Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2016, 02:04:43 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: Check out: Air Race Classic 2016


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  767 almost lands on wrong runway at JFK Sunday 9/19
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: 767 almost lands on wrong runway at JFK Sunday 9/19  (Read 44444 times)
eastern tristar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« on: September 20, 2010, 10:03:16 PM »

Last night I was listening to JFK tower (Sunday 9/19/10) just before 10:30pm, when I heard Aerogal 700 (GLG700) almost landed on 13R when he was supposed to land on 13L
Jetblue 1087 was taking off on 13R, Delta 122 was just told to taxi into position and hold when Delta informed the controller that Aerogal just turned and was about to land on the wrong runway, it was very scary to listen to live but the controller did a great job dealing with it, always kept his cool and even his sense of humor.  I hope someone could edit and post it (I am clueless on how to do it) it is definately worth a listen to.  Thanks.
Logged
Hollis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 403


« Reply #1 on: September 21, 2010, 12:31:16 AM »

Here is the audio in real time: (un-edited)

* JFK wrong way.mp3 (263.23 KB - downloaded 5928 times.)
Logged
speedotann
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 154



« Reply #2 on: September 21, 2010, 01:09:47 AM »

Nice Catch!
Logged

Cessna 152

ATC- N272** expedite departure Please.

ME- I am peddling as fast as I can!!
yurtkuran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2010, 11:28:38 AM »

I was onboard JetBlue 1087, listening to via the LiveATC iPhone app.   Needless to say, my increased dramatically listening to the exchange!
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2010, 03:01:18 PM »

Great Catch!  shocked

On a side note...anyone else catch at the 42 sec mark, Delta 122 asks if he still wants them to LINE UP AND WAIT, and the controller says "Yeah go ahead, POSITION AND HOLD"...  wink  cheesy 

Avherald:

http://avherald.com/h?article=431385e9&opt=0

Below is a pic of Aerogal Boeing 767-322/ER HC-CIJ (cn 25287/449), the aircraft operating 700 heavy that eve:


* 1725528.jpg (222.01 KB, 1024x695 - viewed 203 times.)
« Last Edit: September 21, 2010, 03:13:44 PM by joeyb747 » Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
svoynick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #5 on: September 22, 2010, 12:22:29 AM »

On a side note...anyone else catch at the 42 sec mark, Delta 122 asks if he still wants them to LINE UP AND WAIT, and the controller says "Yeah go ahead, POSITION AND HOLD"...  wink  cheesy 
Yeah, I noticed that - I wonder if that's the first posting of a U.S. "Line up and wait" call on here...  Although I suppose it was not given by the controller as a clearance.
Logged
w0x0f
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 338



« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2010, 12:40:28 AM »

On a side note...anyone else catch at the 42 sec mark, Delta 122 asks if he still wants them to LINE UP AND WAIT, and the controller says "Yeah go ahead, POSITION AND HOLD"...  wink  cheesy 
Yeah, I noticed that - I wonder if that's the first posting of a U.S. "Line up and wait" call on here...  Although I suppose it was not given by the controller as a clearance.

Yes, and this would be the first time in the USA that there was ever any confusion over a "position and hold clearance," or was that, "line up and wait."  We must thank those who have brought this to our shores. 

Of course, if it was up to the NTSB, we would not use position and hold/line up and wait, at all. Try to imagine how that would work.

w0x0f 
Logged
Robert Larson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113



« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2010, 09:13:29 AM »

"Check out the right window guys."   cheesy
Logged

KRDU & KTTA http://d.liveatc.net/krdu2.m3u
Private Pilot
svoynick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2010, 11:19:27 AM »

Yes, and this would be the first time in the USA that there was ever any confusion over a "position and hold clearance," or was that, "line up and wait."  We must thank those who have brought this to our shores. 
Are you implying that there was any "confusion" or failure of communication around the position & hold clearance?  I don't believe there was, nor was that the point of my post.  It seems clear to me that Delta 122 and tower were communicating and understanding each other just fine; in addition Delta performed his duty of looking around, and communicated his concerns to the controller who responded to the situation immediately.  I don't put this situation at the foot of "confusion over a position and hold clearance" or terminology at all - it is completely about confusion by the landing aircraft.  Does anyone hear it differently than I do?
Logged
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127



« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2010, 04:54:51 PM »

Yes, and this would be the first time in the USA that there was ever any confusion over a "position and hold clearance," or was that, "line up and wait."  We must thank those who have brought this to our shores. 
Are you implying that there was any "confusion" or failure of communication around the position & hold clearance?  I don't believe there was, nor was that the point of my post.  It seems clear to me that Delta 122 and tower were communicating and understanding each other just fine;

No worries guys, slow down, it's only a week from now for the line-up & wait vs p&h fun to really start!  grin  It's not an issue this week - and certainly not here.
There was confusion - but only in the Aerogal cockpit (and a lot of it!).
Both, Delta 122 & tower performed really great. Good to see these pilots sharp and awake - and not relying on their clearance to enter the runway alone. And this is what pilots are really trained for: do the same procedures over and over again. Yet, always be prepared for the unexpected - be ready. Kudos to this professional Delta crew!
Logged
w0x0f
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 338



« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2010, 04:33:47 PM »

Yes, and this would be the first time in the USA that there was ever any confusion over a "position and hold clearance," or was that, "line up and wait."  We must thank those who have brought this to our shores. 
Are you implying that there was any "confusion" or failure of communication around the position & hold clearance?  I don't believe there was, nor was that the point of my post.  It seems clear to me that Delta 122 and tower were communicating and understanding each other just fine; in addition Delta performed his duty of looking around, and communicated his concerns to the controller who responded to the situation immediately.  I don't put this situation at the foot of "confusion over a position and hold clearance" or terminology at all - it is completely about confusion by the landing aircraft.  Does anyone hear it differently than I do?

I was referring to another thread.  Just getting ready for next week.  No one was confused in this situation except Aerogal.

w0x0f
Logged
Fryy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 447



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2010, 04:54:45 PM »

I tried to pull the archive for final but couldn't get it to come up. I ended up just getting the audio from tower right when GLG700 checks in. This clip is from the archives so it sounds a little bit clearer than the original post.

* GLG700_KJFK.mp3 (394.94 KB - downloaded 6812 times.)
Logged

svoynick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2010, 10:27:20 PM »

Yes, and this would be the first time in the USA that there was ever any confusion over a "position and hold clearance," or was that, "line up and wait."  We must thank those who have brought this to our shores. 
Are you implying that there was any "confusion" or failure of communication around the position & hold clearance?  I don't believe there was, nor was that the point of my post.  It seems clear to me that Delta 122 and tower were communicating and understanding each other just fine; in addition Delta performed his duty of looking around, and communicated his concerns to the controller who responded to the situation immediately.  I don't put this situation at the foot of "confusion over a position and hold clearance" or terminology at all - it is completely about confusion by the landing aircraft.  Does anyone hear it differently than I do?

I was referring to another thread.  Just getting ready for next week.  No one was confused in this situation except Aerogal.

w0x0f
Roger - thanks for clarifying...
Logged
compressorStall
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #13 on: September 26, 2010, 06:48:42 AM »

That clip was too funny, and more so in light of a recent experience I had. I was in a Cessna (as a pax) that nearly taxied into the path of a landing heavy fifteen seconds before touchdown... we were first in the line-up. Just as I happened to glance around behind us I noticed something. It took me a few seconds to register that the guy behind us was frantically flashing his landing lights and waving a phone in an attempt to keep us off the runway.

All this because ground gave us the wrong tower freq., and this was the pilot's first trip to that airport, so he assumed the perceived radio silence was SOP.

Fun was had, though Cheesy
Logged
aviator_06
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 26, 2010, 03:26:01 PM »

Sounds like that Aerogal crew needs to go back to do more training.
Logged

john4321
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2010, 11:55:13 PM »

I'm still amazed that this runway near-incident almost happened. It reminds me of the possible Canary Island Tenerife type disaster that could have occurred. (pilot-error).

The Tenerife airport disaster in 1977 was a collision involving two Boeing 747 passenger aircraft on the runway of Los Rodeos Airport (now known as Tenerife North Airport) on the Spanish island of Tenerife, one of the Canary Islands. With 583 fatalities, the crash remains the deadliest accident in aviation history. All 248 aboard the fully fuelled KLM flight were killed. There were also 335 fatalities and 61 survivors from the Pan Am flight, which was struck along its spine by the KLM's landing gear, under-belly and four engines. Rescue crews were unaware for over 20 minutes that the Pan Am aircraft was also involved in the accident, because of the heavy fog and the separation of the crippled aircraft following the collision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster

john
Logged
svoynick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2010, 02:52:24 AM »

That clip was too funny, and more so in light of a recent experience I had. I was in a Cessna (as a pax) that nearly taxied into the path of a landing heavy fifteen seconds before touchdown... we were first in the line-up. Just as I happened to glance around behind us I noticed something. It took me a few seconds to register that the guy behind us was frantically flashing his landing lights and waving a phone in an attempt to keep us off the runway.

All this because ground gave us the wrong tower freq., and this was the pilot's first trip to that airport, so he assumed the perceived radio silence was SOP.
Just a clarification...  For the situation you described, are you saying this happened "because" the pilot got the wrong freq. from ground?  Respectfully, am I off-target to suggest that it happened because the pilot entered an active runway without a clearance?  

Are there controlled airports where it's "SOP" for silence to represent an implicit clearance?  (This is rhetorical...)
« Last Edit: September 27, 2010, 02:56:12 AM by svoynick » Logged
Heading090
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2010, 02:07:50 PM »

How is possible that ATC did not detect that Aerogal ended up on the final for the wrong runway?

Somebody cleared him for approach and, I would hope, made sure that he was heading for the correct runway. Shouldn't the tower controller be first to detect the error (radar screen, visual observation)?

Before we send Aerogal crew for more training we may want to look on the ATC role in this incident.
Logged
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127



« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2010, 03:48:29 PM »

How is possible that ATC did not detect that Aerogal ended up on the final for the wrong runway?

Somebody cleared him for approach and, I would hope, made sure that he was heading for the correct runway. Shouldn't the tower controller be first to detect the error (radar screen, visual observation)?

Before we send Aerogal crew for more training we may want to look on the ATC role in this incident.
It was the Canarsie approach to runways 13. It requires an approach at an angle of about 90 degrees, and a sharp right turn on short final. The turn is only 2miles from the runway, so the time between turning, aligning and landing is really short. Landing clearance may be given before the plane has even turned.

We don't know the timing here. It is well possible that Delta was watching Aerogal's approach and spotted their mistake immediately, while Aerogal was still turning. A controller, busy watching his radar, would take several extra seconds to spot this.

And, ATC instructions were clear - "cleared to land 13L". The pilots are responsible for flying the plane. When they align with the wrong runway, it's their fault - not ATC's.

Ah, this reminds me of this great audio:
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviation-audio-clips/ual-56-vs-atc-at-sfo-last-night/
"I fly the airplane - YOU just clear us for take-off!grin
Logged
Flyingnut
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2010, 06:06:58 PM »

KJFK 13L Canarsie  Approach











« Last Edit: September 28, 2010, 10:19:25 PM by beckerm13 » Logged

Marty
PPL - Instrument Rating
8 NW of KORD
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127



« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2010, 03:11:42 AM »

KJFK 13L Canarsie  Approach


He he, I like how the captain asks his flying co-pilot "You see the runway?". This is like 30 seconds before touch-down... smiley

Approach charts to runways 13:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2480636/JFK-VOR-OR-GPS-RWY-13LR-0804

Note the subtle difference between 13R and 13L: 13R requires a 90 degree turn at the same spot where 13L requires the first 45 degree turn...
Logged
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2010, 05:16:53 AM »

interestingly enough there's also a charted visual approach to 13L/R that seems to follow the VOR-GPS ground track
 http://airnav.com/depart?http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/1010/00610PARKWAY_VIS13LR.PDF (PDF file)
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2010, 10:06:00 AM »

I'm still amazed that this runway near-incident almost happened. It reminds me of the possible Canary Island Tenerife type disaster that could have occurred. (pilot-error).

The Tenerife airport disaster in 1977 was a collision involving two Boeing 747 passenger aircraft on the runway of Los Rodeos Airport (now known as Tenerife North Airport) on the Spanish island of Tenerife, one of the Canary Islands. With 583 fatalities, the crash remains the deadliest accident in aviation history. All 248 aboard the fully fuelled KLM flight were killed. There were also 335 fatalities and 61 survivors from the Pan Am flight, which was struck along its spine by the KLM's landing gear, under-belly and four engines. Rescue crews were unaware for over 20 minutes that the Pan Am aircraft was also involved in the accident, because of the heavy fog and the separation of the crippled aircraft following the collision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster

john

Or how about US Air 1493 and Skywest 5569? Boeing 737-300 (N388US) collided with a Skywest Metroliner (N683AV) while landing at KLAX on 02/01/91. US Air 1493 was cleared to land on 24L while Skywest 5569 was holding in position for an intersection departure. Upon touchdown, the US Air crew noticed the Metroliner sitting on the runway, but it was too late. During the investigation, it was determined that Skywest's operating procedure was to turn the landing lights and strobe lights on ONLY AFTER being cleared for takeoff, she sat on the runway with her nav lights and anti-collision beacon on only. The Metroliner was invisible to the US Air crew as they made the approach. The NTSB recreated the conditions that evening, placing a Metroliner at the intersection Skywest 5569 was sitting at, and flew the approach in a helicopter. They could not see the Metroliner on the runway until they were almost over top of it. Controller Error was sighted in this crash that killed all 12 souls on the Metroliner and 22 souls on the B737.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DCA91MA018A&rpt=fi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAir_Flight_1493

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/w19910201.htm

Obviously, it was not controller error in the Aerogal incident. The tower controller did a great job handling the issue. And hats off to the ON POINT Delta crew! Way to keep your heads up! Had they not noticed the Aerogal turning final for the wrong runway, and taxied into position, the outcome could have been very similar to the above US Air-Skywest crash, only on a much grander scale. A B767-300, B757-200, and an E190 were the aircraft present at that time. Aerogal 700H was a B767-300, Delta 122 was a Boeing 757-200 bound for Shannon (EINN), and Jet Blue 1087, the aircraft that was rolling on the runway, was an E190 bound for KCLT.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2010, 10:53:05 AM by joeyb747 » Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
iskyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179


« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2010, 01:12:48 PM »



Note the subtle difference between 13R and 13L: 13R requires a 90 degree turn at the same spot where 13L requires the first 45 degree turn...

Turning to line up for 13R off the Canarsie approach requires rather more effort than the more gradual turn for 13L. They must have really thought they were cleared for 13R.
Logged
NY Z Pilot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195


« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2010, 11:32:06 AM »

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/video?id=7697295&syndicate=syndicate&section
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!