EVA B777 close call departing LAX
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When training for my IFR ticket thirty years ago, I was in Van Nuys, California (just on the other side of those hills) when a Cessna with student and instructor on board was vectored into a mountain when on approach to Burbank.
My grizzled old instructor, who had flown bombers in the fifties, said to me, "If a controller vectors you into a mountain, it will ruin their day. They'll have trouble driving home. But you'll be very dead. So who is really in charge of keeping you out of terrain?"
My grizzled old instructor, who had flown bombers in the fifties, said to me, "If a controller vectors you into a mountain, it will ruin their day. They'll have trouble driving home. But you'll be very dead. So who is really in charge of keeping you out of terrain?"
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flight mode:
The highest antenna on Mt. Wilson is just under 7,000 msl.
BR-15 still continued to the north at about 4900-5000 feet, mountains rising there to 6653 feet. The controller instructed BR-15 to climb to 7000 feet, abeam of Pasadena,CA (USA) the crew finally began to turn right, which brought the aircraft even closer to Mount Wilson (peak and Mount Wilson Observatory at 5715 feet MSL), and to climb. The aircraft passed the peak 0.3nm south of the peak still at about 6000 feet at a heading of about 090 degrees, rolled out at heading 180, climbed to 7000 feet and continued the flight to Taipei for a safe landing without further incident.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to the video, I don't agree with posters that say Eva was to blame, certainly not a "rogue".
The controller made a mistake then got flustered and started mixing up what she was saying... call signs, headings, stop climb vs expedite. You can hear the other pilots detecting that, eg AC asking for confirmation on altitude. Then later she was clearing behind events: letting a subsequent departure level at 2000, switching AC to next sector while it still appeared to have a conflict with Eva, and then not fully monitoring Eva despite it all.
Eva got some rapid fire instructions that contradicted each other: the initial left turn, then as they were passing north a reversal to a right turn then back to a left turn to 270, then just "southbound". At that point they were obviously (and reasonably) confused and asked for confirmation of heading (3:08 in the youtube video) which they didn't get, just more instructions where the controller mixes up north and south.
A couple posters mentioned that the turn left to 180 instruction is not on the live atc audio. Liveatc is often unreliable, audio dropouts due to multiple frequencies monitored. The FAA spokesman quoted in the LA times did say the controller gave that left turn.
The controller made a mistake then got flustered and started mixing up what she was saying... call signs, headings, stop climb vs expedite. You can hear the other pilots detecting that, eg AC asking for confirmation on altitude. Then later she was clearing behind events: letting a subsequent departure level at 2000, switching AC to next sector while it still appeared to have a conflict with Eva, and then not fully monitoring Eva despite it all.
Eva got some rapid fire instructions that contradicted each other: the initial left turn, then as they were passing north a reversal to a right turn then back to a left turn to 270, then just "southbound". At that point they were obviously (and reasonably) confused and asked for confirmation of heading (3:08 in the youtube video) which they didn't get, just more instructions where the controller mixes up north and south.
A couple posters mentioned that the turn left to 180 instruction is not on the live atc audio. Liveatc is often unreliable, audio dropouts due to multiple frequencies monitored. The FAA spokesman quoted in the LA times did say the controller gave that left turn.
@rightwayup. Got on then, 91.117. Unless approved by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft above a speed of 250kias below 10,000.
Clearly we're talking about the civil system and the military operates under different rules, but no US 121 operator has permission from the Administrator.
I'm all ears if you have something better, cos my jet loves a 290-320kt climb....
Clearly we're talking about the civil system and the military operates under different rules, but no US 121 operator has permission from the Administrator.
I'm all ears if you have something better, cos my jet loves a 290-320kt climb....
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
(b) Class C and D stuff
(c) Class B stuff
(d) If the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the maximum speed prescribed in this section, the aircraft may be operated at that minimum speed.
No authorization from ATC required, but an advisory "We'll be climbing at 280 knots" is nice. Also, the aircraft can only be operated at it's minimum safe speed. I normally round up about 10 knots. It's not a waiver to push over to barber pole.
There's also no limit in Class E airspace beyond 12 NM. But the Class B at LAX extends beyond 12 miles. Not sure what AngryRat's airline is doing. They could do 270-280 going east bound if that's what their minimum flaps up speed is.
Last edited by MarkerInbound; 21st Dec 2016 at 02:52.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The controller made a mistake then got flustered and started mixing up what she was saying... call signs, headings, stop climb vs expedite. You can hear the other pilots detecting that, eg AC asking for confirmation on altitude. Then later she was clearing behind events: letting a subsequent departure level at 2000, switching AC to next sector while it still appeared to have a conflict with Eva, and then not fully monitoring Eva despite it all.
Perhaps she was having a bad day, perhaps it was the end of a long day.. (we have all been there, done that..)
But!
Safety should not be depending on a single person. Where was the supervisor?
There should be more then one layer of cheese.. This looks to me like a fault in the system; going to be an interesting investigation and a very interesting read HF wise...
A lot to learn here (again), pilots and controllers alike..
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hold on here. In the video at 2:30(ish) the controller clearly instructs EVA to take up a heading of 270 (she initially says 290, but corrects to 270). However, EVA merrily carries on towards the cumulugranitus....
Given the extreme rarity of an easterly departure in L.A. (I fly out of KSMO and the easterly rwy is practically never in use) would the crew not brief any possible departure route a bit more thoroughly than normal? MSA to the N is between 7.5 and 10.4 k ft.
Given the extreme rarity of an easterly departure in L.A. (I fly out of KSMO and the easterly rwy is practically never in use) would the crew not brief any possible departure route a bit more thoroughly than normal? MSA to the N is between 7.5 and 10.4 k ft.
Last edited by 172driver; 21st Dec 2016 at 05:02. Reason: misleading typo
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Weston Super Mare/UAE
Age: 60
Posts: 406
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One problem that is evident here is lack of listening to readbacks....the crew made a mistake - and didnt query it with 'turn the long way round?' - but the controller had issued her instruction and didnt pick up on the readback that it was misunderstood. Straight onto the next aircraft when confirmation of the instructions via readback would have been more suitable. I find that this is fairly prevalent in the US. If the traffic situation is too busy to allow for this then the system is pushing too much tin......
I was gobsmacked, also, with one transmission where the climb instruction at the beginning of the message was climb to 5000 but had changed to 6000 at the end of the transmission, only to be changed to 7000 seconds later! Little wonder that confusion reigned. SLOW DOWN! ATC should be a slow, careful process. Same thing in India, where medals are clearly given for the fastest ATC transmissions. I often told them to speak slowly 'because I only had 50 years experience of my native tongue and am clearly inadaquate!!'
I speak with 14000 hours and heavy, worldwide time.
I was gobsmacked, also, with one transmission where the climb instruction at the beginning of the message was climb to 5000 but had changed to 6000 at the end of the transmission, only to be changed to 7000 seconds later! Little wonder that confusion reigned. SLOW DOWN! ATC should be a slow, careful process. Same thing in India, where medals are clearly given for the fastest ATC transmissions. I often told them to speak slowly 'because I only had 50 years experience of my native tongue and am clearly inadaquate!!'
I speak with 14000 hours and heavy, worldwide time.
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: México City
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Longtime lurker, new poster.
E190 FO and a frequent flyer in US airspace.
As "native non-native" English speaker, I have to say that ATC was almost at fault as the Eva pilots. Evidently, these chaps are unfamiliar with rwy 7 LAX departures (very unusual indeed) but instructions were really confusing. That, and somewhat poor navigation (I don't want to nail the pilots, since no one is clean in this job, regardless of experience).
I really wish US ATC stick MORE to clear and concise instructions, ICAO phraseology, and engrave in their minds that they are talking to NON ENGLISH speakers from every corner of the world.
Giving this confused crew a simple "fly HDG 180 to the right NOW, expedite turn" would have finished the ordeal without the mountain flyover.
But......I have listened to confused Air New Zealand and Lufthansa crews in IAH........
So it is really someting about US ATC...
E190 FO and a frequent flyer in US airspace.
As "native non-native" English speaker, I have to say that ATC was almost at fault as the Eva pilots. Evidently, these chaps are unfamiliar with rwy 7 LAX departures (very unusual indeed) but instructions were really confusing. That, and somewhat poor navigation (I don't want to nail the pilots, since no one is clean in this job, regardless of experience).
I really wish US ATC stick MORE to clear and concise instructions, ICAO phraseology, and engrave in their minds that they are talking to NON ENGLISH speakers from every corner of the world.
Giving this confused crew a simple "fly HDG 180 to the right NOW, expedite turn" would have finished the ordeal without the mountain flyover.
But......I have listened to confused Air New Zealand and Lufthansa crews in IAH........
So it is really someting about US ATC...
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: earth
Age: 59
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear neilki,
There are things heavier than a C150.
Larger aircraft can almost always get approval to exceed 250 below 10,000 anywhere in the US. ATC usually has no problem approving high speed when you are a fully loaded 777.
There are things heavier than a C150.
Larger aircraft can almost always get approval to exceed 250 below 10,000 anywhere in the US. ATC usually has no problem approving high speed when you are a fully loaded 777.
Last edited by Captain Partzee; 21st Dec 2016 at 05:11.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250KIAS is the maximum below !0,000 in the Continental US. There is no avenue for a controller to approve faster
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US ATC are not obligated to check readbacks and challenge. .
EVA obviously had no SA as exhibited that they happily turned towards terrain with no obvious issue
A simple correction/instruction like : "Break-Break . EVA15 turn right immediately heading 180" . would have solved the problem. and we would not be here discussing it.
Oceanic departures for my operator are approved for high speed climbs out of LA. Where EVA may have gone wrong here is that you have to be clear of the coast to accelerate past 250kts. Runway 25 is usually the duty runway in LA so everyone accelerates past 250kts without thinking too much about it. A change of runway to 07 and having a high speed climb drummed in by almost exclusively flying 25 departures, this previous experience probably contributed to this.
It's not advice. My operater has FAA approval to accelerate to Econ climb speed overwater. Read my post number 33 on this thread if you want further explanation. I merely wondered if EVA has the same approval. If they do, they may have inadvertently made a mistake by accelerating while over land.
Why would the controller keep instructing the Eva to turn "southbound" without giving a heading or a direction? I think there are inadequacies with both the Eva crew and the controller.
Is there any evidence that Eva initiated an EGPWS escape ?
Is there any evidence that Eva initiated an EGPWS escape ?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Here 'n there
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ive just listened to that audio - like many I'm sure, (and although we know there was no cfit), I still sat here quivering, waiting for what seemed like the inevitable. words escape me.
ATC Watcher
I would argue you don't. My responsibilities as a Commander dictate I ensure sufficient terrain clearance. If a controller makes a mistake (like we all can all do sometimes), I cannot just sit there and suck it up.
Well , in the rest of the world you always have to follow ATC vectors, as a Controller takes over responsibility for terrain avoidance when vectoring.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would the controller keep instructing the Eva to turn "southbound" without giving a heading or a direction?
One little disconnect between pilots and controllers I can notice at times is the radar delay (lacking a more technical term for it). It's quite common for ATC to tell you to maintain heading whilst in the middle of a turn. The EVA crew is in the right turn south when they're getting a new instruction to turn left 270 deg. The autopilot is quite slow to react to such a change, and they were going quite fast. I guess the ADS-B plot is not updating accurately so it's hard to say what turn they actually did.
ATC and pilots a bit out of sync me thinks.
