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

81–90 of 402 posts

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

#81

Post by vezuchyy »

rflrob wrote: post #69

Seeing other comments fault the Southwest pilot for not starting faster, but it’s not obvious to me that there was any significant delay—a few seconds at most between lining up and starting the roll down the runway. The diagram isn’t to scale, so it’s hard to tell. I wonder how much faster an expedited departure could have been.

They have their checklists and everything, it's not an unusual case when the plane goes to a runway and stops for a few seconds. Again, as an ATC, if you need a passenger plane to get out as fast as possible - be clear about it or don't clear them to the runway. It was also a Fedex pilot who figured what's about to happen by themselves.

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

#82

Post by bagels »

hattmall wrote: post #68
michaelmrose wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is saying that procedures allow one plane to take off when one is "3 miles out" or 65 seconds out at a very conservative estimate of a reasonable speed. This isn't a lack of attention or coordination. He literally decided that one plane could take off in that space and repeatedly confirmed this decision.

That seems in line with what happens though. There's less than a minute, normally around 40 seconds between movements, a take off and landing. To casual observer it seems close of course but it appears the delay from the southwest crew was the issue. Then it's complicated by the lack of visibility from the tower because the controller couldn't detect the delay and issue appropriate commands.

Nearly billion dollar jets and they can't slap a gps on them to see that they're sitting on the runway.

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

#83

Post by kcg »

michaelmrose wrote: post #49
pooloo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also an extremely niche field, with a very high attrition rate in terms of training, and few people are truly capable of working in that industry. There will be retraining for certain, and a reduction in pay/rank. They certainly do not need to lose their job over a mishap, while an egregious one, it is still a trainable moment.

How do you retrain someone not to tell 2 planes they can use the same runway with repeated confirmations based on the fact that he thinks 3 miles is far enough away? At that point are we certain its not Alzheimer's?

While I 100% think the controller in this situation made a terrible judgement call and likely shouldn't be working planes anymore, it's worth noting that that there are very specific regulations on multiple planes using the same runway (called Same Runway Separation). Specifically, for these types of aircraft (SRS Category III), the departing plane needs to be at least 6000ft down the runway and airborne by the time the arriving plane crosses the runway threshold. Heck, for smaller general aviation aircraft, you can have a plane land when another has landed and is still on the runway, as long as they are 3000ft past the threshold.

A different regulation (applicable only to radar environments, which AUS is) allows for a departure if an arriving aircraft is 2+ miles away from the runway, as long as there is at least 3 miles of separation within 1 min after takeoff.

All that being said -- it is possible to execute a squeeze play like this if everything is perfect, but you need the departure to go IMMEDIATELY. Trying this in low visibility was extremely reckless and incompetent.

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

#84

Post by bagels »

alphabet9000 wrote: post #30

was wondering what it looked like from a side angle and found a 3d animation of the incident from CBS news https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlAuteLjnm0

Not reasonable to draw inferences from that cartoon. Who knows what data (if any at all) they are using for position or if it's to scale. Pitch is definitely wrong.

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

#85

Post by [deleted] »

valine wrote: post #10
King-Aaron wrote: post #3

Wow, reading that audio transmission log was pretty intense. Someone's losing their job for sure

If the goal is to improve safety firing people is almost always the wrong response. That juvenile preoccupation with punishment only serves to create a culture where mistakes are hidden rather than understood.

[deleted]

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

#86

Post by paranoidrobot »

bagels wrote: post #82
hattmall wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems in line with what happens though. There's less than a minute, normally around 40 seconds between movements, a take off and landing. To casual observer it seems close of course but it appears the delay from the southwest crew was the issue. Then it's complicated by the lack of visibility from the tower because the controller couldn't detect the delay and issue appropriate commands.

Nearly billion dollar jets and they can't slap a gps on them to see that they're sitting on the runway.

The issue was not "Where were the aircraft". The controller knew where they were at all times.

(And they do have GPS, They also have ADSB, and ground based position detection, and, and, and..)

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

#87

Post by Dalewyn »

catminou wrote: post #46

Reminds me of a time in 1999 when a US Air crew at Rhode Island refused to takeoff in the fog when the controller insisted it was okay. Another aircraft had landed and was lost in the fog about their location, even saying they were on on an active runway and even said an aircraft just took off (over them). Animation + text here if curious: https://youtu.be/qUDFY5qlTSA

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.

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

#88

Post by bigiain »

bagels wrote: post #82
hattmall wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems in line with what happens though. There's less than a minute, normally around 40 seconds between movements, a take off and landing. To casual observer it seems close of course but it appears the delay from the southwest crew was the issue. Then it's complicated by the lack of visibility from the tower because the controller couldn't detect the delay and issue appropriate commands.

Nearly billion dollar jets and they can't slap a gps on them to see that they're sitting on the runway.

I see aircraft (and even airport ground vehicles) on the runway all the time on my ADS-B setup. They 100% have them, just nobody was looking at them at the right time.

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

#89

Post by kcg »

michaelmrose wrote: post #52
xpe wrote: post #16

The top of the article: > ‘As bad as it gets without body bags.’ > Why the Austin airport situation was so dangerous. Because the planes almost collided. But the author wants to say more than that. The article covers the “how” things went wrong by analyzing the transcript. The write-up doesn’t answer the key ”why” question —- why are existing procedures and training not suitable? Safety-critical systems (including pr…

Who is saying that procedures allow one plane to take off when one is "3 miles out" or 65 seconds out at a very conservative estimate of a reasonable speed. This isn't a lack of attention or coordination. He literally decided that one plane could take off in that space and repeatedly confirmed this decision.

> Who is saying that procedures allow one plane to take off when one is "3 miles out"

The FAA says that, specifically the 7110.65 which governs ATC rules and procedures. In a radar environment it allows for departures when the arriving aircraft is 2+ miles from the runway, and there will be at least 3 miles of separation within 1 min of takeoff. A separate rule requires that the departing aircraft is at least 6000ft down the runway and airborne before the arrival crosses the runway threshold.

If there is a departing plane rolling up to the hold short line and confirmed ready for immediate takeoff, there is possibly time to get them out and maintain separation. If it's low visibility, the departing plane is rolling slowly and not confirmed ready, then it's a bad bad idea.

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

#90

Post by bagels »

paranoidrobot wrote: post #86
bagels wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly billion dollar jets and they can't slap a gps on them to see that they're sitting on the runway.

The issue was not "Where were the aircraft". The controller knew where they were at all times. (And they do have GPS, They also have ADSB, and ground based position detection, and, and, and..)

Time 1:54, Tower: “Southwest 708, confirm on the roll?”

They don't know if Southwest was moving?

Post reply on HN