I repeat, it wasn't the tower's fault.
 

No ZH-127. You fail to understand the concept of pilot in command along with its attendent authority and responsibility. Your bleating on about ATC's short comings is naive to the point of being vacuous. How many thousands of hours of captain's time in air transport operations do you have in your log book? Should you ever acquire any, you'll get the point.

You're missing the point i'm trying to make.

The captain has ultimate responsibility over the safety of his aircraft. Regardless of the instructions given to him/her by ATC, the book stops with the captain.

The point i am trying to make is that whilst not the controllers fault, if there were more than one controller on duty at LEX the chances of avoiding this accident would have been massively increased. Therefore, by its own admission of guilt, the FAA is partly at blame too. I am not saying that the controller is at fault.

Read what i am saying, and engage your logic. I am not disagreeing with you about the responsibility of the captain of any aircraft. :ugh:

…. Sage advice!:ok:
.
..the event you mention is foremost in my mind …… unfortunately uninformed and irresponsible comment in the media may have contributed to that hideous outcome :sad:
.
…… to carefully point out and/or question possible circumstances may reduce the likelihood of the media playing the blame game whilst poking around in the dark
… someone referred earlier to ‘systemic’ ….. seems there might have been … rather that individual responsibility …. Isn’t it better to flesh out 'sytemic' before people are wrongly tared and therefore placed at potentially greater personal risk! :mad:
.
.. the hounds will hunt irrespective! :hmm:
.
…. How many of us could have been in any of those seats that morning .... and really truly honestly say ‘that could not have happened to me’ :uhoh: ……. Well???
.
As has been said …. lots of possible issues in this one …. :( my best wishes go to the FO and the ATC ….. treat them well!!

Accident investigations are NOT about apportioning blame. It's about working out what (normally human) factors were involved, and how to try and stop it happening again.

As usual it was a combination of factors, errors, and bad luck that in the end all the 'holes in the cheese' lined up and an accident happened. Any one thing out of many could have prevented this but it didn't. All we can do is try and learn from it and and perhaps put in extra safety measures or rules or procedures that may help stop it again.

This is a terrible ACCIDENT and no one person or persons are to blame. I for one was careful yesterday lining up that I had the correct runway and will be more careful in the future.

I speak with experience of ground ops at European airports - so a quick question:
The rwy 22 holding point stop bar would have been de-selected as the aircraft had been cleared to lineup / position & hold; were there no taxiway centre line lights on the taxiway that would have been illuminated across the concrete element of rwy 26 over to the rwy 22 hold?

XL5

no doubt that the PIC is the final authority and has the final responsibility for a safe flight.

BUT in aviation we help each other keep things safe. As in a previous post, I mentioned to ATC that a fuel truck was on the runway in my case and I declined to takeoff.


WE WATCH EACH OTHER and help each other and if we don't a hell of a lot of controllers just might be decertified.

There Should have been a controller scanning the runway...there wasn't, and bam...does that make it the controllers fault? no

does that make the system in need of improvement? yes


If a radar controller issued a clearance for an apch to one airport and saw on his screen the plane going in the opposite direction, shouldn't he say something?

AVIATION SAFETY is everyone's business. A real controller would know that.

Do ya think?

http://www.kreindler.com/kreindler_n...Flight5191.htm

jondc9 ..... most ATC staff will agree with you on that , everyone in aviation works together , mostly as independent teams . However managers these days seem to have different thoughts on the subject . Money is the bottom line , the LEX accident seems to prove my point . Certainly from my personal experience , managers decry experts' (read , the people DOING the job's opinion) with a "no , no , that's not true" when their ideas are challenged . "Risk factors" and "Stake-holders view" are the current "management" phrases . There needs to be a distinct management 'culture change' before things change for the better . Money is NOT everything .

For real jondc9?
 

A fuel truck on the runway? A fuel truck? The ubiquitous tongue in cheek simulator scenario for a low level go-around and you, jondc9 the magnificent, self appointed mouth piece of aviation safety driven by a selfless urge of altruism, is the one pilot in ten's of thousands to actually live the scenario of a fuel truck on the runway for real? I suspect it is you, and not the alleged fuel truck, which is full of gas.

Captain, Clearance, Compass, Chart 10-9, Crew. End of story.

…… jon comon that’s a given ….. how many times a day around the world do controllers do just that ….. picking up errors that no one would expect or predict … unless you have worked the job, it is difficult to understand!! … it is however a reality! .... have you ever had your bacon saved by ATC??? .. do you know that he/she did not scan the runway (22) prior to or during the issuance of the T/off clearance?? … no … … correct! … depends on the findings of the NTSB .. and then those parts of the 'system' indentifed and how much those individual factors were considered contributory! ….. if he/she saw it … yes … of course … your point is??
.
.. it is a bit like saying (based soley on your descriptions) you were cleared for take-off twice whilst the runway was occupied!! ... you saw the truck and did not go .... the system failed safe!!! .... mind you I find it a little odd that you site this example without explaining the circumstances of how or why it happened! ....not very fair in the current context!!! ….. in my experience, every RPT Pilot, ATC (and dare I say it GA) operates to that end ….. I do not care for your imputation to the contrary! :suspect:
.
.... .... to those on this thread engaged in a purile pissing contest ..... leave it out ... this is neither the time nor the place .... there is far to much at stake to behave like Imbeciles!!

Yes I think we can agree on this statement, I don't think anyone is trying to pin the responsibility of this tragic accident on ATC, that said though, I feel the question of what the controller was doing is a legitimate one, as a previous Facility rated controller at the busiest (military) airport on the west coast I can't imagine what would be more important than keeping an eye on traffic that is cleared for takeoff, just my 2 cents. :confused:

it is amazing that you find so much wrong with the idea that a controller should look out the window and watch an airliner takeoff. that looking out the window might be more important than tending to "administrative duties".

FAA has admitted 2 controllers should have been on duty.

XL5...should a controller just issue a clearance and not see that it is followed?

….. how many eyes in that tower? … does the ADC have other duties such as coordination etc etc? …. Do they ever take there eyes off the manoeuvring area??
.
….. I am sure your question will be asked and answered in due course!
.
jon … there is nothing wrong with the premise of looking out the window …. There are lots of things that might interrupt that scan and/or re-scan though …. the same for Pilots yes?!?! :ouch:

Complacent - Inattentive or Just Tired ?
 

This is the third time in a few weeks when something tragic and disastrous has been discussed, that plain common sense and attention to detail would have prevented.
Incorrect power settings on a 747 at Halifax, inattention to which engine was shut down in a C-5 at Dover and now an apparent failure to pick the correct runway on a familiar airfield.
I stress that I am a lowly Cherokee driver but I certainly know my rotation speed and as I have to drive over the numbers at the threshold (not to mention seeing the marker board at the stop bar with the runway designator as I leave the taxiway) simple attention pretty much ensures a correct runway choice.
The one thing this tells me is that in whatever we do and wherever we go, we have to attend to all the details and never stop questioning ourselves ... am I in the right place, doing the right thing, at the right time ????
Some mistakes are just too expensive to make.
DGG :confused:

scurvy dog

yes, many things can stop your scan...but if the SYSTEM says 2 controllers should have been on duty and only ONE was on duty, there is room for improvement.

NO one wants ATC to be in command of aircraft, but the lowest private in the army should tell the highest general that his fly is open if it is.

it benefits all of us.

…no argument and no doubt there will be some difficult questions asked on that score! …. hope a proper ‘safety assessment’ was done to reduce the coverage (as apparently happened in the months previous) …. particularly if it is inconsistent with stated FAA policy of two bod’s?!
... was it contingency staffing?? .... a potential minefield either way :uhoh:

…no argument and no doubt there will be some difficult questions asked on that score! …. hope a proper ‘safety assessment’ was done to reduce the coverage (as apparently happened in the months previous) …. particularly if it is inconsistent with stated FAA policy of two bod’s?!
... was it contingency staffing?? .... a potential minefield either way :uhoh:

Lexington paper reports FO was initially in an induced coma. He has emerged from the coma but is still unconscious and in critical condition. According to his mother, he wasn't originally scheduled to fly on Sunday. He arrived in Lexington early Saturday morning, Capt. arrived Saturday afternoon. Crew arrived at KLEX about 05:15 Sunday and fired up APU in what eventually turned out to be the wrong aircraft before boarding N431CA.

Lexington Herald-Leader

Additional from Louisville, Kentucky paper

I don't know what signage is used at LEX, but if it's anything near the ICAO standard this is what they look like:http://www.advancedairportequipment....runwaysign.gif
And yes, the sign is illuminated from inside.

It takes some serious fatigue to see 22 when this kind of sign says 26.

However the arrival time of the pilots the previous day (reported in later posts) does not raise any glaring circadian rhythm adjustment issues.

So what kind of sign is there where the taxiway meets 26? Perhaps because it's just a g/a runway, there's no ICAO standard sign and unfamiliarity with the airport led them to take 26 for 22.

Although there's been no NTSB comment so far, what about the deadhead crew in the jump seat? Could this have added a distraction factor?