Was flying flt 699 BOS-DEN, on 7/11,
Ch 9 - was not on.
Plane taxied to the runway at BOS.
Got to take off spot. "Prepare for takeoff"
Started accelerating down runway.
Looked out portside window, was a plane landing on intersecting runway.
Pilot powered down.

Pilot calmly got on the intercom, announced that there was another plane landing across the runway we were taking off from. And that we would taxi around again.

We taxied around to a different runway to take off.

Spooky!

Anyone know if United or the FAA has to report this kind of stuff? and how often does this kind of stuff happen?

Yes, they do have to report this.

Takeoff incursions are more dangerous because a jet taking off has few options once it reaches a decision speed. It must take off and can only go in a straight line. A landing jet has a easier time of going around or landing long to avoid the obstacle.

From the OP, there is no way of knowing who is at fault. The UA jet could have been on the wrong runway or misinterpreted a taxi into position and hold for a clearance, the other jet could have misunderstood its clearance to cross the runway, or the tower could have given clearances to both by mistake. Or the tower might have thought the other jet had already crossed when it cleared the UA jet.

For anyone really interested, you could probably find the ATC tape at liveatc.net.

You would need to research the time of take off of UA669 that day, transfer it to Zulu and then search the archives. I believe that BOS tower is on there. Sorry no time to search myself today.

Lurker

I had a similar experience where I was watching a plane land out the starboard side on the crossing runway as we departed on BOS-LGA on the DL Shuttle a year ago. In our case the spacing was sufficient that they touched down well after we crossed the intersection, but it was close enough to catch my attention and I watched the entire climb out more closely than usual.

I found it on liveatc.net (http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kb...2008-1300Z.mp3) The abort is about a third of the way in. They are all very calm throughout the whole thing. The pilot comes back on and says "United 699 we're going to cancel that. Abort the take off" and the tower comes back and apologizes.

They moved the flight to 33L from 27 so that they could get them right back out instead of having to go back into the taxi line.

ok, so I'm procrastinating on work, but once I started I was amazed how easy this was to dig up...

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kb...2008-1300Z.mp3

the "incident" is about 1/3 of the way into the segment.

sounds like a AC356 was cleared to land on 22L and a bit later (30 seconds or so?) UA699 was cleared for takeoff on rwy 27. another controller's voice came on and told UA699 to abort the takeoff. sounds like it happened very early in the roll as they hadn't crossed 33L.

ok, now I'll get to work.

A good topic for TravelBuzz!, so I'll send it there.

iluv2fly
Moderator, UA

Departure was at 9:18 am (13:18 Zulu) according to FlightAware and confirmed by listening to the ATC recording: KBOS-Dep-Jul-11-2008-1300Z

I haven't found the incident yet. Would it be on Ground, Departure, or Tower?

edit: Looks like somebody beat me while I was searching.

Rough transcript, times (minutes:seconds) based on recording linked above:

09:38 -> Tower: "Air Canada 356, Boston tower, runway 33L, traffic holding on the crossing runway."
09:44 -> AC 356: pilot reads back landing clearance for 33L
10:04 -> Tower: "United 699, runway 27, clear for takeoff."
10:07 -> UA 699: pilot reads back takeoff clearance
10:21 -> Tower: "United 699, we're going to cancel that. Abort the takeoff United 699."
10:27 -> UA 699: "699, we're stopping the takeoff."
10:30 -> Tower: "Are you able to make that turn off to your right United 699?"
10:34 -> UA 699: "Negative. We'll have to take the next one at the intersection. We'll hold short of the runway."
10:38 -> Tower: "OK United 699. Sorry about that."
10:40 -> UA 699: "That's alright."

Runway Incursions are at the top of the list for the FAA, the problem can only get worse.....

If anyone is interested, The History Channel show Mega Diasters (http://www.history.com/megadisasters) just did a segment on the problem, and talks about the Runway Status LIght (RWSL) project they are implementing. It has been tested at DFW and SAN for several years, and the first "real" RWSL project will be to upgrade the DFW installation, that work is starting now, but will take the rest of the year to become operational. Approximately 20 airports will eventually get the package, although it will take years.

Basically RWSL is a series of Takeoff Hold Lights (THL) and Runway Entrance Lights (REL) controlled by radar (Sensis ASDE-X Surface Detection) and computer, independent of ATC. The idea is that if the radar detects a potential incursion situation, the hold lights stay red, and the pilot stays put until they clear. The same holds true for landing aircraft.

The show is being repeated on Saturday, at 3pm EDT......
-------------------------------------------------------
Mega Disasters : Deadly Jet Collision
Airs on Saturday July 19 03:00 PM

Since commercial aviation began, the romance of air travel has been marred by the tragedy of crashes. Today the sky above is safer than ever before--but the ground below has become more perilous. That was tragically proven in March, 1977, on Tenerife, part of the Canary Island chain, where 583 people were killed when two Boeing 747s collided at Los Rodeos Airport. It was the world's--and history's--worst aviation disaster. Though decades have passed, root causes for the tragedy at Tenerife remain with us today. The problem is called "runway incursions," meaning any incorrect presence of aircraft, vehicles or persons on an airfield. For the last decade, the U.S. has seen roughly 300 incursions per year. Most are not serious, but some have been very near misses--and others have taken lives. Unless significant changes continue to be made in airport infrastructure, aviation technology, and professional training, any American airport could be the site of the next tragedy.

-------------------------------------------------------

Do you get compensation in that case?

"We the people" pay for a national system to collect data on aviation "incidents". The OP describes just such an incident. Data is collected from pilots, FAs, ground crew, ATCs, etc. More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviatio...porting_System

Didn't the FAA in the past year or two relax separation standards ?

Perhaps, though I don't recall hearing about this. It has been 1,000 feet vertically and 3 miles horizontally in terminal airspace as far as I can remember, though that's only roughly two years since I became a pilot. But those separation standards refer to aircraft already in the air. On the ground, separation is fairly clear. You can't have two aircraft using the runway at the same time. The only separation standard having to do with incursions would be the amount of separation needed to clear a following aircraft to land, but this isn't what's really at issue.

They've actually implemented procedures to tighten up ground movements. It is now required for ground controllers to give you exact routing instructions to your final destination. Previously, a controller could say "taxi to runway one-five" and you got to pick how you got there and it was an implied clearance to cross any runways between you and the destination. If needed, the controller previously could add restrictions. Now they have to give you the full route.

This is actually the first time recently that it looks like the controllers messed up. Previous incidents I can recall all had to do with pilots not following clearances and entering runways when they shouldn't. Here the tower cleared two aircraft to use intersecting runways at the same time.