2 planes nearly collide in midair above Orlando airport

[MikeD]

Mike has seen more of these than I, but overhead patterns are typically at 1,500' agl (sometimes 2,000' agl). Overhead aircraft make a level turn to downwind. Departing aircraft are restricted to 1,000 agl until the departure end of the runway so they don't climb through the overhead pattern.

A couple things I don't understand.

• This is SOP for a lot of Military Pilots, many flying heavy jets, others high performance fighter types. Why is this a burden for a 91, 121, or 135 pilots?
• When a departure procedure is TERPS it's built from the departure end of the pavement. If you cross the departure end at 1,000' with flying speed, it seems like your money in the bank.
• I know many carriers policy is to engage the autopilot ASAP. Are you going to get into trouble for hand flying for a mile? Sure beats an F-22 up your APU.

I do acknowledge it's a little inconvenient, but I don't see the issue?

Shouldn’t be difficult at all assuming the aircrew is given the restriction in a timely manner. Many civilian crews aren’t aware of these restrictions unless it’s also in an ATIS or in information they receive, and hence the tower as a good practice should reiterate the restriction to them when the takeoff clearance is given. It shouldn’t even really be an issue at many airports, as crossing the DER at 1000’ AGL is some significant climb rate. Still, in terms of actual flying, it’s not at all impossible to comply with if someone is in some sort of high climb performance aircraft, no different than any other low departure altitude restriction one would encounter.

 

[killbilly]

A couple things I don't understand.

• This is SOP for a lot of Military Pilots, many flying heavy jets, others high performance fighter types. Why is this a burden for a 91, 121, or 135 pilots?

What is? Overheads? What makes you think that because it's SOP for military that it automatically follows for civilians? Most civilians have no clue about overhead patterns/breaks in this manner.

 

[fholbert]

What is? Overheads? What makes you think that because it's SOP for military that it automatically follows for civilians? Most civilians have no clue about overhead patterns/breaks in this manner.

No, restricting altitudes on a departure. You don't have to understand why, just comply.

 

[Box hauler]

Mike has seen more of these than I, but overhead patterns are typically at 1,500' agl (sometimes 2,000' agl). Overhead aircraft make a level turn to downwind. Departing aircraft are restricted to 1,000 agl until the departure end of the runway so they don't climb through the overhead pattern.

A couple things I don't understand.

• This is SOP for a lot of Military Pilots, many flying heavy jets, others high performance fighter types. Why is this a burden for a 91, 121, or 135 pilots?
• When a departure procedure is TERPS it's built from the departure end of the pavement. If you cross the departure end at 1,000' with flying speed, it seems like your money in the bank.
• I know many carriers policy is to engage the autopilot ASAP. Are you going to get into trouble for hand flying for a mile? Sure beats an F-22 up your APU.

I do acknowledge it's a little inconvenient, but I don't see the issue?

I’ve never seen a carrier with a SOP to turn the AP on ASAP. That’s just not a thing, in the US at least. You can hand fly to RVSM if you feel inclined. As for the altitude limitation for departure, it doesn’t really apply. Most 121 aircraft aren’t reaching 1000 agl by departure end in the first place. Traffic flow depends at most big civil airports are what the system is designed around and we typically don’t have many unusual ops like people doing overheads so it’s not a problem that needs to be solved.

 

[MikeD]

I’ve never seen a carrier with a SOP to turn the AP on ASAP. That’s just not a thing, in the US at least. You can hand fly to RVSM if you feel inclined. As for the altitude limitation for departure, it doesn’t really apply. Most 121 aircraft aren’t reaching 1000 agl by departure end in the first place. Traffic flow depends at most big civil airports are what the system is designed around and we typically don’t have many unusual ops like people doing overheads so it’s not a problem that needs to be solved.

thats what I was saying. It’s good for ATC to pass that along with the departure instructions to civil aircraft, but most of the time, it makes no difference as most civil aircraft won’t reach that restriction before crossing the departure end. Still, it’s not an impossible restriction to adhere to if one happens to have a high climb rate aircraft……no different than any other altitude restriction on a takeoff. Just don’t surprise crews with it mid-takeoff roll.

 

[fholbert]

thats what I was saying. It’s good for ATC to pass that along with the departure instructions to civil aircraft, but most of the time, it makes no difference as most civil aircraft won’t reach that restriction before crossing the departure end.

Keep in mind, ATC must assure separation.

 

[MikeD]

Keep in mind, ATC must assure separation.

absolutely, which is why ATC should pass the restriction along with the takeoff clearance, to ensure the crew knows (assuming not a locally based aircraft), even if it’s likely it won’t be needed by that aircraft. Because you never know.

 

[form810]

Video in link...

2 planes nearly collide in midair above Orlando airport

Video captured two planes nearly colliding in the air above Orlando International Airport in Florida last month — and the FAA is now investigating the close call.

nypost.com

Two planes nearly collided in the air above a Florida airport in a close call that was captured on video — and the FAA is investigating the mishap, according to a report.

The pilot of a single-engine Cessna plane came within about 500 feet of a Delta 757 that was taking off from Orlando International Airport last month, ABC News reported.

The pilot, Malik Clarke, told the news station he had to take “evasive action” to avoid the much larger plane.

“I knew that this didn’t look right, so immediately, I turned right and I climbed as steeply as I could because the Boeing 757 from Delta has a much higher climb rate than the aircraft that I was flying,” Clarke told ABC.

Video taken by Clarke of the incident shows the huge jet taking off just a relatively short distance from his small aircraft.


“If I hadn’t done that evasive maneuver, it’s quite likely there would have been a midair collision,” he added.

The Federal Aviation Administration is probing the near-miss, according to the report.

“It was somebody’s error to put them in the same part of the sky,” said Steve Ganyard, an ABC News contributor and former State Department official.

Delta is also investigating the error.

“Nothing is more important than safety,” a spokesperson told ABC.



View attachment 66703

Joey, do like movies about Oshkosh departures?

 

[form810]

Mike has seen more of these than I, but overhead patterns are typically at 1,500' agl (sometimes 2,000' agl). Overhead aircraft make a level turn to downwind. Departing aircraft are restricted to 1,000 agl until the departure end of the runway so they don't climb through the overhead pattern.

A couple things I don't understand.

• This is SOP for a lot of Military Pilots, many flying heavy jets, others high performance fighter types. Why is this a burden for a 91, 121, or 135 pilots?
• When a departure procedure is TERPS it's built from the departure end of the pavement. If you cross the departure end at 1,000' with flying speed, it seems like your money in the bank.
• I know many carriers policy is to engage the autopilot ASAP. Are you going to get into trouble for hand flying for a mile? Sure beats an F-22 up your APU.

I do acknowledge it's a little inconvenient, but I don't see the issue?

I mean, I'm as terrified of some dude in a 172 in the Bravo as the next guy. It's not the airframe I'm worried about, though. It's the "pilot".

 

[inigo88]

While I love overhead breaks as much as the next guy, the whole proceed outbound altitude restricted thing while inbound aircraft break above you just isn’t trained on the civilian side, and this was at MCO between a civilian C172 and B757…

This video partially tells the story, but only some of the tower frequencies were archived. Still I think we can get the gist of it:

• C172 is cleared for takeoff on runway 36L.
• Given caution wake turbulence for a departing 737 on 36R (which would have been no factor by the time they got airborne).
• After departure heading was 090, which sends them climbing across the extended centerlines of 36R, 35L and 35R.
• The delta 757 was apparently departing 35L in the east complex on another tower frequency which wasn’t archived.
• The 172 pilot spotted the departing 757 and kept the right turn going, hence the comment they were assigned 090 but they’re heading 150.

Honestly seems like good SA by the Cessna kept something really bad from happening. Seems like airspace limitations cause MCO tower to assign that 090 departure heading regardless of which side of the airport you’re on. So being on the far west runway you cross the extended centerlines of all the other runways. Combine that with separate controllers working east and west local so in order for the west tower to get somebody out they need to coordinate for east tower to stop their departures. I’d wager that’s where the breakdown occurred.

 

[MikeD]

While I love overhead breaks as much as the next guy, the whole proceed outbound altitude restricted thing while inbound aircraft break above you just isn’t trained on the civilian side,

There’s no training required for it, just a simple cross at or below altitude at the departure end of the runway. The departing crew doesn’t even need to know the why behind the restriction, they just need to meet it, which is simple enough.

 

[Flyinthrew]

While I love overhead breaks as much as the next guy, the whole proceed outbound altitude restricted thing while inbound aircraft break above you just isn’t trained on the civilian side, and this was at MCO between a civilian C172 and B757…

This video partially tells the story, but only some of the tower frequencies were archived. Still I think we can get the gist of it:

• C172 is cleared for takeoff on runway 36L.
• Given caution wake turbulence for a departing 737 on 36R (which would have been no factor by the time they got airborne).
• After departure heading was 090, which sends them climbing across the extended centerlines of 36R, 35L and 35R.
• The delta 757 was apparently departing 35L in the east complex on another tower frequency which wasn’t archived.
• The 172 pilot spotted the departing 757 and kept the right turn going, hence the comment they were assigned 090 but they’re heading 150.

Honestly seems like good SA by the Cessna kept something really bad from happening. Seems like airspace limitations cause MCO tower to assign that 090 departure heading regardless of which side of the airport you’re on. So being on the far west runway you cross the extended centerlines of all the other runways. Combine that with separate controllers working east and west local so in order for the west tower to get somebody out they need to coordinate for east tower to stop their departures. I’d wager that’s where the breakdown occurred.

Thanks for that. It all makes a lot more sense, and seems a bit more credible of a bad scenario now. Any single engine piston taking off of 36L would definitely be climbing through the 35L departure path if it was given 090 heading. I was thinking he was enroute and supposed to be over midfield (a relatively safe place to be). I'm still interested in whether the east tower controller called the traffic for the 757 in the takeoff clearance.

 

[CFI A&P]

No, restricting altitudes on a departure. You don't have to understand why, just comply.

The Ruudy.X SID off of runway 24 and their cousin the ILS 6 at TEB has entered the chat.

 

[inigo88]

I'm still interested in whether the east tower controller called the traffic for the 757 in the takeoff clearance.

Great point here. There are some surprisingly good YouTube comments on that VASAaviation video including by retired controllers discussing things like tower cab coordination between the split locals and this traffic advisory question. I guess if tower didn’t call the traffic the blame is on them, where as if they called the traffic as part of the takeoff clearance it would be on the Delta pilots.

I think I’d argue this is one of those cases where just because it’s legal per the 7110.65 doesn’t make it safe. Making the takeoff clearance contingent on whether an airliner is looking at the right bugsmasher (“they all look the same!” *shakes fist at sky*) or perhaps the right TCAS target seems like a bit of a gamble when the tower controller with the greater SA of the airspace (mark one eyeballs + a radar screen with datablocks) could verify the extended centerline is clear before releasing the departure. Not trying to pre-judge the MCO controllers without all the facts, just wanted to touch on this general philosophical point.