WestJet plane in near miss at L.A. airport

TallDutch · Post by **TallDutch** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 1:03 pm

LOS ANGELES — A WestJet airliner on a flight from Calgary was involved in a near-miss Thursday with another jet on the tarmac at Los Angeles International Airport, aviation officials said.

The close call happened at about 1 p.m. and appeared to have been the result of mistakes made by both the arriving pilot and a ground traffic controller, said Ian Gregor, a spokesman for the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration.

Officials said the WestJet Boeing 737, which seats up to 132 passengers, came within 15 metres of colliding with a 150-seat Northwest Airlines Airbus A320 that was taking off.

The Northwest jet was travelling about 240 kilometres an hour when the WestJet plane approached its path. The WestJet plane managed to stop just in time to avoid a crash.

No one was hurt, authorities said. An investigation was under way.

Mr. Gregor said the arriving pilot switched radio frequencies too early after landing and was unable to receive final directions from the air traffic controller, the Los Angeles Times reported on its web site.

When the WestJet pilot notified the ground traffic controller that the plane was proceeding to its gate, the ground controller cleared him without checking first with the air traffic controller.

Aircraft arriving at the Los Angeles airport must cross the inside runway to reach their gate.

The “runway incursion” was the eighth such incident at LAX this year, matching the total for all of 2006.

WestJet officials refused to comment on the specifics of the incident, or even whether airline officials are concerned about the layout or signage on the runways at the busy airport.

Airline spokeswoman Natalie Green would only say that the airline was investigating what happened.

“We've received notification from the FAA of an incident involving WestJet Flight 900 and another aircraft at LAX Aug. 16. WestJet's flight safety team is investigating the incident and we're working with the FAA on that,” she said Friday from the company's headquarters in Calgary.

“Safety is one of WestJet's core values and the safety of our guests and our flight crew are always top priority.”

WestJet began flying in 1996, and offers flights to 26 Canadian cities, 11 U.S. destinations and the Caribbean. It recently was granted permission by aviation regulators to offer regular service to Mexico.

Last year, the company's revenues totalled about $1.8 billion and the company outlined its expansion plans earlier this year, saying it plans to buy an additional 20 Boeing 737s — a deal valued at approximately $700 million.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... ional/home

jj · Post by jj » Sun Aug 19, 2007 6:45 pm

Well, Well, no "we're better than all the others" comments on this thread?
Let me guess, Capt.S.Kickers and F/O Ya.Hoo, ain't never bin to LA none to many times before.
OOPS!!!!!!!!!!!

. . · Post by **. .** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 8:18 pm

I'd be sooooo careful throwing stones on something like this JJ. God forbid it's you next time.

Just be happy that this ended as a close call and everyone gets to go home. From my understanding it's not like westjet has some wide spread systematic problem with incursions.

KAG · Post by **KAG** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 11:10 pm

jj wrote:Well, Well, no "we're better than all the others" comments on this thread?
Let me guess, Capt.S.Kickers and F/O Ya.Hoo, ain't never bin to LA none to many times before.
OOPS!!!!!!!!!!!

And you've never made a mistake? Wow, wish I could say the same thing.
Oh and BTW, it's FO Ya. FU@king. Hoo.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 11:30 pm

The crew f'ed up it looks like yes, crews and atc make mistakes daily, turns out this one was a little closer to disaster than most.

I can guarantee neither of those pilots will do that again, and the controller will probably always visually verify aircraft position a little better from now on.

Rotten Apple #1 · Post by **Rotten Apple #1** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 5:35 am

jj, please be my facebook friend.

jj · Post by jj » Mon Aug 20, 2007 5:55 pm

Man, that was a fun pot to stir.

amraam · Post by **amraam** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:49 pm

jj, I hope I'm never on a plane operated by a dork like you.

And I sure hope you don't injure anyone else when that glass house you live in shatters.

Amraam

Rotten Apple #1 · Post by **Rotten Apple #1** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:55 pm

Sucked in, apparently. Guilty...apologizes to SW guys/gals.

AsheetMaDraws · Post by **AsheetMaDraws** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 6:19 am

So as not to confuse me with anyone else, I have changed my "handle".
Never flew an MD.
Johnny D, take that hook out of your mouth.

Captain Esq. · Post by **Captain Esq.** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:17 am

Where does it say (local knowledge aside) that aircraft leaving the Los Angeles runways can't immediately contact ground? Isn't that standard procedure at most airports in the world? You leave the runway and contact ground control... who, by the way, would constitute as being ATC, wouldn't they? Yes, they would. The only thing it says on the LA chart is that aircraft can't cross runways without an ATC clearance. Same as in Toronto: Their special little way of operating isn't even published. It seems to me that WestJet got their clearance. I would bet that after they were cleared across, they started across the hold line, the FO said "Clear on the right", and the Captain looked left, saw an Airbus coming at him from 10 o'clock, and stopped. It's only because they actually crossed the hold line, as cleared, that a runway incursion existed. They should be hailed as heroes for catching an ATC mistake that could've been catastrophic. Besides, the media makes 15 meters sound like a very close encounter, but I'd wager that an aircraft at the proper hold line wouldn't be much further away, seeing how close those runways are to each other! Without a doubt, media is making way more of this than they should be. It's probably only because they can lay blame on a wayward 'foreign' aircraft that they bring it up. My2C.

Captain Esquire

W5 · Post by W5 » Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:24 am

NASA Ames studies Los Angeles in effort to improve airport safety

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... afety.html

wooden spoon · Post by **wooden spoon** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 5:24 pm

not sure here but in lax you usually land on the outside runways(they have 2 sets of parallels).25L and r and 24L and r.So the outside runway for landings and the insides for departures.so when you land they are departing aircraft on the runways closer to the apron.This facilitates the need to cross an active(departure) runway.to get to the aprons.So you land and hold short of the inside runways for a clearance from tower to cross the active departing runways.do not know what happened but just a little insight for somebody who hasnt been there.

Rotten Apple #1 · Post by **Rotten Apple #1** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:00 pm

To add one official perspective on crossing a runway in a landing situation:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ ... tml#4-3-20

4-3-20. Exiting the Runway After Landing

The following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed.

a. Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC. Pilots shall not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without first obtaining ATC approval.

b. Taxi clear of the runway unless otherwise directed by ATC. An aircraft is considered clear of the runway when all parts of the aircraft are past the runway edge and there are no restrictions to its continued movement beyond the runway holding position markings. In the absence of ATC instructions, the pilot is expected to taxi clear of the landing runway by taxiing beyond the runway holding position markings associated with the landing runway, even if that requires the aircraft to protrude into or cross another taxiway or ramp area. Once all parts of the aircraft have crossed the runway holding position markings, the pilot must hold unless further instructions have been issued by ATC.

NOTE-
1. The tower will issue the pilot instructions which will permit the aircraft to enter another taxiway, runway, or ramp area when required.

2. Guidance contained in subparagraphs a and b above is considered an integral part of the landing clearance and satisfies the requirement of 14 CFR Section 91.129.

c. Immediately change to ground control frequency when advised by the tower and obtain a taxi clearance.

NOTE-
1. The tower will issue instructions required to resolve any potential conflictions with other ground traffic prior to advising the pilot to contact ground control.

2. A clearance from ATC to taxi to the ramp authorizes the aircraft to cross all runways and taxiway intersections. Pilots not familiar with the taxi route should request specific taxi instructions from ATC.

CD · Post by CD » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:04 pm

************************************************************
NTSB ADVISORY
************************************************************

National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

August 22, 2007

************************************************************

NTSB INVESTIGATING RUNWAY INCURSION IN LOS ANGELES

************************************************************

Washington, DC -- The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating a runway incursion in Los Angeles, California in which two airliners may have missed each other by less than 40 feet.

On August 16, 2007, at approximately 1:00 p.m. Pacific daylight time, West Jet (WJA) 900, a Boeing 737, and Northwest Airlines (NWA) flight 180, an Airbus A320, almost collided at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

The West Jet flight landed on runway 24R, exited the runway, and held between the parallel runways as directed by the tower. However, without authorization, the West Jet crew changed radio frequencies and contacted ground control.

When contacted by the West Jet crew, the ground controller assumed that they had been cleared to cross runway 24L, and provided instructions for the West Jet flight to taxi to its gate. However, the tower controller expected the West Jet flight to hold and cleared the Northwest flight to takeoff from runway 24L.

The ground controller then realized that West Jet had not been instructed to cross runway 24L and told the West Jet flight to stop. According to the FAA, the West Jet airplane crossed the hold short line for runway 24L and the two aircraft came within 37 feet as the Northwest flight crossed directly in front of the West Jet flight during its takeoff roll.

The Board notes that the Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) was operational but it is unknown whether or not it activated.

A preliminary report of the incident is available on
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 1217&key=1

-30-

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:36 pm

Well that NTSB report is a lot more damning of the WJA crew than previous reports.

Again however, humans make mistakes, although its hard to understand why a pilot would switch frequencies without being told to do so. Unless they took someone else's freq change, definately not un-heard of.

WJ700 · Post by **WJ700** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:49 pm

We switch freqs everyday in Canada without being told. Tower to departure... tower to ground, ground to tower. It is clear in the FAA regs on remaining with tower during parallel ops, but I can see how the mistake was made. They also clarified the clearance before moving too.

complexintentions · Post by **complexintentions** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:17 am

Captain Esq. wrote:They should be hailed as heroes for catching an ATC mistake that could've been catastrophic. Besides, the media makes 15 meters sound like a very close encounter

Uh, no. It was a crew mistake, even if you "switch freqs everyday in Canada without being told". It's part of being familiar with other countries regs.

And make no mistake, 15 metres (37 feet in the NTSB report) IS a VERY close encounter. It's an absolute frickin' hairbreadth away from a catastrophe in transport category ops. An Airbus at rotation speed would be travelling 15 metres in a millesecond.

Gives me the shivers thinking about. Methinks the crew may have some bad dreams for time to come.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:44 am

WJ700 wrote:We switch freqs everyday in Canada without being told. Tower to departure... tower to ground, ground to tower. It is clear in the FAA regs on remaining with tower during parallel ops, but I can see how the mistake was made. They also clarified the clearance before moving too.

Curious on this one, I don't work in a tower, nor have I operated an airplane IFR into a busy airport.

But around here anyway the phraseology the tower normally gives to IFR flights is "Contact centre XXX.X airborne, cleared for takeoff runway XX"

And:

"Taxi to runway XX, via X, X X cross runway XX, hold short runway XX, contact Tower holding short"

Those are frequency change instructions. How does it work differently at busier airports?

jim_from_texas · Post by **jim_from_texas** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:04 am

In YVR it is normal to switch from ground to tower on departure without being told to do so. Go on the tower freq, sit there and keep quiet until spoken to.

Ryan Coke2 · Post by **Ryan Coke2** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:05 am

Canadian, U.S. officials at odds over airport near-miss
Suzanne Goldman, CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, August 23, 2007

CALGARY -- Canadian and U.S. officials can't agree on whether a WestJet Airlines Ltd. pilot was at fault in a recent near-collision on a Los Angeles runway.

Initial reports indicate "there was not any pilot error on behalf of WestJet," said Richard Bartrem, WestJet vice-president of culture and communications.

But a U.S. Federal Aviation Administration official said that while the pilot did not technically violate a written regulation, he did break standard procedure.
Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
Font:

* *
* *
* *
* *

"It is our position that the actions of the WestJet pilot contributed to the incident by creating confusion in the air traffic controller's mind," said Ian Gregor of the FAA.

However, Gregor acknowledged the air traffic controller also erred by making a false assumption.

Since the pilot cannot officially be held responsible, the investigation will likely conclude controller error, he said, although no penalty or punishment is expected to result.

The nose of a WestJet Boeing 737 came just 11 metres from the wingtip of a Northwest Airlines A320 taking off at the Los Angeles International Airport on Aug. 16 -- substantially closer than the 62 metres safety standards require.

A preliminary report, released Thursday by the National Transportation Safety Board, stated that when WestJet Flight 900 landed on the runway, the pilot switched to ground control frequency without authorization.

"We didn't receive authorization, but it's not required," said Bartrem, noting that in Canada such clearance is mandatory.

As a result of the incident, WestJet issued an update to the flight plans of all their pilots indicating they are now required to wait for that authorization.

"We have a policy at LAX that you don't switch frequencies without being instructed to," said Gregor. "But we couldn't find a specific federal aviation regulation to that effect."

The traffic of arrivals and departures is managed by one set of air traffic controllers. Once the plane has landed and is in taxi mode, ground control takes over responsibility for the traffic, said Bartrem.

"There's an inconsistent application in the U.S. as to when that handshake, if you will, takes place," he said.

The report stated that ground control assumed the tower controller had cleared the Westjet craft for taxi. Ten seconds later, the Northwest Airlines craft was cleared to cross the runway for takeoff.

The ground controller then realized that the WestJet aircraft was not cleared and instructed the pilot to stop.

Bartrem said his organization is now lobbying Transport Canada and the FAA to institute a consistent set of procedures that would prevent this type of incident in the future.

The WestJet pilot is still flying, he said.

The controller, however, is off-duty while officials contemplate appropriate action. Although the controller has seven years' experience, said Gregor, he was off the job for a period of time before returning in April. He was, however, certified for the task he was managing that day.

Calgary Herald
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news ... 87&k=81959

The Raven · Post by **The Raven** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:15 am

Let's face it....the WestJet guys initially screwed up. They ventured from established protocol and procedures at a busy airport. They should never have changed to the ground controller's frequency without being told to by the tower controller.

Having said that they saved the day (and their bacon) by asking the ground controller if they were cleared to taxi across the active parallel runway. Nice save.

WJ700 · Post by **WJ700** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:27 am

invertedattitude wrote:
WJ700 wrote:We switch freqs everyday in Canada without being told. Tower to departure... tower to ground, ground to tower. It is clear in the FAA regs on remaining with tower during parallel ops, but I can see how the mistake was made. They also clarified the clearance before moving too.
Curious on this one, I don't work in a tower, nor have I operated an airplane IFR into a busy airport.

But around here anyway the phraseology the tower normally gives to IFR flights is "Contact centre XXX.X airborne, cleared for takeoff runway XX"

And:

"Taxi to runway XX, via X, X X cross runway XX, hold short runway XX, contact Tower holding short"

Those are frequency change instructions. How does it work differently at busier airports?

inverted, using your airport as an example: The typical clearance will be to taxi to the runway and the instruction to switch may or may not be included; but the tower controller will be wondering why you haven't switched when holding short on ground freq. Visa versa, the ground controller will be assuming you've switched... with or without instruction.

And complex...maybe you've never made a mistake but I think WestJet has ample experience now flying to the US and LAX or maybe you've never flown with a new FO... I'd hate to see the reaction when one makes a mistake flying with you. As for 15 meters 37 feet being so close in your opinion; I was holding short of 24L in reverse Y taxi way a few days ago, its about 15 meters exactly and you don't have a choice... you're tail will not be clear of 24R if your nose isn't 1 foot back from the hold short line.

Also, I haven't justified the error, its an FAA reg as posted above, I've only said that I can see and understand how easily this error can be made.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:50 am

WJ700 wrote:
invertedattitude wrote:
WJ700 wrote:We switch freqs everyday in Canada without being told. Tower to departure... tower to ground, ground to tower. It is clear in the FAA regs on remaining with tower during parallel ops, but I can see how the mistake was made. They also clarified the clearance before moving too.
Curious on this one, I don't work in a tower, nor have I operated an airplane IFR into a busy airport.

But around here anyway the phraseology the tower normally gives to IFR flights is "Contact centre XXX.X airborne, cleared for takeoff runway XX"

And:

"Taxi to runway XX, via X, X X cross runway XX, hold short runway XX, contact Tower holding short"

Those are frequency change instructions. How does it work differently at busier airports?

inverted, using your airport as an example: The typical clearance will be to taxi to the runway and the instruction to switch may or may not be included; but the tower controller will be wondering why you haven't switched when holding short on ground freq. Visa versa, the ground controller will be assuming you've switched... with or without instruction.

And complex...maybe you've never made a mistake but I think WestJet has ample experience now flying to the US and LAX or maybe you've never flown with a new FO... I'd hate to see the reaction when one makes a mistake flying with you. As for 15 meters 37 feet being so close in your opinion; I was holding short of 24L in reverse Y taxi way a few days ago, its about 15 meters exactly and you don't have a choice... you're tail will not be clear of 24R if your nose isn't 1 foot back from the hold short line.

Also, I haven't justified the error, its an FAA reg as posted above, I've only said that I can see and understand how easily this error can be made.

]
I think you need to step back a little here. I'm not trying to make this confrontational.

An incident like this is something all professionals should learn from. I am a pilot, but my profession in aviation has nothing to do with touching the controls of an airplane, but I do fully respect the confusing environment a busy piece of airspace/airport can be.

I think you may be mincing my posts with others, I've said twice at least how this is a simple human error, never did I say it is the crews fault. Clearly it is as much if not more the ground controllers fault. The last post I made I asked a few simple questions of you, since you would know the answers I was looking for.

Please don't take offense to any of these posts, there's none intended.

WJ700 · Post by **WJ700** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:18 am

invertedattitude wrote:
WJ700 wrote:
invertedattitude wrote: Curious on this one, I don't work in a tower, nor have I operated an airplane IFR into a busy airport.

But around here anyway the phraseology the tower normally gives to IFR flights is "Contact centre XXX.X airborne, cleared for takeoff runway XX"

And:

"Taxi to runway XX, via X, X X cross runway XX, hold short runway XX, contact Tower holding short"

Those are frequency change instructions. How does it work differently at busier airports?

inverted, using your airport as an example: The typical clearance will be to taxi to the runway and the instruction to switch may or may not be included; but the tower controller will be wondering why you haven't switched when holding short on ground freq. Visa versa, the ground controller will be assuming you've switched... with or without instruction.

And complex...maybe you've never made a mistake but I think WestJet has ample experience now flying to the US and LAX or maybe you've never flown with a new FO... I'd hate to see the reaction when one makes a mistake flying with you. As for 15 meters 37 feet being so close in your opinion; I was holding short of 24L in reverse Y taxi way a few days ago, its about 15 meters exactly and you don't have a choice... you're tail will not be clear of 24R if your nose isn't 1 foot back from the hold short line.

Also, I haven't justified the error, its an FAA reg as posted above, I've only said that I can see and understand how easily this error can be made.
]
I think you need to step back a little here. I'm not trying to make this confrontational.

An incident like this is something all professionals should learn from. I am a pilot, but my profession in aviation has nothing to do with touching the controls of an airplane, but I do fully respect the confusing environment a busy piece of airspace/airport can be.

I think you may be mincing my posts with others, I've said twice at least how this is a simple human error, never did I say it is the crews fault. Clearly it is as much if not more the ground controllers fault. The last post I made I asked a few simple questions of you, since you would know the answers I was looking for.

Please don't take offense to any of these posts, there's none intended.

Where I said 'complex' I was refering to 'complexintentions' ,the poster. The first part was for you. I wrote my response pretty fast with a 2 year old yanking at my leg to go to the park and should have been a little more clear.