Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

fallows.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 402 posts

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#241

Post by mnw21cam »

jnsaff2 wrote: post #165

I got my PPL in EU and here it was drilled into me that in Europe there can be exactly ONE plane cleared to use a runway at any time. When the approaching plane is cleared then there is no allowance for anyone and anything to be on the runway. So if there is a departing plane waiting on the runway or someone crossing then the approaching plane is given "cleared approach runway 08" but never "cleared to land". Which a…

> So if there is a departing plane waiting on the runway or someone crossing then the approaching plane is given "cleared approach runway 08" but never "cleared to land". Which also means that if you are piloting the landing plane then at your decision height you have to go around.

My understanding was that the word "cleared" was to be avoided when you aren't actually cleared to land/take off, and the correct wording was now "continue approach runway 08".

There has been a decent amount of study of the cognitive interpretation of exact wordings, resulting in a standardised phrasing that avoids misinterpretation. It's a good thing. Using the word "cleared" could easily cause a lazy/tired/overloaded pilot over a noisy channel to think they are cleared to land.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#242

Post by michaelt »

hef19898 wrote: post #235
piva00 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Austin is proof of the system working as intended, the only thing that saved them was the FedEx flight being able to take action at the last moment during their approach, if the fog was a little thicker and they couldn't see the Southwest flight on the runway as early as they did it would be a catastrophe. That's just luck, not a system that's working as intended.

No, that is good training on behalf of FedEx, Southwest (knowing you have a plane above your own during take off and still follow ATC guidance is no easy feat) and the ATC (knowing you fucked up, staying calm and giving the correct instructions and keep everyone alive is again no easy feat). And training of operators absolutely is part of the overall system.

If the wings fall off my plane mid flight, I jump out with a parachute, and I land without injury then the "overall system" of plane-plus-parachute-plus-training has succeeded.

However, the plane component of the system failed, because the wings aren't supposed to fall off.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#243

Post by bombcar »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #116
Dalewyn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my acquaintances used to be an ATC (air traffic controller) and has many pilot friends from back then. They all say the same thing whenever they talk about the most important thing in aviation: Have the courage to not take off. Kudos to that US Airways captain for refusing to takeoff and stay put until everyone got on the same page.

> Have the courage to not take off. As the old old saying goes, better to be down here wishing you were up there than up there wishing you were down here.

The four most useless things to a pilot are:

the fuel in the fuel truck,

the altitude above you,

the runway behind you,

and a tenth of a second ago.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#244

Post by jnsaff2 »

mnw21cam wrote: post #241
jnsaff2 wrote: post #165

I got my PPL in EU and here it was drilled into me that in Europe there can be exactly ONE plane cleared to use a runway at any time. When the approaching plane is cleared then there is no allowance for anyone and anything to be on the runway. So if there is a departing plane waiting on the runway or someone crossing then the approaching plane is given "cleared approach runway 08" but never "cleared to land". Which a…

> So if there is a departing plane waiting on the runway or someone crossing then the approaching plane is given "cleared approach runway 08" but never "cleared to land". Which also means that if you are piloting the landing plane then at your decision height you have to go around. My understanding was that the word "cleared" was to be avoided when you aren't actually cleared to land/take off, and the correct wording…

You are correct, it is indeed "continue" for the approach.

Also the word "takeoff" is protected, I believe it can only be said within giving and reading back a takeoff clearance. Everywhere else it has to be "departure".

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#245

Post by barelyauser »

mcv wrote: post #223
0xFF0123 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious to know how much it actually improves throughput. It seems strange to use optimistic locks in such a safety critical process, when a more fail-safe approach is available.

Sounds like a money problem to me. Less time between planes means more planes means more money. It sounds to me like far too many critical safety decisions are being made with an eye on money rather than safety. There were reports warning that Fukushima wasn't safe in case of a tsunami, but the company in charge of the plant decided to ignore that. Deep Water was caused by cost cuts. The Boeing 737 Max was made for f…

Risk will always exist. Our most precious resource is time. Every effort to save it is worth it. What if it causes one accident every 20 years? It saved thousands of years of human time in the meantime.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#246

Post by pixl97 »

kylehotchkiss wrote: post #72

Is zero visibility an unheard of condition at Austin’s airport? I thought I saw the other day they don’t have ground radar, which would probably be the leading resolution item if it’s the case. But even then, why not slow things down for the weather? 3 miles or 60 second turnaround when the runway is cat III??

We get occasional fog at the AUS Airport, so not unheard of.

Austin has been experiencing a lot of growth and I'm wondering how much of this is stressing the different systems at the airport. Earlier this year it was common for us to run low on jet fuel for lack of storage. On the weekends we've had issues with lines lasting for hours. There is a fight between the city and one of the leaseholders regarding expansion. These aren't directly related with the flight line, but point at a system that's stretching its capacity.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#247

Post by kayodelycaon »

reisse wrote: post #207
harshreality wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a good thing to try, but the Southwest plane was above V1 (edit: may not have been, but acted as if they were) and couldn't abort, and didn't. Both planes climbed away from the runway with minimal clearance between them. It was simply luck that they didn't crash anyway. The fast reaction by the Fedex pilots may have contributed to increased distance between the planes that saved them, but their callout to the…

> Southwest plane was above V0 and couldn't abort It's up to investigators to find out. Pilots definitely can (and have the right to) abort after V1, if they consider it safer than taking off. Before V1, you can be sure that abort is safe, after V1, you have to weigh risks of high-speed abort against risks of continuing flying, but staying on the ground is still possible. Yes, and nitpicking - decision speed is V1, n…

You only abort after V1 if the plane can’t fly. Aborting for any other reason is more dangerous than continuing takeoff.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#248

Post by jameshart »

bambax wrote: post #192
zackbloom wrote: post #123

Just to give a little context as a pilot: It is the job of the tower controller to decide who uses the runway when. There are often multiple planes waiting to take off, and multiple planes nearing the airport to land. It's not uncommon for a tower controller to allow a plane to takeoff while another is approaching the runway. The theory is, of course, that the flight will depart in plenty of time. In this case, the c…

The linked article (more interesting than this one IMHO) asks > Why were they arriving and departing on the same runway when parallels were available? and it's a good question! If there's more than one runway available, and bad visibility, why make two planes use the same runway so close to one another?? https://vannevar.blogspot.com/2023/02/austin-fedexdal-disast...

Unless the terminal is between the runways, using parallel runways will still require clearing planes to cross runways. The conflict risks are different, but they don’t go away.

Intuitively feels like the safest way to operate would be landing planes on the farthest runway, with takeoffs on the near one, because it would only require clearing just-landed aircraft to cross the takeoff runway and you have more discretion to time departures than arrivals.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#249

Post by doctor_eval »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #229
bagels wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one is pretty infuriating to listen to!

The full version is worse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AP-8uZWxA

That’s horrifying. The controller completely ignores all the information and clears the USAir plane to take off, twice. But the crew knew there was a plane on the runway and refused, twice. Incredible.

Well, I guess the Swiss cheese worked.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#250

Post by hrunt »

jameshart wrote: post #248
bambax wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The linked article (more interesting than this one IMHO) asks > Why were they arriving and departing on the same runway when parallels were available? and it's a good question! If there's more than one runway available, and bad visibility, why make two planes use the same runway so close to one another?? https://vannevar.blogspot.com/2023/02/austin-fedexdal-disast...

Unless the terminal is between the runways, using parallel runways will still require clearing planes to cross runways. The conflict risks are different, but they don’t go away. Intuitively feels like the safest way to operate would be landing planes on the farthest runway, with takeoffs on the near one, because it would only require clearing just-landed aircraft to cross the takeoff runway and you have more discreti…

At ABIA, the terminal is between the parallel runways.
Post reply on HN