Apology

[ReportCanoa]

Fine, even if that's true, it didn't "set off alarm bells" or whatever. Barreling down the runway you don't have a lot of time to consider if you remember the hump on this runway last night or whatever such nonsense. There are other things going on, monitoring speeds, engine instruments, crosswind correction. etc. If you began the takeoff thinking you're on a correct runway, it's going to take a heck of a lot more stimulus to make you reject the takeoff.

There is more nonsense from people on this board who either drive a desk for a living, or the have no real experience- 'cause the first thing a pro pilot will do is admit that this very thing could have happened to them if circumstances and stimuli were just right, which is exactly what the investigation will reveal- a series of mitigating factors combined with mistakes- human errors. Surprised this could happen? Don't be.

 

[nichnack]

I'm referring to the crew doing everything they could to get the airplane off the ground, once they realized what was happening. There is no doubt these pilots made a mistake. I used the wrong word when I said, "negligence", and wasn't referring to the idea they somehow did this on purpose. But, pilot error is to blame, and that does seem evident now. The reason for the error is what really needs to be looked into. Lack of rest, stress, poor signage, lack of an updated airport diagram, etc.

I think a few things that need to change as a result of this accident;

1) ATC should now be required to keep an eye on, and watch each aircraft they give clearance to, takeoff, and land. UNLESS tower obtructions somewhow prohibit view of the runway. In this case, someothing should be looked into as far as cameras put in those places, with monitors on the tower, or something, so there are no "blind" spots. This may be an issue at busier airports, but maybe that is a reason for staffing more ATCers.

2) No clearances should be asked for by the pilots, or given by ATC until the aircraft has come to a stop at the hold short line of the runway, and ATC verifies they are stopped at the correct runway assigned for departure. No more takeoff clearances given while still taxiing, or even still at the gate.

3) This would be an airline thing, but pilots should be required to taxi onto and position the plane on the runway for departure, but come to a stop, verify the heading indicator indicates they are on the correct runway, before blasting off.

That is three things to go through, all of which are simple, having to be missed, in order for this to happen again.

1) and 2) would be impossible on a bad visibility day and would slow aiport operations way down.
3) This is a possiblity and could become a normal operation in the future.

 

[PilotOnTheRise]

1) and 2) would be impossible on a bad visibility day and would slow aiport operations way down.
3) This is a possiblity and could become a normal operation in the future.

Yes, you are right. 1 and 2 would also be hard at hub airports with multiple takeoffs and landings at the same time, but I do think ATC needs to play a part in verifying aircraft are doing what they are told, both on the ground, and in the air.

#3 I think is very simple, and really does need to become common practice. Giving take off clearance before leaving the gate, or giving take off clearance while the airplane is still taxiing doesn't seem safe. This should only be done once the aircraft has stopped at the hold short line. Then of course, airlines should do away with the rolling take off, and be required to position the airplane on the runway, stop, verify heading matches runway, once that is done, blast off. It might take 10 seconds to do that, and could save lives.

 

[YourPilotFriend]

There is more nonsense from people on this board who either drive a desk for a living, or the have no real experience- 'cause the first thing a pro pilot will do is admit that this very thing could have happened to them if circumstances and stimuli were just right, which is exactly what the investigation will reveal- a series of mitigating factors combined with mistakes- human errors. Surprised this could happen? Don't be.

I don't know if I quite agree with saying anyone coud make this mistake. To say a professional would make a mistake sure we all do, but this case is slightly different. This falls under the careless and wreckless operation of an aircraft category. (this is not meant to be flame bait merely stating an opinion) Not only did they recognize the signs that they were possibly on the wrong runway, they chose to ignore them according to the CVR. Lack of proper interpretation of airport signs, impropery identifing runway markings, omission or misinterpretation of flight instruments, not having the chart out for taxi or not reading it correctly, believing in gut feeling over that of the flight instruments....the list goes on and on. I'm not a perfect pilot and I make mistakes all the time, and I think 100% of you out there could have made the mistake of taking the wrong runway. However, to not recognize that mistake immediately I don't know.....

 

[HoserASA]

1) ATC should now be required to keep an eye on, and watch each aircraft they give clearance to, takeoff, and land. UNLESS tower obtructions somewhow prohibit view of the runway. In this case, someothing should be looked into as far as cameras put in those places, with monitors on the tower, or something, so there are no "blind" spots. This may be an issue at busier airports, but maybe that is a reason for staffing more ATCers..

As a retired USAF controller, the tower controller should have been watching that plane. He should have checked the runway to insure it was clear, clear the aircraft for TO, and watch the plane's takeoff, day or night. The tower controller can determine whether the plane is on either runway too, day or night. Perhaps the tower controller had other duties, but I believe they could have waited while he watched this plane takeoff. No excuse. Along with the crew, the controller is another set of eyes that possibly could have caught this. At least that's the way it's supposed to be done. My opinion.

Hoser
ASA CRJ Capt

 

[HoserASA]

Yes, you are right. 1 and 2 would also be hard at hub airports with multiple takeoffs and landings at the same time, quote]

Not really. At ATL, separate controllers control the arrival and departure runways. The controller at LEX should have been watching that plane. It may have prevented this incident.

Hoser
ASA CRJ Capt
Retired ATC

 

[acaTerry]

29 years for me, and neither are mine.

It is YOU who condescends the customers, even to the point of saying it's "well founded"; that makes YOU the elitist.

Oh whatever you say....

 

[gto2002]

how was the weather if any one has a copy of themetar. I do not understand how it was not caught when they pulled out in the runway with the big painted numbers. When I have done a low vis t/o just to make sure I am at the beginning of the runway I look for the numbers. Anyway it was horrible and totally preventable.

Unfortunate

 

[acaTerry]

ACATerry :
could you clarify the poit that said,
"As for the traveling public, if they want such high safety, then they need to pay for it."

Sure. The same public who, whenever a pilot work action takes place, b1tches about our dissatisfaction of making $17,000 a year to fly jet airplanes with being away from home 200-300 hrs a month, with varying schedules, flying planes with deferred equipment, in varying weather, etc etc is the same public that demands uncompromised safety. At the same time, their wanting rock-bottom prices feeds this. They need to accept the fact that ticket prices need to reflect the cost of providing a service. Just like they accept the cost of groceries, movies, ball games, etc.
Funny, they blindly accept with minimal complaining, the TSA fees and other "security" fees. But when an airlines pilot group goes to walk...WHAM!!!!


Little cindy lou gets on board... who has no clue about airline pilot pay.

Actually, payscales are available to the public and it is not all-that unknown anymore. Even my neighbor, who does not even travel by plane knows what you guys make.

A captain that passed a stressful type ride and has done this thousands of times.

I call BS on this. A type ride in a sim. Wooooooow. No ATC, no radio chatter, no FA calling the cockpit, no other aircraft to watch, no radar echoes...you get the idea. I am typed in 6 planes, and the type rides are simply a matter of providing the sim a fixed set of variables (X power plus X pitch plus X bank plus X configuration will always give the predetermined response).

There was fifty /fifty chance he was going to screw it up if you look at the odds.

I agree.

There were two runways right? And what about being a good FO. Looking at the airport diagram?

Have you EVER been an FO on a short taxi, especially with all the first flight of day items?!!!!!!!! This guys head was likely down in the cockpit, man!


Somehow using safety and adding to it different levels or degrees when living is the only level you can ascribe and I'll bet you'll want to rethink that comment.

Say again? I think you are transmitting on the wrong frequency here pal.

That comment was as disrespectful to those 49 souls and my bantering about who and what the poor chap did in the left seat and allowed to take place on his watch.

I fail to see how. I said nothing that was not true. Perhaps you need to travel more as a passenger. I do twice weekly, and I hear what the pax say. They are clear about cheap. They hate us for being able to jumpseat, they hate that we occasionally get to preboard (with our REQUIRED flight baggage), the ticket cost too much, the plane is easy to fly because it said so on Discovery Channel, so on and so on... I hear these remarks ALL THE TIME. And the common link? Its always the pilots fault.

what about calling in sick?

I don't know what dreamland you live in, but in the airlines I have worked for, call in sick / fatigued more than a few days a year and you get FIRED. This has been challenged and has stood up in court.

"

I have no disagreement that this was crew error. But you really need to look at the exterior factors that lead to this kind of thing. Look through the ASRS (available on the web). This happens hundreds of times. The jig was up on this one though, and it turned fatal. If you continue to deny the FACT that pilots operate under stresses that could be lessened by not having BS pay, BS workrules and a BS agency trying to violate them everytime they turn around...then your head is in the sand just as much as the FAA who insists that rest and duty rules are safe.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

As to the three suggestions, #3 is just good aviating. We should probably all adopt that one. I think that will be the big lesson for us all.

I'd hate to see #2 become the norm. Don't we all try NOT to stop at the hold line in order to maintain a continuous "flow" from taxi to takeoff? Same after landing.

As for #1, I'd hate to see ATC take any blame here. Their job is separating airplanes. If they have one airplane in their airspace, do they really have to watch it? That seems a little ridiculous to me. Shouldn't they be able to depend on us to get the airplane to the correct runway?

One other thing that I haven't seen discussed is the clearance. Isn't LEX usually a RH/6000 on departure? I've only been there twice this year. Somebody mentioned the heading bug. This is a really strange accident.

Hey Terry it's all good man; we just disagree. Sorry for the fight.