Bad Day at the office?

[EridanMan]

Just saw this one on AVweb:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1

Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...

The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...

Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
know enough to make a real judgement here;)

-Scott

[Peter Dohm]

"EridanMan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Just saw this one on AVweb:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1
>
> Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...
>
> The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
> judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
> should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...
>
> Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
> know enough to make a real judgement here;)
>
> -Scott
>
I don't know either, but here is a link for a diagram of TEB:
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0706/00890AD.PDF

It looks like an incidious type of event. Worth watching for, but....

Peter

[[email protected]]

Good on the pilot who saw the problem looming. Think about your own
takeoff runs, soon after you move the throttle(s) forward. Scanning
instruments -- is this thing gonna fly? -- tracking down the
centerline, all that stuff. Someone on the flight deck was looking at
more than the runway ahead. Did the P180 have a SIC?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"EridanMan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Just saw this one on AVweb:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1
>
> Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...
>
> The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
> judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
> should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...
>
> Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
> know enough to make a real judgement here;)
>

The takeoff clearances were issued 40 seconds apart. The PIC of the second
aircraft cleared may not have been on tower frequency when the first
clearance was issued, although he certainly should have seen the first
aircraft on the intersecting runway. I have to wonder how this incident
occurred so long after the first clearance was issued.

[Ben Jackson]

On 2007-06-25, Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>
> he certainly should have seen the first
> aircraft on the intersecting runway.

That's hard to say unless you've been at the end of 19 in a spam can.
It doesn't take much brush to make it impossible to see the end of
another runway. The geometry also makes it look like the plane on 24
would be slightly behind the plane on 19 as they approached the
intersection.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Robert M. Gary]

On Jun 25, 12:42 am, EridanMan > wrote:
> Just saw this one on AVweb:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1
>
> Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...
>
> The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
> judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
> should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...
>
> Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
> know enough to make a real judgement here;)
>
> -Scott

I have had similar happen to me. You have to assume that the tower
will not make mistakes. Often these types of mistakes happen at
airports that have different freq for different runways, making it
harder to determine.

-Robert

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
...
>
> That's hard to say unless you've been at the end of 19 in a spam can.
> It doesn't take much brush to make it impossible to see the end of
> another runway.
>

It's easy to say if you've examined high resolution imagery of the airport.

http://mapper.acme.com/?lat=40.85641&long=-74.05680scale=14&theme=NEXRAD&width=3&height=2&dot=Yes


>
> The geometry also makes it look like the plane on 24
> would be slightly behind the plane on 19 as they approached the
> intersection.
>

To an SR22 at the hold short line for runway 19 on taxiway bravo a P180
departing full length on runway 24 would be moving from a position about 45
degrees off its left nose to the right.

[EridanMan]

On Jun 25, 6:35 pm, "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
> On Jun 25, 12:42 am, EridanMan > wrote:
>
> > Just saw this one on AVweb:
>
> >http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1
>
> > Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...
>
> > The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
> > judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
> > should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...
>
> > Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
> > know enough to make a real judgement here;)
>
> > -Scott
>
> I have had similar happen to me. You have to assume that the tower
> will not make mistakes. Often these types of mistakes happen at
> airports that have different freq for different runways, making it
> harder to determine.
>
> -Robert

Yeah, I know there are _WAY_ too many variables I can't possibly know,
which is why I submitted that little gem with a massive disclaimer;)

I mean hell, for all I know, my bias comes simply from the fact that
the P-180 is probably my single favorite current aircraft(from a
design perspective), and I'm not a particular fan of Cirrus... Purely
my own fanboyish reaction.

Either way, props to the crews for avoiding a serious incident... and
a reminder to all of us that situational awareness means a lot more
than simply what the tower is telling us in particular.

-Scott

[[email protected]]

On Jun 25, 1:42 am, EridanMan > wrote:
> Just saw this one on AVweb:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070618X00759&key=1
>
> Wow, someone was having a bad day at the office...
>
> The obvious tower mistake is one thing, but I would also question the
> judgement of the PIC of the second aircraft cleared... He really
> should have been the one to catch the controllers mistake...
>
> Granted, thats my own damn opinion and nothing else, I obviously don't
> know enough to make a real judgement here;)
>
> -Scott

Who paid for the blown tires?

[Peter Dohm]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > That's hard to say unless you've been at the end of 19 in a spam can.
> > It doesn't take much brush to make it impossible to see the end of
> > another runway.
> >
>
> It's easy to say if you've examined high resolution imagery of the
airport.
>
>
http://mapper.acme.com/?lat=40.85641&long=-74.05680scale=14&theme=NEXRAD&wid
th=3&height=2&dot=Yes
>
>
> >
> > The geometry also makes it look like the plane on 24
> > would be slightly behind the plane on 19 as they approached the
> > intersection.
> >
>
> To an SR22 at the hold short line for runway 19 on taxiway bravo a P180
> departing full length on runway 24 would be moving from a position about
45
> degrees off its left nose to the right.
>
>
Presuming, of course, that the P180 was in motion before the SR22 taxied
into position, turning 90 degrees in the process...

I'm glad that the P180 pilot realized that the situation was running amock!

[Morgans[_2_]]

> wrote

> Who paid for the blown tires?

The insurance company of the plane with the blown tires, after the
deductible.

I would imagine that they are very cheerful about writing _that_ check, as
opposed to the one with a wrecked airplane, and dead occupant(s).
--
Jim in NC

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
>
> Presuming, of course, that the P180 was in motion before the SR22 taxied
> into position, turning 90 degrees in the process...
>

Of course. The P180 called ready for takeoff 40 seconds before the SR22
did. He certainly should have been in motion before the SR22 taxied into
position.

[Peter Dohm]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Presuming, of course, that the P180 was in motion before the SR22 taxied
> > into position, turning 90 degrees in the process...
> >
>
> Of course. The P180 called ready for takeoff 40 seconds before the SR22
> did. He certainly should have been in motion before the SR22 taxied into
> position.
>
>
Agreed. It's just that I have read nothing that said he was.