Aerolineas Argentina A340 runway incursion BCN video
 

No need to explain it, just watch the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N5T...ature=youtu.be

Well that was a big failure on someone's part.

When you see something stupid going on in front of you just react as necessary. No need for ATC to tell you to go around. Sort it all out afterwards.

Now lets see what the investigators say.

More than one failure here and a bit of luck to overcome them.

I would have expected some eyes in the RH seat would be looking at the approach to confirm it was clear and not buried in a map or something else.

Wow, I guess we can forget getting a 25R crossing from now on...Sierra and M10 it is....

It looks worse because of the foreshortening of the lens used, but in terms of close it ticks that box. It makes you wonder how sharp the BCN ATC staff are to let that happen.

Always felt comfortable with 2.5nm spacing at LGW, and landing clearances as the departing is rotating, because, it is "planned" that way, and IF it goes wrong, they have a game plan.

Problem with BCN is that stuff like that happens by default, and the plan is. . . . . . . . well, there is no plan.

Unfortunate consequence of course, as said already, RW crossings will go out of fashion. Oh well, good for the block hrs.

It is foreshortened but according to ASN:

ADS-B data logged by Flightaware24 suggest the B767 had descended to 250 feet before the go around was initiated.

Comments on Youtube seem to be saying that the Argentine Airbus repeated the instruction to holdback and then didn't. Aviation Herald says it's unclear as to whether ATC gave clearance or not. LiveATC has LEBL tower but not ground. Is there any other option to replay the interactions directly before the incursion?

Are eyeballs out the window what saved the day here or would there have been some other warning to alert the crew?

Could have been very different if a night approach.

www.jacdec.de

http://www.jacdec.de/WP/wp-content/u...2@LEBL_MAP.jpg

ADS-B height data logged by the flight tracking websites is basically a Flight Level (whether above or below the TA), in other words it's not corrected for QNH.

So if the aircraft was actually at the height indicated by FR24, it's pure coincidence - indeed the video strongly suggests it was lower.

Agreed. Seems like the pitch up happened in 2 stages as well.

it was maybe as low as 100ft certainly much lower than 250

QNH in the early morning of yesterday at LEBL was 1016 from archive metar so 250 feet based on 1013 would put a/c about 80 feet higher at 330 feet but not sure about accuracy of ADS-B height data.

Maybe pitch up in 2 stages on GA a/c due initial TOGA and then max thrust due urgency?

This is such a basic lack of airmanship that there can't be many excuses for the A340's crew. Always check for traffic on finals before crossing a runway, even if cleared to cross. PPL lesson 1.01 or so...

That said, ATC has some answering to do too. I wonder:
1/ which language was used between ATC and Aerolineas Argentinas (if using Spanish then the approaching UTAir 767 crew was probably left out of the loop)
2/ whether any stop bars are fitted at taxiway/runway crossing points (such as M5 on the diagram).

I fly to BCN every now and then, and never like it. Convoluted taxi routings, near mandatory runway crossings (at least to/from apron R4), and you just feel that ATC isn't on top of their game. When there, I taxi at walking pace, make sure the FO writes down all taxi instructions, and (yes, even before this happened) double-check all runway crossing instructions (and of course check for traffic).

I'll be even more careful in the future...

Cheers :cool:

I'm still trying to figure out (if the above diagram is correct) what exactly the A340 was doing. Had he landed on 7R (unlikely) and was taxying to the terminal. If so why that route? Was he taxying for departure on 25R (normal for heavies and if so, why did he originate from K4/K5 area?

Judging by the speed at which the A340 was taxying as it crossed the runway, together with the relatively late go-around of the B767, my take on it is that the A340 crew had been cleared to expedite the crossing, but in the end didn't do it as quickly as the controller had expected/hoped (especially considering the turn - if the taxy route is correct - from D onto M).

Had it been a completely unexpected incursion onto RWY02, I'd have thought that the B767 crew would have commenced the go-around earlier.

I can't imagine any crew would cross an active runway at such speed, in clear conditions, without looking in both directions first. Nor can I imagine a scenario in which that same crew, having looked, could fail to see the heavy on final. Lastly, having seen the aircraft on final, I couldn't imagine a crew crossing that runway (with or without a clearance) unless they felt comfortable to do so by virtue of a clearance which of and by itself inferred that, if done without delay, would be a safe manoeuvre and expeditious to the flow of traffic at the airport.

I think it was an error of judgement (by both the controller and the Argentinian crew) instead of a careless compliance failure.

Let's also not forget that the A340 was at least 1km from the threshold when it crossed.

It was a dramatic-looking video, but I doubt it was a particularly dramatic event for either crew.

Hotel Tango, it didn't originate from K4/5 but most likely from the sea-side apron of the terminal 1, i.e @ K8/9 limit.
So taxi via K, then D, then M to 25R. Only D & M parts highlighted on the diagram, but you can see the K part at the beginning of the video.

Quote:

AENA didn't notice any close call. The 767 was leared to land and the A340 to cross. There were plenty of time and separation distance. The UTair wanted to GA then it's his decision !

The crew of the 767 MUST have seen the A340 approaching their active runway at high speed and they should have been watching them very closely, I fail to see why they left it so late to go around..........?

Anyway it's made all the news channels....

Any reason for a HD camera to be positioned so accurately where this was at the time including having a complete pan and follow thru of the AA aircraft? Very well choreographed film with a human at the other end of the camera...just wondering if this is normal practice at BCN or any other airport.

I am curious how someone was able to get all of those different views on video....

Keen spotter

To me it looks like they were filming on airport grounds, and their website looks like a semi-official site of the airport (Google Aerobarcelona). Might well have been a coincidence, doing a video shoot and then seeing this situation unfold.

As a photographer I can just say that using telephoto lens can dramatically change the perception of distances which is also the case in this great video.

Just from a curiosity my question to pro's: from what distance would a pilot decide to GA when observing a moving object blocking his runway which is about to vacate it? Or is it rather a rule of 500 or 1000 ft agl for stabilized approach?

Depends on company i guess. If the runway is in sight and we do not have a landing clearance by 50ft AGL it's a mandatory go around. If the runway is blocked it is the decision of the crew at the day, although as mentioned above on many airports it is quite normal that the runway is still occupied at 200ft with the previous traffic usually just leaving the runway.

I guess that makes sense. What doesn't (to me) make any sense is a taxy route which effectively crosses an active runway no less than 3 times when the route K, J, E and M would only necessitate 1 crossing. Seems a strange procedure, albeit without knowing all the facts of course.

More than a distance we talk about an altitude...MDA , minimum decision altitude, where you decide to continue for landing or go around. ;)
From the video they look very close but can be just an optical perception, things like this happen every day worldwide.

Argentinas A343 at Barcelona on Jul 5th 2014, runway incursion | AeroInside

HT, the "route K, J, E and M" seems nice, but it's only one route.
What if you have two ways taxiiing traffic to manage?

(only a guess)

So, no possibility of:

"XXX expect late landing clearance, traffic crossing"

"YYY expedite crossing, traffic on short final"

"XXX Go around I say again go around acknowledge"

Or (given the recent thread about use of English) the Argentinian talking in Spanish to the controller and the aircraft on final not understanding the transmission and electing to go around as the safer option.

How well does your tin foil hat fit?

There are thousands of spotter videos on you tube. The spotter was filming the A340, then the B767 on final, and panned out as the Airbus crossed the hold and entered the runway. It's been edited and snipped to make a shorter video. Much as I don't see the appeal in standing in a field watching aeroplanes, it's pretty clear there is no conspiracy or choreography here.

Absolutely, and most likely the reason. Nevertheless it does beg the question about a procedure which requires a heavy jet to cross an active no less than THREE times at a busy international airport when there are other options, even if it does mean holding inbound traffic to the most southerly gates of T1.

Might be an idea to extend J to M for starters.

From an ATC perspective this sounds correct. Lander told to expect late landing clearance while the crosser was told to expedite the crossing. Did not look like the crosser was going to clear the runway in time so the lander went around. No dramas and not an unusual event at very busy airports.

This surprises me very much because in the video it seems that the UTair would have touched down before the A340 would have cleared the runway. So if the Aerolineas would have got stuck with some problem we would have had disaster.

My experience with Barcelona is that they never clear you to cross when an airplane is that close. One note though, BCN have reduced their seperation margins and now have something called like intense traffic or so. Therefore the margins are smaller, and runway 02 is a runway that needs to be crossed...

Spotter Video
 

from the credentials of the video it seems to have originated from an avid spotter who is setup permanently at BCN.

AeroBarcelona: Toda la actualidad del aeropuerto de Barcelona

Answers my question of being at the right place at the right time with good equipment. Puts to rest any further queries on this issue from my end. :ok:

I'm sorry but that reply from AENA is nonsense to me.

It's one thing to issue a conditional landing clearance "land after", though I'm not sure if Barcelona are able to issue such clearances? it's a different thing entirely however to expect an aircraft to actually touch down with another still infringing the runway within his landing zone whether it's a km from the threshold or not. To me it is clear that the Utair would have touched down with the Argentinas still infringing had they continued.

I also can't comment for anyone else here, but I personally wouldn't cross a runway with the landing traffic that close to crossing the threshold whether ATC had cleared me or not!

Certainly not "ops normal" as they imply in my opinion, especially considering the amount of time I've wasted in my life taxiing the long way around 25R due to "insufficient separation" on the landing traffic.

So did they just go around for sh!ts and giggles? An honest mistake from ATC and dreadful airmanship from the Argentinian crew.

With a fin that high and possible sink on g/a I don't think I would push it too far!