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

Washington Dulles RTO incident

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

Washington Dulles RTO incident

Old 24th Sep 2018, 00:10
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Ireland
Posts: 32
Washington Dulles RTO incident


Could've been much much worse. Thankfully UAL had their eyes ahead.
SliabhLuachra is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 00:23
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 542
WTF??? The controller almost didn't seem to realise what type of dog up he'd made!!!!
thunderbird7 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 01:43
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,856
Clear left...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 09:43
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 338
WTF??? The controller almost didn't seem to realise what type of dog up he'd made!!!!
That is invariably the case when people make these kinds of errors. The truth is if you’re human, you’re susceptible to it, it gets scary when you’re human and you don’t realise you’re susceptible to it.
I was impressed with how all parties reacted and worked after the RTO.
73qanda is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 10:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,788
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs View Post
Clear left...
one rolling, but we’ll make it across in time...
AerocatS2A is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 14:22
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 53
Posts: 2,332
I was impressed with how all parties reacted and worked after the RTO.
+1 and I think he realized it right after UA326 told him he had cleared them.
His dudeness is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 15:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 49
Sounds like they switch controllers (judging by the voices) at some point when 326 gets the line up and wait and requests a few minutes to reset some things?
RufusXS is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 15:51
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
It's only a guess but I would think that the controller (possibly a little shaken) requested to be relieved from his position. All I can say is that with multiple runway crossings at many major US airports, and the amount of tin that moves around at these airports, it's a wonder that these type of incidents don't happen more frequently. On the whole ATC do a magnificent job.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 16:35
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,506
If there was an operational error, the controller would have been relieved from the position.
West Coast is online now  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 17:24
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
If there was an operational error, the controller would have been relieved from the position.
That's for sure, but controllers will also voluntarily request to be relieved as soon as possible after an incident. They don't have to be told!
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 18:14
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,506
Originally Posted by Hotel Tango View Post
That's for sure, but controllers will also voluntarily request to be relieved as soon as possible after an incident. They don't have to be told!

Their wishes vs process.
West Coast is online now  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 22:48
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 726
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Their wishes vs process.
I suspect that any decent process will have such a request from a controller built in because it's a safety issue. I have vague recollection of reading an accident write-up (with fatalities) that was controller error where the unfortunate person couldn't be relieved for half an hour due to lack of someone to sit in the chair.
llondel is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 00:57
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,506
What it really comes down to is whether the controller wants off or not, they are coming off and protocals are initiated, statements, pee in s bottle, NATCA rep, preservation of data, etc. Its nice to say he or she may ask to come off position, its moot, they're coming off.
West Coast is online now  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 01:18
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,196
At United does the crew require an amended dispatch release after a rejected takeoff for a non-maintenance reason? In recent years that seems to be a big deal with some outfits, not so big with others.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 14:51
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,240
Think night and moderate rain. Think Tenerife. Think Air Canada at SFO. Seems like the weakest link in the U.S. air transport system.
aterpster is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 16:33
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
Think night and moderate rain. Think Tenerife. Think Air Canada at SFO. Seems like the weakest link in the U.S. air transport system.
I don't know if this is ATC bashing but let's get one thing straight: Tenerife was not an ATC error. It was pilot error! Furthermore, there was no ground radar to assist the controller. It was also an era when official ATC phraseology used the term "standby for take-off". A clipped transmission made the senior Captain think he had been cleared for take-off and he dismissed doubts expressed by other crew members! Since then we have CRM in the cockpit and "departure" iso "take-off" used by ATC with the sole exception of an actual take-off clearance. As for Air Canada at SFO, yet again pilot error!
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 18:13
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 586
The only thing to bash here is airport layout requiring runway crossings..
I think by now everybody in the industry must understand the need for building taxiways around runways whenever possible, even though the extended taxi times can be a bit frustrating once in a while...
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2018, 03:15
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 726
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
What it really comes down to is whether the controller wants off or not, they are coming off and protocals are initiated, statements, pee in s bottle, NATCA rep, preservation of data, etc. Its nice to say he or she may ask to come off position, its moot, they're coming off.
OK, I misunderstood what you were saying. However, when there is an incident like that, possibly not that bad but serious enough, who else in the tower knows about the screw-up? It may rely on the controller to flag the problem (no point in hiding it because someone's going to file a report) in the first instance to get things moving.
llondel is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2018, 14:08
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by Hotel Tango View Post
I don't know if this is ATC bashing but let's get one thing straight: Tenerife was not an ATC error. It was pilot error! Furthermore, there was no ground radar to assist the controller. It was also an era when official ATC phraseology used the term "standby for take-off". A clipped transmission made the senior Captain think he had been cleared for take-off and he dismissed doubts expressed by other crew members! Since then we have CRM in the cockpit and "departure" iso "take-off" used by ATC with the sole exception of an actual take-off clearance. As for Air Canada at SFO, yet again pilot error!
Indeed, Tenerife was not ATC error, nor was SFO. IAD was. Airport layout as well. The public isn't going to care whose fault it is if another high speed collision between two large transports occurs on a runway at a major airport. Think: weak link.
aterpster is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2018, 14:32
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chocolatetown
Age: 59
Posts: 83
Runway Status Lights Debut at Washington-Dulles

Was the RWSL system not operational or just ignored by the crossing aircraft?

"Runway status lights (RWSL) are now operational on runways and taxiways at Washington-Dulles International Airport (IAD).

The fully automated lighting system is being implemented at airports throughout the U.S. as part of a program to help enhance runway safety. The lighting system provides direct runway status information to pilots and surface vehicle operators indicating when it is unsafe to enter, cross, or takeoff from a runway. It requires no input from controllers as it processes information from surveillance systems and then activates runway entrance lights and takeoff hold lights in accordance with the motion and velocity of the detected traffic.

Light fixtures embedded in the pavement are directly visible to pilots and vehicle operators.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plans to have RWSLs operational at 23 U.S. airports by the end of 2016."

https://www.nbaa.org/ops/safety/runw...es-airport.php
climber314 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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