Another Botched use of runways

[Skunk]

Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a
disaster worse than Lexington?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/31/missed.runway.ap/index.html

Notice the number of passengers on board

Now look what happens when you land or take off on the wrong
runway or use a taxi way

You hit **** sometimes

http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/sq006/photo.shtml

Where was ATCT? How can the tower not see a jet is lined up
for a taxiway landing?

I wonder if all the experienced white males over 40 have
been run off from this location also by the Anti-White male
racist FAA???

[tscottme]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
. ..
> Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a disaster worse than
> Lexington?
>

Please explain how someone in the ATC cab, maybe a half-mile away and
off-axis, would be able to tell an aircraft is 100 feet left/right of final?
This is like blaming the mall security guard when someone dings your car
door in the parking lot.

--

Scott

[Gary Drescher]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
. ..
> I wonder if all the experienced white males over 40 have been run off from
> this location also by the Anti-White male racist FAA???

Your sentence, as you've punctuated it, is asking us if that's what you
wonder. So I suppose the answer is: yes, given your tediously obsessive
bigotry, you probably do wonder that.

[Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]]

"tscottme" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Please explain how someone in the ATC cab, maybe a half-mile away and
> off-axis, would be able to tell an aircraft is 100 feet left/right of
> final?

He doesn't know. He's an idiot.

[Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a disaster worse than
> Lexington?
>

It's you.


>
> http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/31/missed.runway.ap/index.html
>
> Notice the number of passengers on board
>
> Now look what happens when you land or take off on the wrong runway or use
> a taxi way
>
> You hit **** sometimes
>
> http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/sq006/photo.shtml
>
> Where was ATCT?
>

Due north of terminal A, where it always is.


>
> How can the tower not see a jet is lined up for a taxiway landing?
>

By not being in a position to see it.


>
> I wonder if all the experienced white males over 40 have been run off from
> this location also by the Anti-White male racist FAA???
>

Where did you get the idea that landing aircraft are remotely controlled
from the control tower?

[Skunk]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "tscottme" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>Please explain how someone in the ATC cab, maybe a half-mile away and
>>off-axis, would be able to tell an aircraft is 100 feet left/right of
>>final?
>
>
> He doesn't know. He's an idiot.
>
>

You are the idiot sir

1. The ILS would be off in the cockpit
2. If the ATCT can't see an aircraft landing incorrectly on
the taxiway what good are they?
3. The pilot(s) should notice
4. The pilots on the ground should notice
5. The BRITE display in the cab should paint a weird picture
of a weird approach on radar

ALL of the above however requires a human being who gives a ****

In todays America nobody is at fault huh?

Just point blame don't accept fault or fix the problem. That
is the long term result of dumbing down and filling ATCT
cabs and the FAA and cockpits with unqualified minorities
and women.

A cluster **** in Air Traffic control

America is on her way marching toward a society like a
Banana Republic. One Politically Correct bite at a time.

Hold on it's going to be a bumpy ride

Go ahead. Shoot me I am the racist messenger. If it makes
you feel better.

[tscottme]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
.net...
>
> "Skunk" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a disaster worse than
>> Lexington?
>>
>
> It's you.
>

Subscribe. "We're not laughing with you, we're laughing at you."

--

Scott

[Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
...
>
> You are the idiot sir
>

Am I? What have I written that you believe to be idiotic?


>
> 1. The ILS would be off in the cockpit
>

Can the ILS in the cockpit be seen from the ATCT?


>
> 2. If the ATCT can't see an aircraft landing incorrectly on the taxiway
> what good are they?
>

No good at all. And what good are pilots if they can't see the aircraft is
lined up with a taxiway instead of a runway. In the name of aviation safety
we must eliminate ATCTs and pilots.landing incorrectly on


>
> 3. The pilot(s) should notice
>

Yes, but you didn't blame the pilots, you blamed the FAA.


>
> 4. The pilots on the ground should notice
>

What pilots on the ground should notice?


>
> 5. The BRITE display in the cab should paint a weird picture of a weird
> approach on radar
>

Why? Have you ever seen BRITE radar? Have you ever been in an ATCT? Have
you been to an airport?


>
> ALL of the above however requires a human being who gives a ****
>
> In todays America nobody is at fault huh?
>
> Just point blame don't accept fault or fix the problem. That is the long
> term result of dumbing down and filling ATCT cabs and the FAA and cockpits
> with unqualified minorities and women.
>
> A cluster **** in Air Traffic control
>
> America is on her way marching toward a society like a Banana Republic.
> One Politically Correct bite at a time.
>
> Hold on it's going to be a bumpy ride
>
> Go ahead. Shoot me I am the racist messenger. If it makes you feel better.
>

No, you're not a messenger, you're just an idiot.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Skunk > spewed nonsense

*plonk*

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Judah]

Skunk > wrote in news:UeO1h.19717$kI6.17626
@bignews4.bellsouth.net:

> Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a
> disaster worse than Lexington?

This is very similar to the Lexington accident. They were both caused by
pilot error.

The only difference was that in Lexington, the FAA had a completely separate
issue that people tried to scapegoat as the cause of the accident.

The same does not apply here. This incident can only be blamed on the pilots
who made the mistake.

Perhaps if there were a second controller in Lexington, this incident could
have been prevented as well.

[Skunk]

Judah wrote:
> Skunk > wrote in news:UeO1h.19717$kI6.17626
> @bignews4.bellsouth.net:
>
>
>>Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a
>>disaster worse than Lexington?
>
>
> This is very similar to the Lexington accident. They were both caused by
> pilot error.
>
> The only difference was that in Lexington, the FAA had a completely separate
> issue that people tried to scapegoat as the cause of the accident.
>
> The same does not apply here. This incident can only be blamed on the pilots
> who made the mistake.
>
> Perhaps if there were a second controller in Lexington, this incident could
> have been prevented as well.

And the chaos in Newark continues. Remember, it's all the
pilots fault. The FAA has nothing to do with anything
anywhere. We could never blame the "Guvment" for anything
could we???

NEWARK, New Jersey (CNN) -- Two commercial planes bumped
into each other Tuesday on a Newark International Airport
runway, delaying hundreds of passengers on a trans-Atlantic
flight.

Lufthansa flight LH403, headed to Frankfurt, Germany, bumped
into another plane, said Lufthansa spokeswoman Jennifer
Urbaniak. A wing on the Lufthansa Boeing 747 was damaged,
she said.

In a statement, Lufthansa said there were 291 passengers,
three infants and 17 crew members on board. No injuries were
reported.

The second plane was an empty Continental Airlines Boeing
757, which was being relocated to a remote overnight parking
spot "and was in a stationary position" when the contact
occurred, the airline said in a statement.

It "was apparently brushed by a taxiing Lufthansa 747
aircraft," Continental said. "It appears that the 747's left
wing brushed the 757's right wing."

The Lufthansa flight was canceled, said Alan Hicks,
spokesman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
He added the Federal Aviation Administration will investigate.

[Sam Spade]

Skunk wrote:


>>
>
> You are the idiot sir
>
> 1. The ILS would be off in the cockpit
> 2. If the ATCT can't see an aircraft landing incorrectly on the taxiway
> what good are they?
> 3. The pilot(s) should notice
> 4. The pilots on the ground should notice
> 5. The BRITE display in the cab should paint a weird picture of a weird
> approach on radar
>
Obviously, you are not an aviation professional or, if you are, you are
incompetent. KEWR Runway 29 does not have a straight-in instrument
approach procedure of any type, much less an ILS.

As they say in court, you are assuming facts not in evidence.

I can understand why they replaced you.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Skunk wrote:
>
> In todays America nobody is at fault huh?

um... The pilot that's flying? <G>

[David Cartwright]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
...
> 1. The ILS would be off in the cockpit
Yes, and this is the PF's (Pilot Flying) problem. Only if the controller is
giving the pilot a SAR "talkdown" (very rare) would he be using any system
that allows him to see accurately where the aircraft is relative to the
runway centreline.

> 2. If the ATCT can't see an aircraft landing incorrectly on the taxiway
> what good are they?
Remember the Tower is generally off to the side of the runway - often by
quite a way. Thus, until an aircraft is relatively close to the runway, it's
pretty hard to picture where an aircraft is relative to the centreline.

> 3. The pilot(s) should notice
Yes, they should. Landing in the right place, in the right configuration,
and at the right speed is the job of the pilots.

> 4. The pilots on the ground should notice
They _might_ notice, but the priority of the pilots of any aircraft on the
ground is to make their way around the airport safely, down the right routes
and without banging into anything or anybody. Taxying, though apparently
easy, is actually one of the places where plenty of accidents occur through
complacency. And let's face it, if aircraft on the ground were having
accidents because their crew were too busy looking into the sky, you'd be
moaning about that too. It may well be that someone waiting on a taxiway
might have been gazing into the air and thought: "Hang about, his approach
looks a bit weird", but (a) at an airfield with multiple runways the
instinct might be that the landing aircraft is heading into a different
runway. And even if you do choose to say anything, it might take a while to
get a word in edgeways if the frequency is busy.

> In todays America nobody is at fault huh?
Errr, no. If a pilot is told which bit of ground to land on, and then lands
on the wrong bit, then it's his (or her) fault. Simple as that. Go surf the
NTSB incident report archive and you'll find plenty of reports where blame
is attributed - to engineers, to controllers, to pilots, to wherever it's
due.

DC

[David Cartwright]

"Skunk" > wrote in message
.. .
> NEWARK, New Jersey (CNN) -- Two commercial planes bumped into each other
> Tuesday on a Newark International Airport runway, delaying hundreds of
> passengers on a trans-Atlantic flight.

And your point is ...?

There will be an accident investigation, and the reason will be found. Maybe
the stationary aircraft was in the wrong place, maybe the moving one was
going the wrong way, maybe they were both doing the right thing but the
moving one thought the gap was bigger than it was, or maybe delinquent
squirrels came out at night and repainted the taxiway lines ten feet to the
left. It'll all come out in the investigation, and fault will be attributed
approriately.

D.

[Mark Hansen]

On 11/01/06 08:40, David Cartwright wrote:
> "Skunk" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> NEWARK, New Jersey (CNN) -- Two commercial planes bumped into each other
>> Tuesday on a Newark International Airport runway, delaying hundreds of
>> passengers on a trans-Atlantic flight.
>
> And your point is ...?
>
> There will be an accident investigation, and the reason will be found. Maybe
> the stationary aircraft was in the wrong place, maybe the moving one was
> going the wrong way, maybe they were both doing the right thing but the
> moving one thought the gap was bigger than it was, or maybe delinquent
> squirrels came out at night and repainted the taxiway lines ten feet to the
> left. It'll all come out in the investigation, and fault will be attributed
> approriately.

And hopefully we'll finally be able to nail those damn squirrels!

;-)

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Judah]

Skunk > wrote in
:

> And the chaos in Newark continues. Remember, it's all the
> pilots fault. The FAA has nothing to do with anything
> anywhere. We could never blame the "Guvment" for anything
> could we???

Please explain who exactly at the FAA was responsible for this accident?

Oh, perhaps if there were a 24th person in the tower cab, whose sole
responsibility would have been staring out the window, he might have been
able to see from 3 miles away that the Lufthansa flight was 6 inches past its
hold short line and prevented this accident.

Oh I know. Perhaps if there were 5,000 FAA controllers in the Tower Cab, they
could each be assigned a plane to watch at all times so that the pilots can
just sleep their way through the flight.

Give me a f^&*ing break.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Judah wrote:
>
> Oh I know. Perhaps if there were 5,000 FAA controllers in the Tower Cab, they
> could each be assigned a plane to watch at all times so that the pilots can
> just sleep their way through the flight.

How about guys in pink shirts standing next to the runway?

[Sam Spade]

B A R R Y wrote:

>
> How about guys in pink shirts standing next to the runway?

In the days before RVR really worked, when the weather was foggy at some
airline airports they had a certified observor standing beside the
runway who provided manually observed RVR readings to the tower via an
interphone link.

[Skunk]

Judah wrote:
> Skunk > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>And the chaos in Newark continues. Remember, it's all the
>>pilots fault. The FAA has nothing to do with anything
>>anywhere. We could never blame the "Guvment" for anything
>>could we???
>
>
> Please explain who exactly at the FAA was responsible for this accident?
>
> Oh, perhaps if there were a 24th person in the tower cab, whose sole
> responsibility would have been staring out the window, he might have been
> able to see from 3 miles away that the Lufthansa flight was 6 inches past its
> hold short line and prevented this accident.
>
> Oh I know. Perhaps if there were 5,000 FAA controllers in the Tower Cab, they
> could each be assigned a plane to watch at all times so that the pilots can
> just sleep their way through the flight.
>
> Give me a f^&*ing break.

Just a little sarcasm toward the "Tombstone Agency"

Relax

http://www.adversity.net/FAA/ryan_v_mineta.htm

[Skunk]

B A R R Y wrote:
> Judah wrote:
>
>>
>> Oh I know. Perhaps if there were 5,000 FAA controllers in the Tower
>> Cab, they could each be assigned a plane to watch at all times so that
>> the pilots can just sleep their way through the flight.
>
>
> How about guys in pink shirts standing next to the runway?


This may be a joke but its not far from the truth. As the
FAA runs off their tenured and experienced white
heterosexual males over 40 in favor of homosexuals and black
females for racist diversity goals out of Washington D.C.
pink shirts and rainbow flags may be a common site around
airports.

http://www.adversity.net/FAA/ryan_v_mineta.htm

[Judah]

Skunk > wrote in
:

> Just a little sarcasm toward the "Tombstone Agency"
>
> Relax
>
> http://www.adversity.net/FAA/ryan_v_mineta.htm
>

Just so we're clear, the sarcasm was directed at the idiots who want to blame
the FAA for a pilot's mistake.

Bigotry against white heterosexual men is no different than Bigotry against
black homosexual women... You are the ultimate hypocrite.

[Skunk]

Judah wrote:
> Skunk > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>Just a little sarcasm toward the "Tombstone Agency"
>>
>>Relax
>>
>>http://www.adversity.net/FAA/ryan_v_mineta.htm
>>
>
>
> Just so we're clear, the sarcasm was directed at the idiots who want to blame
> the FAA for a pilot's mistake.
>
> Bigotry against white heterosexual men is no different than Bigotry against
> black homosexual women... You are the ultimate hypocrite.


Hypocrite for pointing out the reverse racism that is now
common in the Federal Government and FAA??

OK...,,, what ever you say Chief

[Judah]

Skunk > wrote in
:

> Hypocrite for pointing out the reverse racism that is now
> common in the Federal Government and FAA??

No. For trying to turn everything into a racial issue so that you can promote
your agenda. You are the white Al Sharpton.

[Skunk]

Judah wrote:
> Skunk > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>Hypocrite for pointing out the reverse racism that is now
>>common in the Federal Government and FAA??
>
>
> No. For trying to turn everything into a racial issue so that you can promote
> your agenda. You are the white Al Sharpton.

No agenda just a concern for Air Safety. Management of the
National airspace system and the safe movement of air
traffic requires the best and brightest Government service
can attract. However the FAA has made social engineering a
priority over Air Safety. The FAA Academy standards were
lowered several years ago because black women could not pass
all the courses. White males in the FAA are passed over in
favor of less qualified Blacks all the time. That is not right.

[Sam Spade]

Skunk wrote:
> Judah wrote:
>
>> Skunk > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Hypocrite for pointing out the reverse racism that is now common in
>>> the Federal Government and FAA??
>>
>>
>>
>> No. For trying to turn everything into a racial issue so that you can
>> promote your agenda. You are the white Al Sharpton.
>
>
> No agenda just a concern for Air Safety. Management of the National
> airspace system and the safe movement of air traffic requires the best
> and brightest Government service can attract. However the FAA has made
> social engineering a priority over Air Safety. The FAA Academy standards
> were lowered several years ago because black women could not pass all
> the courses. White males in the FAA are passed over in favor of less
> qualified Blacks all the time. That is not right.

Guess what! This country really screwed the blacks for a very long time.

Then, the scales tipped a bit far the other way to make things up.

On balance, both the whites and blacks are a lot better off today for
how it has progressed.

Sure, there are dull blacks in some FAA positions. But, you know what,
there are also some dull whites in some FAA positions.

And, so it goes.

Do you hate Mexican-Americans, too?

[Allan9]

Actually it was a controller who gave visibility observations in the
vicinity of the touchdown zone from a car. IIRC most airports only had RVV
at the time.
Al


"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
...
>B A R R Y wrote:
>
>>
>> How about guys in pink shirts standing next to the runway?
>
> In the days before RVR really worked, when the weather was foggy at some
> airline airports they had a certified observor standing beside the runway
> who provided manually observed RVR readings to the tower via an interphone
> link.

[Cirrus]

Skunk wrote:
> Is it me or is the FAA about one incident away from a
> disaster worse than Lexington?
>
Sometimes these threads are frustrating. How can anyone here who is a
pilot post a message and blame the FAA for a pilot landing on a
taxiway? If you aren't a pilot, why post here with such authority?
The FARs clearly make the PIC resposible for the safety of flight.
Pilots are also "supposed" to be able to differentiate between a runway
and a taxiway. Why does it matter if its VFR,IFR, ILS,towered,
non-towered, black person, white person, etc?

IF the tower sees the plane landing on the taxiway and says "go
around", that's fantastic, but it's still a PILOT making a mistake.
How do you think pilots at non-towered airports land? Yes, ATC works
with the pilots, and yes they have responsabilities too. And how about
maybe giving ATC some credit for all the hard work they do to keep our
butts safe up there?

[Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]]

"Cirrus" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Sometimes these threads are frustrating. How can anyone here who is a
> pilot post a message and blame the FAA for a pilot landing on a
> taxiway?
>

None can.


>
> If you aren't a pilot, why post here with such authority?
>

He doesn't post with authority. He is an idiot. Idiots do not post with
authority.

[Sam Spade]

Allan9 wrote:
> Actually it was a controller who gave visibility observations in the
> vicinity of the touchdown zone from a car. IIRC most airports only had RVV
> at the time.
> Al
>
Yes, RVV, not RVR. I thought about that after the posting.

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 22:11:07 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Skunk" > wrote in message
...
>>
<snip>
>>
>> 4. The pilots on the ground should notice
>>
>
>What pilots on the ground should notice?
>
The ones who mistakenly pulled out in front of the landing aircraft?

>
>>
>> 5. The BRITE display in the cab should paint a weird picture of a weird
>> approach on radar
>>
>
>Why? Have you ever seen BRITE radar? Have you ever been in an ATCT? Have
>you been to an airport?
>

I do have to admit that on one training flight in actual to Pontiac
(PTK) as I was coming down the glide slope fighting a 90 degree cross
wind that seemed to counter every correction the tower did come on
and ask if I planned on landing on the taxiway, or was I going to use
the runway. I replied I was kinda hoping for the big one on the left
with all the marks painted on it if the wind would cooperate. When we
broke out pretty close to DH I was very close to being lined up. I had
to be with as sensitive as those needles get that low. <:-))

OTOH that is more than a bit different than trying to see an airplane
100 feet left or right of centerline from the cab.

<snip>
>> Go ahead. Shoot me I am the racist messenger. If it makes you feel better.
>>
>
>No, you're not a messenger, you're just an idiot.
>
Certainly a bit...aw...never mind.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in message
...
>
> The ones who mistakenly pulled out in front of the landing aircraft?
>

I saw no mention of anyone pulling out on the taxiway in front of the
landing aircraft.

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 21:38:20 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> The ones who mistakenly pulled out in front of the landing aircraft?
>>
>
>I saw no mention of anyone pulling out on the taxiway in front of the
>landing aircraft.
>
Neither did I, but that would be about the only one who could see the
landing plane was 100 feet right or left.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Mike Beede]

In article >,
Skunk > wrote:

> Is it me

Yes.

Can you please pick an email address and stick with it so
I don't have to killfile everyone at your ISP?

Thanks,

Mike Beede