If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
LAS incident
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/29/na...erland&emc=rss
September 29, 2005 Near Miss for 2 Jets on a Las Vegas Runway By MATTHEW L. WALD WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 - An America West passenger jet taking off from Las Vegas missed hitting an Air Canada jet by about 100 feet last Thursday night, according to a preliminary report, because a controller in the tower confused two planes and issued conflicting instructions. The controller has been taken off duty and sent for more training, according to the Federal Aviation Administration, and the episode is under investigation. America West Flight 539, departing for Cleveland, was cleared for takeoff about 11 p.m. local time on Runway 25 Right. At the same time, Air Canada Flight 593 had landed on Runway 25 Left, a parallel runway, on a flight from Toronto, and had been cleared to taxi to the terminal, across 25 Right. A collision was averted because the America West plane was airborne by the time it reached the point where the Air Canada plane was crossing. The America West and Air Canada planes were both midsized Airbus jets that carry more than 100 passengers. An F.A.A. spokeswoman said Wednesday that the agency did not believe that the America West plane had flown directly over the Air Canada plane, but that investigators were still trying to determine how close the two jets came. Donn Walker, an F.A.A. spokesman, said the tower controller had cleared the America West plane for takeoff. Then a different America West plane, a Boeing 757, taxiing behind Flight 539, asked for a brief delay. The controller responded by revoking the takeoff clearance for the 757 - although he had never issued one for that plane - and cleared the Air Canada plane to cross the runway. Meanwhile Flight 539, duly cleared, rolled down the runway for takeoff. "Our system is set up as much as possible to absorb human error and still not have a collision," Mr. Walker said. He said, as did others, that the aviation agency had computer systems in place that would alert controllers to some kinds of human error, like pilots not following directions because they misheard an instruction or got lost in the field, but that it did not have an automatic system for warning controllers about confusing two airplanes. In July at Kennedy International Airport in New York, a DC-8 cargo plane nearly hit a fully loaded Boeing 767 that blundered onto the active runway. The tower controller could not spot the problem because of heavy rain and clouds that cut visibility to near zero and made radar ineffective. The aviation agency has a system for seeing through clouds and rain, using signals given off by the planes themselves, as opposed to radar, which bounces electromagnetic energy off the planes' skins. But the agency has not installed it at Kennedy. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
("H.P." wrote)
September 29, 2005 Near Miss for 2 Jets on a Las Vegas Runway By MATTHEW L. WALD WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 - An America West passenger jet taking off from Las Vegas missed hitting an Air Canada jet by about 100 feet last Thursday night, according to a preliminary report, because a controller in the tower confused two planes and issued conflicting instructions. [snip] He said, as did others, that the aviation agency had computer systems in place... The aviation agency has a system for seeing through clouds and rain, using signals given off by the planes themselves, as opposed to radar, which bounces electromagnetic energy off the planes' skins. But the agency has not installed it at Kennedy. I thought it was odd, in a creapy kind of way, that the reporter kept referring to it as 'the agency.' Very Matt Helm, ...or Our Man Flint. Either one. Montblack |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I can't understand why a series of stop/caution/go lights has not been
implemented at intesections of runways and taxiways. Controller clears one aircraft for takeoff, the intersection lights go from yellow to red. Progessive taxiing is following a series of green lights. It seems so cheap and easy -- much easier than cleaning up the wreckage of two jets. But that's just like another idea I had, make all runway lights respond to VHF Guard in addition to the CTAF or other published frequency. I was flying back near Philly one night, juggling the usual combination of charts and pencils in the dark. I was under a shelf, and not particularly high. I thought if the engine quit, I'd be dead because even with a GPS, I wouldn't have time to find the the frequency, turn on the lights, locate the airport, etc. How nice to put in 121.5. key the mike and watch all of the lights in the vicinity come on at the same time. I called AOPA and ASF and they said it was a clever idea, but no one was interested in implementing it. WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 - An America West passenger jet taking off from Las Vegas missed hitting an Air Canada jet by about 100 feet last Thursday night, according to a preliminary report, because a controller in the tower confused two planes and issued conflicting instructions. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
lets see if you read the article correctly.
Aircraft A is cleared to take off Aircraft B is cleared to take off behind Aircraft A Aircraft B says there will be a delay Controller cancels Aircraft B take off clearance. (Changes your lights from red to green for the taxing aircraft) And then Clears Aircraft C to taxi across runway while Aircraft A is still taking off. That's what I read.. what did you read.. I don't think your lighting thinking will work any better. ATC controls the lights too.. radio or lights.. no different BT "LWG" wrote in message ... I can't understand why a series of stop/caution/go lights has not been implemented at intesections of runways and taxiways. Controller clears one aircraft for takeoff, the intersection lights go from yellow to red. Progessive taxiing is following a series of green lights. It seems so cheap and easy -- much easier than cleaning up the wreckage of two jets. But that's just like another idea I had, make all runway lights respond to VHF Guard in addition to the CTAF or other published frequency. I was flying back near Philly one night, juggling the usual combination of charts and pencils in the dark. I was under a shelf, and not particularly high. I thought if the engine quit, I'd be dead because even with a GPS, I wouldn't have time to find the the frequency, turn on the lights, locate the airport, etc. How nice to put in 121.5. key the mike and watch all of the lights in the vicinity come on at the same time. I called AOPA and ASF and they said it was a clever idea, but no one was interested in implementing it. WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 - An America West passenger jet taking off from Las Vegas missed hitting an Air Canada jet by about 100 feet last Thursday night, according to a preliminary report, because a controller in the tower confused two planes and issued conflicting instructions. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:05:38 -0400, "LWG"
wrote in :: I can't understand why a series of stop/caution/go lights has not been implemented at intesections of runways and taxiways. There is a system like that employs lights imbedded in the taxiways at the hold bars called: Surface Movement Guidance and Control System. http://www.gofir.com/aviation_accide...nce_system.htm |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"LW" wrote in message
I can't understand why a series of stop/caution/go lights has not been implemented at intesections of runways and taxiways. Controller clears one aircraft for takeoff, the intersection lights go from yellow to red. Progessive taxiing is following a series of green lights. It seems so cheap and easy -- much easier than cleaning up the wreckage of two jets. The FAA has instituted a test program similar to what you describe. So far, the test results are disappointing. D. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Capt.Doug" wrote The FAA has instituted a test program similar to what you describe. So far, the test results are disappointing. Is there some way with existing technology, that a pilot could alert ground personnel that he is on takeoff roll? I picture some code be entered into a transponder, from the time the pilot receives takeoff clearance, until (s)he goes wheels up, then goes back to the assigned code. The computers and display would then clearly show the location of the pilot, on which runway, and that he has begun rolling. Perhaps that (in addition) could trigger the stop lights. Could the same work for when (s)he has been given landing clearance, and is on very short final? Just an idea, and I'm sure there are problems, but could this, or something like it work? -- Jim in NC |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:52:51 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote: "Capt.Doug" wrote The FAA has instituted a test program similar to what you describe. So far, the test results are disappointing. Is there some way with existing technology, that a pilot could alert ground personnel that he is on takeoff roll? I picture some code be entered into a transponder, from the time the pilot receives takeoff clearance, until (s)he goes wheels up, then goes back to the assigned code. The computers and display would then clearly show the location of the pilot, on which runway, and that he has begun rolling. Perhaps that (in addition) could trigger the stop lights. Could the same work for when (s)he has been given landing clearance, and is on very short final? Just an idea, and I'm sure there are problems, but could this, or something like it work? There is something like that available, only not for aircraft. When I was a police officer we had mobile data terminals (MDT's) in our patrol car. A signal would go off telling us that we had an incoming call, I hit one button to acknowledge the call, The next button I would hit would to tell the system that I was en route. When I got to the scene, I would hit another button that told the system I was there. Then when I was finished, I would hit another button that told the system I was done and that I was back in service. I could go from call to call to call all day long without even talking on the radio. So I could easily see this implemented in aircraft as follows: Button one: acknowledge cleared for take off, Button two: Cleared runway. Button fthreer: acknowledge cleared for landing. Button four: off of active. With this incorporated into the transponder, the system would see which transponder sent the signal and change the lights as so required. So it could be accomplished, I would just hate to see what the cost would be to do something like that. Scott D. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Scott D wrote With this incorporated into the transponder, the system would see which transponder sent the signal and change the lights as so required. So it could be accomplished, I would just hate to see what the cost would be to do something like that. That's why I think there would have to be a system that would use existing, already installed equipment. We need to get creative for this one, everyone! -- Jim in NC |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
One idea I had was to use GPS and a simple ethernet network topology to
allow planes to do some of the work themselves. Each plane, large or small would have a computer onboard that would take the GPS position data and broadcast it with some additional info such as heading, airspeed, ground speed, altitude, etc. Using ethernet technology each plane would send and receive information from all other active aircraft in the area. In remote areas were transponders don't work well they could even relay packets plane to plane. Rather then worry about transponder codes, the computer would accept the aircraft call sign and broadcast it so everyone who sees it can call them up if they have to. Ethernet technology is sofisticated enough to pass large amounts of data between hundreds of computers on a single network with minimal collisions and was originally designed to be wireless. It also includes error correction so that the data received can be reliablely decoded. The incoming packets would be entered into the on-board computer and project on the screen the image of a plane complete with a 5 min line (= to the distance the plane will fly in 5 min.) on the intended flight path. If two lines intersect, at least one of the planes will have a 5 min warning and can change course. You could even do a security bubble where you have a variable size bubble around the plane and if two bubbles touch you have a warning message come up. With the current processing capability of an Intel CPU, performing one task only, this should not be a problem. Not to mention that you have multiple computers each looking around each plane for possible threats. On the ground each plane would be able to see where the other active aircraft are on an airport diagram and even see if one is on a takeoff roll the pilot waiting to cross the threshold could see that the plane is in position and either ready to roll or rolling. He could then act as a backup for ATC, and catch possible mistakes before they become bigger. The system could even be used to provide WX info to the appropriate agency. Imagine if the system could provide true airspeed and ground speed as well as heading and the difference between heading and the way the plane is pointing. A computer on the ground could calculate wind speed aloft all along the flight path. I am sure the weather service would love it and be willing to help with the cost. A very simple idea really. "Morgans" wrote in message ... Scott D wrote With this incorporated into the transponder, the system would see which transponder sent the signal and change the lights as so required. So it could be accomplished, I would just hate to see what the cost would be to do something like that. That's why I think there would have to be a system that would use existing, already installed equipment. We need to get creative for this one, everyone! -- Jim in NC |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Swearingen-TEB incident: control issues with twins | R.L. | Piloting | 72 | June 8th 05 04:08 AM |
British Airways 747 incident on NPR | Ron Garret | Piloting | 3 | March 9th 05 07:38 PM |
The Puchacz incident: check the sticks! | Janusz Kesik | Soaring | 0 | October 5th 04 10:06 PM |
Bush/Hitler creates another phony "terrorist" incident to suppressus... | Ronald Gardner | Home Built | 4 | December 29th 03 09:19 PM |
Indonesian Bawean Island Incident (2 F-16B vs 5 F/A-18s) | Bram U. Kusuma | Naval Aviation | 6 | September 7th 03 06:06 PM |