Plane Lands on Taxiway at KSEA

Derg said:
Better call SLC.

I turned down a sidestep request inside the marker and got a "Is there a reason you wouldn't accept the sidestep?" on ground.
Click to expand...
Was it a sidestep request from 17/35 to 16L/34R or was it a request from one of the 34/16s to the other?

Not judging your choice not to (not that you'd care if I did ;) ), but that would be pretty ballsy of them to question a sidestep from one 16/34 to the other, when the terminal is right in the friggin' middle of them! And that's a rather sizeable sidestep to boot, especially inside the marker.

I just find it funny. They questioned your decision not to when they're the ones giving taxi instructions just as the reversers crack, have you slow to final approach speed at 11,000 ft when you're still 5 miles from the departure end of the runways AND you're the only plane on approach, etc. Good ole SLC.

99.9% of the time, when approach says the runway on the initial call, I'm going to land on that one. Unless they give an advanced warning with ample amounts of time to redo the box and dial the new freq. @Seggy had something about this a while ago about the incident rate skyrocketing when you're given a different runway than briefed. Or something to that effect.
 
I was amazed at the amount of impact rubber on taxiway T when I was there last. It is not as rare as one might think. Also people do the same at HND but there are quite a few less skilled aviators at that airport.
 
B767 said:
Was it a sidestep request from 17/35 to 16L/34R or was it a request from one of the 34/16s to the other?

Not judging your choice not to (not that you'd care if I did ;) ), but that would be pretty ballsy of them to question a sidestep from one 16/34 to the other, when the terminal is right in the friggin' middle of them! And that's a rather sizeable sidestep to boot, especially inside the marker.

I just find it funny. They questioned your decision not to when they're the ones giving taxi instructions just as the reversers crack, have you slow to final approach speed at 11,000 ft when you're still 5 miles from the departure end of the runways AND you're the only plane on approach, etc. Good ole SLC.

99.9% of the time, when approach says the runway on the initial call, I'm going to land on that one. Unless they give an advanced warning with ample amounts of time to redo the box and dial the new freq. @Seggy had something about this a while ago about the incident rate skyrocketing when you're given a different runway than briefed. Or something to that effect.
Click to expand...

It was LDA/DME 35, inside the marker and then a request to land 34R.

We talked about the high probability of an untimely runway change, my first officer elected not to accept on based upon both our history of two to four runway changes in a short period of time and when it came inside the marker, NOPE.

I've been jacked around, he had been jacked around, he was new and I'm not going to put my first officer in a situation against what we already briefed, out of his comfort zone, all for the convenience of ATC and pilot lounge bravado.

This was our third runway change. Got set up for 34R as directed, then a change to 35. Then approach said "landing south! Set up for 16R. Whoops I mean 35". Then a sidestep to 34R when they asked if we had the field in sight.

Nope! Nope! Nope! Too much too quickly and for what? We were one of three airplanes, from our perspective, on arrival.
 
Derg said:
It was LDA/DME 35, inside the marker and then a request to land 34R.

We talked about the high probability of an untimely runway change, my first officer elected not to accept on based upon both our history of two to four runway changes in a short period of time and when it came inside the marker, NOPE.

I've been jacked around, he had been jacked around, he was new and I'm not going to put my first officer in a situation against what we already briefed, out of his comfort zone, all for the convenience of ATC and pilot lounge bravado.

This was our third runway change. Got set up for 34R as directed, then a change to 35. Then approach said "landing south! Set up for 16R. Whoops I mean 35". Then a sidestep to 34R when they asked if we had the field in sight.

Nope! Nope! Nope! Too much too quickly and for what? We were one of three airplanes, from our perspective, on arrival.
Click to expand...
One day, when the straw on my back breaks, or I get a wild bug in my ass, I'm just going to let them know the truth.

"We get paid by the minute."
 
I can't speak for SLC but typically if I ask a pilot why he couldn't do something, it is really just to train myself on some of your SOP's. We don't know what you are not allowed to do, I give the clearances when you say unable I go to plan B. If I have time, I like to ask why you couldn't do such a thing so that next time plan A doesn't count on that. If it is company policy I will bring it to our supervisors attention so our airspace and procedures people can look into it and get a briefing memo out so everyone learns from it.

One example we had a flight coming out daily with jacked up routing and they would unable any directs. We started asking why, they were saying dispatch said they couldn't fly through such and such airspace due to equipment on the plane. We stopped asking, but took it to the procedures office to look into. When they looked into it, it turned out they could fly through there, they just didn't know of an exemption that applied. It took a few months for the FAA to show them the exact exemption (government work for ya) but once the company was satisfied the flight plans started coming out on the more direct routing.

So just because a controller is asking you why, doesn't always mean we are in a hissy fit for you not doing it, we may be just trying to learn so we know to not try that move on the next guy, or so we can try to work it behind the scenes to allow such a move in the future.

Obviously if you just say you weren't comfortable with the maneuver we will call you a female's body part and move on with our day...in jest of course
 
Derg said:
I think the problem is that they're only doing that because a lot of other pilots in that size of aircraft have gleefully accepted it.

In the era of a continuous datastream uplink and FOQA datamining coupled with a heavy emphasis on stabilized approach criteria, the company already knows what you're doing and is (a) about ready to drop the information on the desk at a hearing or (b) wait until you break something and bring down the hammer.

Looking cool and being the "good guy" isn't high on my list of priorities with SLC ATC.
Click to expand...

Many of my ASAP reports start with a last minute runway change.
 
I don't want to interrupt the collective eye-rolling at ATC, but maybe they were just genuinely curious.

If ATC doesn't understand why a requested operation isn't desirable, why would they stop offering it if most other aircraft take the instruction?

Of course there's no reason to be snotty about it, but Derg didn't specify whether they were or not. Whatever, I'm not here.
 
FM_Weasel said:
I don't want to interrupt the collective eye-rolling at ATC, but maybe they were just genuinely curious.

If ATC doesn't understand why a requested operation isn't desirable, why would they stop offering it if most other aircraft take the instruction?

Of course there's no reason to be snotty about it, but Derg didn't specify whether they were or not. Whatever, I'm not here.
Click to expand...
Derg said:
There was some "butthurtedness" on ground control it seems, I'll have it liveATC it.
Click to expand...
 
FM_Weasel said:
I don't want to interrupt the collective eye-rolling at ATC, but maybe they were just genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

ATC freq's aren't the place for this. Give me a number to call and say on the radio they want me to talk to quality assurance about how things might be done differently.
 
Derg said:
I turned down a sidestep request inside the marker and got a "Is there a reason you wouldn't accept the sidestep?" on ground.
Click to expand...
My dad told me a similar story of a time a controller down in Mexico asked him a similar question, but IIRC the issue on his case was requesting a visual in VMC and the controller denying both the visual approach and refusing to "accept" cancelling IFR. It was amongst those lines. Anyhow, long story short, My dad's reply (who was much abrasive at that time) was "hey, I'm PIC, the buck stops with me".

Good thinking, man
 
FM_Weasel said:
Good idea. Informal information requests aren't unheard of on frequency though.
Click to expand...

In retrospect, it's alright. I get a little upset with SLC, sometimes for good measure, sometimes just frustration with the operation.

We're under a tremendous amount of pressure for stabilized approach criteria and each runway change triggers a number of checklist items, FMS entries and re-briefing if we haven't previously briefed it. Granted, the idea is to shut everything off and visual-it but you still have a number of FMS entries that you make so the Airbus is happy that you're not landing somewhere you didn't intend it.

Additionally, the threat increase dramatically, for example the taxiway landings in ATL and more recently SEA. That few moments saved or ATC flexibility granted by accepting a late runway change is crushed by landing somewhere not intended.

Generally, we briefed that SLC likes to change runway assignments often, briefed which runways we'd accept if re-assigned and at which point we wouldn't accept a change. 15 miles out — ok. 10 miles out — ok, with some conditions. 5 miles out — unable. Inside the marker — unable.

Too many memories of blazing in, best speed from the north, as requested, kept very high on the vertical profile, asked for an expedited descent, asked for a slow to final approach speed/runway change, then another runway change, then back to the original runway and we're high, fast and Airbuses don't do high and fast above the glideslope very well. Well, at all.

Every time you push a button or make an FMS entry, you only have about 90% accuracy. So the more you tinker with the airplane, that number starts to be a threat.

A simple, 'cleared LDA/DME 35, 34R is an option' on initial clearance would be great. But many of us only get to see SLC once every few months so the "localisms" aren't specifically known. And we fly to a crap-ton of airports so you're never going to be able to stockpile the localisms of every airport you operate in and out of.
 
Last edited:
I'm with Derg on this one.

On the Mighty -9, this was easy peasy....point the nose of the airplane to the different runway, and MAYBE have the other guy dial in the ILS freq. Take your distance times 3, and add it to the elevation and that's what altitude you should be at if you're having a problem eyeballing it. Usually both pilots were used to it, and totally with the program.

A couple of button pushes and my current chariot reverts back to DC-9s-ville. BUT....as Derg said, the payback is meager, and messing up your hot-rodding is not well rewarded by the uberlords.

If you do it the way you're supposed to do it, one guy has to QUIT monitoring what's going on outside. Hop in the box. make at least 7-8 keystrokes, looking for menu items in a time compressed fashion with %100 accuracy or start over. Go back and check what he's done is correct, THEN get the other guy to verify it looks right. When he/she gets done, he has to look up, and get re-combobulated to what's going on outside, during which you've moved at least 1 mile and 300 feet closer to the ground. MAYBE the guy you're flying with has been in there before...and maybe not.

No upside, lots of downside. Hey, I want to help out, but I don't want to @#@# my @(#*@ up in the process.

Richman
 
Last edited:
Sorta in the same kind of stupidity....


So I'm in a 64E (fully instrument capable Apache) doing a non-precision approach into Colorado Springs. This is using the same NDB that is standard on all the D model helicopters in the 2 D model battalions we share the base with.

I'm inside on the instruments completely focused on lining up the needle for the 35L and we are just perfect as you can expect an NDB to be. That's when approach starts calling us to deviate course... On an instrument approach. Now it happens to be a practice in VFR weather so my back seater instrument examiner is outside visual and he just goes "wtf..." And so I cheat and look up on short final.... Needles are perfect and we are lined up dead on to land 35R.... We would have to turn something like 30 degrees to even hope to make the approach end of 35L.

So needless to say we terminate the approach and execute the ugliest go around with turn, but I can't help but think this place is our primary emergency recovery field we brief. Now I in an E model am never gonna take an NDB over my ILS, and honestly I'd do my non approved GPS first if I had to. But the D models don't have that option. They only have the GPS and NDB.

Definitely pointed out the ability for somebody to be legal on an emergency IMC recovery and in confusion of "oh thank go there is the field" put it onto an active runway you aren't cleared to land on at a major airport.
 
A sidestep is not allowed per SOPs at some companies? Thats crazy. I thought the circle to land restriction was overboard. I guess thats why I like my current job to much to go to an airline!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top