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

EVA B777 close call departing LAX

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

EVA B777 close call departing LAX

Old 24th Dec 2016, 19:28
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm trying to think if I've ever had a heading like 018 (other than maintain runway heading) given for vectors in airline flying. If that's what I thought we heard, like everyone here says, I would question and confirm.
I totally agree that a radar vector to 018 just wouldn't happen. However, we just don't know what they were thinking. There may even have been a difference of opinion being "discussed" on the F/D, with the captain insisting on his interpretation.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2016, 20:04
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All Boeing products afaik turn in the direction closest to the HDG target in AP HDG mode
Thats a behaviour i have only seen in very old 737 classics. Even in newer classics and all NGs i have flown the AP/FD followed the direction one turned the bug, happily for a 360 degree turn. However, if one selects the bug first while in another lateral mode and then presses the HDG button the AP turns the shortest way.

That might however be a pin programmable thing.
Denti is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 06:42
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: US
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ATC are required to check readbacks

[QUOTE=Right Way Up;9615850]US ATC are not obligated to check readbacks and challenge.


ATC is definitely required to listen to and correct readbacks. If we for example issue a descent to FL 330 and it is acknowledged with a readback of "descend and maintain FL 230" we are now responsible to the same extent as if we had issued the descent to FL 230. On rare occasions I have seen the FAA try to also fault the flight crew, but without fail if a loss of separation of any sort occurs we will be considered at fault.
ZOA ATC is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 07:01
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: US
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did ATC say turn left

[QUOTE=Hotel Tango;9615777]We don't actually hear her turn instructions (did she say left or right?).

Has anyone seen an actual transcript? If so do you have a link for it?

I'm curious if the controller did issue a turn direction. She certainly missed a readback that clearly says turn left which she is absolutely responsible to hear and correct. From the tapes though you cannot hear her issue a turn direction. She had lots of opportunities to help correct the entire situation and failed completely to do so. Just curious about the actual first clearance though
ZOA ATC is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 10:37
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,306
Received 83 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by ElectroVlasic
I don't think I'd go with "entire", but would say this thread seems to be fixated on radio terminology (which I can say is a pet peeve of this forum after reading it for more than a few years) and largely ignoring the fact that the crew was told to get to heading 180, and acknowledged that, and regardless of the issue regarding left turn vs right turn, flew heading 0.
Thanks!
I thought I was missing something because everyone was so fixated on the "Southbound" Radio stuff.
And I was wondering what on Earth was so complicated in understanding Heading 180, Turn Southbound plus knowing that closely North of LA since Thousands of Years there has been a huge Mountain range with lowest Elevations ~8000ft and chances are that won't have changed over Night.

Yes the comms were surely less than ideal. But I expect from Airline Pilots a minimum Situational Awareness. In this case it is so fundamentally clear that they were completely lacking any SA .
Normally I'm not happy if they hang the Pilots to dry as a PR measure. In this case I would support this. I surely wouldn't want to have these guys in the Cockpit of a plane I fly with.
henra is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 11:00
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hotel Tango
I totally agree that a radar vector to 018 just wouldn't happen.
Precisely. ATC only work in five degree heading increments. A fact that is lost on many pilots who (for instance) report heading of 347 instead of common sense rounding to the nearest heading (345) which is all ATC are interested in anyway. Sorry to thread drift a little with one of my bugbears though.

Regardless of the lack of SA of the EVA crew (and that is clear) how can the controller escape censure for the way she dealt with this incident? Ambiguous instructions and, when clear that a lack of understanding has taken place, she continues to rabbit those same instructions in a frustrated tone in the expectation that something is going to change.

Last edited by RexBanner; 25th Dec 2016 at 11:19.
RexBanner is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 11:29
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ZOA ATC, No, there is no official transcript released as yet.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 13:01
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: -
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I read somewhere the controller has been suspended. Is it true?
RedBullGaveMeWings is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 14:46
  #129 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RedBullGaveMeWings:

I read somewhere the controller has been suspended. Is it true?
Reassigned to desk duty according to the Los Angeles Times. Article attached.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
aterpster is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 15:00
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,442
Received 73 Likes on 40 Posts
Uplinker:
jumpx3 is very kind with you to explain how it normally works, , and he is 100% correct .
I am however a bit puzzled by 2 points in your reply :
Quote:
I have 16 years commercial passenger flying experience, including 10 years flying heavy twin jets (A330) longhaul
and
Quote:
I did wonder if EVA015 had suffered a compass malfunction,
Not really compatible I would say.
Hello ATC Watcher. I am sorry to have caused you puzzlement. So far, your contribution to this thread has mostly been regarding the 250 Kts below FL100 rule, and having a go at me. I wonder if you have actually read my posts carefully or just skimmed them? And have you listened carefully to the ATC tape? Judging by your attacks, it would seem that I am missing something obvious, so I would be interested to know what your theory is as to why EVA015, on being told "turn....[something].......heading 180", actually turned north and kept a heading just east of north all the way until it got to Mount Wilson?

I am very familiar with being given heading turns of more than 180 degrees, and in that event ATC usually says something like "left, left onto heading xxx degrees", or "all the way round to heading xxx", or " the long way round to heading xxx". If they don't, then I or my colleague will query the turn direction, just to be sure.

You dismiss my suggestion of a compass malfunction : Was it a Korean 747-400 that crashed out of Stansted UK whose PFD1 malfunctioned and the F/O did not query or take control out of apparent cultural deference to the Captain but just watched as the Captain followed his failed PFD and banked into the ground?

I completely agree; being given a heading of 018 degrees by ATC is most unlikely - they would say 015, or 020. I am merely trying to understand why EVA015 headed just east of north after being given a heading of 180? Was PF dyslexic or confused?

As far as EVA015 ignoring instructions; Well judging by ATC's comments and looking at the graphic:- after his initial incorrect turn, he did not act on any of the heading changes given by ATC until he got to Mount Wilson. That seems to me to be ignoring instructions. Had he not understood the instructions, then why did he not query them?

.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 16:40
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by RexBanner
Precisely. ATC only work in five degree heading increments. A fact that is lost on many pilots who (for instance) report heading of 347 instead of common sense rounding to the nearest heading (345) which is all ATC are interested in anyway. Sorry to thread drift a little with one of my bugbears though.
That's a new one on me, not saying that you are wrong. What do you do if the controller says 'maintain present heading, say heading'? Stay at 347? Or turn to 345? Is this ICAO or FAA? Obviously a turn to anywhere close to a heading of 180 would have prevented a near CFIT in this case.

Originally Posted by Uplinker
Was it a Korean 747-400 that crashed out of Stansted UK whose PFD1 malfunctioned and the F/O did not query or take control out of apparent cultural deference to the Captain but just watched as the Captain followed his failed PFD and banked into the ground?
Actually, the 1999 KE crash out of Stansted was a steam driven 747-200 freighter, not a -400:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean...go_Flight_8509
Airbubba is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 16:45
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.S.A
Age: 56
Posts: 495
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
The initial call from atc was turn left hdg xxx. These guys were a heavy crew with a significant cockpit gradient and most likely significant language barriers. It may have been a situation where the senior guy flying was releying on the junior guy using the radio to interperet the instruction. As i have seen before, this situation is a recipe for massive confusion in the cockpit. There may have been 4 guys all yabbering at each other with contradictory information, misunderstanding, concerns about terrain AND tcas traffic from the canucks.

None of us were there but i suspect that cockpit was one hell of a s%#¥ show for several minutes.
oicur12.again is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 19:35
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The initial call from atc was turn left hdg xxx.
What is your source? Have you not read any of the previous pages of this thread?

There is at present NO official evidence that the controller said left 180. The only tx heard is the read back from EVA which says "left". I do not consider a newspaper article as official evidence.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 19:42
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Airbubba
That's a new one on me, not saying that you are wrong. What do you do if the controller says 'maintain present heading, say heading'? Stay at 347? Or turn to 345? Is this ICAO or FAA?
You maintain heading as instructed and report it as 345. When was the last time you heard any vectors from Air Traffic Control ending in anything other than a zero or five? ATC only work to the nearest five degrees (two degrees difference - which is the most it will ever be provided you've rounded the right way - isn't going to make any difference and in the unlikely event it does, ATC can give you a further heading change). I've had this discussion with controllers many a time.

Epic thread drift, which is what I feared by making the comment in the first place, so apologies!
RexBanner is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 19:49
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flight controller accidentally sends jet on course toward Mt. Wilson after LAX takeoff - LA Times
Bound for Taiwan, the EVA Air Boeing 777 took off to the east early Friday from Los Angeles International Airport’s south runway complex, according to FAA spokesman Ian Gregor. After takeoff, the air crew switched from the LAX control tower to the approach control operations in San Diego, which Gregor said was common practice.
“The air traffic controller at the approach control who was handling EVA instructed the pilot to make a left turn to a 180-degree heading,” he said. “She meant to tell the pilot to make a right turn to a 180-degree heading.”
Following the controller’s instructions, the pilot turned left.
donotdespisethesnake is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 20:32
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm putting the blame on the pilots here. Yes the controller may have given an initial left turn to 180, but as a pilot, my reply would have been "confirm LEFT turn 180" or (non-std) "left turn 180, long way around". I'd like to think that anyone with a bit of SA would have said something similar.

The only bit of the ATC transmission that didn't make sense to me was the left turn to 270/290- towards ACA788.

On the "southbound" comment, perhaps she used to work at a VFR tower before, but it's quite common RT to hear when handling VFR traffic. "Fly southbound to join the final for runway 9".

On the use of "southbound" vs "180 degrees"- I'm not sure if it's the way they're trained, but I've observed that quite often, when dealing with disoriented pilots, ATC will sometimes revert to cardinal directions. I'd like to think that despite a different culture, "turn south now" is pretty clear.

Someone else suggested "stop your climb" is ambiguous. I disagree. It isn't at all. If that instruction is given, in my experience ATC needs it done immediately. Just level off wherever you are. How is that ambiguous?
Check Airman is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 20:41
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by RexBanner
You maintain heading as instructed and report it as 345. When was the last time you heard any vectors from Air Traffic Control ending in anything other than a zero or five? ATC only work to the nearest five degrees (two degrees difference - which is the most it will ever be provided you've rounded the right way - isn't going to make any difference and in the unlikely event it does, ATC can give you a further heading change). I've had this discussion with controllers many a time.
Maybe that's how they do it some places but not here in America. If ATC asks you to say heading, you are supposed to give the actual aircraft heading, not the nearest five degrees. If you are asked to say altitude you do round it to the nearest 100 feet if you are climbing or descending, however.

And, if you're given runway heading on runway 4, you maintain the actual mag heading of the runway centerline, e.g. 044, not 040.

Hope this helps.

Last edited by Airbubba; 25th Dec 2016 at 20:54.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2016, 22:30
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Denver
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Language/phraseology may have been a contributing factor, but the EVA crew were largely at fault here. They were not situationally aware and turned North toward terrain without clearance and ignored repeated ATC requests to turn right to a heading of 180.
COflyer is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2016, 08:02
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 146
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
They were NOT repeatedly told to turn right unless we are listening to different tapes.

They were told to turn LEFT, then RIGHT, then STOP THE CLIMB!, then turn LEFT. Thereafter they were told repeatedly turn SOUTHBOUND. Repeatedly.

They didnt know which direction the controller wanted them to turn to achieve that! There's been a near miss as far as they know and the last direction given was LEFT. So they hesitated.

Poor SA on the crew's part re terrain, yes, but the controller really blew the thing up with the "LEFT ONTO 29... CORRECTION 270 " followed by "TURN SOUTHBOUND"

She managed to use the word RIGHT with the other callsigns on frequency, but not with EVA when they needed it most. Just SOUTHBOUND, SOUTHBOUND. "Which WAY do you want us to turn to achieve southbound?" these guys were thinking in two languages. You hear the confusion when they say "LEFT...RIGHT?"

Last edited by Ushuaia; 26th Dec 2016 at 21:07. Reason: Typo. No content change.
Ushuaia is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2016, 10:20
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,306
Received 83 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by Ushuaia
They were told to turn LEFT, then RIGHT, then STOP THE CLIMB!, then turn LEFT. Thereafter they were told repeatedly turn SOUTHBOUND. Repeatedly.
Sorry but the Key Instruction they were given is "180" and "Southbound". REPEATEDLY. What part of 180 is so difficult to understand?
The 1? The 8? Or the 0?
Turn Left to 180 would have meant a 270° turn to the left towards 180°. What on Earth made them go for a Course 0? I haven't seen any request in that direction.

What is so difficult to understand in "Southbound"?? How many "South's" did they have on their Compass?

Yes, the Controller delivered a less than stellar performance, much less than stellar and surely initiated some confusion.



But the real major Up was clearly by the Crew.
I absolutely expect an Airline Pilot to be able to distinguish between Course 0 and 180. And I expect him not to mentally fall apart as soon as anything goes a little bit different than expected.
henra 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.