Near Miss at LAX? True or False?

[Hugh Jorgan]

Maybe you should read what it says first idiot beofre you post crap about our company. What an ASS!

Uhh... that's why I said "it's a pretty good record". Only two accidents, both which seem to not be the fault of the company. To me, that's a pretty good record. It's still not a good idea to throw stones in this business (or any other). I see you've already graduated to grenades. Good luck out there, my friend.

 

[Ted Striker]

Hey Flex757!!

I gotta fever....and the only prescription is more cowbell!!

 

[flx757]

I gotta fever....and the only prescription is more cowbell!!

I gotta have more cowbell...

http://www.fracpilot.com/videos/cowbell.wmv

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Oh man, that's funny. I'll never be able to not think of that whenever I hear that song ever again!

 

[Bruce Dickenson]

Undoubtedly, it is ulitmately the pilots fault. Did the WN and CX pilots receive a complete FAA weather breifing? Did they request the shift change schedule for each ATC facility they checked in with with their departure, enroute, approach and local controllers? I recommend they place all flight crews on unpaid leave while this near-hit is investigated to the fullest. Expect the fullest report in 24-36 months.


Glad you guys enjoy my gold records!

 

[English]

Thanks for the post...now I get it!

I gotta have more cowbell...

http://www.fracpilot.com/videos/cowbell.wmv

 

[jbud]

here you go...


http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20040830X01323&key=1

 

[vschip]

Sorry to put this thread back on track, but it looks like this did happen...

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lax1sep01,1,910565.story?coll=la-home-local

Near Miss Reported at LAX in August
An arriving jumbo jet takes evasive action when its pilot sees a plane on the runway

By Jennifer Oldham and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Times Staff Writers

An arriving Asiana Airlines jumbo jet narrowly missed a departing Southwest Airlines flight at Los AngelesInternationalAirport last month after a controller mix-up that apparently placed both planes on the same runway, federal authorities confirmed Tuesday.

A captain aboard the Asiana Boeing 747-400, which was arriving from Inchon, South Korea, aborted the landing Aug. 19 and came within several hundred feet of a Southwest jet headed to Albuquerque, according to a report obtained by The Times.

The incident eerily resembles a 1991 accident on the same runway, in which 33 people died after a controller cleared a USAir jet to land on a runway where a commuter plane was waiting to take off.

That crash occurred at night, whereas last month's incident was at 2:55 p.m. in clear weather.

Confirmation came the same day the Federal Aviation Administration held a news conference in Washington to announce that near misses on the nation's runways are declining. At the event, officials said there had been no serious incidents involving commercial jets this year. An agency spokeswoman later explained that the LAX incident was still under investigation and had not been officially added to the statistics.

Nationally, the FAA reported a 20% drop in all runway safety incidents in federal fiscal years 2000 through 2003, and serious near misses declined by more than 50%. Serious incidents involving two jets declined even more markedly, from 15 in 2000 to two in 2003.

In the Asiana incident, initial reports from the control tower at LAX estimated that the jet flew within 200 feet of the Southwest aircraft, but just how close the planes ever were to each other is still under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board.

"It's still too **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**ed close," said a high-ranking FAA official who requested anonymity.

The incident is the closest call at the world's fifth-busiest airport in at least four years. The facility led the nation in near misses from 2000 to 2003, according to the FAA report released Tuesday.


At LAX, controllers orchestrate a complex choreography involving nearly 2,000 landings and takeoffs a day. The airport has two sets of parallel runways, one on the north side and the other on the south side.

The NTSB has obtained the black box recorders from the Southwest plane and has interviewed the captain and first officer. Investigators have requested a statement from the Asiana captain.

They are also examining radar data and recordings from the tower, and interviews with the controllers are being scheduled.

The incident followed a shift change in the tower. A controller told a colleague that the Asiana jet had been cleared to land on the inner runway on the airport's north side, according to interviews and records. But the first thing the second controller did was to clear the Southwest pilot to take off from the same runway.

The Southwest jet taxied into position and waited at the end of the runway. When the Asiana jet's captain was about a mile away from the airport, he saw the Southwest plane and took action to avoid it.

Seconds later, a ground radar system at LAX alertedthe controller, who canceled the Southwest aircraft's takeoff clearance and told the Asiana pilot to "go around," records show. The 747 flew within several hundred feet of the Southwest jet about 10 seconds after the ground radar went off, according to a report.

The incident was initially considered so serious that the FAA classified it as a "Category A" near miss, or a runway incident that requires "extreme action to narrowly avoid a collision," but the incident will not be finally classified until after the NTSB investigation, sources said.

Controllers at LAX blamed the near miss on antiquated radar systems and understaffing during a busy Friday-afternoon rush, when scores of jets approach the airport and controllers must use all four runways for arriving aircraft. Controllers typically use two inner runways for takeoffs and two outer runways for landings.

"Either way, what happened that day … was not optimal for aviation safety," said Mike Foote, an air traffic controller at LAX. But Foote said the ground radar "functioned as advertised."

That system, known as AMASS for Airport Movement Area Safety System, may become an issue in the probe of the incident. The FAA has relied on the new ground radar, in place at LAX and several dozen other busy airports nationwide, to warn controllers when planes are on a collision course.

But safety board experts, who favor a system in the cockpit that directly warns pilots, have questioned whether AMASS gives a timely warning. In computer simulations, some alerts have come only eight to 11 seconds before a collision would have occurred — not enough time for controllers to figure out what is happening and warn pilots, and for pilots to then react.

The Aug. 19 incident cast a pall over efforts by local and federal officials to make LAX safer. During the 2003 federal fiscal year, LAX recorded nine runway incidents. But none were classified as Category A or Category B, the two most serious designations.

In the current federal fiscal year, LAX had six incidents before Aug. 19, said FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown. All were in the two lower-risk categories, in which there is ample time to avoid a collision or little chance that one will occur. The federal fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2003, and ends Sept. 30.

The statistics show marked improvement from the poor runway safety records posted by LAX in the last decade. From 1997 to 2000, the airport recorded 13 serious near crashes — the most of the nation's busiest airports. The number of incidents has fallen after an effort to educate pilots about the orientation of the airport's runways.

"We are concerned about every incursion — that's why we investigate them," Brown said. "But we've made incredible progress at LAX in reducing the serious incursions."

 

[Cathay747400]

Metro 752 and Hugh Jorgan

YOU TWO DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!! "Pretty good record" thanks for sharing your obvious expertise on the matter. Implying that ALL Asian carriers are equal is a statement of utter stupidity and it doesn't appear to even be Asianas fault. Do you know if the Captain was even Asian? A lot of English (British and American) pilot's on contract there. So I'll ask, who is throwing the stones. Before you come to a conclusion, again I'll mention neither one of you know what the hell you are talking about, get the facts straight. Working "Da Ramp" and flying Dash 8's does not get you even close to talking about Asian or for that matter any large carriers. I am almost willing to bet that neither one of you has ever been to Asia. I wanna know Navy boy why you are flying Dash 8's with all those aircraft you have listed and whom are you flying for?

 

[chperplt]

several hundred feet

Asiana 744 almost tried land on a 737. Missed it by 50 to 100 feet when it went around. Some one said the details were on a Airliners Net forum.

Several hundred feet is a little different than 50-100 feet..

 

[flx757]

Several hundred feet is a little different than 50-100 feet..

Yep. That's why the investigators at the NTSB wil rule out most "eyewitness" accounts. They are so unreliable and most often contradictory. It is by far their least reliable bits of information gathered during an investigation. Even though they may interview hundreds or even thousands of eyewitnesses, very little usable information is gained from them.

Even though these witnesses believe that they are telling the truth, and usually honestly believe that what they are saying is accurate, it is often clouded by emotion and misunderstandings.

The running joke among investigators is "how many 'sputterers' did you interview today?". A reference to the unending number of "eyewitnesses" to any accident who report the aircraft's engine(s) "sputtering" just before the accident.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

I wanna know Navy boy why you are flying Dash 8's with all those aircraft you have listed and whom are you flying for?

Guess ya just can't pull off a good fraudulent resume these days.

 

[English]

Geez, Hugh, everyone thinks you are a fraud! I think you are keeping your secrets way too well! Keep up the good work.

Cathay 747400, you really have no clue about our buddy Hugh.

 

[Cathay747400]

Huh?

I have no clue? So am I to understand that he is an expert on aviation including Asian carriers. He knows all about flying heavy jets. He is typed in the L188 and DHC-8 and has vast experience and knowledge with 3000 hours. I guess next you'll tell me that the other guy is a NASA scientist. Please, criticize only things you can speak on with some degree of knowledge. The post about CX having a pretty good record of accidents, one a bomb and the other shot down is simply an assinine remark. If you want to enlighten me on what I am mssing, then please do so.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

If you want to enlighten me on what I am mssing, then please do so.

A fuking personality.