AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by C.W.E. »

Further to confusedalot's comments which most of us can relate to there is still the troubling issue of this was beyond any doubt one of the most serious cases of a crew flying for a major airline coming so close to flying into a line of airplanes all lit up on a taxi way that the investigators are having a tough time measuring just how close they actually were.

What has been done by Air Canada to reassure the public this will not happen again?

One thing for sure it was so unbelievable that a crew could be that out of the situational awareness loop that no one can figure out where they were, it sure was not flying the arplane.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by mbav8r »

Jet Jockey wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 9:34 am
Diadem wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 7:41 am The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

Regardless whether it was 20 feet, 13.5 feet or 3 feet, I would call this a very, very close call.

IMHO, there is no excuse for this and I hope the pilots were severely reprimanded (not a slap on the wrist) for this incident and frankly if what I heard from inside sources (Air Canada pilots) the two up front were not, let us say the most professional pilots and one of them will be most likely (hopefully) be a copilot for life... Perhaps he shouldn't be flying an aircraft, any aircraft.
Jet Jockey wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 6:31 pm [quote="Bet the farm" post_id=<a href="tel:1038798">1038798</a> time=<a href="tel:1525455269">1525455269</a> user_id=58414]
To anyone bad mouthing the FO for failing to upgrade: I bet the farm that you would have struggled mightily to pass in the same circumstances he found himself in, having received grave family news just prior to the start of training. In hindsight he should have removed himself as his head wasn’t in it. But other factors were pushing him to carry on. “During the return to the right seat, the FO performed above average” and “return to line check was above average and the recheck was above average” as stated by an AC trainer. He’s a better man than most of you keyboard warriors. IMHO.

Here we go... more excuses.

I have friend that is now retired from Air Canada (senior captain on the A320) and he was also on course (upgrade) when something terrible happened in his life. He went to management and asked for a leave of absence which he got. That was the right thing to do and after things went back to normal his life he went back on course.

As for your version of this copilots return to the right seat, I'll take your word for it at face value because it is only hearsay. The fact that an AC Trainer is letting it known that this pilot is/was better than average is also a red herring in my books. How pilots perform while in training and during a test or while in line indoc should not be public knowledge whether it is good or bad. If I ever heard a check pilot was letting it known to others that so and so was weak or better than average, I would have a word with him.
[/quote]
So, Betthefarm’s hearsay is somehow less reliable than yours, were your inside sources better than his?
There is no question, it was a close call screw up but it’s not like they didn’t question it, they asked tower to confirm the runway was clear, who didn’t know they were lined up for a crowded taxiway when confirming it. Maybe a little confirmation bias, tower confirmed for them that their eyes were playing tricks on them.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by pelmet »

tps8903 wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 11:12 am
Jet Jockey wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 9:34 am
Diadem wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 7:41 am The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

Regardless whether it was 20 feet, 13.5 feet or 3 feet, I would call this a very, very close call.

IMHO, there is no excuse for this and I hope the pilots were severely reprimanded (not a slap on the wrist) for this incident and frankly if what I heard from inside sources (Air Canada pilots) the two up front were not, let us say the most professional pilots and one of them will be most likely (hopefully) a copilot for life... Perhaps he shouldn't be flying an aircraft, any aircraft.
There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the FO failing to upgrade. He has his role in this incident, no doubt, but the Captain was flying the plane, and it was a visual approach. Any way you slice it the captain is the one responsible for this incident, and was the one controlling the aircraft as he flew into the path of 4 aircraft and came within feet of killing 1000 people. The FO failing to upgrade is a red herring in this investigation.
Having a sharp F/O can make all the difference in the world. A weak one, not as likely. The crew work as a team and the PM is the one who is more likely to notice a misalignment like this.

Media reports are saying the crew was tired. Apparently they had a day flight the day before. If this was overly tiring(and one can get tired), good thing they don't do long haul flights then where you can be up ALL night. I wonder if any enroute controlled rest was attempted. Some people seem more interested in chatting or reading in my experience. Power naps can do wonders.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Eric Janson »

Jet Jockey wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 9:34 am
Diadem wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 7:41 am The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

Regardless whether it was 20 feet, 13.5 feet or 3 feet, I would call this a very, very close call.

IMHO, there is no excuse for this and I hope the pilots were severely reprimanded (not a slap on the wrist) for this incident and frankly if what I heard from inside sources (Air Canada pilots) the two up front were not, let us say the most professional pilots and one of them will be most likely (hopefully) be a copilot for life... Perhaps he shouldn't be flying an aircraft, any aircraft.
From the NTSB docket.
The lowest adjusted radio altitude (nominally indicating the bottom of the landing gear, the
fuselage would be an additional 5 ft higher), which occurred as the airplane passed over
PAL115, was 60 ft. Measurements were made using an image of the security camera footage to
confirm this altitude reading. The image when ACA759 and PAL115 are closest is quite small
in the camera frame, so measurements made from the pixilated image are approximate. The
vertical stabilizer of the A340 was well illuminated and is 8.2 m (26.9 ft) tall (Figure 6).
Assuming ACA759 passed directly over PAL1151, the distance between the two airplanes in the
image was measured to be 13.5 ft. Allowing for uncertainty, this measurement was bracketed to
be between 10 and 20 ft of air gap. An A340 is 55 ft tall, so the altitude of the fuselage of
ACA759 as it passed over PAL115 was between 65 and 75 ft. This is consistent with the
adjusted radio altitude.
People earlier is this thread were describing this as a 'non event' - unbelievable. The video is very disturbing to watch.

If I did something this this it would cost me my job - I'm 100% certain of that.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by photofly »

It *is* fun to go and re-read some of the fist posts in this thread, for sure.

Maybe that first press report linked to, was more accurate than some thought?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
User avatar
5x5
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:30 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by 5x5 »

mbav8r wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 9:08 pm There is no question, it was a close call screw up but it’s not like they didn’t question it, they asked tower to confirm the runway was clear, who didn’t know they were lined up for a crowded taxiway when confirming it. Maybe a little confirmation bias, tower confirmed for them that their eyes were playing tricks on them.
Wow, I hope you don't really think that any professional pilot - heck, any competent pilot - on VFR approach would let a controller's confirmation over rule what they're seeing/not seeing. If there's any confusion they should simply overshoot and figure it out much higher above the ground.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Being stupid around airplanes is a capital offence and nature is a hanging judge!

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Mark Twain
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by mbav8r »

5x5 wrote: Sun May 06, 2018 1:40 pm
mbav8r wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 9:08 pm There is no question, it was a close call screw up but it’s not like they didn’t question it, they asked tower to confirm the runway was clear, who didn’t know they were lined up for a crowded taxiway when confirming it. Maybe a little confirmation bias, tower confirmed for them that their eyes were playing tricks on them.
Wow, I hope you don't really think that any professional pilot - heck, any competent pilot - on VFR approach would let a controller's confirmation over rule what they're seeing/not seeing. If there's any confusion they should simply overshoot and figure it out much higher above the ground.
Ever been up for nearly 20 hours to have your day culminate with a night landing with some black hole effect due to the water surrounding the runway you’re lined up with or thought you were lined up with. Ever had trouble processing what your eyes are telling your brain? Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
For what it’s worth, according to the Captain, he initiated the go around before the FO and the tower, so in all likelihood if not for his actions the two second delay could very well have been a different outcome.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
5x5
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:30 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by 5x5 »

mbav8r wrote: Sun May 06, 2018 5:21 pm Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’. For what it’s worth, according to the Captain, he initiated the go around before the FO and the tower, so in all likelihood if not for his actions the two second delay could very well have been a different outcome.
I'm not trying to argue, I'm just struggling to understand how could the Captain not know whether or not he was at 400'? One of the basic, basic tenets of night flying taught when you first get the rating is that the biggest risks at night are not being able to see clearly and illusions. And you use instrument indications to verify altitude, especially at critical stages like approach. I don't know what AC's SOPs are for night VFR approaches, but I assume there must be some guidance as to what minimum descent altitude is allowed prior to going around if you don't have certain, visual connection to the clear runway. It shouldn't be a manoeuvre done at the last minute to "save the day".
---------- ADS -----------
 
Being stupid around airplanes is a capital offence and nature is a hanging judge!

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Mark Twain
User avatar
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2394
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Old fella »

Very interesting reading from the data on the NTSB docket especially on statements from various AC training, check pilot and Chief Pilot, Managerial personal. To me personally it was a kinda an educational scenario in understanding the inside layers/ issues of a major airline and everything they have to deal with on operations. To me, AC is giving this incident very serious attention that it deserves.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by trey kule »

Wow! Just Wow.

An educational experience. :rolleyes:

The operations issues! The inside layers!

What...50;feet lower and how many hundreds of people would have died. Yep, this is all about learning. This was a failure by two pilots to fly even close to what would be expected of them. But Lets all celebrate the opportunity to learn....
Of course they are giving it serious attention. It was a huge screwup, and not one that can be put down to “ but for the grace of buddha, go I “

Yeh, Air Canada. :prayer:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Bet the farm
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 03, 2018 5:16 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Bet the farm »

This was a very serious incident and is being treated as such. I have always tried to keep an open mind with regards to how experienced flight crews can find themselves in a situation like this, and learn from their mistakes. Some people however tend to believe “that could never happen to me”. That type of thinking raises a persons chances of being weeded out via natural selection significantly. The interviews with the preceding flight crews in the docket, and their various levels of confusion on final are interesting. I believe that in the right circumstances this could happen to anyone. Always stay vigilant.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2394
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Old fella »

trey kule wrote: Mon May 07, 2018 10:18 am Wow! Just Wow.

An educational experience. :rolleyes:

The operations issues! The inside layers!

What...50;feet lower and how many hundreds of people would have died. Yep, this is all about learning. This was a failure by two pilots to fly even close to what would be expected of them. But Lets all celebrate the opportunity to learn....
Of course they are giving it serious attention. It was a huge screwup, and not one that can be put down to “ but for the grace of buddha, go I “

Yeh, Air Canada. :prayer:
I am not an Air Canada pilot nor have I ever worked for any airline further, I am not qualified on the A320 nor have I ever flown into SFO as a flight crew member. I try very hard to stay out of areas I know absolutely nothing about however reading this docket I did get education on ins/outs of airline operations and I qualified that with”personally”. There was quite a bit of written detailed information , even the names of the incident flight crew.

Yes, it was a very serious incident in view of the fact NTSB has opened a Docket on it and I have no doubt that AC is taking this incident seriously as well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by C.W.E. »

he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
That is really interesting.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Eric Janson »

Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
Our airbus all have a "100" autocall - I know that the autocalls are customisable by the operator.

Anyone from Air Canada able to clarify what the autocalls on the A320 are?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
User avatar
AOW
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:23 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by AOW »

Eric Janson wrote: Sun May 13, 2018 1:17 pm
Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
Our airbus all have a "100" autocall - I know that the autocalls are customisable by the operator.

Anyone from Air Canada able to clarify what the autocalls on the A320 are?
“400” “100” “50” “30” “RETARD”
---------- ADS -----------
 
hamstandard
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:33 am

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by hamstandard »

[quote=AOW post_id=1039778 time=1526270373 user_id=4441]
[quote="Eric Janson" post_id=1039747 time=1526242676 user_id=11458]
[quote]Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
[/quote]

Our airbus all have a "100" autocall - I know that the autocalls are customisable by the operator.

Anyone from Air Canada able to clarify what the autocalls on the A320 are?
[/quote]

“400” “100” “50” “30” “RETARD”
[/quote]

Are you suggesting that the last statement that their aircraft said to them that night was a call of retard, retard?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by Eric Janson »

he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
Just trying to understand this. It makes no sense to me. The CVR data would have been useful.

There would have been a '400' autocall and a '100' autocall after which a go around was made.

Radar altimeter data is clearly displayed at the bottom of the horizon on the PFD. It's a normal part of my scan.

Hopefully the final report will clarify this.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by pelmet »

Eric Janson wrote: Mon May 14, 2018 11:42 pm
he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’.
Just trying to understand this. It makes no sense to me. The CVR data would have been useful.

There would have been a '400' autocall and a '100' autocall after which a go around was made.

Radar altimeter data is clearly displayed at the bottom of the horizon on the PFD. It's a normal part of my scan.

Hopefully the final report will clarify this.
Lack of awareness if you thought you were at 400 feet but you were below 100 feet. I suppose after seeing lights on what they perceived to be the runway and then being assured that the runway was clear, it was mentally decided to ignore the distracting but unknown lights, perhaps concluding that a they were Ok to be there even if their purpose was unknown, and the approach continued with attention focused on being stable. One can intentionally put this stuff out of their mind and feel they they will figure it out upon landing with some strange excuses going through the mind such as maybe it has something to do with the turnoff lights. Been in a similar situation myself.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by pelmet »

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-release ... 80831.aspx

You will be able to watch the board meeting live. They can be interesting in that you might hear info that doesn't make it to the final report.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

Post by C.W.E. »

Are you suggesting that the last statement that their aircraft said to them that night was a call of retard, retard?
Maybe it should have said retard's?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”