AC in SFO. Again...

[whistlerboy02]

The CVR will sort it out...... it always does

[GyvAir]

Are FDRs these days fancy enough to determine and record what radios are selected and to what frequencies?

[Mach1]

Agreed and I'm willing to accept your comment but they claim they had radio problems...

What sort of problem, partial comm failure, total comm failure, hit the wrong switch comm problem?

SQ7600 if you know you have a comm failure? How did they talk to ground once they had landed?

Anyway I guess we will find out when the "official" report comes out.

Hopefully this crew will be more forthcoming and more truthful then the previous 320 crew involved in the near miss in SFO.

I can't and won't speak to the radio... I wasn't there... my only comment was on the use of a light signal.

if you know you have a comm failure?

I think than is an important part of the event... did they know they had a comm failure? Or did they only realise that after they tried to call for taxi clearance? I don't know... none of us know.

Maybe we should put down the pitchforks and torches until we do know.

[A346Dude]

What is the point of a landing clearance if everyone gets it on initial contact, especially if they're not told about the traffic not far ahead who could dog it getting off the runway?

[True North]

This was by definition a comm failure, we just don't know what caused the failure.

I can't accept that an Air Canada crew intentionally ignored 6 calls in one minute from the tower to go around (according to CTV News so take that for what it's worth). They didn't hear the calls. It could be a technical fault or it could be finger trouble but the last transmission they heard was "cleared to land". They undoubtedly knew the preceding traffic had to clear the runway and that things were close so they were likely both quite focused on the traffic while also mentally preparing for a go around. The control tower is way over there on the left somewhere and I don't know how bright the light is that they shine at you. The last time I saw one was when I did my PPL and I seem to remember having to really look for the damn light - and that was at a little airport that didn't have lights flashing all over the ramp all the time. So, it's entirely possible the crew didn't see the light either. Ultimately it's a happy ending, nothing got bent and no one got hurt. The facts will come out and we'll all learn some lessons but in the big scheme of things it's a non-event. I agree that if it wasn't SFO we probably wouldn't be talking about it.

[atphat]

I don’t know about any of you. But when I’m within 6 miles of the airport the last thing I’m looking at is the tower and looking for lights. I’m either flying or monitoring. So we can all stop pretending that’s it’s a big deal in any way they didn’t see “the light”. A light they weren’t aware they were supposed to be looking for.

[ahramin]

It’s worth thinking about though. Happened to me in YVR a couple years ago. Pm messed up the frequency change, was trying to get back on arrival at 500’ and I looked at the tower and saw the green light. Saved a go around.

If you’re not expecting it though, you’d never see it.

[atphat]

Good point

[trey kule]

If you’ve ever paid attention you would know I don’t speculate and will say what I always say regardless of who is involved. I don’t know what happened and will wait until the report comes out and facts are known. Pretty much what you said, but don’t let that stop your insults.

You are right about the insult, my apology, and I will try and refraim in the future

[Meatservo]

A whole lot of feathers and not much chicken, if you ask me. This is boring.

[confusedalot]

Unintended finger trouble...oops...that's my vote. Yes it is boring.

['97 Tercel]

SFO is a supreme sh$t-show. Most days it makes Newark or Teterborough look like CYEG...and that's on a nice day. I find the controllers there difficult to deal with.

[KAG]

I second the thought if this had if happened anywhere other the SFO, this wouldn't be news. Anyone who hadn't accidentally flipped a radio (or forgot to) isn't being honest. The red light... Been a long time since looking for one. Can't comment. It's just poor timing (go around instructed after landing clearance Recieved) and location that this is even news.

[oldtimer]

No one has ever mentioned the fact that maybe the comm radios were working just fine but the busy crew just tuned them out. They were cleared to land, had the runway in sight and in all probability saw the United flight clearing the runway. From the audio feed I listened to, my SWAG guess was that they were inside the FAF when the go around instruction was given. Before I retired, I can remember instructing my right seater to ignore all calls below 200 feet. On take-off, we were also trained to ignore and not respond to any calls from V1 and until we reached 400 feet. Does anyone know what AC's SOP's say about any communications inside the FAF or if they are instructed about doing a go around below 500 feet AAE.

[daedalusx]

No one has ever mentioned the fact that maybe the comm radios were working just fine but the busy crew just tuned them out. They were cleared to land, had the runway in sight and in all probability saw the United flight clearing the runway. From the audio feed I listened to, my SWAG guess was that they were inside the FAF when the go around instruction was given. Before I retired, I can remember instructing my right seater to ignore all calls below 200 feet. On take-off, we were also trained to ignore and not respond to any calls from V1 and until we reached 400 feet. Does anyone know what AC's SOP's say about any communications inside the FAF or if they are instructed about doing a go around below 500 feet AAE.

Completely false as every 705 operator will conduct a low-energy go-around in sim during training/ppc/loft (truck/plane on the runway) way below 200'.

[Jet Jockey]

No one has ever mentioned the fact that maybe the comm radios were working just fine but the busy crew just tuned them out. They were cleared to land, had the runway in sight and in all probability saw the United flight clearing the runway. From the audio feed I listened to, my SWAG guess was that they were inside the FAF when the go around instruction was given. Before I retired, I can remember instructing my right seater to ignore all calls below 200 feet. On take-off, we were also trained to ignore and not respond to any calls from V1 and until we reached 400 feet. Does anyone know what AC's SOP's say about any communications inside the FAF or if they are instructed about doing a go around below 500 feet AAE.

Completely false as every 705 operator will conduct a low-energy go-around in sim during training/ppc/loft (truck/plane on the runway) way below 200'.

Not only 705 operators but 604 and 704 operators too, as low as 50'.

[atphat]

Ignore any calls below 200’?? Lol. Doesn’t matter what year it was. That’s just insane.

[trey kule]

From experience, I have found that when cleared, say no 3 on final...follow the Bowbus in front.
There is still chatter on the radio from the tower clearing the arriving aircraft in front off the runway, or clearaces to aircraft following etc.

So it would seem strange that suddenly things were quiet, or the talk was of ground clearances maybe..


But having said that, if it happened on final...the com failure rules used to be go to the last point cleared...which is to land, in this case.
And as there were aircraft in front on the runway I can see the crew focussed on that rather than trying to diagnose a comm failure on short final. Funny how there is so much emphasis on fly the airplane first, and then condemation for doing just that,

If it was a finger issue! . Maybe an SMS issue for better training before cleared to fly on line, and if SOPs not followed, a dressing down.

The tower called them 6 times, flashed lights etc, makes sensational news, but putting myself in their position and recognizing a com problem, I would have been focussed on the runway traffic and preparing for the missed, rather that trying to diagnose a com issue. If it was a real com failure going missed would have been a nightmare, and despite what today’s pilots think you can get a fairly good sense of the plane in front being clear before you land.
Now if they simply did not recognize they had a problem that may be a different issue. I doubt we will ever know.

I think was far different from lining up visual on a taxiway full of aircraft. Very different.

[photofly]

But having said that, if it happened on final...the com failure rules used to be go to the last point cleared...which is to land, in this case.
And as there were aircraft in front on the runway I can see the crew focussed on that rather than trying to diagnose a comm failure on short final. Funny how there is so much emphasis on fly the airplane first, and then condemation for doing just that,

That, is a very good point. I'd be stunned if an aircrew were cleared to land and on short final went around because they had a radio failure. Then what?

[crazyaviator]

From experience, I have found that when cleared, say no 3 on final...follow the Bowbus in front.
There is still chatter on the radio from the tower clearing the arriving aircraft in front off the runway, or clearaces to aircraft following etc.

So it would seem strange that suddenly things were quiet, or the talk was of ground clearances maybe..


But having said that, if it happened on final...the com failure rules used to be go to the last point cleared...which is to land, in this case.

And as there were aircraft in front on the runway I can see the crew focussed on that rather than trying to diagnose a comm failure on short final. Funny how there is so much emphasis on fly the airplane first, and then condemation for doing just that,

If it was a finger issue! . Maybe an SMS issue for better training before cleared to fly on line, and if SOPs not followed, a dressing down.

The tower called them 6 times, flashed lights etc, makes sensational news, but putting myself in their position and recognizing a com problem, I would have been focussed on the runway traffic and preparing for the missed, rather that trying to diagnose a com issue. If it was a real com failure going missed would have been a nightmare, and despite what today’s pilots think you can get a fairly good sense of the plane in front being clear before you land.
Now if they simply did not recognize they had a problem that may be a different issue. I doubt we will ever know.

I think was far different from lining up visual on a taxiway full of aircraft. Very different.

Totally Agree !

[CFR]

Time to bring back Tasker Shacks!

[lostaviator]

1. I've been given clearance to line up and wait and here I am sitting there fat dumb and happy thinking "man, it got quiet", then noticed the FO's fingers had done a little frequency dance accidentally switching to the backup while putting the departure frequency in.

So, it can happen.

2. Re: the last SFO incident and arguing over the "trustfulness"; correct me if I am wrong, but did the incident not go unreported for 2 days? And then only by ATC?

[pdw]

Now if they simply did not recognize they had a problem ...

Looks like they're #2 as the " problem " begins (from a com dial glitch/issue). Well, the com problem (" finger dance" issue or whatever) dawns on them e v e n t u a l l y , but first, it's like you say ... "you are focusing on #1 clearing the active" for your turn while anticipating the expected clearance which isn't coming .. isn't coming .. huh? Focused up ahead rather than any red light effort/frustration in the tower ... impossible to expect really ... during heavy business of the late approach / next-in-line and no reason to expect any different ...

If radios were fine other than the fault of nudging the other dial ?.. which then sees them maintaining 'in-position for landing' if turned out safe to do so ... as it now appears it was. Then the point made for the PIC's perspective, he/she becomes aware of com-fail rules applying upon realization, yet also still 'flying the plane' in the meantime applies. Not as critical at which point that was discovered if it fits under the com fail rules, since they never reached the point where they saw a visual indicator of conflict that would have forced them around under com fail rules.

Maybe the CBC can figure out a way to explain that ...

[ditar]

I agree that this is probably nothing more than finger trouble. I found myself in the opposite situation once, having been cleared for takeoff and given the departure frequency, I dialled it in and accidentally hit the swap button. As (bad) luck would have it we did a rejected takeoff and I announced the reject on the departure frequency. By the time I realized the error and switched back to tower the controller was already telling us to get off the runway.

[BE20 Driver]

My first question was what time of day did this occur at (body clock time)? Finger trouble can happen at any time of day but it's far more likely at 3:00 am (which I believe was the body clock time of the first SFO incident).