United Airbus almost lands at wrong airport

[Hacker15e]

enjoy a very, very high level of safety overall.

Just to add fuel to the fire, "safety" is not directly analogous to "proficient" or "correct" or "excellent".

 

[PhilosopherPilot]

A crappy landing doesn't break FARS, SOP's or endanger the lives of the general flying public.

In the training word these two pilots would have busted a private pilot checkride, instrument rating checkride, commercial checkride, ATP checkride, and type checkride. In each instance the applicant has to have additional training on the area they busted on, and be signed off by a instructor in order to retest.

Some airlines simply wont hire people with training event failures...and your telling me that 2 airline pilots that just busted every checkride known to man doesn't deserve additional training at a private pilot level? Sorry, but this was a clear VMC day in a modern airplane. The work load just is not that high. Inexcusable.

They wouldn't bust a check ride for that. They lined up, realized it was the wrong runway, and went around.

That's TEM in practice. They made an error, and trapped it by going around. If they had continued to a landing it might be a different story.

Error is inevitable. It's how you deal with errors that counts.

 

[Roger Roger]

Those two did. Wanted to "just fly it".

There's a lesson in there somewhere....

Well that seems sort of silly. I mean I've done that to private pilot students but this is the real thing.

 

[dasleben]

Not at all. NO one is or should be questioning any kind of professionalism here, that's nowhere near the discussion. I would've thought I'd made that clear in my postings.

Procedures are indeed tailored to longer segments, which is why when one receives a short segment or something that's not very standard or part of the daily norm, it's a logical question to ask what mitigation (planning, operationally, etc) do the individual crews take to fit the longer-segment procedures into the shorter-segment tasking, and thus mitigate the risk? And it's possible that no two crews would do that in the exact same way. That's a fair question to ask as part of the totality of the circumstances.

I suppose I'm just a bit confused by "longer-segment procedures." The flightplans are loaded before push from the departure airport, and any arrival/approach change can be inputted into the FMS in about 10 seconds (with verification from both pilots). An approach briefing takes a minute or two. There are no long, drawn-out briefs or procedures unless CAT II/III is in play.

 

[PhilosopherPilot]

Just to add fuel to the fire, "safety" is not directly analogous to "proficient" or "correct" or "excellent".

True. Safe = operating at or below an acceptable level of risk. Each airline decides for itself the amount of risk it's willing to accept. What's safe for Delta may not be safe for United, though that's probably a bad example as most US 121 carriers share safety data and aim for the same or similar goals.

A perfect example of this is JetBlue's Latin America Qualification training. Once we started flying to Lima, that was the straw that broke the camel's back. Mgmt realized that out LA Qual program wasn't really up to snuff for the type of flying we were growing into, and that risk was too high. So, we now are developing a completely new program specifically for one base.

If the ASAP and FOQA data show that the risk continues to be high, additional measures will be taken. It's an interesting example of safety risk management in action.

 

[MikeD]

Automating the humans out might do it, but it turns out that automation is designed by humans too.

Stupid stuff will continue to happen in airplanes (and airliners), mostly when people are in a hurry.

Agreed. And all we can do is try to mitigate the best we can when it comes to that. Any and all of us can be bit by that at any time, sadly.

 

[MikeD]

I suppose I'm just a bit confused by "longer-segment procedures." The flightplans are loaded before push from the departure airport, and any arrival/approach change can be inputted into the FMS in about 10 seconds (with verification from both pilots). An approach briefing takes a minute or two. There are no long, drawn-out briefs or procedures unless CAT II/III is in play.

What I'm referring to is that it's not normal day to day ops where 121 planes are flying from points to points 5 miles apart. I fully agree with you regarding the above, and it takes some planning for when things are moving pretty quick, or airspace is tight, or any number of other factors. Factors that are present that others have mentioned that legitimately make these operations which aren't the norm, somewhat higher risk; and therefore mitigating that risk safely to avoid things like this occurring. That's all. There's always good learning to be had from "almost" situations.

They wouldn't bust a check ride for that. They lined up, realized it was the wrong runway, and went around.
That's TEM in practice. They made an error, and trapped it by going around. If they had continued to a landing it might be a different story.
Error is inevitable. It's how you deal with errors that counts.

Agreed. And learning afterwards what lead to that error counts too and I'm sure the guys know and have learned. All without anything terminal occurring.

 

[flyboy6585]

I don't think anyone is being high and mighty or acting immune. However lets not make excuses such as "there are lots of gotcha's here", and lets be honest about why or how the situation developed. Bottom line is, this was getting an airplane from point A to point B, albeit a short distance and a non-standard operation, but nothing that should've been a difficult or overly taxing task either.



Yes, I agree. That's why when performing a flight operation visual only, lower level within a terminal environment [and not usually performed] and not having the luxury of all the colored screens while sitting back and relaxing at FL350 on autopilot; there has to be a certain amount of preplanning and SA building in order to get and remain ahead of the game; you know...Back-to-Basics 101 stuff.

The learning comes from pilots being honest with why this occurred and taking those lessons forward; not from making excuses about why this basic operation was so apparently difficult.

The pilots made a mistake. The mistake was caught and corrected with no foul. Now the learning begins through honest breakdown of the situation so these guys, as well as others, can avoid a similar circumstance.

Completely agree, we need to learn from the event. Unless we understand it, we are doomed to repeat it.

 

[T/O w/FSII]

They wouldn't bust a check ride for that. They lined up, realized it was the wrong runway, and went around.

That's TEM in practice. They made an error, and trapped it by going around. If they had continued to a landing it might be a different story.

Error is inevitable. It's how you deal with errors that counts.

They didn't realize anything! It was ATC that alerted them they were headed to the wrong airport.

And finally, yes, that is a textbook bust. I work with DPE's and the FAA everyday and I can guarantee you that is about as bust as it can get.

 

[dasleben]

And finally, yes, that is a textbook bust. I work with DPE's and the FAA everyday and I can guarantee you that is about as bust as it can get.

PTS is a document only used for standards that must be kept on a practical test. Saying "He'd bust his ATP for that" in response to an error made by professional flight crew doesn't mean anything. Both no doubt passed their ATP practical tests years ago, and have had thousands of safe flying hours since.

The crew must file their ASAPs, and as @Polar742 said, if the ERC deems necessary, they'll be sent back to the schoolhouse for a period of retraining. Unless they are severely deficient, they will go back on the line and carry on with their careers as normal. We don't hang crews for making mistakes unless it's severe.

 

[dasleben]

What I'm referring to is that it's not normal day to day ops where 121 planes are flying from points to points 5 miles apart. I fully agree with you regarding the above, and it takes some planning for when things are moving pretty quick, or airspace is tight, or any number of other factors. Factors that are present that others have mentioned that legitimately make these operations which aren't the norm, somewhat higher risk; and therefore mitigating that risk safely to avoid things like this occurring. That's all. There's always good learning to be had from "almost" situations.

I agree, Mike. But, as you know, these wrong airport approaches/landings don't stem from following standardized procedure. Rather, it's the opposite.

 

[PhilosopherPilot]

They didn't realize anything! It was ATC that alerted them they were headed to the wrong airport.

And finally, yes, that is a textbook bust. I work with DPE's and the FAA everyday and I can guarantee you that is about as bust as it can get.

It doesn't matter why they realized their mistake. When they realized it, they made the right choice and went around. So if they didn't catch it, it wouldn't have been a trapped error, and it might have been a grade of "1" on our grading scale, but you can still pass a ride with a 1.

I agree with you that DPEs are behind the times with regard to threat and error management and that type of forward thinking when it comes to check rides. All of us on this site have enough experience with DPEs to know that. But believe me, this would NOT be a bust on most any modern 121 check ride. Debriefed? Oh yeah, definitely. But that alone would not be enough to bust.

To bust a check ride at a 121 carrier (even a type ride) you must consistently demonstrate deficiency in managing threats and errors. That means that when you make errors, you don't trap them, and they become undesired aircraft states, AND the UASs are further mismanaged and result in incidents, accidents, or violations. They had an UAS, but they managed it properly. That's a satisfactory ride.

Errors are inevitable. The old model of check ride where you must have the perfect ride or you bust is out of date and really has no place in our system, but until those old guys die off, we are stuck with old ways.

Stick and rudder perfection isn't what prevents accidents, but rather the ability to manage threats and errors, and have the right mindset to fix undesired aircraft states when/if they occur that does. If a pilot can do that, they will be far ahead of a guy who flies a steep turn perfectly, but cannot see threats coming at him.

 

[dasleben]

It doesn't matter why they realized their mistake. When they realized it, they made the right choice and went around. So if they didn't catch it, it wouldn't have been a trapped error, and it might have been a grade of "1" on our grading scale, but you can still pass a ride with a 1.

I agree with you that DPEs are behind the times with regard to threat and error management and that type of forward thinking when it comes to check rides. All of us on this site have enough experience with DPEs to know that. But believe me, this would NOT be a bust on most any modern 121 check ride. Debriefed? Oh yeah, definitely. But that alone would not be enough to bust.

To bust a check ride at a 121 carrier (even a type ride) you must consistently demonstrate deficiency in managing threats and errors. That means that when you make errors, you don't trap them, and they become undesired aircraft states, AND the UASs are further mismanaged and result in incidents, accidents, or violations. They had an UAS, but they managed it properly. That's a satisfactory ride.

Errors are inevitable. The old model of check ride where you must have the perfect ride or you bust is out of date and really has no place in our system, but until those old guys die off, we are stuck with old ways.

Stick and rudder perfection isn't what prevents accidents, but rather the ability to manage threats and errors, and have the right mindset to fix undesired aircraft states when/if they occur that does. If a pilot can do that, they will be far ahead of a guy who flies a steep turn perfectly, but cannot see threats coming at him.

Summed up far better than I could ever do myself. Well said.

 

[ClarkGriswold]

They didn't realize anything! It was ATC that alerted them they were headed to the wrong airport.

And finally, yes, that is a textbook bust. I work with DPE's and the FAA everyday and I can guarantee you that is about as bust as it can get.

What is your experience?

 

[Autothrust Blue]

PTS is a document only used for standards that must be kept on a practical test. Saying "He'd bust his ATP for that" in response to an error made by professional flight crew doesn't mean anything. Both no doubt passed their ATP practical tests years ago, and have had thousands of safe flying hours since.

The Conquest of Lines and Symmetry bemoans that airmanship died with the advent of the PTS. I've some rather fine ideas about them myself, but the training and checking environment doesn't always map 100% to the line environment.

The real question is: Since when did the words "Airline Transport Pilot" equate to "incapable of error?"

 

[jtrain609]

They didn't realize anything! It was ATC that alerted them they were headed to the wrong airport.

And finally, yes, that is a textbook bust. I work with DPE's and the FAA everyday and I can guarantee you that is about as bust as it can get.

Even with the old system of doing PC's you could retrain two items once or one item twice.

And an event like this hasn't been on any PC or AQP event I've ever done.

You're out of your element, Donny. Take some time to learn something instead of taking your time to crucify these guys with standards they're not held to.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

You're out of your element, Donny. Take some time to learn something instead of taking your time to crucify these guys with standards they're not held to.

Several fathoms.

 

[mrivc211]

Never ok, but that's an ultra highworklad flight into an unfamilier airport that's not typically on your flight schedule. Lots of "threats".

I've almost done this twice. once going into Edmonton at night. I always would get fooled into looking at the wrong airport because I'd only go up there once every 6 months.

 

[purpel]

What is your experience?

I second this. It really sounds like FSII is talking as if he has never has made an error.

I've known some of the best pilots line up for the wrong runway.

Second FSII, I'm not going to call you out, but if you are flying a single engine piston at a 75 kt approach speed it is a lot different than flying a complex jet at much higher approach speeds.

Third again not calling you out, but from your post it sounds like a pilot with less than 1000 hours wrote it. My reasons for this are that your post only talks of the negative errors these pilots made. The aviation environment also includes ATC, and every pilot should use them to his/her benefit. These pilots made errors, but you know I'll bet you they have learned from their mistake. And I'll bet you united airlines will include this scenario to train future pilots. Come on man don't just bash pilots that make honest mistakes. And please don't be the guy that's "Mr.Perfect Pilot expecting a ATP check ride every time he flies." Having high standards is fine, but also realize that the best pilots in this industry are those that have learned from their errors from experience.

 

[T/O w/FSII]

I second this. It really sounds like FSII is talking as if he has never has made an error.

I've known some of the best pilots line up for the wrong runway.

Second FSII, I'm not going to call you out, but if you are flying a single engine piston at a 75 kt approach speed it is a lot different than flying a complex jet at much higher approach speeds.

Third again not calling you out, but from your post it sounds like a pilot with less than 1000 hours wrote it. My reasons for this are that your post only talks of the negative errors these pilots made. The aviation environment also includes ATC, and every pilot should use them to his/her benefit. These pilots made errors, but you know I'll bet you they have learned from their mistake. And I'll bet you united airlines will include this scenario to train future pilots. Come on man don't just bash pilots that make honest mistakes. And please don't be the guy that's "Mr.Perfect Pilot expecting a ATP check ride every time he flies." Having high standards is fine, but also realize that the best pilots in this industry are those that have learned from their errors from experience.

5 years in pilot certification and current G-IV international FO.

Try again.