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

Cathay messy in 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.

Cathay messy in SFO

Old 2nd Sep 2019, 15:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 662
Cathay messy in SFO


Well this is worrying, you can almost feel the uncertainty/confusion in the Cathay cockpit, another reminder of how important situational awareness is and to never lose sight of it. Surely this would've been a 3 man ops with someone observing during this phase to keep overall awareness?

With all that high tech in the 350 too
Officer Kite is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 15:32
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Going home
Posts: 243
Looks like Cathay went right through the 28L localizer and was intercepting the the 28R localizer. Did they have the correct runway in the box I wonder?
VH DSJ is online now  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 15:33
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The sky
Posts: 212
How can it be that the UAL failed to follow a TCAS RA. Or have I misunderstood?

TCAS is the final barrier to a mid air collision. Not following one is insane.
Locked door is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 15:44
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 662
Originally Posted by Locked door View Post
How can it be that the UAL failed to follow a TCAS RA. Or have I misunderstood?

TCAS is the final barrier to a mid air collision. Not following one is insane.
Strictly speaking that's true and I was always taught the same and wondered too. It seems they took reassurance from SFO tower telling them the traffic was not on a collision course. One does wonder how far Cathay were willing to go on this rollercoaster of an approach before they themselves thought it was time for a GA!
Officer Kite is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 17:27
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: england
Posts: 26
just looking for that youtube clip. Did this happen yesterday Officer K??
cabbages is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 17:51
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 2
Should have just followed the RA , not tried to reason the position of the Cathay
Meester proach is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 17:57
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by cabbages View Post
just looking for that youtube clip. Did this happen yesterday Officer K??
rather worrying that UAL seemingly ignoranced a TCAS RA. Cathay, whilst far from blameless, at least followed his TCAS.
no matter what Atc say, always follow the TCAS. NOT atc.
3Greens is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 18:12
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 835
Originally Posted by cabbages View Post
just looking for that youtube clip. Did this happen yesterday Officer K??
Video is of 28-08-2019, not stating when it happened.
gearlever is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 18:23
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: England
Posts: 3
The only thing ATC should be saying in the event of a TCAS RA is "roger". Giving traffic information is a big no.
tigerinthenight is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 19:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 63
Posts: 293
In many parts of the USA, pilots will often operate with TCAS in TA mode to avoid 'nuisance' RA because of parallel runway ops, mixed GA traffic etc. and the operators think this is quite acceptable as the airspace is designated as congested. The chances are that the UAL aircraft never got an RA because the automatics were not enabled. The danger comes when these guys operate over in Europe, which the US regards as congested in all areas, so it is quite possible that one half of a conflict is only receiving TA. So long as the other party follows the RA adequate separation should result, though the experts might be able to point out circumstances where this may not be good enough.
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 19:39
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,098
Originally Posted by Fortissimo View Post
The chances are that the UAL aircraft never got an RA because the automatics were not enabled.
On the tape at 4:34 United 1515 reports that he got a climb RA.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 19:48
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,895
Originally Posted by cabbages View Post
just looking for that youtube clip. Did this happen yesterday Officer K??
It happened at least 3 months ago, judging by the United's flight number.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 19:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 10
TCAS RA only gives 500' parallel path vertical separation, worst case.

No followee, no guarentee.
moosepileit is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 20:01
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,221
Sounds like a very bad day in the office for the Cathay.

Long flight, poor crew rest, poor arrival briefing?
Uplinker is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 20:13
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: VA
Posts: 210
Can’t speak to the specifics of this incident, but we have SFO specific procedures that allows the Captain to select TA only for TCAS during closely spaced parallel approaches in VMC with discretion to disregard warnings if the encroaching aircraft is in sight and safe separation can be maintained.
Tomaski is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 20:34
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by tigerinthenight View Post
The only thing ATC should be saying in the event of a TCAS RA is "roger". Giving traffic information is a big no.
I take what you are saying however when faced with a question, ATC tried to help. Instead of:

UAL 1515: “OK,Sir, Where is that aircraft behind us? I got an RA here to climb”

Tower: “Roger”

(Btw “Roger” is the response to “TCAS RA” which UAL did not technically say”)

To add to what someone said earlier .... I’ve flown domestically in the US and as an expat flying heavies, for both operators there was a note in the company pages recommending TA only for KSFO when conducting the 28L/28R approaches. Who knows what UAL recommends in theirs.

The bigger industry wide issue is operators having difficulties flying a visual (based on proceeding traffic, or just the runway in site). I completely get why, since when I was overseas we practiced patterns all the time in the sim so that we could say we could do it, but in the real operational environment no one would dare fly a visual from a downwind, even CAVOK daylight. It’s aviation, crap happens and if all envolved in this reflected on what they could’ve done better then that’s a good outcome. However in some companies and aviation cultures punitive actions would be the result. Which leads to people not willing to accept a visual for fear of cocking it up! Yet puff up their chests and think themselves superior aviators.
VThokie2 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 21:55
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: away from home
Age: 58
Posts: 705
Originally Posted by Tomaski View Post
Can’t speak to the specifics of this incident, but we have SFO specific procedures that allows the Captain to select TA only for TCAS during closely spaced parallel approaches in VMC with discretion to disregard warnings if the encroaching aircraft is in sight and safe separation can be maintained.
We have identical procedures. The Cathay guys seemed lost in SFO.
oceancrosser is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 22:22
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Age: 100
Posts: 1,447
According to the audio the UAL communicates "I got a RA here to climb" so it looks like they did get a TCAS RA.
sonicbum is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 23:37
  #19 (permalink)  

I Have Control
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 1,204
RA =OBEY

No issue
RoyHudd is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 23:59
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 89
I was a little shocked when the UAL says “he’s passing underneath us” and then doesn’t respond to a climb RA.

Without being on the flight deck it’s hard to know exactly what the dynamics looked like but it sounds pretty bad.

Glad it all turned out ok.
ScepticalOptomist 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.