Exclusive: SFO near miss might have triggered ‘greatest aviation disaster in history’
Aug 9, 2017, 9:04 pm
#691
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 16,652
(my emphasis)
Are you sure about that? Here's the report: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-rele...r20170802.aspx
I don't see anything to suggest that the pilot initiated a "go around" on his own.
Are you sure about that? Here's the report: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-rele...r20170802.aspx
I don't see anything to suggest that the pilot initiated a "go around" on his own.
https://ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA17IA148.aspx
"At 2356:10 PDT, the local controller directed ACA759 to go around. The airplane had already begun to climb at this point (see figure 4)."
Aug 9, 2017, 9:07 pm
#692
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
When interviewed, the pilots stated that they thought Taxiway C was 28R (presumably for whatever reason they did not see the big red lit X but did see two lit "runways" and knew they were supposed to land on the right hand side one. If 28L had been open and lit as was 28R, they almost certainly would have lined up correctly - hence the runway closure was a contributing factor to the pilots' (mis)perception.
Therefore, I would rephrase your last sentence: The pilot's failure to observe/comprehend that a runway was closed is a contributing factor.
Aug 9, 2017, 9:09 pm
#693
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: YYC
Posts: 495
That said, I can only find one instance of an airplane landing on a closed runway, with a quick search through wikipedia's list of 1990-2019 and 1960-1989:
- Western Airlines Flight 2605 -- landed on closed runway at MEX; 23L was closed, but 23R didn't have ILS. They were told to use 23L's ILS to approach, with an implied sidestep to 23R once visual was acquired. They never did the sidestep and landed (disastrously) on 23L. Not sure if runway lights were a contributing factor here.
Presumably there are other instances of closed runway landings or almost-landings that were less disastrous and thus less well recorded, but presumably there are also other instances similar to what happened in SFO, with not nearly as much of a close call.
Aug 9, 2017, 11:24 pm
#695
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,073
From the more complete report referenced in your link
https://ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA17IA148.aspx
"At 2356:10 PDT, the local controller directed ACA759 to go around. The airplane had already begun to climb at this point (see figure 4)."
https://ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA17IA148.aspx
"At 2356:10 PDT, the local controller directed ACA759 to go around. The airplane had already begun to climb at this point (see figure 4)."
Aug 9, 2017, 11:28 pm
#696
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
Yes, UA1's transmissions would have been heard in AC759's cockpit. I believe that's what caused AC pilots to initiate the go-around
Aug 10, 2017, 1:20 pm
#697
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,324
Aug 10, 2017, 4:06 pm
#698
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,073
I don't claim to know either way. Seems like the pilots here would know: are the planes under tower control usually listening to other pilots' communications with the tower?
ETA: I should be more specific. Are planes approaching the runway (or taxiway, as the case may be) usually listening to other pilots' communications with the tower?
ETA: I should be more specific. Are planes approaching the runway (or taxiway, as the case may be) usually listening to other pilots' communications with the tower?
Last edited by dhuey; Aug 10, 2017 at 4:15 pm
Aug 10, 2017, 4:38 pm
#699
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NYC
Programs: AA 2MM, Bonvoy LTT, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,636
UA transmission would have been picked up by AC cockpit as both would have been on same frequency but it's a big jump to say that AC pilot hearing UA transmission caused them to initiate go-around.
Aug 10, 2017, 4:59 pm
#700
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,073
I would imagine the AC cockpit voice recorder will shed some light on that. Still, if the AC pilot decided to go around a few seconds prior to the tower's order based on his or his co-pilot's observations (and not hearing UA1's transmissions or seeing the Philippians Air illumination of its landing lights), wouldn't you think he would have emphatically said that in the initial NTSB interview?
Aug 10, 2017, 5:10 pm
#702
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,073
Aug 10, 2017, 5:13 pm
#703
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,446
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-...l#post28640178
The incident airplane’s cockpit voice recorder had been overwritten, so NTSB investigators did not have that data.
Aug 10, 2017, 5:23 pm
#704
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YEG
Programs: AC Lifetime SE100K, 3MM, SPG Lifetime Plat, Hertz PC, National Executive Elite
Posts: 2,901
I would imagine the AC cockpit voice recorder will shed some light on that. Still, if the AC pilot decided to go around a few seconds prior to the tower's order based on his or his co-pilot's observations (and not hearing UA1's transmissions or seeing the Philippians Air illumination of its landing lights), wouldn't you think he would have emphatically said that in the initial NTSB interview?
Aug 10, 2017, 5:24 pm
#705
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 57,073
True? You need to read more of this thread such as post #557 in which the NTSB commented on the near miss and noted the lack of CVR:
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-...l#post28640178
The incident airplane’s cockpit voice recorder had been overwritten, so NTSB investigators did not have that data.
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-...l#post28640178
The incident airplane’s cockpit voice recorder had been overwritten, so NTSB investigators did not have that data.