Recent Near Mid-Air at MSP - NTSB Prelim

[JEP]

Tower error blamed for 2 planes nearly colliding over MSP
By PAUL WALSH, Star Tribune

Last update: October 27, 2010 - 9:32 AM
The near midair collision of a commercial airliner and a cargo plane that occurred last month over the Twin Cities is being blamed on an air-traffic control error.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), in preliminary findings released Wednesday, said the tower mistakenly instructed the US Airways jetliner to turn left shortly after departing the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, bringing it within 50 to 100 feet above the climbing Bemidji Aviation Services' Beech 99 aircraft.

The US Airways captain heard the cargo plane below but "neither pilot saw the other aircraft because they were operating in instrument meteorological conditions," the NTSB report read.

The agency has yet to explain why the errant instruction from the tower was issued.

"It will be some months" before a final report on the incident is released and more about what prompted the tower's order are revealed, said NTSB spokeswoman Bridget Ann Serchak.

The report added that the US Airways aircraft was aided in averting disaster because its collision-avoidance system issued climbing instructions to the cockpit. The cargo plane was not equipped with that technology.

It was about 6:50 a.m. Sept. 16, and the Thursday morning rush hour was just unfolding, when the two planes left on parallel runways and nearly collided over the intersection of Hwys. 62 and 77, which is a half-mile northwest of the airport's edge and not far from south Minneapolis neighborhoods.

The US Airways plane was carrying 95 people and was headed to Philadelphia. The cargo plane, with only the pilot aboard, was bound for La Crosse, Wis. Both continued on as scheduled.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said the planes needed 1,000 feet of vertical separation.

Midair collisions, though rare, are almost always disastrous. A recent spate of near or actual midair crashes, including four others involving U.S. jetliners or air taxis in the past 17 months, already had prompted the FAA to launch fresh studies of the problem.

Paul Walsh • 612-673-4482

 

[Boris Badenov]

Interesting. I remember a number of people calling for the 99 guy's head on a pike...wonder where they are now.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

My distrust of controllers is at an all time high...

There's another event you'll never hear about on the news; but New York Center tried to combine two aircraft a few weeks ago at FL230...

 

[dasleben]

My distrust of controllers is at an all time high...

There's another event you'll never hear about on the news; but New York Center tried to combine two aircraft a few weeks ago at FL230...

For the job they have to do, I'd say they do a pretty damn good job normally. Anytime there are people in the loop, there will be errors. Just a part of life.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

For the job they have to do, I'd say they do a pretty damn good job normally. Anytime there are people in the loop, there will be errors. Just a part of life.

What annoys me is that they're trigger happy on issuing pilot deviations, and yet I'll bet that guy is still working with no consequences...

 

[Bernoulli Fan]

What annoys me is that they're trigger happy on issuing pilot deviations, and yet I'll bet that guy is still working with no consequences...

Just remember that controllers and their FAA sups are two different things.

 

[mshunter]

What annoys me is that they're trigger happy on issuing pilot deviations, and yet I'll bet that guy is still working with no consequences...

I have found just the opposite. I have deserved a few deviations in the past, and usually if you are apologetic, they let you off with a "don't do it again!" YMMV.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

What annoys me is that they're trigger happy on issuing pilot deviations, and yet I'll bet that guy is still working with no consequences...

Yeah, not so much. A pilot deviation may involve some sort of system deviation or scrutiny of the controller involved, too, and the controllers I know and work with every day are a forgiving lot. If you mess up, you fess up, call the facility, and it's usually "Ah, yeah, I see why you did that/what happened/etc., y'all be careful now, y'hear?"

Now, if you call 'em and cop an attitude or if you do something flagrantly stupid, then you're going to get a nasty registered letter.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Yeah, not so much. A pilot deviation may involve some sort of system deviation or scrutiny of the controller involved, too, and the controllers I know and work with every day are a forgiving lot. If you mess up, you fess up, call the facility, and it's usually "Ah, yeah, I see why you did that/what happened/etc., y'all be careful now, y'hear?"

Now, if you call 'em and cop an attitude or if you do something flagrantly stupid, then you're going to get a nasty registered letter.

Recent events suggest otherwise....

A controller forgot to issue my friend a speed reduction at a fix, and then was wondering why the heck he was getting so close to the guys in front.... controller called the gate, and advised of possible pilot deviation.... turns out that when they listened to the tapes again.... controller didn't issue the instruction....

Like I said.... quick to call us out on a mistake... I would never .... ever .... make a report over a controller over anything that didn't cause a TA/RA.... if it's a TA/RA I have to...

 

[gne in prog]

"The agency has yet to explain why the errant instruction from the tower was issued."

That's an easy one. People make mistakes.

 

[Krieger]

Interesting. I remember a number of people calling for the 99 guy's head on a pike...wonder where they are now.

Was that on this forum? I wouldn't mind reading the references.

 

[exneophyte]

Thanks for posting. The popular media plastered this incident all over the front pages when it happened, but they never seem to want to report on the follow up or resolution to something. Maybe I'm weird, but I actually would rather read the resolution than the sketchy details that are now immediately released.

 

[SteveC]

http://forums.jetcareers.com/general-topics/115013-near-collision-us-airways-jet.html

 

[mooneyguy]

Interesting. I remember a number of people calling for the 99 guy's head on a pike...wonder where they are now.

Yeah, and I was scolded for my IGNORANCE in my reply on that thread to another self professed atc'r who seems to enjoy pointing out errors pilots make.

I myself have a couple of good friends who are approach controllers. They are tops in their field, and i highly respect them. However there are more then a few in my area that are "in training" and you really need to watch yourself when they are on. Funny though, I don't go screaming when they make a mistake, trying to make them look stupid, or trying to get them in trouble. I just deal with it and move on.

 

[A150K]

Generally speaking, controllers do a great job, but one pretty major issue is that some pilots forget they are PIC and let the controllers fly their airplanes. Even if you are on an IFR plan, when VMC conditions exist, it is the pilot's duty to see and avoid (speaking for the light piston singles I flt). Had I not excercised my 91.3 authority on one occasion, I would have been a smoking hole in the ground along side a Beech Baron.

Back to the topic, I couldn't imagine being as close to traffic as the US pilots described...Glad to see the NTSB didn't berate the 99 driver like many in the media did.