AC ignores multiple SFO ATC go around orders Oct22
#46
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: OGG, YYC
Programs: AA, AC
Posts: 3,697
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"?
What they might have done is, after landing clearance, pre-tune the ground frequency so that when handed off to ground, they can switch quickly with one button push. I do this myself, but I always get that done long before I'm on tower frequency. Making any change to the radio in the super critical phase between landing clearance and clearing the runway is risky.
The above is speculation. It's possible there actually was a radio equipment failure. But I'd bet against that. My money is on poor cockpit practices.
#47
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: OGG, YYC
Programs: AA, AC
Posts: 3,697
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?
This might have been an effective signal in 1920 when airfields were remote and dark places. But in 2017 at SFO where there's a sea of lights, including blinking red lights on the left wing tips of every aircraft on the ground, it might be very difficult to see.
#48
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 430
Question is did maintenance checked and found any issue with equipment. Very unlikely or they fixed in 90 minute. FAA/TSB report should tell.
Some posters on social media suggesting, crew are allowed to erase CVR, that would raise more questions.
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada
Programs: UA*1K MM SK EBG LATAM BL
Posts: 23,309
#50
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YEG
Programs: AC Lifetime SE100K, 3MM, SPG Lifetime Plat, Hertz PC, National Executive Elite
Posts: 2,901
Just my two cents.
#51
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
Obviously, you have never worked in a hazardous environment. It is exactly these types of events that give upper management the warnings that something is missing and that changes need to be made. BTW, in this event, there are, once again, redundant processes in place to prevent a ground strike. Of course, the primary barrier is the call from the tower. The secondary barrier is the light. These 2 barriers were obviously ignored. There is a third and equally important barrier. That is the pilots' ability to see as they land. Of course, if there was a plane on the runway, and they saw it, they would go around. They landed and they landed safely, I don't think we know if there was still traffic on the runway when they landed. The warning is that the first two (or perhaps more) barriers did not function as designed. Once you rely on the final barrier, you no longer have a redundant process. This is concerning. I think it is wrong to say that no one cares. I am sure that management cares and that they are doing everything that they believe is necessary to fix these problems.
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.
#52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
At least they got rid of Valujet Klaus.
#54
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YEG
Programs: AC Lifetime SE100K, 3MM, SPG Lifetime Plat, Hertz PC, National Executive Elite
Posts: 2,901
Don't get me wrong. Events like this are eye opening. It is false to say that AC doesn't care. It also opens their eyes. The only other thing that I can offer as evidence is that, a couple of months after the taxiway landing attempt, I sat beside an AC Director and had a direct conversation with him.
I fly as much as anyone does on AC. Especially within NA. If they didn't care, they would be unsafe. If they were unsafe, I wouldn't trust them.
#55
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
Snarky? Towards whom? I just thought it was a little more factual. Evidence that they care? Millions of people fly with them on an ongoing basis and have no close calls or incidents. It is an extremely hazardous industry. If upper management didn't care and didn't put efforts into improvement, things would deteriorate quickly. I have seen it.
Don't get me wrong. Events like this are eye opening. It is false to say that AC doesn't care. It also opens their eyes. The only other thing that I can offer as evidence is that, a couple of months after the taxiway landing attempt, I sat beside an AC Director and had a direct conversation with him.
I fly as much as anyone does on AC. Especially within NA. If they didn't care, they would be unsafe. If they were unsafe, I wouldn't trust them.
Don't get me wrong. Events like this are eye opening. It is false to say that AC doesn't care. It also opens their eyes. The only other thing that I can offer as evidence is that, a couple of months after the taxiway landing attempt, I sat beside an AC Director and had a direct conversation with him.
I fly as much as anyone does on AC. Especially within NA. If they didn't care, they would be unsafe. If they were unsafe, I wouldn't trust them.
#57
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YEG
Programs: AC Lifetime SE100K, 3MM, SPG Lifetime Plat, Hertz PC, National Executive Elite
Posts: 2,901
No close calls or incidents?? 100% false. You must have an incredibly short memory. I would argue that AC has had the MOST number of close calls and incidents of any worldwide airline this year. You clearly have a blind trust of them, regardless of the facts. Fine, it's your life. I, however, will not fly on an AC plane until things change.
And, now I am truly curious. How will you know when things have truly changed, so that you can start to fly with them again?
#58
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
The two incidents at SFO. I follow the industry closely and I am not aware of any other worldwide airline that has had multiple such incidents this year or that came within a handful of feet of killing so many hundreds of people. Especially not airline that cares so little that they keep "accidently" letting the CVR get overwritten by quickly flying the plane again. So ya, there's lots of evidence.
#59
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,449
I'm sorry but "not aware" isn't empirical evidence to support your contention. If there is facts to support your contention please share them but until then it's merely an opinion. That is of course merely my humble opinion.
#60
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878