|
Originally Posted by krautland
(Post 9935906)
I presume briefly switching off the runway lights after having denied them landing clearance multiple times would be unacceptable?
Perhaps flashing them ON and OFF several times to get their attention and then turning them OFF for a prolonged time would work. |
light board next to the PAPI's would be better...
It wouldn't be to long before flares set the airfield grass on fire during a dry period. |
BTW, I can’t believe someone with Atc is so naive to assume a pilot would see a red light signal at an International airport. Must be a desk-jockey. CYA. What else could they do? |
Originally Posted by tescoapp
(Post 9935841)
For the SLF reading there is a huge difference between they way they do things in the USA and how most of the rest of the world works.
In Europe they won't give a landing clearance until much later on, in fact until the runway is clear. We do have a "land after" call in the UK but generally they don't use it with commercial aircraft. |
I stand corrected, thankfully I don't have to operate into CDG and their screwed up mixture of French and English.
But hey if a load of pilots don't know what the other aircraft are doing most of the time there is no issue with landing clearances being issued without the runway being safe. |
Sounds like they had the wrong frequency dialed in for the tower but then switched to the correct ground control frequency after landing. Does anyone know whether the crew checked on with the tower?
|
Originally Posted by Jet Jockey A4
(Post 9935889)
Not to excuse the Air Canada pilots in this incident but the tower using the light to tell them not too land was perhaps a long shot in this instance.
|
Does anyone know whether the crew checked on with the tower? Probably the same crew as the last incident. This time, they were so happy to have actually found an actual runway, they missed the 8 calls to GA from tower. Perhaps flashing them ON and OFF several times to get their attention and then turning them OFF for a prolonged time would work. |
How where they able to communicate to tower once they were on the ground so quickly? Did they realize they had a radio failure on roll-out and then decide to use the second radio?
The pilot monitoring could surely switch the radios even on short final in visual conditions. I'm interested to see what comes from this. |
So.... eight calls to GA and still they landed safely with the previous vacated. Little premature on the GA instruction maybe? What was wrong with continue expect late landing clearance. I can normally tell whether a runway I'm about to land on is clear or not in VFR
Heard one the other day where tower instructed a GA due to a plastic bag blowing across the runway - really? |
So.... eight calls to GA and still they landed safely with the previous vacated. Little premature on the GA instruction maybe? The aircraft had no idea why they were being told to GA. What if it was FOD from the previous landing? EDIT: I just listened to the ATC recording again. I think I figured it out, not once in the 8 times tower said GA, was there a "please"..... after all ATC only issues 'requests'....:\ FAA investigates another Air Canada landing mix-up at SFO The official Air Canada twitter account initially sent a tweet to this reporter after a story about the incident first appeared online, appearing confused about what had happened. AC twitter reads PPRUNE! |
Originally Posted by Chesty Morgan
(Post 9934696)
Hold on, who's in command of the aircraft? ATC or the commander? ATC only issue requests...
|
Nope if you say expedite and I am already at my max SOP speed I ain't going any faster.
|
Nope if you say expedite and I am already at my max SOP speed I ain't going any faster. |
Which reminds me of the Sin Bin at ORD.
|
(b) is particularly pertinent to this case:
§ 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions. (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC. (b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised. (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible. (d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC. (e) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no person operating an aircraft may operate that aircraft according to any clearance or instruction that has been issued to the pilot of another aircraft for radar air traffic control purposes. |
When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. Looks good on paper, sure some expensive people in some office thought it all through:ugh: But, they are no pilots, with real experience. Try following the above quote somewhere over Africa... Or even over europe or the usa, if i see a cb in front of me, and all the lcc`s and others asking for different levels, I don´t declare emergency, if the freq. is too busy........... i will just turn! and tell/explain atc later what i am doing. Too much abuse of RT nowadays.... TP |
Obviously these 2 pilots were on the proper frequency to receive their landing clearance initially, then either a transceiver failed, the #1 transceiver was changed to a incorrect freq. or the #1 transceiver volume was turned off.
If a transceiver was changed to a improper frequency most pilots would realize they might be on the wrong frequency with either departure/approach type of instructions or radio silence on a busy Tower Frequency. Then again these guys had another working transceiver that was most likely on a company frequency. Another example of poor awareness of another AC crew. |
I'm bothered by hints in the discussion that there are so many escape paths without obvious correctable faults that could lead to such a landing accident.
If I imagine that the next similar combination will lead to an accident with loss of life, I ask myself what corrective actions would we seek? would it be "flashing red strobe lights or flares on the runway approach surface? commanded ATC activation of lights or horn in the cockpit? mandatory pilot fault with consequences ? others? |
When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance If a clearance is given and then a reply of "unable " is given. Then its not been obtained. ATC have zero clue if I have Anti skid in the mel or any of the other items which can make high speed taxing interesting. To be honest on a roll out at 90 knts getting told to expedite my priority is the aviating not the communicating. I won't hit the brakes I won't reduce the power any further but I won't be increasing it until I am at 30 knts. You can stick me in the sin bin if you like, fact is if I go off road and the accident investigation lot pull the FDR and declare I was taxing faster than the SOP's even if what happen is not my fault I will be hung drawn and quartered. Then I have a incident on my record and basically become unemployable if I wish to move company's. Why should put my career at risk for a ATCO's screw up? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:47. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.