• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Another Air Canada landing incident at KSFO: Plane ignores order to go-around

FriskyCanuck

FriskyCanuck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,063
Toronto, Canada
Via Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...anding-at-san-francisco-airport-idUSKBN1CT2GT

MONTREAL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Air Canada and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said on Tuesday they are investigating a weekend flight that landed on a San Francisco runway after the crew was told to abort, the second recent incident involving the carrier at the busy California airport.

Air Canada Flight AC781, an A320 originating in Montreal, landed at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) on Sunday after receiving proper clearance only to learn that a subsequent message from air traffic control was not received by the crew, a spokeswoman for the airline said by email.

Air traffic control at SFO had instructed the Air Canada crew multiple times to execute a go-around because the controller was not certain that a preceding arrival would be completely clear of the runway before the jet was due to land, said FAA spokesman Ian Gregor.
...
...
...
The FAA was already investigating a separate incident from July after an Air Canada pilot lined up to land on a taxiway at SFO where four other planes were waiting to depart.

Gregor said a supervisor tried to alert Sunday's flight by using a red light gun to alert the plane to go around, as is standard practice when an air crew is not responding to radio instructions. Instead, the flight landed, as previously authorized, on runway 28R at 9:26 p.m. PDT (0626 GMT).

"After landing, the Air Canada crew told the tower they had a radio problem," Gregor said.

A radar replay showed the preceding arrival was in fact clear of the runway when Air Canada landed, he added.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A visualization with ATC audio:


This comes in the wake of news that Transport Canada will no longer be evaluating airline pilots and instead leave that task to the airlines themselves.

Via the Toronto Star:
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ators-leaving-responsibility-to-airlines.html

VANCOUVER—Transport Canada is planning to stop evaluating pilots who perform checks on their counterparts at the country's largest airlines and will instead give the responsibility to the operators, a change critics say erodes oversight and public safety.

Documents show Transport Canada made the decision in May when the House of Commons transport committee was reviewing aviation safety and subsequently recommended more on-site inspections generally of the airline industry instead of paper audits.

A risk assessment document and an internal letter from Transport Canada's director of national operations for civil aviation were obtained under an access to information request by the Canadian Federal Pilots Association, the bargaining agent for about 450 pilots, most of whom work for the federal government.
...
...
...
"It could be argued that Canada's experience and relative maturity with systems-based surveillance will adequately complement this shift of responsibilities ... and therefore mitigate any concerns other states or trade associations may have with response to such a departure from globally accepted practices," the risk-assessment document says.

Canada is one of over 190 members of the International Civil Aviation Organization and has agreed to follow its recommended practices, including evaluating pilots twice a year.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
Thread title is just a false headline, plane is cleared to land, it has radio issues. It lands only to find out its clearance to land was revoked while its radio was out. It never ignored any commands it did not receive them.
 
KHarvey16

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
darscot said:
Or they didn't see it. Thread and story make it out like a big screw up or some intentional decision to ignore air traffic and just land because they felt like it. None of that is in any way true.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think the concern is lack of training or competence, which is certainly what not paying attention to the lights would be.
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
KHarvey16 said:
I think the concern is lack of training or competence, which is certainly what not paying attention to the lights would be.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

:: Rollseyes or maybe it's a little sensationalized. Shining a light at a jet at that speed moments from landing is hardly going to be 100%, There are a thousands factors at play here maybe the pilot made the right call and didn't do a last second dangerous maneuver and put his passengers safely on the ground.
 
KHarvey16

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
darscot said:
:: Rollseyes or maybe it's a little sensationalized. Shining a light at a jet at that speed moments from landing is hardly going to be 100%, There are a thousands factors at play here maybe the pilot made the right call and didn't do a last second dangerous maneuver and put his passengers safely on the ground.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If your radio doesn't work you're trained to look for light gun signals. A go around isn't a dangerous maneuver and are pretty routine.

The pilot can choose to receive the signal and make a determination that it's safer to land, but the spokesperson simply stated they never got an indication that the runway was unsafe. Unless the equipment was broken the pilot not seeing the flashing red light is his or her fault.
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
There is no evidence they knew the radio didn't work. How about we wait to see the results of the probe, instead of sensationalizing it? Oh wait that won't be nearly as interesting a headline. Right now its they coulda woulda shoulda.
 
KHarvey16

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
darscot said:
There is no evidence they knew the radio didn't work. How about we wait to see the results of the probe, instead of sensationalizing it? Oh wait that won't be nearly as interesting a headline. Right now its they coulda woulda shoulda.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, if it goes quiet it's not working. I can't imagine a scenario where they don't realize it's broken.
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
KHarvey16 said:
I mean, if it goes quiet it's not working. I can't imagine a scenario where they don't realize it's broken.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ah I see you have all the answers, you know exactly what the pilots saw, heard and should have done. Impressive from a garbage headline and reuters story.

P.S. How much radio silence is an indication your radio is broken?
 
KHarvey16

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
darscot said:
Ah I see you have all the answers, you know exactly what the pilots saw, heard and should have done. Impressive from a garbage headline and reuters story.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I know what the pilots should have done and I know what the spokesperson from the airline said.

If the radio was broken it's almost inconceivable they didn't know. If they know, they need to watch for the light gun. If they saw the light gun and decided to land anyway, the spokesperson failed to communicate the only piece of information that matters and instead said something that wasn't true (they didn't get the indication).
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
My whole point is the headline would actually be more accurate as "Pilots safely lands plane during electronics failure."
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
I guess it's just me but any emergency landing that everyone survives is a good one. Yet we have this thread making it sounds like the pilots are Trump at the UN just shoving their way to the front like incompetent assholes.
 

Deleted member 2625

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,596
KHarvey16 said:
I know what the pilots should have done and I know what the spokesperson from the airline said.

If the radio was broken it's almost inconceivable they didn't know. If they know, they need to watch for the light gun. If they saw the light gun and decided to land anyway, the spokesperson failed to communicate the only piece of information that matters and instead said something that wasn't true (they didn't get the indication).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I hope you are a pilot.
 
OP
OP
FriskyCanuck

FriskyCanuck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,063
Toronto, Canada
Simon Belmont

Simon Belmont

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,037
darscot said:
I guess it's just me but any emergency landing that everyone survives is a good one. Yet we have this thread making it sounds like the pilots are Trump at the UN just shoving their way to the front like incompetent assholes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think the issue is that it could have been an emergency, rather than it was one.

You can't just judge an incident by the outcome, especially when so much is on the line. Close calls and near misses like this should be investigated to see if there's anything that could have been done differently.
 

darscot

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
92
Simon Belmont said:
I think the issue is that it could have been an emergency, rather than it was one.

You can't just judge an incident by the outcome, especially when so much is on the line. Close calls and near misses like this should be investigated to see if there's anything that could have been done differently.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I 100% agree of course it should be investigated, I look forward to the results of the probe. I just don't like everyone and their dog has to say they shoulda, coulda, woulda done this or that. I'm sure they didn't intentionally ignore the tower and put hundreds of lives at risk. I hate this thing where we have to immediately try and blame someone, start the thread with a BS headline to sensationalise it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.