SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
mercurynews.com
SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
1–10 of 435 posts
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#2How is this even possible? Is it gross negligence on the part of the pilot, a systems problem, or something else? (IANAP)
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#3There's an mp3 of the radio chatter here:
https://forums.liveatc.net/atcaviation-audio-clips/7-july-ks...
> Audio from the air traffic controller communication archived by a user on LiveATC.net and reviewed by this newspaper organization showed how a the confused Air Canada pilot asks if he’s clear to land on 28R because he sees lights on the runway.
> “There’s no one on 28R but you,” the air controller responds.
> An unidentified voice, presumably another pilot, then chimes in: “Where’s this guy going. He’s on the taxiway.”
> The air controller quickly tells the Air Canada pilot to “go around.” telling the pilot “it looks like you were lined up for Charlie (Taxiway C) there.”
> A United Airlines pilot radios in: “United One, Air Canada flew directly over us.”
> “Yeah, I saw that guys,” the control tower responds.
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#4I am just a passenger, but this looks very over-blown. A pilot aligned with the taxiway, that's bad. But no pilot would ever land on a runway (or taxiway) with 3 planes on it. Just search the Aviation Herald for "runway incursion". And indeed, he spotted them, communicated, went around.
Aviation safety margins are so wide that this does not qualify as a near-miss.
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#5How is this even possible? Is it gross negligence on the part of the pilot, a systems problem, or something else? (IANAP)
SFO is said to be a somewhat abnormal/difficult approach [0]. This could cause stress and fractured attention in the pilot.
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there was some other complicating factor. Planes don't usually crash (or nearly crash) without several safety factors being breached.
0: https://jethead.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/how-do-you-land-at-...
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#6Can we have "might have triggered" changed to "could have triggered" in the title?
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#7I am just a passenger, but this looks very over-blown. A pilot aligned with the taxiway, that's bad. But no pilot would ever land on a runway (or taxiway) with 3 planes on it. Just search the Aviation Herald for "runway incursion". And indeed, he spotted them, communicated, went around. Aviation safety margins are so wide that this does not qualify as a near-miss.
Right, I'm confused by this. Surely the pilot would notice at least one of the planes he'd be inevitably crashing into well before he started to land?
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#8I am just a passenger, but this looks very over-blown. A pilot aligned with the taxiway, that's bad. But no pilot would ever land on a runway (or taxiway) with 3 planes on it. Just search the Aviation Herald for "runway incursion". And indeed, he spotted them, communicated, went around. Aviation safety margins are so wide that this does not qualify as a near-miss.
Seems that it was the ATC and another pilot who spotted it.
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#9Can we have "might have triggered" changed to "could have triggered" in the title?
Title is from the original article. What's your reason for could instead of might?
Re: SFO near miss might have triggered aviation disaster
#10Can we have "might have triggered" changed to "could have triggered" in the title?
Title is from the original article. What's your reason for could instead of might?
The tense/mood is wrong. It implies it could have been the cause of something that did happen rather than it having had a possibility of causing something that did not happen.
Text of article has correct tense: "In what one aviation expert called a near-miss of what _could have been_ the largest aviation disaster ever..."