More woes at SFO - transposing runway numbers leaves little room for error
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest, how many 01 and 10 runways exist worldwide?
The candidates I've been able to find (discounting runways shorter than 6000'):
Airports with both a 01 and 10: Albany, Presque Isle and Savannah.
With both a 03 and 30 (and therefore also a 12 and 21): Albuquerque, Appleton, Artesia, Tel Aviv/Ben Gurion, Prestwick, Laramie
Airports with both a 01 and 10: Albany, Presque Isle and Savannah.
With both a 03 and 30 (and therefore also a 12 and 21): Albuquerque, Appleton, Artesia, Tel Aviv/Ben Gurion, Prestwick, Laramie
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But this would also flag up a conflict while inputting runway data at any other position other than being lined up on the correct runway. Another software check would be to include an ‘Are you sure?’ prompt, when it detects another runway at a particular airport which could be mistaken for the desired one.
Out of interest, how many 01 and 10 runways exist worldwide?
And yes, I have when using varying tactical and nav displays now and again fat fingered it and hit the wrong key/button.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Washington state
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps for a cross check the computer should require the pilot to enter the runway length as well. As long as humans are in the loop we will screw this sort of thing up. We are not yet at the point where you just touch "Chicago" on a map and the computer figures out all the rest for you (by talking to the ATC computer and the ground control computer and the corporate computer....)
Things will be SO much easier when we hop into our personal Ooober flying car and just talk to the computer to tell it where we want to go. Then we sit back and play with our smut-phones while HAL does the thinking.
Only half a speed-brake
Worse yet, I can imagine a little light reflection on the screen obscuring the readability between 1L and 10; add a fair dose of presbyopia and you get my drift. What about 1l and 11, not nice.
Which SW were they using?
Last edited by FlightDetent; 17th Sep 2019 at 12:43.
Originally Posted by Speed of Sound
But this would also flag up a conflict while inputting runway data at any other position other than being lined up on the correct runway.
As I said before: just add a check of the ND when you arm NAV before takeoff. It will stand out like dog's balls if you are not using the runway/SID you put in the box, or check the runway on the ND as you start rolling.
Calling and thinking about a runway by only its non-zero digit might lead to confusion - doing so gets one into the habit of ignoring the zero and just concentrating on the other number. This is dangerous because you then lose the crucial distinction between, say, 01 and 10.
Voicing the zero adds safety because it reinforces the image of the number in the mind as one looks at the MCDU or NAV display - of both the digits instead of just the non-zero digit.
Pilots in certain places in the world almost routinely abbreviate RT comms and use non standard phrases - presumably to sound slick? - but in my experience this practice often adds confusion, and the irony is that non standard messages have to be repeated much more often than in airspace where standard phraseology is more fully adhered to.
Calling and thinking about a runway by only its non-zero digit might lead to confusion - doing so gets one into the habit of ignoring the zero and just concentrating on the other number. This is dangerous because you then lose the crucial distinction between, say, 01 and 10.
Voicing the zero adds safety because it reinforces the image of the number in the mind as one looks at the MCDU or NAV display - of both the digits instead of just the non-zero digit.
Voicing the zero adds safety because it reinforces the image of the number in the mind as one looks at the MCDU or NAV display - of both the digits instead of just the non-zero digit.
Yes, it's compounded by the fact that, as mentioned above, long-standing US practice is not to paint the leading zero on the threshold marking, in contravention of ICAO SARPS (Annex 14), which specifies that runway heading markings should always include two digits.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The candidates I've been able to find (discounting runways shorter than 6000'):
Airports with both a 01 and 10: Albany, Presque Isle and Savannah.
With both a 03 and 30 (and therefore also a 12 and 21): Albuquerque, Appleton, Artesia, Tel Aviv/Ben Gurion, Prestwick, Laramie
Airports with both a 01 and 10: Albany, Presque Isle and Savannah.
With both a 03 and 30 (and therefore also a 12 and 21): Albuquerque, Appleton, Artesia, Tel Aviv/Ben Gurion, Prestwick, Laramie
Well yes, that's why I didn't include those.
Unlike the other examples, confusing 02 with 20 or 13 with 31 isn't typically going to make much difference to the TORA, though the resulting wind might come as a bit of a surprise.
Unlike the other examples, confusing 02 with 20 or 13 with 31 isn't typically going to make much difference to the TORA, though the resulting wind might come as a bit of a surprise.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless of course they are parallel runways of differing length, although the ‘L’, ‘C’, or ‘R’ should then be an added clue
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m pretty sure the journalist was just trying to give the reader some general idea of the speed involved. “How fast are we going at takeoff/landing?” is a fairly common question. 160kt is a reasonable enough answer without getting into a lesson on runway performance.
Regarding the incident, my airline has had crews misread performance data for 01 and 10 at SFO. I assume it’s got to do with the way our brain processes information. You’re much more likely to confuse 01 and 10 than 08 and 18.
Similar situation with 13/31. Even more so since it’s the same bit of pavement, and your mental picture of the airport may actually add to the confusion. “Did ATC say 13L or 31L?”
Always have to look out for that at JFK, for example.
Regarding the incident, my airline has had crews misread performance data for 01 and 10 at SFO. I assume it’s got to do with the way our brain processes information. You’re much more likely to confuse 01 and 10 than 08 and 18.
Similar situation with 13/31. Even more so since it’s the same bit of pavement, and your mental picture of the airport may actually add to the confusion. “Did ATC say 13L or 31L?”
Always have to look out for that at JFK, for example.
I’m pretty sure the journalist was just trying to give the reader some general idea of the speed involved. “How fast are we going at takeoff/landing?” is a fairly common question. 160kt is a reasonable enough answer without getting into a lesson on runway performance.
Regarding the incident, my airline has had crews misread performance data for 01 and 10 at SFO. I assume it’s got to do with the way our brain processes information. You’re much more likely to confuse 01 and 10 than 08 and 18.
Similar situation with 13/31. Even more so since it’s the same bit of pavement, and your mental picture of the airport may actually add to the confusion. “Did ATC say 13L or 31L?”
Always have to look out for that at JFK, for example.
