Near miss in YYC?

[cammelanson]

Does anyone know of a near miss that happened today in yyc?
I work on the ramp and after seeing what I did, and hearing a few others confirm the same sighting, this is what we have heard:

2 planes, a WJ and a small charter jet were taking off at opposite ends of the same runway at the same time? Both banked hard rights at a very low altitude (guessing 50-80 meters, but I was near the A wing and fairly far away)

Can anyone confirm this at all or do I just need to stay clear from the tug exhaust?

[URC]

Nav Canada was doing navigation/flight checks with their RJ, they tend to peel it off in a steep turn/bank when they reach the threshold. Maybe that is what you saw ? It would explain the "small charter jet" not sure about WJ ?

[cammelanson]

Nope. Saw the Nav Canada RJ a few times that day, (working on the ramp, I know what that one is for sure) but this was def a 737 and a small charter plane from the south end. And def a near miss

[Beefitarian]

That sounds strange. Even if one of them was going against ground clearance, I would have thought the controllers would have noticed before it got to the point where they were both rolling on the same runway.

[username here]

Nothing on cadors

[ArcticKat]

Wouldn't that be a near collision rather than a near miss?

[mag check]

This was released yesterday:

October 16, 2011 - The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released a report that raises concerns about the increasing number of runway safety incidents at U.S. airports.

According to the GAO, the rate of runway incursions and operational errors in the terminal environment (within roughly 30 miles of an airport) has increased dramatically over the last three years.

The report finds that in that time the rate of airborne operational errors in the terminal area nearly doubled increasing 97%, the rate of operational errors in the TRACON environment more than doubled increasing 166%, the rate of operational errors in the tower environment increased by 53% and the rate of the most severe airborne operational errors more than doubled.

“The increase in runway safety incidents raises significant concerns,” said Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John L. Mica (R-FL). “FAA must continue to address this safety issue.


We have also requested the Department of Transportation Inspector General to examine runway safety issues and report back to Congress, and in light of these results from the GAO, the Aviation Subcommittee will also convene a roundtable to examine these persisting safety issues which seem to have gotten worse in recent years.”

“Airlines and FAA controllers alike share credit for the safety record we enjoy today. However, the recent uptick in near miss events is a precursor to tragedy and the Federal Aviation Administration must improve its performance in this area,” said Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Thomas E. Petri.

“Our reauthorization proposal directs the FAA to develop a runway safety plan and directs the FAA to remain accountable for tracking and addressing safety events. Accountability is crucial for FAA officials to address this safety hazard in an appropriately risk-based fashion.”

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) collects official data on these types of safety incidents into a system known as the Air Traffic Quality Assurance (ATQA) database. FAA is also implementing additional safety reporting systems to supplement the data collected in ATQA.


GAO suggests that the implementation of the new supplemental reporting systems may actually mean the ATQA numbers reported are lower than they otherwise could have been, since incidents reported into another system are not likely to be reported more than once.



According to the report, technologies aimed at improving automated incident reporting have not yet been fully implemented. Furthermore, FAA does not have comprehensive risk-based data the sophisticated databases to integrate incident data from multiple sources. “As a result, aviation officials managing risk using safety management systems… have limited if any access to FAA incident data,” according to GAO.

[gopher_killer]

I was at YYC all day that day and have a view of the field. What time did this happen and on which runway was the 'smaller jet' 'taking off'? I think I know the incident.

Cheers,

gk

[mag check]

I was at YYC all day that day and have a view of the field. What time did this happen and on which runway was the 'smaller jet' 'taking off'? I think I know the incident.

Cheers,

gk

So something did happen? What did you see? Has the "incident" been reported to TC?

[gopher_killer]

There was no "incident'. NavCan had thier RV, I mean RJ out shooting approaches on Runway 10 all day. I think I saw what cammelanson saw. Early in the afternoon, the RJ was coming in on approach to 10 while RWY 28 was active. NavCan made a steep right turn to the south and climbed to about 5 or 6000'. About 20 seconds from when the RJ broke off th(e approach, WJ took off from RWY 28. From where cammelanson was over by Concourse A it would have looked very close but was not at all. Conditions were severe clear with light winds (maybe 10 kts if memory serves) all day.

My recomendation - stay away from the tug exhaust. This is and easy mistake to make if you have not seen it before. A couple of weeks ago I spoke with a couple of our maintainance guys who were dumbfounded by what that RJ was doing. These are guys with 20 years in the biz and have seen a great deal.

Hope this clarifies.

GK