AC ignores multiple SFO ATC go around orders Oct22
Oct 25, 2017, 12:05 am
#31
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
There will at least be records of a mechanic taking a reported problem and attempting to reproduce, diagnose, or fix, whether any parts were replaced, etc.
In reality, the most likely explanation is that pilots not paying full attention set the wrong frequency and didn't notice the red light alerting them due to the same inattention. This will all be obvious from the CVR...oh wait, the airline let the potentially negligent pilots leave with passengers on a potentially malfunctioning (hah) plane, destroying that evidence.
Personally, I think it's time for some heavy FAA sanctions on AC. I'm not sure
whether that should be banning from SFO for a time, insisting that the pilots and dispatchers involved come testify under penalty of perjury, declaring that any passenger that wants a ticket refund can have one, or what. There's something systematically wrong here that nobody at the airline seems interested in fixing.
And yes, as mentioned, this incident seems much more related to the SFO incident thread where it started then disappeared, than this long catchall "Winnipeg" thread.
In reality, the most likely explanation is that pilots not paying full attention set the wrong frequency and didn't notice the red light alerting them due to the same inattention. This will all be obvious from the CVR...oh wait, the airline let the potentially negligent pilots leave with passengers on a potentially malfunctioning (hah) plane, destroying that evidence.
Personally, I think it's time for some heavy FAA sanctions on AC. I'm not sure
whether that should be banning from SFO for a time, insisting that the pilots and dispatchers involved come testify under penalty of perjury, declaring that any passenger that wants a ticket refund can have one, or what. There's something systematically wrong here that nobody at the airline seems interested in fixing.
And yes, as mentioned, this incident seems much more related to the SFO incident thread where it started then disappeared, than this long catchall "Winnipeg" thread.
Oct 25, 2017, 7:31 am
#32
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canada
Programs: Star Alliance G*, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium,
Posts: 3,585
It happened again - October 22, 2017
This:
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
Oct 25, 2017, 7:33 am
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada
Programs: UA*1K MM SK EBG LATAM BL
Posts: 23,309
Of course we will never know what actually happened because the CVR will be gone.
Excellent to see AC actually called out on their serious safety deficiencies in the US media.
Oct 25, 2017, 7:37 am
#34
Formerly known as newbie elite
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: YUL
Programs: IHG Diamond Ambassador, Accor Platinum, AC50K
Posts: 2,927
This:
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
Hope whoever's bonus was based on not updating the A320 avionics suite is doing well today.
Oct 25, 2017, 8:14 am
#35
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: OGG, YYC
Programs: AA, AC
Posts: 3,697
I don't follow your thinking. Aviation VHF radio technology hasn't changed since long before A320s were introduced. So you link this incident to FMS/navigational technology?
Oct 25, 2017, 8:15 am
#36
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: OGG, YYC
Programs: AA, AC
Posts: 3,697
This:
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3821395/a...abort-landing/
The common denominators are an A 320 and AC. I find it very disturbing that the pilots said the radio was not working properly.
Oct 25, 2017, 8:32 am
#37
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
I do agree with your above comment about VHF technology; AC mgmt deciding against updating the A320 avionics suite is a red herring.
Oct 25, 2017, 8:43 am
#38
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: OGG, YYC
Programs: AA, AC
Posts: 3,697
How could this happen? Pure speculation: maybe they set up the next frequency (ground) but mistakenly made it active instead of standby. Or thought they were tuning the other radio. There are lots of ways in which this can happen. I've made enough radio mistakes myself to know that.
Oct 25, 2017, 8:47 am
#39
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 4,105
To this of us who do multiple landing and takeoffs each year with this airline, I think a fair question is this: What demonstrable steps do we see from Air Canada that indicate it is addressing what seem to be an increasing number of safety / safety culture failures?
I'm sure there will be all kinds of folks who will jump on such a question, but it seems fair. Do we have to wait for one of us to go down in an incident for such a question to bear resonance?
I'm sure there will be all kinds of folks who will jump on such a question, but it seems fair. Do we have to wait for one of us to go down in an incident for such a question to bear resonance?
Oct 25, 2017, 9:01 am
#40
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
To this of us who do multiple landing and takeoffs each year with this airline, I think a fair question is this: What demonstrable steps do we see from Air Canada that indicate it is addressing what seem to be an increasing number of safety / safety culture failures?
I suspect yes, it will take a crash for something to change in the culture. It shouldn't be much longer now before there is a crash.
Oct 25, 2017, 9:06 am
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada
Programs: UA*1K MM SK EBG LATAM BL
Posts: 23,309
If there is a crash, will AC execs not get their bonus? I dont think so. So why should the very top care about all these occurences?
Oct 25, 2017, 11:50 am
#42
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YVR - MILLS Waypoint (It's the third house on the left)
Programs: AC*SE100K, wood level status in various other programs
Posts: 6,232
We will probably never know, but I really question what is going here with cockpit management. ATC assigns a frequency, you read it back and punch into the radio if it's not already set up. They identify themselves on the new frequency and get no response.
At this point two pilots decide to ignore the issue for now and proceed to land. Is this SOP? I always thought you were supposed to go back the previous frequency, identify yourself and your status and inquire what the correct frequency is supposed to be. Or were they simply following the last "AC 781 clear to land, contact XXX at YYY.Y"?
At this point two pilots decide to ignore the issue for now and proceed to land. Is this SOP? I always thought you were supposed to go back the previous frequency, identify yourself and your status and inquire what the correct frequency is supposed to be. Or were they simply following the last "AC 781 clear to land, contact XXX at YYY.Y"?
Oct 25, 2017, 12:17 pm
#43
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Halifax
Programs: AC SE100K, Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite. NEXUS
Posts: 4,569
Do you think that the cold statistical analysis that lead to not "upgrading" the 320s avionics suite was somehow invalidated? I think its clear it doesn't make sense to do that upgrade just before the one way flight to Arizona. Before the last rev flight? Before 1000? A "hard landing" was possible when they came up with their threshold for risk tolerance.
Oct 25, 2017, 12:21 pm
#44
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: YYC
Programs: AC 50k 1MM, Marriott LT Titanium Elite
Posts: 3,402
Why do you think nothing has changed? Are you up on the flight polices and maintenance PIM?
Do you think that the cold statistical analysis that lead to not "upgrading" the 320s avionics suite was somehow invalidated? I think its clear it doesn't make sense to do that upgrade just before the one way flight to Arizona. Before the last rev flight? Before 1000? A "hard landing" was possible when they came up with their threshold for risk tolerance.
Do you think that the cold statistical analysis that lead to not "upgrading" the 320s avionics suite was somehow invalidated? I think its clear it doesn't make sense to do that upgrade just before the one way flight to Arizona. Before the last rev flight? Before 1000? A "hard landing" was possible when they came up with their threshold for risk tolerance.
Oct 25, 2017, 12:26 pm
#45
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Halifax
Programs: AC SE100K, Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite. NEXUS
Posts: 4,569
We will probably never know, but I really question what is going here with cockpit management. ATC assigns a frequency, you read it back and punch into the radio if it's not already set up. They identify themselves on the new frequency and get no response.
At this point two pilots decide to ignore the issue for now and proceed to land. Is this SOP? I always thought you were supposed to go back the previous frequency, identify yourself and your status and inquire what the correct frequency is supposed to be. Or were they simply following the last "AC 781 clear to land, contact XXX at YYY.Y"?
At this point two pilots decide to ignore the issue for now and proceed to land. Is this SOP? I always thought you were supposed to go back the previous frequency, identify yourself and your status and inquire what the correct frequency is supposed to be. Or were they simply following the last "AC 781 clear to land, contact XXX at YYY.Y"?
It is suspicious that they ignored the red light, but I have no idea if it could realistically have been visible from the cockpit. Pilots have good vision, but peripheral vision and cognitive capabilities are finite. If you don't think your radio is broken, you think everything is fine, why would you be on alert for 1920's signal device?