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

Air Canada non go-around at SFO

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

Air Canada non go-around at SFO

Old 24th Oct 2017, 06:21
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 726
Air Canada non go-around at SFO

This one just came up on the local news feed.

Federal Aviation Administration officials are investigating an incident at San Francisco International Airport involving an Air Canada plane.
The incident occurred Sunday night when Air Canada flight 781, an Airbus A320, wan preparing to land at SFO.
FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said air traffic control cleared the flight to land on Runway 28R. The Air Canada crew acknowledged the instruction when they were about 6 miles away from the airport, Gregor said.
"The tower controller subsequently instructed the Air Canada crew multiple times to execute a go-around because he was not certain that a preceding arrival would be completely clear of the runway before the Air Canada jet reached the runway threshold," Gregor said, adding the crew onboard the plan did not acknowledge any of the controller's instructions.

A supervisor then resorted to using a red light gun to alert the Air Canada flight to go around. Gregor said flashing a light gun is standard protocol when an air crew is not responding to radio instructions.
Air Canada flight 781 landed on Runway 284 at 9:26 p.m. The Air Canada crew after landing told the tower they had a radio problem, according to Gregor.
"A radar replay showed the preceding arrival was in fact clear of the runway when Air Canada landed," Gregor said.
llondel is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 06:57
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,412
Wow... That's a nasty one. Obviously CVR were not preserved?
atakacs is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 06:58
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 629
Air canada, SFO, 28R, go-around...
I thought here we go again, somebody who doesn’t regularly read PPRuNe posts an old new thread about something that has happened months ago.
But no! This is Air Canada again, on the same runway, same airport, same same same doing something they shouldn’t have.
What are the chances of that happening?
fox niner is online now  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 07:02
  #4 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,702
Devil

Hold on, who's in command of the aircraft? ATC or the commander? ATC only issue requests...
Chesty Morgan is online now  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 07:46
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: CYYC (Calgary)
Posts: 5,012
ATC recording here:

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ks...2017-0400Z.mp3

AC781 is cleared to land at 21.41. The first go-around is at 23.46.

This kind of incident is bound to happen occasionally if aircraft are being cleared to land before the aircraft ahead has cleared the runway.
India Four Two is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 08:46
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,784
The enthusiast-sourced ADS-B feed from SFO is pretty patchy and (as with last time around) the ACA A320 was a very early aircraft without GPS.

Notwithstanding that, it looks like the landing sequence was:

Southwest 3117 (28R)
Hawaiian 12 (28L)
Air Canada 781 (28R)

Again, subject to confirmation, it appears that the SWA 737-700 used the entire length of 28R before turning off at the far end. At the Bridge, it appeared to be about 1:20 ahead of the ACA (subject to the above caveats re the A320's ADS-B).
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 08:53
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 30
Not good!
Going NORDO after landing clearance is issued is very sloppy piloting. Even if the radio quits, you have two other radios. In a busy environment like SFO, if I don't hear anything for more than 30 seconds, I do a radio check!
I am sure they did not ignore the instructions deliberately, but c'mon fellas, were you trying to outdo your buddy and land on top of another aircraft?
787PIC is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 08:54
  #8 (permalink)  
BRE
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
The enthusiast-sourced ADS-B feed from SFO is pretty patchy and (as with last time around) the ACA A320 was a very early aircraft without GPS.
Is not having GPS significant to the event?

And don't majors usually buy the enhancement package if they want to hold on to their older jets at all?
BRE is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 09:11
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,784
Originally Posted by BRE View Post
Is not having GPS significant to the event?
Not at all.

It just makes working out what happened without access to the FDR and radar tapes more difficult for PPRuNers.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 09:25
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by Chesty Morgan View Post
Hold on, who's in command of the aircraft? ATC or the commander? ATC only issue requests...
Having read just a few of your comments on here I am seriously doubting if you are here to contribute to any discussion or just here to troll the out of everyone
jmvdb22 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 09:28
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 591
I believe that some of what you see on FR24 is EHS Mode S in any event; a number or our fleet aren't ADS-B equipped but you still see them on FR24.
Reverserbucket is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:01
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,789
Even if the radio quits, you have two other radios.
One on 121.5 and the other on ACARS DATA?
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:06
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Between the sheets
Posts: 159
showing once again that they are the finest in the land.
GMC1500 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:06
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,329
If they did have a radio failure, I can understand the decision to land in visual conditions. A go around in busy airspace without communication is no fun.
If they faked it, it was a very unprofessional and stupid decision, but why on earth would they do that?
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:23
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 490
CHESTY trolling as usual. I recall, final approach into LHR, we were catching up the one ahead. Did all I could but still gaining, I prepared for a Go Around. ATC got in first and said "a/c call sign, Go Around, Go Around, I say again, Go Around". Didn't sound like a 'request' to me Chesty !
Landflap is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:34
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 114
Originally Posted by India Four Two View Post
ATC recording here:

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ks...2017-0400Z.mp3

AC781 is cleared to land at 21.41. The first go-around is at 23.46.

This kind of incident is bound to happen occasionally if aircraft are being cleared to land before the aircraft ahead has cleared the runway.
Exactly about the way that the USA ATCOs issue / treat a landing clearance!
Neptune262 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:47
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 75
Posts: 8,286
Landflap. I agree. I have always had respect for Chesty but disagree that ATC issues "requests"!! We all know that the pilot has the ultimate responsibility but ATC but ATC instructions are mandatory and if the pilot thinks otherwise then he'll be called to explain his actions later. Long ago I was up front on a 747 landing on 09L at Heathrow. We left the runway and ATC told us to take the "second left........" The captain said to the FO "take the first, it's easier". I suggested doing what ATC said as the crew didn't know if ATC might know something the crew didn't - like maybe a broken light fitting which could have burst tyres. They took the second intersection....
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 10:54
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,136
Only a humble SLF observation and I appreciate there is such a thing as a conditional clearance but giving someone clearance to land when the runway is occupied is typical of todays habits of using words with no meanings or ignoring the meaning of the words you actually use..

Surely 'You are cleared to land' means just that surely-ie there is nothing in front of you in the air or on the ground, no one is going to taxi or drive a vehicle across the runway -the way ahead is CLEAR. If any of those things are not true then you cannot be CLEAR to land for the simple reason that you are not , there are obstacles in the way so the whole issue becomes pretty pointless and an opening to have an accident at some point
pax britanica is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 11:06
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,329
Some airports take it a step forward, they give land behind clearances.
In this case: Radio failure or no radio failure? That’s the question.

Logging on to ACARS when on 6 miles final? I don’t think so.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2017, 11:28
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 54
Posts: 0
the way I took chesty's comment was we get many requests.

Such as expedite this expedite that and we have to just ignore you.

On the roll out if we put the power up even slightly after landing and the ground speed is above 30 knts (or some other value) it triggers a FDR SOP bust. ATC told us to go faster is no excuse. Being on the runway is no different to being on the taxiway or apron.

Only way round it is being told to roll to the end before landing then not using flight idle and leaving the power setting reduction until further down the runway.

Brake hard to try and make a intersection and still to fast to make it but over 30 kts we can't put the power up. Once at 30knts we can increase power again but can't go over 30kts. You can scream expedite all you like tell us aircraft at 2 miles final, not going to change a thing. It will be 30knts until we get to the next exit.
tescoapp is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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