoff clearance? Really? Or is this just bad reporting?
EEngr is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2016, 18:23
  #59 (permalink)  
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: The Gulf Coast
Posts: 1,658
Received 250 Likes on 115 Posts
@EEngr: you will typically find a Ground control frequency at an airport that is a dedicated frequency to control ground movement. You will also have a tower frequency that governs take off and landing.


After you land, your switch to ground when directed by tower. (In my experience, usually "when clear of the active" which with multiple runway airports means you have to pay attention to what runway(s) are or are not active.)


The point of the different discrete frequencies is to avoid conflicting or confusing instructions for aircraft taking off and landing, versus those moving to and from the runway environment.
T28B is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2016, 21:11
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: All over Africa
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It seems to me that we have two conflicting reports here now:

The Herald says:
A China Eastern Airbus A330-300, registration B-6506 performing flight MU-5106 from Beijing to Shanghai Hongqiao (China) with 266 passengers, had landed on Hongqiao's runway 36R and was taxiing to the terminal needing to cross runway 36L. The aircraft, that had been previously cleared to cross runway 36L, was instructed to stop and hold short of runway 36L but did not react to the stop instruction.
Then next thing I see, the CAD says:
All of a sudden, He's aircraft encountered another Airbus A330 cutting across its path.

The two planes, both owned by China Eastern Airlines, were found to have been simultaneously cleared for take-off by air traffic control.

The near-collision occurred as He sped up to take off, narrowly evading a head-on crash.
So the impression the reports give are: The A330 crew were in such a hurry that instead of dropping their packs off and refueling having just landed, they crossed runway 36R on Taxiway H3 in front of the A320, then taxied at one hell of a speed and turned onto 18R, commenced takeoff again WITH ATC clearance and caused a second near head on collision with the same A320. I gotta get me one of those A330s!!!! Must be capable of light speed.

Doesn't that just sound absolutely ridiculous? I would rather trust the Herald than some news paper.

I am just dying to know how a CVR recording from a modern plane that has just landed get over written. For me, most runways I land on are the gate and parking. Has it ever taken any of you 30 minutes (assuming this was a 30 minutes CVR) to reach your gate and shut the aircraft down? It just sounds suspicious to me that the whole recording was over written.
PPL Hobbyist is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.