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

91–100 of 402 posts

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

#91

Post by catminou »

Dalewyn wrote: post #87
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.

And the first officer too. It's a team effort and safety is the responsibility of all crew members (including the flight attendants to call out something, jumpseaters and even folks dead heading).

I recall in a CRM training they asked the class what would you do if the captain wanted to take off and you thought it was unsafe. Various answers and one person said "I'd hold my feet on the brakes to prevent moving" to which the trainer said yes - that's the right answer.

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

#92

Post by chrisbolt »

smiley1437 wrote: post #22
xpe wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without keying the mic I’m not following

'keying the mic' is turning on the microphone It's very likely they said some less polite words like 'WTF ARE THEY DOING' before turning on the mic and acting all professional

> It's very likely they said some less polite words like 'WTF ARE THEY DOING' before turning on the mic and acting all professional

Reminds me of Air Canada 759[1]:

> The pilot of United Airlines 1 (UA001), the first in line for takeoff, interrupted the radio traffic at 11:56:01 p.m. and asked "Where is this guy going? He's on the taxiway."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

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

#93

Post by sitkack »

Dalewyn wrote: post #87
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.

> Have the courage to not take off.

So many tragedies could have been averted if people just sat the fck down.

If shit doesn't feel right, just chill until it does.

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

#94

Post by Animats »

mynegation wrote: post #32

So I am neither a pilot nor an aviation geek, but to me it looks like, besides heavy fog, two things happened. (1) control misjudged the approach time for FedEx. 3 miles out is - what? - a minute and a half, at best at approach speed? (2) control did not expedite a takeoff for southwest so they took their sweet time rolling onto the runway and accelerating. At this day and age it is bewildering to see all of this run…

That's called Runway Status Lights, controlled by an Autonomous Runway Incursion System [1]. The busiest US airports have that, but Austin doesn't have one.[1][2]

So the tower controllers had responsibility for separation. Here are the current FAA rules on separation between departing and arriving aircraft using the same runway. See section 3-1-3 of [3].

This is the rule: "Separate an arriving aircraft from another aircraft using the same runway by ensuring that the arriving aircraft does not cross the landing threshold until one of the following conditions exists .... The other aircraft has departed and crossed the runway end or turned to avert any conflict. If you can determine distances by reference to suitable landmarks, the other aircraft needs only be airborne if the following minimum distance exists between aircraft: ...when either is a Category III aircraft- 6,000 feet."

The trouble is, the controller can apparently say "Cleared to land" when they expect that departing aircraft will be airborne and at least 6,000 feet down the runway, and thus out of the way, before the incoming aircraft crosses the landing threshold. Not when it actually is in the air and out of the conflict zone. Or at least in this case, the controller did. This is apparently called "reduced runway separation". The intent is to increase traffic capacity.

But this was in fog. Tower probably could not see the departing aircraft, and they did not apparently have a sensor system to compensate for that.

[1] https://skybrary.aero/articles/autonomous-runway-incursion-w...

[2] https://skybrary.aero/articles/runway-status-lights-rwsl

[3] https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html...

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

#95

Post by EdwardDiego »

Animats wrote: post #94
mynegation wrote: post #32

So I am neither a pilot nor an aviation geek, but to me it looks like, besides heavy fog, two things happened. (1) control misjudged the approach time for FedEx. 3 miles out is - what? - a minute and a half, at best at approach speed? (2) control did not expedite a takeoff for southwest so they took their sweet time rolling onto the runway and accelerating. At this day and age it is bewildering to see all of this run…

That's called Runway Status Lights, controlled by an Autonomous Runway Incursion System [1]. The busiest US airports have that, but Austin doesn't have one.[1][2] So the tower controllers had responsibility for separation. Here are the current FAA rules on separation between departing and arriving aircraft using the same runway. See section 3-1-3 of [3]. This is the rule: "Separate an arriving aircraft from another a…

The fact that Austin doesn't have ARIS terrifies me. It might not be the busiest airport, but it's not exactly a backwater town.

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

#96

Post by hef19898 »

ekianjo wrote: post #53
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…

> he write-up doesn’t answer the key ”why” question —- why are existing procedures and training not suitable? This will be the job of the investigators but it sounds like obvious tower control human operator error.

Listening to the radio traffic, everybody stayed super cool and chill throughoit this, including the ATC. All the way until FedEx cleared the runway, at which point the ATC showed some emotion in his voice. The FedEx pilots again stayed super chill. That's what coolness and professionalism during pressure and under stress looks like.

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

#97

Post by hef19898 »

bagels wrote: post #90
paranoidrobot wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

ATC is run by humans, planes are piloted by humans. The whole environment is highly controlled and regulated. And highly complex, and as this incident shows, one mistake in the whole chain, even a little one, can literally kill hundreds of people.

This is nothing one can solve by throwing even more sensors and technology in, and have that run by ChatGPT or something. Highly trained people with the right amount and kind of technology are the solution.

Edit: Sensors and stuff tell you were aircraft is, not what the human pilots are going to do when within the aloted period of time they have to do whatever they are cleared to do. Hence, you do the logical thing and ask them.

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

#98

Post by monocasa »

digdigdag wrote: post #19
jonathanyc wrote: post #14

I admire how pilots are able to communicate so concisely and professionally. No one swore at each other or ranted over the radio. Southwest didn’t drag their feet because they didn’t appreciate FedEx’s tone. I suspect that higher stakes encourage politeness. A much lower stakes example than the OP: politics at a startup vs. at a big company.

It's not just professionalism. It's intentional and codified down to how you pronounce numbers: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html...

And in fact one of the worst air disasters of all time was from a similar situation where a 747 taking off ran into another 747 that was still landing at least partially due to a communication breakdown and nonstandard phrasing between the planes and the ATC. 9/11 is the only air disaster with more casualties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster#Comm...

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

#99

Post by hef19898 »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #95
Animats wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's called Runway Status Lights, controlled by an Autonomous Runway Incursion System [1]. The busiest US airports have that, but Austin doesn't have one.[1][2] So the tower controllers had responsibility for separation. Here are the current FAA rules on separation between departing and arriving aircraft using the same runway. See section 3-1-3 of [3]. This is the rule: "Separate an arriving aircraft from another a…

The fact that Austin doesn't have ARIS terrifies me. It might not be the busiest airport, but it's not exactly a backwater town.

You're flying in and out of Austin a lot?

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

#100

Post by 1letterunixname »

kochie wrote: post #43
mynegation wrote: post #32

So I am neither a pilot nor an aviation geek, but to me it looks like, besides heavy fog, two things happened. (1) control misjudged the approach time for FedEx. 3 miles out is - what? - a minute and a half, at best at approach speed? (2) control did not expedite a takeoff for southwest so they took their sweet time rolling onto the runway and accelerating. At this day and age it is bewildering to see all of this run…

Because adding more technology doesn’t always makes things work better. I like this idea but the problem is you’ve just added another point of failure. Sure it may avoid this situation, but how many aircraft lifted off and landed at airports in the same day? In America I’d hazard a guess at aground the tens of thousands. Any new system has to reduce the complexity or risks of flying and that’s very hard to do. I’m no…

Hand-waving about "people" == "simpler" == "better" aside, read about TCAS.

Humans in the loop are a SPoF if they're there:

1. Solely to read information over a lossy, slow medium like analog radio. Digital data between ground and air systems should be the primary means of comms with voice radio as a backup channel for clarification and stating intent.

2. To flawlessly plan and avoid collisions between dozens of objects moving at high speed in 4 dimensions. Never going to happen. These should be done and verified mechanically, continuously.

Humans should be guiding and assisting mechanical, reliable automation of decision-making rather than playing telephone or doing long division on paper when calculators exist.

Post reply on HN