Posted on 08/17/2007 9:13:26 AM PDT by 7thOF7th
L.A. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, Aug. 17, 2007 (KABC-TV) - A close call at LAX could have had disastrous consequences. Airport officials are reporting two planes came within 200 feet -- perhaps as little as 50 feet -- on the airport runways. There have been near collisions at LAX before, but this one was very close. The FAA says it appears that both the air traffic controller and the pilot of the plane landing made mistakes.
The incidents happened around 1 p.m. Thursday afternoon. Officials say a WestJet Boeing 737 coming in from Canada was landing. The plane seats around 132 passengers. It nearly struck a Northwest Airbus A320 that was taking off. The WestJet plane managed to stop just in time to avoid a collision.
A FAA spokesman says that the arriving pilot was on the wrong radio frequency and therefore unable to get directions from the air traffic controller. Then the ground traffic controller cleared the pilot for landing without first checking with the air traffic controller.
LAX has had a number of these incursions, and this was already the eighth near collision on a runway at LAX this year. That already matches the total number of such incidents in 2006.
The FAA is looking at changing some policies and instituting some new measures that hopefully will ease some of these near collisions at airports across the country.
I call that a near-hit.
“I call that a near-hit.”
You beat me to it!
“Then the ground traffic controller cleared the pilot for landing without first checking with the air traffic controller.”
Typical BS from the LSM.
Ground controllers DO NOT clear planes to land.
How could he be on the wrong frequency and be cleared to land????
I don’t dispute that there could have been a near miss but this story is so full of holes.
“The FAA is looking at changing some policies”
Darn! There goes the old ‘let ‘em land anywhere they want’ policy. Guess they’re going to be giving careful consideration to adopting that whole ‘two objects.. same space’ thing from the physics guys.
Ground control can relay a clearance from an ATC to land but you are essentially correct, ground control does not have direct authority to clear an aircraft to land.
The chance that a pilot, cleared to land at a controled field, is on the wrong radio frequency is zero. The FAA spokesman, and the folks for whom he is a mouthpiece need to get a different jobs.
ML/NJ
The WestJet aircraft made one mistake, coming up the wrong frequency. When he checked in the ground controller should have told him to switch tower instead of clearing him to land.
He was cleared for the approach when on approach so the tower controller should have been expecting the 737 when he cleared the A320 to take off.
As a pilot I disagree. Cockpit management is essential to safe flight but there are times when ground control can be the active freq. and tower is on the alt freq. on their radio. This can happen but usually ground control will instruct the pilot he is on the wrong freq. and direct him to the proper one. It all depends on the pilot staying ahead of the plane.
One other thing. If you are on approach in a 737 you would think seeing the Airbus taking the runway would get your attention.
If this consideration of a new policy holds true to form the ‘do not run into each other’ memo should be out around February.
“...and this was already the eighth near collision on a runway at LAX this year”
Nope.
One time we were coming into land at DFW. We were almost on the ground when the plane took off in the air again.
It was the scariest plane flight I have ever been on. I don’t know if we almost hit another plane, or what happened.
I hate flying now.
Not in my experience. Never. (I'm just a Private Pilot, and an inactive one at that, but I do have about 200 hrs IFR.)
(I suppose if the Tower frequency is off-line and Approach told the PIC to switch to the Ground Freq, maybe it could be "active" - whatever this means to you - but then that Freq would be the Tower freq.)
Who would initate this? What frequency do you think the PIC heard the words, "Cleared to land," on? What possible reason would he have, after hearing those words, to switch frequencies prior to turning off the active runway? Even if his radio goes dead after being "cleared to land" the runway is his, if he wants it. (Seeing another plane on the runway might change his mind.)
ML/NJ
“I fly in and out of LAX frequently and this is concerning. “
You have my prayers.
And hopes that your will is made out and all your insurance premiums
are paid up.
Flying in/out of LAX can be a glorious spectacle and a bone-chilling
fear-factor experience.
I have to admit I would often be in awe when seeing lights of maybe
seven or eight planes floating on the path for landing at LAX.
I would have used Burbank/Bob Hope Airport, but it didn’t usually fit
my flight plans.
Besides, there your plane might end up in the parking area of a
gas station (the Southwest Airlines 737 that skidded off the end
of the runway).
Sounds like somebody was partying with that drunken flight attendant the night before....unnngh!
I've heard controllers(on my scanner)do double duty during late-night off-peak hours....but certainly not at 1pm at a busy airport.
Something doesn't jive.
I don’t get it. KLAX operates with 4 parallel runways, there shouldn’t be any runway incursions at all even with miscommunication imo as the runways don’t cross.
Last time I mentioned that my flight into LAX nearly hit another flight out of LAX I was told it is supposed to be like that. So it is supposed to be like this.
By 1995 all the ground controllers for the LAX area (along with the southwestern corridor) were physically located in San Diego - La Jolla, to be exact.
It didn’t matter much as TRACON(Terminal Radar Approach Control) was in a darkened room prior to that in the old Douglas manufacturing hangar that was built in 1944 on the grounds of what is now LAX and were fixed to their machines.
I’m only posting this so that someone doesn’t get the idea that the control tower guy is going to run downstairs and yell at the ground control guy.
“there are times when ground control can be the active freq. and tower is on the alt freq”
At a small airort but not at LAx!
It is very difficult to look over the nose of a 737.
Another reason I am glad I always fly in and out of Southern California at John Wayne Airport.
At LAX you are handed off to the tower long before you even get close to the airport and he would have been corrected, or should have been, long before he got close.
I’ve landed at LAX well over 100 times.
I’m sure that the guy was on the wrong freq. but it’s the controlers that screwed up.
.
But until you flare you can still see the runway.
Huh? Somebody's full of sheep-dip
ML/NJ
Yes, my original post was to be critical of the press.
The story made no sense.
You are right. The tower is responsible for all take off and landings, and ground control covers only planes that
have cleared the active runway.
It is logical that the mistake may have involved ground control giving bad taxi instructions, or the plane on the ground turning at the wrong intersection.
Heh, indeed...especially when it comes to aviation related stories. I'll always remember this one fem-cupcake TV reporter talking about a (small aircraft) accident that had claimed the life of the pilot. She was standing in front of a parked Cessna that had a foil sunscreen on the cockpit windshield and proceeded to tell everyone that the pilot in the accident had one of those on his aircraft and thus was flying IFR and couldn't see anything which contributed to the accident.
I always thought they should make the whole nose cone out of glass for maximum visibility. :-)
BUMP!
I am a retired USAF air traffic controller. After reading this article I have no idea what the writer is trying to say. The article talks about a ground traffic controller and the air traffic controller. These don’t refer to any ATC positions I am familar with. Ground Control does not clear aircraft to land or takeoff, they issue taxi clearances to aircraft on the ground. The Local controller in the tower issues landing and takeoff clearance. All are air traffic controllers so I’m no sure exactly what the author is trying to say. Was the arriving aircraft on ground frequency, Tower frequency, or Approach frequency? Not much of this article makes any sense to me.
It might have scared you, but it was probably out of an abundance of caution that the pilot went around. Most go-arounds aren't strictly necessary - they are precautionary because the pilot feels that something isn't right about his approach or what he sees in front of him. Nothing to worry about - on the contrary, a pilot that kept on going might have ended up scaring you a lot worse!
I've only heard it from the tower. Only after clearing the runway did I ever speak to ground.
ML/NJ
“You beat me to it!”
Me too.
You are right, of course, but aviation and air traffic control is difficult to explain to the layman. If you don’t have an aviation background it is hard to understand VORTACs, radial, DME, visual separation, special VFR, etc.
Those are completely fake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.