LGA accident

MikeD said:
The comms from Truck 1, the lead truck of the responding vehicles and thus the one doing the comms for all of them, I don’t like the comms used. “Truck 1 and company” is too general, and doesn’t convey specificity to the ground controller. Especially for crossing an active runway. The better way to communicate it, and the way I’ve done it before when in the lead of three vehicles, is to instead use callsign plus number of additional vehicles. So something like “Ground/tower, Crash 5 plus two, holding short of RW 4 at Delta to cross.” That tells the controller specifically how many vehicles there are in your “formation” of vehicles, and lets the local controller plan how big a gap they need to get you crossed. From then on, the formation uses the callsign of the lead vehicle, plus the number of following vehicles. If it’s just a routine crossing, non-emergency, then the controller has time to get a large gap. If it’s an emergency response, he may have to wait for a jet to land and pass the intersection, and may even need to slow the next plane on arrival, or even send it on a go around if needed.
Click to expand...
Personally all I’ve ever heard is “and company”. Although your way makes sense.
 
🦈💜 said:
Ground all the private jets and just watch how fast stuff gets fixed.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, wait. Why are we the problem exactly? We are not the reason you have to sit and wait in ATL or ORD or PHX because you arrived 12 min early and you dont have a gate. We are not the reason you have TMU problems into DEN or LGA or EWR or LAX or pick your favorite class B airport. Last I checked I file IFR to SWT because company policy. Otherwise I'd rather not talk to anyone on my way in there anyway. We aren't gumming up the works. Commercial traffic is the problem. Over sold. Over booked. Over scheduled. All these major airports have reached the absolute peak traffic numbers. It cannot get any higher. Due to staffing, space, and safety. Period.
 
This thread took a weird turn. I don’t blame airlines or 50-76 seat RJs. It falls on the govt for airport and air traffic infrastructure. We didn’t make the proper investments into the ATC system. We didn’t hire enough, we didn’t staff enough.

After Vietnam, after Iraq, after Afghanistan, I had some hope Americans would be sick n tired of wasting money and lives on useless wars and instead spend money on key issues at home, like our airport and controller infrastructure.


Wanting to ban RJs is just dumb. Let’s ban Corpies first, starting with the politicians and CEO private jets. Watch how quickly things change then.
 
🦈💜 said:
A significant majority of the flying I do is hub to hub.

I don't understand what "we've all made our choices <etc>" has to do with the discussion here.

Instead of fixing the problem, you're suggesting we throw a large number of pilots under the bus as a palliative.

We don't even know what the problem is that caused this accident. Controller overwork? Probably at least contributory. But it's a systemic FAA problem, being exacerbated (as some have suggested above) by a lack of desire to spend on infrastructure and likely political maneuvering for privati$$$$$ation.

Why immediately jump to attacking 76-seat aircraft? For that matter, why not blame scope clauses? If we flew 100 or 130 seat aircraft, that might solve the problem too.

Doubt that is what people have in mind, though.
Click to expand...

Christ. Okay.

For the purposes of clarity, I'll explain a little more and then I'm done with this thread because I see the direction it's going.

I advocate the position of minimum seat-miles for slot-controlled airports. What I should have added to that was the following:

* During peak times of highest controller workload (y'know, the thing we were talking about when I offered this idea - I'm not the first)
* Strong consideration should be given to scope clauses to return that flying to mainline and bring the pilots with it.

We are, I think, in agreement on this last point.

And these things go to reducing controller workload while preserving the greatest number of seats. The things that pay us.

I didn't add those things since I didn't know I was required to posit a full-spectrum solution for approval. Instead, you decided that I wanted to throw everyone - including you - under a metaphorical bus.

And my remark about choices? Mine is commuting in an adversarial environment yet advocating a position that would make my life more difficult. Yours is being a self-labeled regional lifer. These choices we make inform our ideas and positions. That's why the remark is relevant.

But go ahead and assume that I'm out to wreck your career, Sasha. Assume that I'm twirling my mustache and cackling to myself about how to screw over every regional pilot out there.

I've tried to clarify further. I'm out.
 
🦈💜 said:
Depending on it for commuting is different than depending on it as a livelihood, and you need to understand the different weight in those two states.

Bluntly, you're reflexively calling for the end of my career, which, forgive me, is something I'm sensitive to. Disclaiming it doesn't make it better. (Granted it's coming anyway thanks to the current president, but that's a separate affair.)

Just consider the effects reactionary calls for change may have on real people.

Also, there's a hint of "blame the regional," which ... no.
Click to expand...

I can't remember how many times just last week that I called for something that harmed my career as an air service development consultant - but if I'm just looking at what's good and sustainable for the industry, it's probably not going to align with what's good and best for me all the time.
 
Roger Roger said:
it’s a pointless discussion anyway because the FAA works for the airlines and they’ll never, especially in this political climate, do something that might mess with the airlines business plan.

Personally, I think that between one thing and another the conditions that allowed the US airline industry to become the behemoth it has are all coming to an end and I’m rapidly becoming very skeptical of the long term viability of this as a career.
Click to expand...
Back to exotic dancing for you? 😀
 
tcco94 said:
Was 2nd RTO for strange odor (first was for an anti ice light). Got off runway just asked for fire to meet them at the gate. Couldn’t get a gate and LGA tower started making calls for them. About 2 mins later say they will need to declare emergency if no gate soon (aft FA feeling sick and odor still on plane). Say need air stairs soon if no gates. About a minute later get a lane entry and gate, and shortly after that is the crash. Can see how busy the LGA tower is during this incident.
Click to expand...

Curiously, how much would LGA tower have been involved with trying to help UAL get a gate? Wouldn’t the UAL jet be talking to ramp tower for coordination of all of that? Then let ground know what solution has been made? Assuming the UAL jet wasn’t sitting on or blocking a taxiway or other movement area, but still, would LGA ground controller be involved with any coordination of that? It seems outside their scope of responsibility, if I’m understanding it right?
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
This thread took a weird turn. I don’t blame airlines or 50-76 seat RJs. It falls on the govt for airport and air traffic infrastructure. We didn’t make the proper investments into the ATC system. We didn’t hire enough, we didn’t staff enough.

After Vietnam, after Iraq, after Afghanistan, I had some hope Americans would be sick n tired of wasting money and lives on useless wars and instead spend money on key issues at home, like our airport and controller infrastructure.


Wanting to ban RJs is just dumb. Let’s ban Corpies first, starting with the politicians and CEO private jets. Watch how quickly things change then.
Click to expand...
Tell me more about how you felt immediately after Vietnam.
 
MikeD said:
Curiously, how much would LGA tower have been involved with trying to help UAL get a gate? Wouldn’t the UAL jet be talking to ramp tower for coordination of all of that? Then let ground know what solution has been made? Assuming the UAL jet wasn’t sitting on or blocking a taxiway or other movement area, but still, would LGA ground controller be involved with any coordination of that? It seems outside their scope of responsibility, if I’m understanding it right?
Click to expand...

Idk the details but I know when we have medical emergencies coming in tower wants to know what gate they’re going to and at PHL they ask every arrival for their gate number
 
Why is it that there isn't a protocol in place (FAA REG.) requiring to come to a complete stop to ascertain "clear left, clear right go!" before crossing an active runway or even a closed one. 3 or 4 seconds are not going to make a major difference in most cases (ARFF response) . A distressed aircraft could be landing with Inop coms, and power ( no lights). I see Ambulances and police vehicles even when they have a green light slowing down to a crawl before crossing an intersection in urban environment. The video shows the fire truck entering the active runway very fast. If they have stopped and "scanned right", they would have noticed the aircraft.
 
Last edited:
melax said:
Why is it that there isn't a protocol in place (FAA REG.) requiring to come to a complete stop to ascertain "clear left, clear right go!" before crossing an active runway or even a closed one. 3 or 4 seconds are not going to make a major difference in most cases (ARFF response) . A distressed aircraft could be landing with Inop coms, and power ( no lights). I see Ambulances and police vehicles even when they have a green light slowing down to a crawl before crossing an intersection in urban environment. The video shows the fire truck entering the active runway very fast. If they had stopped and looked, they would have noticed the aircraft.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about just ground vehicles or everyone coming to a stop? Ground vehicles fine, but If it’s everyone it would slow things waaaay down.
 
In my flight school days, (I was privileged to have learned from an old school no non-sense FBO owner who also was a Captain for a major airline).
When cleared we had to visually make sure that the runway was indeed clear ("Left-Right" before entering the active.
Didn't slow anything down, just common sense. I do not fly blind... too many rocks behind that cloud.... Just saying. I now have close to 30 years experience and still adhere to basics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top