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

Another SFO incident for AC (#3)?

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

Another SFO incident for AC (#3)?

Old 30th Oct 2019, 20:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Innisfil Ontario Canada
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another SFO incident for AC (#3)?

Not sure if it's ok to reference AV Herald here, but this raised an eyebrow today...
Incident: Canada A319 at San Francisco on Oct 3rd 2019, landed without hearing landing clearance
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Oct 29th 2019 21:26Z, last updated Tuesday, Oct 29th 2019 21:26ZAn Air Canada Airbus A319-100, registration C-FZUJ performing flight AC-741 from Toronto,ON (Canada) to San Francisco,CA (USA) with 110 people on board, was on approach to San Francisco's runway 28L when the crew did not report on tower frequency. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on runway 28L.

The Canadian TSB reported the landing clearance was issued, however, it was not heard by the flight crew because they didn't switch to tower frequency. The airline conducts an investigation.

ACA856 is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 21:49
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lemme guess, they 'forgot' to preserve the CVR recording.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 22:51
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They landed uneventfully without a clearance at a busy airport. Iím sure nobodyís going for the CVR. Maybe file an ASAP, then enjoy your layover.
Check Airman is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 05:16
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Sudbury, Suffolk
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Check Airman View Post
They landed uneventfully without a clearance at a busy airport. Iím sure nobodyís going for the CVR. Maybe file an ASAP, then enjoy your layover.
"They landed without a clearance as a busy airport".

You think that's OK?
Maninthebar is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 05:23
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maninthebar...
They didn't land without a clearance, they landed without acknowledging a clearance. Subtle difference.
Cropduster is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 05:34
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Sudbury, Suffolk
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That is not accurate. They landed without receiving clearance to land.

The Canadian TSB reported the landing clearance was issued, however, it was not heard by the flight crew because they didn't switch to tower frequency.
The clearance was issued but the crew did not know that., on this report anyway
Maninthebar is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 06:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Back in my day we only did something after we had heard the clearance AND read it back for confirmation.
blue up is online now  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 06:57
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 77
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Big airports like that they kind of imply landing clearance with approach clearance. Itís the medium and smaller cities you have to worry about.

Atlanta used to say Ďyouíre always cleared to landí. They didnít want any go-arounds because of a late switch over or frequency congestion. Theyíd also flash a green light to make it legal.
FIRESYSOK is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 17:31
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does it mean anything in the US anyway ? Theyíll be four ahead when you are ď cleared to land ď
Meester proach is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 18:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There does seem to be a significant difference between the US approach and other countries. In the US a clearance to make an approach is issued 15 minutes or so before touchdown as the aircraft is still in descent 10,000 - 8,000ft and the aircraft takes that as you can land off the approach. In other countries an explicit landing clearance is required and is provided at 2 or 3nm prior to touchdown, if not the aircraft is expected to go around. This was highlighted in the case of an aircraft landing at DCA when the Tower controller was not responding to phone calls and did not issue a clearance but an aircraft landed anyway.
Ian W is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 18:38
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
In the US a clearance to make an approach is issued 15 minutes or so before touchdown as the aircraft is still in descent 10,000 - 8,000ft and the aircraft takes that as you can land off the approach.
Izzat so?

I'm not rightly sure that's how it works in America.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 20:17
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: European Administrative Area (Western District and Islands)
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Come to the Old World: Paris Charles De Gaulle on switching to tower at 9 miles "...you are number 3 for 26L cleared to land"
six-sixty is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 20:29
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 6,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was very surprised the first time I flew in a light plane in the US at Santa Monica, when we were number 3 and cleared to land. In Canada (and all the other countries I have flown in), you are not cleared to land until you are number 1 and the runway is clear.
India Four Two is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 21:27
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The US controllers would clear you to land on first contact regardless of how many landers were in front of you. But I can’t honestly recall if they ever did that in poor visibility. I used to fly there often enough that the phrase “cleared to land” lost its meaning.

The more troubling thing about this incident isn’t that the crew didn’t hear the clearance, its that they wouldn’t have heard a go-around instruction either.
Australopithecus is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 21:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: expat
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last time I landed in SFO the landing clearance was issued on first contact with TWR even though the runway was subsequently occupied by other aircraft three times prior to us actually landing. Itís a conditional clearance but different to most countries in that the conditions are not stated. Like a lot of what happens in SFO it can throw you off your game a little as it is a bit out of the normal pattern.
HPSOV L is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 00:10
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Benelux
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last time I landed in SFO the landing clearance was issued on first contact with TWR
Indeed, and this is pretty much standard at most, if not all, major airports in the USA.
BRUpax is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 02:22
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's called anticipated separation. If they end up not having it, then it's off you go. It works quite well.
West Coast is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 03:09
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
It's called anticipated separation. If they end up not having it, then it's off you go. It works quite well.
But why? Seems like an unnecessary erosion of safety. The only answer I can conceive is controller laziness or a desperation to sound slick.
giggitygiggity is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 04:01
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by giggitygiggity View Post
But why? Seems like an unnecessary erosion of safety. The only answer I can conceive is controller laziness or a desperation to sound slick.

Who cares what it seems like, do you have any data that indicates itís unsafe? Opinion isnít fact nor data. The vast majority of the top 10 busiest busiest airports in the world successfully use anticipated separation daily.

itís simply different than what youíre used to, not more safe or less safe, just different,
West Coast is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 05:18
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Sudbury, Suffolk
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But this was not what happened in this case. The flight crew did not receive a clearance to land from TWR whether anticipated or not. They just landed.

Hence, I assume, the investigation
Maninthebar 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.