NTSB investigating UAL/SFO near miss
- Thread starter inigo88
- Start date
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Re: UAL pilot to SFO TWR after TCAS RA: "We need to talk!"
The tail number given above comes back as an Aeronca 11AC.... so who is wrong?
The tail number given above comes back as an Aeronca 11AC.... so who is wrong?
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Re: UAL pilot to SFO TWR after TCAS RA: "We need to talk!"
Nevermind, I see it now.
And from reading the transcript... meh.
Nevermind, I see it now.
And from reading the transcript... meh.
Re: UAL pilot to SFO TWR after TCAS RA: "We need to talk!"
Agreed, but with that being said....No airliner should have to worry about an aircraft crossing over a runway within any distance especially while the a/c is still over the runway.
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the follow up. I wonder how far if at all the SE a/c crossed where it should not have. Listening to the tapes it sounds like there were told to remain West of ???
Does UA use a relief pilot on those flights? Do they have any responsibility in the cockpit if they are 'not flying'. I assuming they might be eyes outside if possible.
A little to close for comfort.
Agreed, but with that being said....No airliner should have to worry about an aircraft crossing over a runway within any distance especially while the a/c is still over the runway.
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the follow up. I wonder how far if at all the SE a/c crossed where it should not have. Listening to the tapes it sounds like there were told to remain West of ???
Does UA use a relief pilot on those flights? Do they have any responsibility in the cockpit if they are 'not flying'. I assuming they might be eyes outside if possible.
A little to close for comfort.
DE727UPS
Well-Known Member
I didn't listen to the transcript, but TCAS isn't going to know when visual separation is being applied. The question is, when do you ignore an RA? I'd say only when I see the traffic in question and can maintain separation. Even then, it's pretty hard to ignore an RA. It goes against everything you are trained for. But in the end, visual separation is in the book as a way to keep two airplanes apart. TCAS just can't read the book...
Bumblebee
Commodore
Re: UAL pilot to SFO TWR after TCAS RA: "We need to talk!"
I think we should address these issues in the sim, and during IOE and OOE. I always knew from the beginning of my instrument training (don't need to be told as a VFR only pilot) to get the eyes out when visual conditions exist. The problem is that there are tasks that are practiced over and over in the sim with out ever being reminded that during this period to make sure and keep your eyes out... truly it is a given, right?
But it is not a given...we need to remember that looking out on a VFR day is our PRIMARY responsibility, even under radar contact,and an IFR flight plan in Bravo airspace! We tend to relax once in Bravo...head on a swivel people!!!
exactly
I was just talking to my FO the other day about this (matter of fact it was Saturday am flying out of SFO, by coincidence)...one airline training department (not ours) calls it eye-suck. There are timing issues, and it should be briefed because there is a natural tendency to both be handling inside tasks at the same second (at least in my little airliner) so I make sure that when the FO is in, I look out, or at least I make sure to have just made a good scan prior to coming inside.
:yeahthat:
I think we should address these issues in the sim, and during IOE and OOE. I always knew from the beginning of my instrument training (don't need to be told as a VFR only pilot) to get the eyes out when visual conditions exist. The problem is that there are tasks that are practiced over and over in the sim with out ever being reminded that during this period to make sure and keep your eyes out... truly it is a given, right?
But it is not a given...we need to remember that looking out on a VFR day is our PRIMARY responsibility, even under radar contact,and an IFR flight plan in Bravo airspace! We tend to relax once in Bravo...head on a swivel people!!!
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Never.
The question is, when does the media freak out about an RA? and why wont someone think of the children?
Bumblebee
Commodore
Hey Donnie, I don't fly an airplane with RA, but (from my reading about it)aren't you supposed to do the RA even with traffic in sight, because it might be a different target?
On the ATC freq is generally not the place to handle problems/issues. That's what landlines on the ground are for.
DE727UPS
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I guess that's my point. You aren't given any guidance about a visual separation situation like this. The books says you must follow the RA unless the PIC decides it's unsafe. It also allows you to turn off RA's if operating in proximity of other aircraft. But if you get an RA, you have to follow it. Should it be ATC's job to never allow visual separation that might result in an RA?
It just seems like the book doesn't always apply well to real life...
It just seems like the book doesn't always apply well to real life...
Douglas
Old School KSUX
I was talking about her stumbling for words and the shakiness in her voice.
Just like the Holding in lieu of "should I fly the PT turn or not" scenario....where real world disagrees with the book.
In a terminal area like this in close proximity to other aircraft, why don't crews disable RAs? If only to avoid getting one every 5 minutes?
We had a case where a C-17 crew was landing at Holloman AFB, back when I was flying the F-117. They were flying the HI-TACAN Z 22, however as usually is the case, HMN was doing launched on RW 25 and recoveries on RW 16. The pattern, both inside downwind as well as outside downwind, are east traffic (ie, towards arrival traffic that may be arriving on RW 22). RW 22 is the landing runway for heavy aircraft. The fighter traffic pattern is 2000AGL, and you'll notice in the attached IAP, that the FAF is a hard altitude of 5700'. The C-17 was on the approach, at the same time we were recovering F-4s and F-117s. As they approached the FAF, a flight of F-4s went straight through initial and to the outside downwind (about 3 miles east of the field) and a flight of F-117s were coming up initial at 2000AGL for the break into the downwind. Tower called the C-17 as traffic to the fighters, and vice versa, BOTH acknowledging "visual separation". As the F-4s rolled out on outside downwind getting to re-enter initial for the break, the C-17 crew got an RA from them and took evasive action, even though BOTH they and the flight of fighters saw each other, there was no other traffic in the area, and the traffic info had been getting displayed by the TCAS the whole time. The C-17 crew wanted to file a HATR report against the F-4 crew and against tower for bringing them too close and compromising safety. Investigating this whole deal, my big question to the C-17 crew was why did you have the RA on? Do your regs allow you to have it off? And worst, why didn't you use some common sense to know what the traffic was you were getting an RA on....you knew who was in the area at that altitude and in that direction, and you were visual separation on them. And further, if the evasive maneuver to have to dive towards the ground was so unsafe, why did you do perform it?
Never did get satisfactory answers to this.
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/1003/00007HTZ22.PDF
BrewMaster
Well-Known Member
Fox News yesterday had a picture of a United 737 and said the incidient involved a 777 "like the one pictured above."
I can't keep these fancy flyin masheens straight. They all do the same thing anyways.....
Bumblebee
Commodore
they did have more of a conversation on the "discrete" fequency, which wasn't very discreet....
rd757
Well-Known Member
Yeah, LiveATC picked up some of it, but it was sort of mucked up by another frequency on the feed. I wonder what really went down on the phone!
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
This.
WTF are we, the aviation community, doing such that TCAS RAs are now GOD, and in some peoples' minds trump good old fashioned airmanship?
pericynthion
Well-Known Member
discrete, a. constituting a separate entity : individually distinct <several discrete sections>
discreet, a. unobtrusive, unnoticeable <followed at a discreet distance>
Muff3n
Well-Known Member
I am normally a huge Fox news fan, but they can really mess up on some aviation reporting.
I just watched their version of the transcript of them talking. They said the girl said " That made a T Test......" Didn't she actually say " that set off TCAS"?
The media corporations really should cut 80k out of their budget made of millions of dollars, and hire 1 person in the company that knows something about aviation, it really would make them a lot more credible when stories like this come to light.