Every time Delta was responding, you could literally hear his teeth grinding at how much more he wanted to say. Kept his professionalism to say the least.
@@AEMoreira81 I'm sure that both of the pilots are doing some kind of reporting on the incident. I am quite sure that the FAA,and both airlines will have to file a safety report. It was very good that they didn't collide. That could have been a big disaster.
@@TeemarkConvair That really sounded like bad advice from ATC. The plane below that was taking off is to climb as fast as possible, and the one above is supposed to climb as slow as possible. It seems like that would bring them both to the same altitude.
Was it? They accepted the responsibility of maintaining visual separation with an aircraft they can barely see under them. It's ATC's job to maintain separation, let him figure it out.
@@Vugoseq yeah visual separation IS a form of separation. “We’ll do our best” means he’ll do it but if I can’t he would be expected to let ATC know if he can no longer maintain it
@@dz-ed8oe that's just what I said: he can't see the other plane at all because it's below him, but he still agreed to keep separation. He should have told ATC immediately he's unable to maintain visual separation instead of halfheartedly accepting. At what future moment would he decide to inform ATC he lost separation? When he collides? Then ATC will open his umbrella and say it's the pilot's fault.
Not that bad, sure, because he did a go around. I sure wouldn’t want to be on a plane with a hotshot pilot who thinks he can land land on a runway with a departing plane on it.
@@BigfootBrass Prob wasn't at minimums and was exaggerated by the Delta pilot, hence the other pilot saying it wasn't that bad. No you can't see behind you but without tower calling for an immediate deviation of either aircraft, and without an RA it was likely less of a problem than is being portrayed.
Southwest, you were on the runway and in no way able to see the situation from the viewpoint of the crew flying an airplane cleared to land on the same runway. Your opinion does not matter. Tower seriously screwed this one up.
I'm not a pilot but from what I know about aviation my guess is that he was saying "it wasn't that bad" to the comment made by DA that he was at minimums before SW started rolling. That doesn't make sense and you don't need to see behind you to know that isn't true. Reason being, if that was true then delta would've overflown the SW, also once tower was aware of the conflict they did not call for a deviation of either aircraft. Additionally I don't think Delta would have waited all the way until minimums to go around for traffic unless it was poor visibility. One last point, once airborne, there was no RA. Although I'm not sure how RA's work at low altitudes.
Excellent work as usual on the production but is there any particular reason the video is zoomed so far out? Can it be done with a more zoomed in map? it appears a lot of territory is viewable that is not relevant to the event. Just my opinion.
Eddie common sense isn't very common bro. I personally would have thought priority goes to the guy in the sky but hey what do I know, I'm just some nobody online lol.
@@ihateusernamesgrrr I’m actually like 99% certain that atc is supposed to give priority to landing aircraft so I agree. I also found it odd they were landing and departing one runway when they have parallels but it looks like there is a lot of construction going on because 16L is currently closed so I guess that doesn’t help
The first guy to say on the radio “tower, possible ATC deviation, I have a number for you to copy” and give the tower your cell phone number….. wins in my book.
While it’s understandable they were annoyed, a random broadcast without a call sign doesn’t help. DAL could have been clearer. They did the correct action for safety, but could have been clearer on comms
thats what im thinking too. Turn Delta 5 degrees to the left ( still wouldve avoided the mountains on the left ) .. and also turn Southwest 5 degrees to the right
@@eddieflxible379 You don't want to turn too soon after takeoff, since it reduces your climb performance, so I think the standard procedure is to get the plane that is going around to turn. I don't know why that procedure wasn't followed here.
@@rmc6884 lol little over 5000 but thanks for the tcas lesson. But you know what… youre right. A guy staring at a dot on his screen has way more sa than the pilots on short final. /S
Yea, that seemed extremely unnecessary/unprofessional. Yes, you didn't end up in a massive fireball mid-runway because you had to abort your take off. Guess 2666 is just a 'drama queen'. Guess that's why I'm not a pilot because they'd have to duct tape my hands to not respond to such a snarky comment.
I was plane watching at Milwaukee's airport a few years ago, and they had a similar experience. Both pilots were told that they would be having to report the incident. Plus the ATC was also filled a report of the incident. It was very lucky that the ATC seen what was going on ,and got the plane to go around, and the other one to stop the rolling down the runway. The one who was on the ground had to go, and get off the runway to reset the planes computer because when they hit the brakes it set a warning lights off.
Besides his bad call on the runway, the local controller doubles down on foolishness by not telling the departure controller what's going on. Departure didn't seem like he was paying much attention either, how could he call radar on Delta and not see the other target?
I feel that the Tower not only messed up with having the Southwest jet take off with the Delta coming in for a landing (why wasn't Delta landing on 16 R (righthand runway, basically South-Southeast) while Southwest taking off on Runway 16L? Also, once they realized the rapid closing speed why didn't they have Delta (who was to the left of the Southwest jet) make a gentle turn to the left and Southwest make a gentle turn to the right? Get some horizontal as well as vertical separation!!!
Should have had the planes offset slightly in different directions so they could at least see and avoid each other. If 16R was clear, it would have been easy for Delta to overfly 16R to guarantee obstacle clearance.
@@rosscomer I made a mistake, I meant to ask why weren't they using both the righthand and the lefthand runways. But the main thing was why didn't the Controller order one plane to make a lefthand turn and the other a righthand turn to get horizontal distance in addition to vertical distance! This would have made the whole thing much safer!!!
tower has no control on which runway the tracon puts that aircraft on, unless they call and ask them to use another runway. reason they were probably on that runway was bc of 16R being closed. Plus the terrain around the airport is the reason for not giving a turn. Elevation in the area is 11k due south, 9600 west and 9400 to the east. Not much you can do. I dont know their SOP but I know they have stuff in there for go-arounds and what they can and cant do with them.
Reno based (student) pilot here. 16R is the ILS runway and designated primarily for commercial traffic, while 16L is a shorter runway which is generally used for VFR and general aviation. So essentially 16R is the only runway suitable for airliners or traffic on IFR approaches. Sounds like the controller just spaced things a little too tight here and Delta wasn’t having it… I completely understand their desire to go around here.
I wouldn't blame ATC on this one, I'd wait until the report is available and gives all the information. There was a loss of separation during the go around but what could the tower have done about it is not clear given the local topography and procedures. It seems that the separation was tight prior to the go around between the landing aircraft and the departing one but how close it was is certainly not clear at this stage not if a mistake occurred on the ATC side. They may have cleared the other traffic to depart too late to provide adequate separation with the landing traffic, the departing traffic lay have spent more time than expected to initiate it's roll, or separation may have been tight but adequate for the DL to land on clear runway. We'll see.
Good ol' SWA downplaying yet another rather serious incident. Had DAL struck SWA, and both went down in flames, that SWA pilot would still probably say, "It wuudn't that bad..." Seriously though,Tower should have done either, 1. Cancel SWA's and DAL's respective clearances & instruct DAL to go around, or, 2. Had SWA hold short until DAL landed. This was 100% the Tower controller's fault. Doing some quick math -- KRNO's RNAV Z 16L minimum decision height is 381' AGL. That places DAL at about a mile out from the runway when Tower cleared SWA for an immediate takeoff. With DAL approaching and landing at around 135 KIAS, they would literally be landing directly in the jetblast of SWA. And as if that wasn't bad, had DAL continued to land *AND* SWA failed to accelerate quickly enough (e.g., blown tire, engine failure, etc.), DAL would have plowed right into the tail of SWA, killing a whole lot of people in a massive fireball. Additionally, it appears that the Tower controller attempted to cover his blunder by asking DAL to stay in the pattern. The DAL captain, who was clearly pissed off at the Tower controller, did the right thing by executing a missed and leaving the pattern. His actions forced ATC to report the reason for the go-around as controller-caused, pinning the blame squarely on that specific Tower controller. This hopefully was a learning experience for the Tower controller. As you can tell, I'm not particularly happy with the cavalier attitude of this SWA flight crew. The pilot flying was slow to take off, further exacerbating an already bad situation, afterwhich they attempted to blame-shift by making that stupid and dismissive remark. The SWA flight crew could have become the "heroes" in this incident had the SWA pilots simply aborted their takeoff, followed by an apology,.immediately after DAL stated they were going around. SWA was still slow enough to safely abort. All in all, everything worked out, despite how bad this close-call was.
I live in Reno but don't remember hearing anything on the local news about this. Guess I must of missed it. Find it hard to believe that thi s had to happen as the Reno airport isn't that busy. Wondering how the tower could not see this happening. Guess that is why they call them accidents
Let me guess there was no one in the pattern but those two. I’ve had JfK tower do that to me and if the departure rejected or delayed their departure we would’ve been in a real bad spot. For what? The towers convenience?
Ah but if you don't try and squeeze some airplanes out and leave em holding short, they complain. It's the life of a tower controller. Most of the time, it works, sometimes it doesn't.
100% ATC's fault. Good job on Delta pilots for being smart and going around. That whole situation was just unacceptable, and the ATC should get in big trouble for that, though he probably won't. It seems to only be the pilots who get blamed in situations like these, even if they did everything correctly.
I am unfamiliar with the airport so why were they having aircraft take off and land 16L? Don’t they normally land L and take off R like pretty much EVERY other airport?
Not sure why Delta would phrase it as "YOU cleared an aircraft for takeoff..." when queried for the reason for the go-around. The departure controller isn't the tower controller.
i guess his wording referred not specifically to the one controller he is speaking to, but to airport controller. i think he wanted to say, that he was not the cause for the go-around. just my guess. could have been worded better, eg. "we were cleared for landing when another airplane was still on the runway" ;-))
I think he was using "You" in the same way someone might say "You charged me extra on my bill" to a customer service rep, even though that rep had nothing to do with it. They represent the company, and this controller represents "the controllers" to the delta pilot, I would guess.
Not me, but when the DAL2666 was told to climb (from 9000) to 10000, the plane taking off was at around 6200 When DAL2666 said they could barely see the other plane off the nose at first I thought, they barely missed but it really means they had enough seperation because he could barely see them. DAL2666 was just understandably pissed that Tower did not order a go around but they themselves had to make that call. If they had not been able to see the other plane due to bad weather, it could have ended very differently.
I’m not familiar with this airfield, but 10000ft seems a high clearance for a missed approach. I suppose if they’d stayed in the pattern they would have levelled off lower? I’m not sure why the controller couldn’t turn one of the planes on climb out to increase lateral separation?
@@CaptainSiCo And I'm not ATC at that airfield. Listen for yourself, starting at 2:00 EDIT: according to Wikipedia, Reno-Tahoe airfield is at an elevation of 4,415 ft / 1,346 m
@@CaptainSiCo Reno is at 4,000 feet and is surrounded by mountains. It’s a challenging airport to fly into. There are also specific terrain avoidance procedures in the event of a go around. There’s literally a mountain very close to the departure end of 16L. That’s why no turns could be made.
I think SW was already on the runway. I'm no pilot, but i THINK DAL should've been kept above the SWA since BOTH were climbing, and then DAL could be brought back down after the turn to the north.
@@wildgurgs3614 it doesn't work that way, but the tower could have given him a left or right deviation of 15 degrees - that would have been enough to separate them and allow the following aircraft to see the leading one. My guess is the controller was relatively new and misjudged the amount of time it would take the aircraft to take off. Three miles is not enough time to pull something like that unless everyone is one their toes.
@@chrisschack9716 Yes, you are correct, but I stick by my comment about the controller. I think he expected the aircraft taking off to be ready to go and was surprised when he had to repeat the clearance - that cost at least 10 seconds plus the time the pilot took in responding before moving the aircraft.
@@Sontus718 Controller messed up, no question ... if they're cleared for immediate takeoff, and they need a repeat, the next transmission should probably be "Cancel takeoff clearance" followed by either "hold short runway 16L" or "break, DAL go around"
I'm not an expert, but surely this isn't *too* unsafe? Controller was aware of the fuck-up, informed the planes about each other and requested visual separation when an aircraft was spotted. Admittedly I'm just a guy who watches crash investigations, but I feel like it's when the controller *doesn't* know there's a fuck-up is when the real troubles begin.
The only problem with visual separation is the limited visibility of the big jets. If the departing plane is under the nose of the go around aircraft, they can’t see each other. While no one got hurt, flirting with danger is what ATC is supposed to prevent, not cause.
Why did the ATC keep the Delta at the same heading with the go around? I would think a left or right heading would have helped to avoid the planes getting too close 🤔. I assume the airspace was very busy.
@@ericgingras4988 the southwest about a nm in front, so when he climbed he would've been directly in front of delta, maybe at equal speed, at the exact same altitude
That's not a busy airport, why was DL2666 not immediately turned to the east to clear the traffic? Even 10 degrees for separation. I would have called RA and did it myself. People ask how close is to close? That's to close.
Why ATC didnt tell Delta to deviate left or right instead maintaining rwy hdg and conflicting with dep SWA...is the rwy on a kind of valley with a no-turn or so?
As the 😅nly one in this comment section without a pilot license I would like to say that I wasn’t there so I can’t judge. But the rest of you licensed and high time pilots please go ahead. 😂
If Southwest couldn't T/O immediately they ought to say so. Tower would have held them while telling Delta to go around. No delay/immediate take-off means just that....full power and go now. Lastly, Southwest can't see behind them. Wasn't necessary to say "Was not the bad".
Piss poor planning by the tower controller, then absolutely no alternative instructions to keep these two aircraft apart. My opinion as a former QA, operational error by the tower controller who gave departure an deal.
The American ATC system seems to work well at the high capacity that is required. However, when a mistake happens it always seems to be of a more serious nature.
This isn't really true. The small mistakes just don't usually make it to RUclips. If all you're doing is looking at noteworthy mistakes, it's going to be biased towards the more serious ones.
Do not like Reno-Tahoe, the departure is bad. On leaving there once on a 737-200, the climb out was that bad even a female cabin crew screamed... tends to make one question what they are doing.
Should have had the planes offset slightly in different directions so they could at least see and avoid each other. If 16R was clear, it would have been easy for Delta to overfly 16R, although the eventual turns would suggest the opposite which still wouldn't have been bad.
Every time Delta was responding, you could literally hear his teeth grinding at how much more he wanted to say. Kept his professionalism to say the least.
Give the Delta pilot credit for not telling the ATC "I have a number for you to call...".
Those pilots should still be filing a report. Remember, anyone can file a report.
I would love to hear "Ah tower, possible controller deviation, let me know when you can write down a phone number".
@@AEMoreira81 I'm sure that both of the pilots are doing some kind of reporting on the incident. I am quite sure that the FAA,and both airlines will have to file a safety report. It was very good that they didn't collide. That could have been a big disaster.
that would have really capped it,, SWA saying "it wasn't that bad"..really? "delta give me your slowest.. SWA give me your fastest,"
@@TeemarkConvair That really sounded like bad advice from ATC. The plane below that was taking off is to climb as fast as possible, and the one above is supposed to climb as slow as possible. It seems like that would bring them both to the same altitude.
Tower - try not to crash into that other aircraft.
Pilot - yeah, we’ll do our best.
That was a great reply by the pilot.
Was it? They accepted the responsibility of maintaining visual separation with an aircraft they can barely see under them.
It's ATC's job to maintain separation, let him figure it out.
@@Vugoseq it’s visual separation. There not always a reason for atc to tell the pilot what and where to be in the sky.
@@Vugoseq yeah visual separation IS a form of separation. “We’ll do our best” means he’ll do it but if I can’t he would be expected to let ATC know if he can no longer maintain it
@@dz-ed8oe that's just what I said: he can't see the other plane at all because it's below him, but he still agreed to keep separation. He should have told ATC immediately he's unable to maintain visual separation instead of halfheartedly accepting. At what future moment would he decide to inform ATC he lost separation? When he collides? Then ATC will open his umbrella and say it's the pilot's fault.
Delta pilot kept his feelings in check. I applaud him.
But did he really?
@@Tommy_Boy. In check (restrained, curbed) yes he did. This is not to say that there was not some sense of frustration in his tone.
I'm sure it didn't seem that bad from the plane in front!
Passenger jets have no sideview, nor rearview mirrors! (LOL)
Not that bad, sure, because he did a go around.
I sure wouldn’t want to be on a plane with a hotshot pilot who thinks he can land land on a runway with a departing plane on it.
This all doesnt add up. Id never get to minimums with a stationary plane at the threshold. That's 250ft.......
@@BigfootBrass Prob wasn't at minimums and was exaggerated by the Delta pilot, hence the other pilot saying it wasn't that bad. No you can't see behind you but without tower calling for an immediate deviation of either aircraft, and without an RA it was likely less of a problem than is being portrayed.
@@JetSettingBotanist Best explanation yet. Had Delta truly been “at minimums” , he would’ve wound up being a mile in front of SWA. 😂
Southwest, you were on the runway and in no way able to see the situation from the viewpoint of the crew flying an airplane cleared to land on the same runway. Your opinion does not matter. Tower seriously screwed this one up.
Thank you for your service.
@@jacksprat9209 LOL!
and the swa capt could give two fucks what you think! LOL!
I'm not a pilot but from what I know about aviation my guess is that he was saying "it wasn't that bad" to the comment made by DA that he was at minimums before SW started rolling. That doesn't make sense and you don't need to see behind you to know that isn't true. Reason being, if that was true then delta would've overflown the SW, also once tower was aware of the conflict they did not call for a deviation of either aircraft. Additionally I don't think Delta would have waited all the way until minimums to go around for traffic unless it was poor visibility. One last point, once airborne, there was no RA. Although I'm not sure how RA's work at low altitudes.
With TCAS set at 10 or even 5 miles we can most definitely see traffic behind us including their altitude.
Excellent work as usual on the production but is there any particular reason the video is zoomed so far out? Can it be done with a more zoomed in map? it appears a lot of territory is viewable that is not relevant to the event. Just my opinion.
Reno isnt a busy airport. Tower shouldve either
a) Had Southwest to hold short of 16R and allow Delta to land or
b) Had Delta to go around
Preferably A. Lol
Eddie common sense isn't very common bro. I personally would have thought priority goes to the guy in the sky but hey what do I know, I'm just some nobody online lol.
@@ihateusernamesgrrr lack of common sense will end humanity. So much bs in this world
A.
@@ihateusernamesgrrr I’m actually like 99% certain that atc is supposed to give priority to landing aircraft so I agree. I also found it odd they were landing and departing one runway when they have parallels but it looks like there is a lot of construction going on because 16L is currently closed so I guess that doesn’t help
The first guy to say on the radio “tower, possible ATC deviation, I have a number for you to copy” and give the tower your cell phone number….. wins in my book.
I had tower burp on frequency last night. Thought it might be funny to ask for his supervisor 🤣
ATC are quick with the number for you to call when pilots screw up, but when they do it .. "ok"
When DAL2666 was stating: 'How is that gonna work?'
Was that when they saw there was still a plane on the runway?
... And not taking off any time soon
Apparently someone was giving time for ATC to own up. I suspect the Delta pilots ultimately did file a report.
While it’s understandable they were annoyed, a random broadcast without a call sign doesn’t help. DAL could have been clearer. They did the correct action for safety, but could have been clearer on comms
@@asmrbuddha9033 I suspect the pilot was talking to his own crew but forgot his mike was still open.
@@AudieHolland quite possible
Why wasn't Delta given a turn after going around? Flying runway heading when there is departing traffic climbing beneath you doesn't seem wise...
That was my question as well. Tower seemed entirely uninterested in what was happening.
thats what im thinking too. Turn Delta 5 degrees to the left ( still wouldve avoided the mountains on the left ) .. and also turn Southwest 5 degrees to the right
Like was said, they seemed a bit uninterested and unaware. I also was wondering why they didn’t give a heading at least a few degrees off centerline.
@@eddieflxible379 You don't want to turn too soon after takeoff, since it reduces your climb performance, so I think the standard procedure is to get the plane that is going around to turn. I don't know why that procedure wasn't followed here.
Reno has specific missed approach procedures due to terrain. Gotta follow that.
Wow the balls of that SW pilot and that ATC guy. Smh
As soon as he said immediate takeoff and Southwest didn't pick up on it right away, it was too late.
Didn’t realize southwest installed rear view mirrors in the cockpit
TCAS shows traffic behind us up to five miles including their altitude. How much time do you have in a transport category aircraft?
@@rmc6884 lol little over 5000 but thanks for the tcas lesson. But you know what… youre right. A guy staring at a dot on his screen has way more sa than the pilots on short final. /S
"Too close for missiles, switching to guns!"🤕
They had a tally ho on the bogey inside of 5 miles, "I've got tone, master arm on ..."
😂
SWA “ it wasn’t that bad”. But of course they couldn’t see behind them. What a mess
Yea, that seemed extremely unnecessary/unprofessional. Yes, you didn't end up in a massive fireball mid-runway because you had to abort your take off. Guess 2666 is just a 'drama queen'.
Guess that's why I'm not a pilot because they'd have to duct tape my hands to not respond to such a snarky comment.
Exactly
Leave it to SWA to play down a spacing issue. Smh
cry ne a river. You're breaking my heart!
2666 was PISSED.
“You wanna stay in the pattern with me?”
“No I’d rather you give me anyone else.”
I was plane watching at Milwaukee's airport a few years ago, and they had a similar experience. Both pilots were told that they would be having to report the incident. Plus the ATC was also filled a report of the incident. It was very lucky that the ATC seen what was going on ,and got the plane to go around, and the other one to stop the rolling down the runway. The one who was on the ground had to go, and get off the runway to reset the planes computer because when they hit the brakes it set a warning lights off.
Southwest pilot is too chill lol. I guess we know why the takeoff was less than expeditious.
Besides his bad call on the runway, the local controller doubles down on foolishness by not telling the departure controller what's going on. Departure didn't seem like he was paying much attention either, how could he call radar on Delta and not see the other target?
“Let them know you have a southwest in sight.”
@@akafxde7245 1. That's not how it's supposed to be done, because... 2. Delta didn't say a word about it, did he?
It was that bad! But, while this does not happen often, it does happen and all parties need to be aware at all times as to what is going on.
Sounds like everyone one but the tower was aware
Very easy for the pilot who didn't see any of it to say it wasn't bad!
So........ who does the tower call when they screw up? Was waiting to hear "copy down this number" 🙃🙃
I feel that the Tower not only messed up with having the Southwest jet take off with the Delta coming in for a landing (why wasn't Delta landing on 16 R (righthand runway, basically South-Southeast) while Southwest taking off on Runway 16L?
Also, once they realized the rapid closing speed why didn't they have Delta (who was to the left of the Southwest jet) make a gentle turn to the left and Southwest make a gentle turn to the right? Get some horizontal as well as vertical separation!!!
Terrain is why.
Should have had the planes offset slightly in different directions so they could at least see and avoid each other. If 16R was clear, it would have been easy for Delta to overfly 16R to guarantee obstacle clearance.
@@rosscomer I made a mistake, I meant to ask why weren't they using both the righthand and the lefthand runways.
But the main thing was why didn't the Controller order one plane to make a lefthand turn and the other a righthand turn to get horizontal distance in addition to vertical distance! This would have made the whole thing much safer!!!
tower has no control on which runway the tracon puts that aircraft on, unless they call and ask them to use another runway. reason they were probably on that runway was bc of 16R being closed. Plus the terrain around the airport is the reason for not giving a turn. Elevation in the area is 11k due south, 9600 west and 9400 to the east. Not much you can do. I dont know their SOP but I know they have stuff in there for go-arounds and what they can and cant do with them.
Reno based (student) pilot here. 16R is the ILS runway and designated primarily for commercial traffic, while 16L is a shorter runway which is generally used for VFR and general aviation. So essentially 16R is the only runway suitable for airliners or traffic on IFR approaches.
Sounds like the controller just spaced things a little too tight here and Delta wasn’t having it… I completely understand their desire to go around here.
I wouldn't blame ATC on this one, I'd wait until the report is available and gives all the information. There was a loss of separation during the go around but what could the tower have done about it is not clear given the local topography and procedures. It seems that the separation was tight prior to the go around between the landing aircraft and the departing one but how close it was is certainly not clear at this stage not if a mistake occurred on the ATC side. They may have cleared the other traffic to depart too late to provide adequate separation with the landing traffic, the departing traffic lay have spent more time than expected to initiate it's roll, or separation may have been tight but adequate for the DL to land on clear runway. We'll see.
Good ol' SWA downplaying yet another rather serious incident. Had DAL struck SWA, and both went down in flames, that SWA pilot would still probably say, "It wuudn't that bad..."
Seriously though,Tower should have done either, 1. Cancel SWA's and DAL's respective clearances & instruct DAL to go around, or, 2. Had SWA hold short until DAL landed. This was 100% the Tower controller's fault.
Doing some quick math -- KRNO's RNAV Z 16L minimum decision height is 381' AGL. That places DAL at about a mile out from the runway when Tower cleared SWA for an immediate takeoff. With DAL approaching and landing at around 135 KIAS, they would literally be landing directly in the jetblast of SWA. And as if that wasn't bad, had DAL continued to land *AND* SWA failed to accelerate quickly enough (e.g., blown tire, engine failure, etc.), DAL would have plowed right into the tail of SWA, killing a whole lot of people in a massive fireball.
Additionally, it appears that the Tower controller attempted to cover his blunder by asking DAL to stay in the pattern. The DAL captain, who was clearly pissed off at the Tower controller, did the right thing by executing a missed and leaving the pattern. His actions forced ATC to report the reason for the go-around as controller-caused, pinning the blame squarely on that specific Tower controller. This hopefully was a learning experience for the Tower controller.
As you can tell, I'm not particularly happy with the cavalier attitude of this SWA flight crew. The pilot flying was slow to take off, further exacerbating an already bad situation, afterwhich they attempted to blame-shift by making that stupid and dismissive remark.
The SWA flight crew could have become the "heroes" in this incident had the SWA pilots simply aborted their takeoff, followed by an apology,.immediately after DAL stated they were going around. SWA was still slow enough to safely abort.
All in all, everything worked out, despite how bad this close-call was.
We can't believe you blew a crap load of time posting this comment. Really.....stop flying your sofa and take a nap on it.
"Possible tower deviation. Advice when ready to copy a phone number"
Delta pilot was being very polite on the incident.
This reminds me of stories where there are only two cars in an empty mall parking lot and they still manage to crash into each other!
I actually saw that happen about 30 years ago only two cars and they crashed pulling out.
@@steveblankenship5474Same, only they were actually driving!
😂
DAL2666 sounds like he’s chillin in his lazy boy with a cold one
“Wasn’t that bad.” Love it.
“It wasn’t that bad”….says the pilot climbing into the invisible plane on his roof.
I live in Reno but don't remember hearing anything on the local news about this. Guess I must of missed it. Find it hard to believe that thi s had to happen as the Reno airport isn't that busy. Wondering how the tower could not see this happening. Guess that is why they call them accidents
Let me guess there was no one in the pattern but those two. I’ve had JfK tower do that to me and if the departure rejected or delayed their departure we would’ve been in a real bad spot. For what? The towers convenience?
Ah but if you don't try and squeeze some airplanes out and leave em holding short, they complain. It's the life of a tower controller. Most of the time, it works, sometimes it doesn't.
That's when the pilot should have given the ATC guy the feared number to call 😅
A resolution advisory would have directed both air crews if there was a conflict.
“it wasn’t that bad” … until two massive jets collide and kill all people on board
100% ATC's fault. Good job on Delta pilots for being smart and going around. That whole situation was just unacceptable, and the ATC should get in big trouble for that, though he probably won't. It seems to only be the pilots who get blamed in situations like these, even if they did everything correctly.
I am unfamiliar with the airport so why were they having aircraft take off and land 16L? Don’t they normally land L and take off R like pretty much EVERY other airport?
Hahaha the Southwest pilot at the end
I guess when you are the plane looking up, its better than the plane that can't really look down. Plus Delta was inconvenienced so they were pissed.
That is a very uncomfortable situation. Neither aircraft can see the other one.
Well, Delta said they did. So you're technically wrong.
There have been quite a few close calls, lately, and quite a few mid airs.
The pilot in front was clueless. How would he know "it wasn't that bad" ?
I'd say 1nm clearance IS that bad.
How would southwest know it wasn't that bad? They don't have a rear view mirror.
it's called TCAS. Obviously it didn't even go off.
Not sure why Delta would phrase it as "YOU cleared an aircraft for takeoff..." when queried for the reason for the go-around. The departure controller isn't the tower controller.
i guess his wording referred not specifically to the one controller he is speaking to, but to airport controller. i think he wanted to say, that he was not the cause for the go-around. just my guess. could have been worded better, eg. "we were cleared for landing when another airplane was still on the runway" ;-))
You are just making small and unnecessary nag. Everything here is ok. Making small mistakes is ok.
I think he was using "You" in the same way someone might say "You charged me extra on my bill" to a customer service rep, even though that rep had nothing to do with it. They represent the company, and this controller represents "the controllers" to the delta pilot, I would guess.
It's the "royal you"... kinda like the royal "we".
The comment by the SWA at the end was peak Southwest
Do we know how close they came to each other? Vertical and horizontal separation?
Not me, but when the DAL2666 was told to climb (from 9000) to 10000,
the plane taking off was at around 6200
When DAL2666 said they could barely see the other plane off the nose at first I thought, they barely missed
but it really means they had enough seperation because he could barely see them.
DAL2666 was just understandably pissed that Tower did not order a go around but they themselves had to make that call.
If they had not been able to see the other plane due to bad weather, it could have ended very differently.
"Traffic on a 3 mile final" ... so less than that and less than 1000 feet, and probably less than half that once SWA was airborne.
I’m not familiar with this airfield, but 10000ft seems a high clearance for a missed approach. I suppose if they’d stayed in the pattern they would have levelled off lower? I’m not sure why the controller couldn’t turn one of the planes on climb out to increase lateral separation?
@@CaptainSiCo And I'm not ATC at that airfield. Listen for yourself, starting at 2:00
EDIT: according to Wikipedia, Reno-Tahoe airfield is at an elevation of 4,415 ft / 1,346 m
@@CaptainSiCo Reno is at 4,000 feet and is surrounded by mountains. It’s a challenging airport to fly into. There are also specific terrain avoidance procedures in the event of a go around. There’s literally a mountain very close to the departure end of 16L. That’s why no turns could be made.
Seems like they should have let Delta land before letting SW takeoff
I think SW was already on the runway.
I'm no pilot, but i THINK DAL should've been kept above the SWA since BOTH were climbing, and then DAL could be brought back down after the turn to the north.
@@wildgurgs3614 it doesn't work that way, but the tower could have given him a left or right deviation of 15 degrees - that would have been enough to separate them and allow the following aircraft to see the leading one. My guess is the controller was relatively new and misjudged the amount of time it would take the aircraft to take off. Three miles is not enough time to pull something like that unless everyone is one their toes.
@@Sontus718 No, they really couldn't ... 16L has no DVA, so it's runway heading all the way.
@@chrisschack9716 Yes, you are correct, but I stick by my comment about the controller. I think he expected the aircraft taking off to be ready to go and was surprised when he had to repeat the clearance - that cost at least 10 seconds plus the time the pilot took in responding before moving the aircraft.
@@Sontus718 Controller messed up, no question ... if they're cleared for immediate takeoff, and they need a repeat, the next transmission should probably be "Cancel takeoff clearance" followed by either "hold short runway 16L" or "break, DAL go around"
The SW pilot commented, "It wasn't that bad, " is much worse than the ATC call. Like it has to be bad enough to go around.
Delta: How's that gonna work? Southwest: Wasn't that bad! Right pair of cucumbers.
"It wasn't that bad" = No TCAS.
Reno is in the mountains, especially south and southwest. If you have a plane over you/coming from below you can get pinched in.
When did this happen?
Tower, I have a number to copy when you are ready.
Occurred September 11, 2021 per KOLO news.
Why is "one zero thousand" used instead of "10,000"? Thanks in advance.
This is why you don’t try to make squeeze plays.
The SWA pilots comment it wasn't that bad is meaningless, he can't see behind him or how close Delta was closing on him. Stupid thing to say.
Delta did the right thing, if u r going to err, u rather err on the side of caution!
That first tower controller is purposely trying to talk so fast, he's not even fully annunciating words and numbers. Absolutely ridiculous and toxic.
Southwest sounds like a bold pilot.
Wow, those clouds are moving faster than the planes. Must have been some serious weather!
🤣
I'm not an expert, but surely this isn't *too* unsafe? Controller was aware of the fuck-up, informed the planes about each other and requested visual separation when an aircraft was spotted.
Admittedly I'm just a guy who watches crash investigations, but I feel like it's when the controller *doesn't* know there's a fuck-up is when the real troubles begin.
If the landing plane didn't go around - based on their experience - it would have been a disaster.
The only problem with visual separation is the limited visibility of the big jets. If the departing plane is under the nose of the go around aircraft, they can’t see each other. While no one got hurt, flirting with danger is what ATC is supposed to prevent, not cause.
You sound like you are weird.
Mr Cool ATC almost got everyone killed…”Errrrrrrrodger”. Pilot of 2666 was ticked off and who can blame him. “Errrrrrrrrodger”!
When a Southwest pilot says "It wasn't that bad" - you know it was really bad!
ATC’s mistake. Should not have cleared southwest to depart when delta was on short final.
Alarmist clickbait title
Controller told Southwest to climb his best rate right into Delta... And Delta was told to give slowest rate... Trying to design a crash or what??
Yes, I picked up on that - my guess is that the controller mixed up who he was talking to - on top of creating the problem in the first place.
Exactly…
I wondered about that one too, unless the tower expected SWA to climb out at max speed and max rate and stay in front. Seems dicey.
@@bishwatntl not really. Get SW high enough so Delta could keep an eye on SW.
@@curtisa3069 did you hear any RA in the audio? I didn't.
Anytime you have a conflict it is that bad...
Tower couldn’t give DAL a due east heading climb to 10 before it crossed the threshold?
Nope. Mountains.
Why did the ATC keep the Delta at the same heading with the go around? I would think a left or right heading would have helped to avoid the planes getting too close 🤔. I assume the airspace was very busy.
Or there are high mountains in the area??
OOPS! How about sidestep to runway 16R? How about any form of diverging headings?
what I don't understand is why does he tell the delta for the slowest rate of climb out
@@ericgingras4988 the southwest about a nm in front, so when he climbed he would've been directly in front of delta, maybe at equal speed, at the exact same altitude
“Slowest possible climb” haven’t heard that one before.
Tower pretty much screwed the pooch on this one.
You have no idea man Reno ATC is the worst I’ve ever dealt with
@@andrewbrenneman563 lmao PLEASE DO tell!
Thumbnail says it was a TCAS, but there’s no indication from audio that there was ever a TCAS alert.
It wasn’t that bad? He almost landed into him. Was the SWA pilot at fault for delaying his roll?
That's not a busy airport, why was DL2666 not immediately turned to the east to clear the traffic? Even 10 degrees for separation. I would have called RA and did it myself. People ask how close is to close? That's to close.
I'm sure doing a false RA would make things worse.
Was light chop on short final.
See and avoid….if he’s under your nose; offset your heading to maintain sight.
SW pilot: “it wasn’t that bad”😂
Why ATC didnt tell Delta to deviate left or right instead maintaining rwy hdg and conflicting with dep SWA...is the rwy on a kind of valley with a no-turn or so?
Yes. There’s a mountain right off the departure end of 16L. You don’t want to be doing any turns that low.
@@saxmanb777 tanx for the info 🙏
Tower... we have a number for you to call... just stupidly too close.
Could here just a _drop_ of irritation from Delta 2666. He was probably holding back a lot off of frequency.
As the 😅nly one in this comment section without a pilot license I would like to say that I wasn’t there so I can’t judge. But the rest of you licensed and high time pilots please go ahead. 😂
If Southwest couldn't T/O immediately they ought to say so. Tower would have held them while telling Delta to go around. No delay/immediate take-off means just that....full power and go now. Lastly, Southwest can't see behind them. Wasn't necessary to say "Was not the bad".
So why not just have the first plane turn out of the way?
If you were directly above him, how could you see him?
No 737s harmed in this near-incursion...
Piss poor planning by the tower controller, then absolutely no alternative instructions to keep these two aircraft apart. My opinion as a former QA, operational error by the tower controller who gave departure an deal.
The American ATC system seems to work well at the high capacity that is required. However, when a mistake happens it always seems to be of a more serious nature.
This isn't really true. The small mistakes just don't usually make it to RUclips. If all you're doing is looking at noteworthy mistakes, it's going to be biased towards the more serious ones.
That simply should not have occurred. Reno isn't that busy.
Just about killed two planes full of people and he just says "sorry about that". Unbelievable.
Do not like Reno-Tahoe, the departure is bad. On leaving there once on a 737-200, the climb out was that bad even a female cabin crew screamed... tends to make one question what they are doing.
Seems like that controller was thinking about going to the casino later on and not so worried about doing his jawb.
Why does ATC ask reason for the go around? I am not talking about this incident specifically.
Because they need to know if the plane is ready for the next approach or if they have for example technical problems that they have to sort out first.
Should have had the planes offset slightly in different directions so they could at least see and avoid each other. If 16R was clear, it would have been easy for Delta to overfly 16R, although the eventual turns would suggest the opposite which still wouldn't have been bad.
Landing traffic needlessly created a situation.