Yet another aviation thread.

October 26th, 2017 at 8:31:00 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 14
Posts: 4525
Quote: Nareed
recently another Air Canada Airbus A320 had a mishap at SFO. A near-fatal one, too.

The plane was instructed to go around, because ATC was unsure whether a plane had cleared the runway (it had, but that's not the point). Not only did the crew not go around, they didn't even reply on the radio. Some reports say the flight was sent a visual signal to go around (I'm not clear on that), and either they failed to see it or ignored it.

After landing safely, they reported problems with their radio.

I wonder about visual signals. In many of his novels, former Naval combat pilot Steven Coonts details carrier operations. I recall that the Landing Signals Officer controls the runway lights. Flashing the lights is a wave-off, similar to a go around in civilian ops. On a carrier, a wave-off often happens when the plane's trajectory is such it won't be able to land safely on deck. Such as it's coming in too high, so it will hit the deck too far along to stop. Or too low and will crash into the carrier's stern.

It's often reported that in the Vietnam war, naval pilots experienced higher levels of stress when landing on carriers, especially at night, than during combat missions when they were being shot at. I don't know whether that's true.


The video clearly shows the tower shining a directional red light at the plane. Apparently this means go around but it was ignored.
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin
October 26th, 2017 at 9:02:05 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
There is a light gun in the control tower. It can send red, white, green signals, flashing or solid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_light_signals

BBB could probably tell you plenty about it.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
October 26th, 2017 at 9:06:56 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Dalex64
There is a light gun in the control tower. It can send red, white, green signals, flashing or solid.


How visible is that? When I see cockpit video of night landings, there's way too many lights on the ground. also, landing is a high-workload period. You're looking out for obstructions on the runway, not lights.

Often I'm amazed how screwed up things seem in aviation. Like landing at a closed airfield, or one without a tower staff.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
October 26th, 2017 at 9:10:59 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
I've only seen one from the ground, and it wasn't pointed at me, but even so it was quite bright. It is focused with lenses, and should pop out above anything in the background in day or night when pointed directly at an aircraft.

That is what they used
Quote:
Federal Aviation Administration officials are investigating an incident at San Francisco International Airport involving an Air Canada plane.
The incident occurred Sunday night when Air Canada flight 781, an Airbus A320, wan preparing to land at SFO.
FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said air traffic control cleared the flight to land on Runway 28R. The Air Canada crew acknowledged the instruction when they were about 6 miles away from the airport, Gregor said.
"The tower controller subsequently instructed the Air Canada crew multiple times to execute a go-around because he was not certain that a preceding arrival would be completely clear of the runway before the Air Canada jet reached the runway threshold," Gregor said, adding the crew onboard the plan did not acknowledge any of the controller's instructions.

A supervisor then resorted to using a red light gun to alert the Air Canada flight to go around. Gregor said flashing a light gun is standard protocol when an air crew is not responding to radio instructions.
Air Canada flight 781 landed on Runway 284 at 9:26 p.m. The Air Canada crew after landing told the tower they had a radio problem, according to Gregor.
"A radar replay showed the preceding arrival was in fact clear of the runway when Air Canada landed," Gregor said.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
October 26th, 2017 at 10:17:08 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Dalex64
I've only seen one from the ground, and it wasn't pointed at me, but even so it was quite bright. It has focused with lenses, and should pop out above anything in the background in day or night when pointed directly at an aircraft.


Thanks.

It seems the Air Canada crew may have been distracted. I believe a bad radio, but they should have seen the light, yes? Maybe they were fiddling with the radio, maybe they had it on the wrong frequency (it happens). The investigation should get lost and forgotten by the press, even the aviation press, because nothing really happened. But then, nothing really happened with Colgan Air until something finally happened.

So lost or not, I hope they take a deep look, including adherence to crew rest rules.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
October 26th, 2017 at 2:29:29 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 62
Posts: 7831
Yeah. there is a green and white rotating beacon at 3 degree elevation for an airport.

A standby light gun in the tower for emergency use but a pilot may be too busy to look and too confused to see it.

There is even a pattern to fly indicating total loss of communications (or at least loss of ability to transmit). Eons ago one flying magazine got FAA permission to fly that pattern off the coast of California and it took over an hour for any controller to notice it.

Going around can be the pits but it sure beats an intersection collision or gaining to fast on a plane that can't find its turnoff gate.
October 31st, 2017 at 10:43:26 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
While there was a lot of coverage of the AF A380 that landed on Goose bay, Canada, due to a suicidal engine, there was little concerning another transatlantic flight diverted there:

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/delta-flight-atlanta-makes-emergency-landing-newfoundland-engine-trouble/

This was a far smaller A330, operated by Delta on a flight from Atlanta to Amsterdam.

Question: is this like a record number of transatlantic flights visiting Goose Bay in one year? :)
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 1st, 2017 at 8:15:13 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Nareed
Question: is this like a record number of transatlantic flights visiting Goose Bay in one year? :)

I think you have to count Goose and Gander together. I get the feeling it happens more often than we know, especially when the headwinds are strong.


For about a year or two the B707 had to stop in Goose or Gander until models were delivered powered with newer turbofan engines in 1959.
November 3rd, 2017 at 8:04:10 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Pacomartin
I think you have to count Goose and Gander together.


Really?

I've known about Gander for years. The DC-8 and 707 often stopped there to refuel. It's been used by military transports as well. I'd no idea Goose bay even existed until the AF 380 limped there.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 3rd, 2017 at 8:14:53 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 14
Posts: 4525
Quote: Pacomartin
I think you have to count Goose and Gander together.


One is on the mainland and one is on the island of Newfoundland not sure if that is fair. By road and ferry they are 1258 KM apart, probably half that as the crow flies. Flying time between them is 1h 35m according to Google Maps.
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin