Nevermind the cat iii but just the lowered vis conditions I’d figure anyone inside the faf the critical ils area to be kept clear. Was the sw even supposed to be at the short bar?
cat III is very sensitive, that's why you have a different stopping point than normal, plus restricted movement on apron/taxi ways, etc. So i have no clue how he can clear someone to line up while the other one is on final. Imagine if the RVR was 200m/125m/75m in BR/FG, you don't see shit until you hit minima, and only then you see, like the approach lights. They would probably not see the aircraft until it was too late.
Former ATC here. This is on ATC. He should have given the FDX missed approach instructions turning him away from the departing aircraft. He also should have asked the SWA if he could accept an immediate takeoff. You need the separation to be at least 2 miles increasing to 3 in these scenarios.
ATC here: what the f... was that!? It was as far from smart as Marcellus Wallace was far from ok after pawn shop basement incident. Arriving traffic 3miles out, traffic with take off clearnce still not on the runway, poor visibilty, that's asking for trouble.
That's probably why the ATC said he was appreciative of the pilot's professionalism. Although I reckon a true professional would have had something to say to the ATC even if it were only "Take a bit more care buddy."
You also have to understand KAUS doesn’t have a ground radar and the visibility was very bad, limited RVR, so the air traffic controller had no way of knowing their exact location without the pilots giving that information, the Southwest pilots said they were ready for takeoff when in reality they weren’t they stayed on the runway longer than they should have while the FedEx was on a 3 mile final. EDIT: I realize that the FDX 767 was on a CATIII ILS autoland and the southwest jet should’ve never been cleared to enter the runway in the first place since it can mess up the ILS receiver on the FedEx 767, this is fully on the local control.
@@j_taylor The context is that when a pilot does something stupid, they are sometimes told to call the tower on the phone so they can discuss it, especially if a regulation was broken. The turn of phrase Erik used was turning the tables on the tower.
@@edmondhung6097 Not sure about landing being a bonus given that all airborne planes eventually have to land! But that's why all pilots are trained to have their hand on the throttle when they land in case they need to increase thrust for the go around.
Props to that FedEx pilot. Was asking "are you *sure* we can land?" and then made the right call to not do so even after being reassured that they can.
ATC to me in a 172... "with an early right turn, cleared for immediate take off, 767 on a 3 mile final" 🤣 Mind you, there are then days when we have to wait for an ATR on a 9 mile final...
Right and they do this with a cat C/D aircraft on 3 mile shooting a cat3?! What was the controller thinking. It would have been so easy to have WN hold short for a couple mins.
The controllers I know are PISSED about this because this was grossly ATC’s fault. There’s no justification for launching a 737 in front of a 767 on a 3 mile final. On a good day that’s pushing it. Add weather and it’s a recipe for a disaster. If it wasn’t foggy I bet they would have shit bricks if they really knew how close they were.
@@LowEarthOrbitPilot So, I’m not familiar with the TCAS systems on the 737 or 767 but at least on the slowtation I fly we get TAs on the ground but not RAs for obvious reasons. That being said, it didn’t seem like Southwest was not all that concerned about the traffic that was landing behind them.
@@denniswise1460 Less than 1000' vertical separation right on top of each other in CAT III conditions isn't that close? Hope you're not a pilot, or a controller.
I think as soon as he heard Southwest getting the takeoff clearance he figured it was going this way, hence the extra confirmation he had clearance to land. Super professional.
Near-death experience, yet their voice might reflect someone having a cup of tea in the morning and commenting on the news. Incredible professionalism from the pilots.
And people try to convince themselves flying is safe. If it was so safe they wouldn't always be trying so much to convince. They love to explain in it's the safest form of travel. Yeah, okay.
@@jamesmarshall2800 why are you trying so hard to convince? You just love to explain its the safest form of travel. Get out of here with your "data" and empirical "evidence"
@@burncycle4621 .... I'll bet the captain won the bet with his FO (co-pilot) that they'll get closer than 500 feet to Southwest. He'll be buying the beers all month.
@BurnCycle it was hardly a routine go around, the only thing stopping both aircraft from crashing into each other was a measly 30 feet of vertical separation
Well, the FEDEX pilots just did their job and didn’t do it perfectly. The non-standard call “FEDEX is on the go’ instead of ‘FEDEX is going around’ needs to be criticised. As a pilot from outside the US I note the almost constant sloppy non-standard phraseology used by US pilots which can cause confusion.
Methinks that tower controller may be looking for new employment. Remember the controller at LAX early 90s who cleared regional turboprop to takeoff & US Air to land same time on same runway? Current incident was almost a repeat
@@morganghetti who cares about the controller or the origin of the transmission? The instruction is for Southwest to make sure they don't climb into FedEx. Hell at that point if I was FedEx I would have instructed South West to offset and maintain altitude to deconflict since the controller sure as hell wasn't doing anything.
@@michaelhodges8312 what? Not a "good thing" in what context and by who's standard? If FedEx has better SA, ATC isn't stepping in, they can absolutely send instructions to avoid midair. South West chose not to comply. Okay. But it's better than doing nothing.
@@valerierodger7700 If the diagram is synced then I doubt they had reached V1, but that wasn't the point. The point is there is no reason AC cannot communicate directly over Tower in order to deconflict and prevent a midair.
26 years air traffic control experience, retired. This is probably the closest I have ever seen two planes on the same runway without colliding and killing everyone on board both. Worst controller judgment I’ve ever seen, never realized what was going on in the situation and never did anything to correct the situation. Thank God for the FedEx pilot, obviously this controller was not paying attention in any way.
It feels to me like he made a bad call, but then stuck with it hoping it'd just work. At some point, "Crap, this isn't working and I need to fix it *now*" simply needs to kick in, though it doesn't look like it did here. To me, that's much worse than having a bad plan, making a mistake, etc. That happens because humans are humans, and we mess up. But you *need* to recognize it and *need* to take the temporary hit of looking like / being very wrong, and fixing it.
@@DJFLDJFL I've worked those conditions many times. Putting SWA on the runway wasnt a bad call. It was negligence. That was never going to work and no one could see anyone. He wouldn't have known if there was an accident in those conditions.
At 140 knots 3 nm out, the FedEx would take 67 seconds to land. SWA doesn’t begin his takeoff roll until 70 seconds after he has received takeoff clearance. Yikes! Hats off to a very situationally aware FedEx crew. Also, think of the wake turbulence the 737 might have encountered so close to the ground from a going-around powered-up 767 right above him. We were lucky with this one.
The video appeared to simulate the SW climbing out and the FedEx 767 heavy climbing out below him. This kind of ATC error occurs more often than is reported. If that SW had been landing it never would have made it to a taxi way turnout.
My thoughts exactly! SWA took too long to begin roll knowing there was a 76 coming in behind him. Shouldn't have taken over 40 seconds to being the roll
@@valerierodger7700 he was told there was a 76 on a 3 mile final. That gave him roughly 65/75 seconds to depart or, 30/40 seconds to start his takeoff roll. All which is perfectly normal. No need to say no delay, just be aware of inbound traffic
That’s B.S.! With a heavy on a THREE mile final, nothing should have been cleared to take off, unless it was already on the piano keys, in position, and ready to go!
Even then, low visibility procedures are in force. FedEx said they were doing a CATIII approach, which will (normally) mean an autoland. It needs uninterrupted ILS signals to do so, so no traffic should be crossing or departing not to interfere with the localiser signal broadcasted from the end of the runway. ATC should know better.
@@nickakers7985 It is normal operating procedure in the US everyday. In most other parts of the world you don't give takeoff clearance after already giving someone a landing clearance. In the US it happens all the time.
One extra thing that should be pointed out is that FedEx was on CAT III app, so no metal should be moving around in the ILS sensitive area during his approach.
@@prorobo Yes there is. Have a look at the threshold of 18L and taxiway E on the east side. There are ILS hold bars there. The GS equipment is on that side.
Exactly correct. Never should have been cleared onto the runway. Add to it that SWA was cleared with FEDEX on a 3 mile final or 60-80 seconds away, and no one in low vis just rolls right into a takeoff. May have been fine on a VFR day, but not with mid at 600 RVR.
@@mjg407I’ve heard it for runway crossing clearance, but could a “do not delay” instruction be given as part of a take off clearance? That would’ve made the critical timing more apparent, and given the take off aircraft an opportunity to call “unable” as they would know full well they’re (rightfully) gonna sit there a little while?
@@Islacrusez No delay isn’t mandatory. Also, thats fine when aircraft can see each other, but with vertical vis of 200’ and freezing fog, no one is taking off without delay.
If you watch the SWA708 data on FR24, once they're off the ground and start climbing, FedEx overtakes them and you can actually SEE the pilots flinch, because very very very suddenly the climb STOPS at 375 feet. Vertical separation as they pass on the runway, if ADS is accurate, is maybe 70ft, and that's not including the height of the 737 tailfin, or the rear of the 767 lowered due to its climb.
It looks like it would've been about 100m (or 300ft) separation maximum once you consider the length of the aircraft and their actual position coordinates. Yeah naaaaaaaa.......
Why? Why would you risk it? If I was ATC I'd get the Southwest to wait. If I was the Southwest pilot I'd let ATC know I'll wait until the Fedex has landed.
And that's where I think the fuckup exists on both of them. PIC has final say and SWA's crew should've recognized the danger and continued to hold short. IMO the only people showing any situational awareness in this case was the FedEx crew, and thank fuck for that.
@@aleted62 you don’t need more atc experience than this controller to know pushing a 73 when a heavy 76 is on a 3 mile in cat 3 conditions is a shit idea. He should’ve known better. You don’t even need to work in Aviation to figure that out. All you need to know is a little bit of math and ground speeds…
@@ArturoGuerraPerez Roughly 75 seconds from 3 miles at 140 knots¹. Add time to slow and turn off would be about 2 minutes. Would have taken them way longer than that to clean their pants afterwards. 1 - I just guessed the speed there - didn't see it in the video anywhere so I googled for typical approach speeds for 767.
While clearly ATC is at fault here, I do have to ask: why did Southwest pilots accepted departure with FedEx on 3 mile final (and closing)? Especially with FedEx clearly voicing their concern just seconds prior...
Because they are Southwest and they remain grossly inept and they’re spending all their time, energy and resources trying to cover their asses from their week from hell back in December. I’ll take my bike before EVER flying Southwest again.
You can fault Southwest here for going ahead with the approved take off, despite the FedEx aircraft being on short final. However, ATC did give the approval for take off. Even with a expedited take off, this was far too close in these conditions to approve Southwest for take off.
"we appreciate your professionalism" = "ty for not making a 'possible controller deviation' joke" (i would have lol, so it's totally true, incredible professionalism from them fedex pilots)
Given the potential consequences of what almost happened, despite my sense of humor, had I been shitting in the left seat, I doubt I would have been in the mood for *any* jokes. This illiterate tower controller needs to be fired immediately.
A lot of controllers I work with are pretty upset about these actions by this controller. I work at a center facility and this is just speculation, but I'm willing to bet this controller was pushed through training too quickly just to cover staffing numbers. ATC had a training and hiring pause for 2 years because of covid, in an already understaffed agency. Between that and a bunch of controllers retiring during covid we've taken a huge hit across the board. I know some facilities work 6 day mandatories during the summer with a lot of overtime. Even an approach control under my airspace called ATC 0 a couple times because of a sick hit and no one to staff the evening shift. So between a 2 year gap of no hiring or TRAINING, now we are trying to bridge the gap with a ton of trainees where management says to expedite their training. And ontop of that the FAA has a list and sends trainees to facilities where they need staffing instead of the older way of trainees picking 2 regions they want to work at. So you'll get people from Florida sent to Seattle, only to spend 4 years in training then transfer right back to Florida. So its a massive waste of time and we have to double train everybody. It's a mess
If they didn't put an age cut off for ATC I would have applied. I get their reasoning but in this day and age, people changing careers later in life, they should accept applicants over 30 years old
If Southwest was lined up on runway then I think a 3 mile final on the landing plane would be enough separation. Southwest took almost 30 seconds to enter runway and start rolling. In that 30 seconds, Fedex has covered the 1.5 miles (approximately). Bad decision on ATC. Good thing Fedex was aware and confirmed they are cleared to land with traffic in front and made the go around
The animation isn't necessarily real time but yes, controller was wrong to clear them to take off when they were still only holding short and vis was so low
@@Smiley1701 The animations are created with FR24 data, as far as I understand... That means even if the airport diagrams and positions of aircraft are not accurate, the heading still should be. So since they had to roll out and turn 90 degrees, you can get a fair estimation of the time it took to line up from that heading alone.
The graphic specifically states that the time has not been trimmed. It took 70 seconds for SWA to begin its takeoff roll after receiving takeoff clearance. FedEx covered 3 nm at 140 knots in 67 seconds. The only entity with 100% situational awareness here is FedEx. Bravo Zulu!
I would seriously like to know what ATC was thinking letting that Southwest go knowing a FedEx was on a 3-mile final. Common sense says that you let the FedEx come in and depart the runway before letting Southwest go. As for Southwest, he has a share in this too because he didn't wait until FedEx did his landing. How the FedEx pilot kept his cool is more than I'll ever know. Props to the FedEx crew.
@@VOIP4ME every industry has diversity quotas where they get more benefits and funding through the amount of poor and underprivileged blacks they hire. The FAA shouldn’t be one of them. IQ tests should be mandatory for jobs like this, that would rule out alot of these affirmative blacktion hires
For a man who knows he is about to be fired, he was very calm and professional. Those pilots are great for not tying up the radio laying into the controller.
he won't be fired, for the same reason he was hired in front of people with better scores and evaluations. Then later he will get a job at the FAA telling people how to do their jobs. I know that is insulting, and some other rude things, but that does not make it any less true.
The pilots knew that raising a ruckus ON THE AIR would serve no purpose after the danger had passed and could possibly get them into hot water. I'm sure they both submitted some spicy writeups that may or may not have found their way to the FAA, who may or may not have bothered to read them.
Damm, I could not believe that this ATC gave that Southwest clearance for takeoff, knowing that FedEx was on a short 3 mile final cleared to land on the same runway. If that FedEx had a sudden tailwind factor, it could have turned into a deadly disaster. This ATC was taking a huge and very dangerous gamble in Foggy conditions. 😠😠
I was a Ramp Agent for FedEx at MEMH some 17 or 18 years ago when ATC mistakenly put two departing flights on the opposite runways of where they needed to be. Example, FLT 841 headed East and FLT 814 headed West. The end result was two A300's crossing airspace at around 2500 ft. One had a head start over the other, so there was no chance of collision, but from the ground it looked pretty insane...
I thought they always had them take off into the wind. I don't think I've heard of them changing the direction like that. I'll take your word for it, but I never saw that when I was out there. Oh well. Stra be days we live in.
@@Smiley1701 That flight was a great example of situational awareness from the flight crew that isn't discussed enough, at least in the aviation circles I'm a part of.
What happens with ATC after this? I guess they make a log just like when a pilot needs to call the tower after the pilots make a mistake. Will the ATC be relieved for a while to catch some breath and walktrough what happened? Does the ATC go to the pilot and buy them a cup of coffee and talk about it to clear the air and apologize?
Military ATC and commercial rated pilot/CFI here. There is such a thing as efficient controlling, but this looked way too aggressive to me. Even before I knew what the outcome, I caught my breath when he cleared the SWA with a heavy on 3 mile final with those flight conditions. In any of ATC facilities I worked in, that would have been a near certain de-certification, with the inevitable HATR investigation pointing the finger straight at ATC 100% on this one. We get blamed for a lot of incidents where it really wasn't an ATC deal, but this one is a sure-nuff deal.
Quite. Simultaneously too aggressive and too laid back. If you’re gonna give a clearance like that, which is dubious to begin with, it better be “immediate takeoff” with a “no delay” thrown in there for good measure…
@@andrewd1455 Quite! I believe later in the exchange the controller asks one of the aircraft to report clear of the runway, which again is indication that he couldn't see a bloody thing...
@@MikeGranby you just described black brain structure. It runs on estrogen, has low IQ, emotional/impulsive, doesn’t plan for the future. Over-confident while simultaneously incompetent. Lacking significant prefrontal cortex (judgement, higher order decision making, social control, planning into the future).
Asking as a layman. Aside from the ATC error. couldn't the Southwest pilot abort the take-off as requested by the Fed-Ex pilot? I understand if Southwest has already gone past V1, that may not be possible.
This is the same controller that was involved in the ramp incident a few weeks back. Sounds like they run a pretty loose operation down there in Austin.
This is a direct result of the woke diversity at all costs attitude of this administration. This guy would have killed everyone on board both planes if not for the airmanship of the FedEx crew. He has no business being in an air traffic control tower. He is just a fuck up and is going to get some innocent people killed
Situation like these illustrate why professionalism matters! Everyone stayed professional, did not increased each other stress, and had a positive outcome. We can criticize ATC decision at a later time, the pilot did a great job!!!
Insane. Both tower and SW apparently asleep at the switch regarding the 800/2 weather requirement to protect the CATII/III landing zone. "Cleared for takeoff, traffic 3 mile final" is really pushing it on a clear day, unthinkable in bad vis. This is as close as it gets and everyone still gets to sleep in their beds that night. Except for that poor tower guy who will not get much sleep for a long time.
Southwest guy wasn't paying attention or he would have rejected the clearance and requested to wait, however Southwest pilots do NOT have a reputation of being patient.
This is the most underrated comment. Most people obviously mentioned the reduced separation, but no one mentioned the requirement to protect ILS signals in low vis operations. Fedex would most likely have to conduct an autoloand under this prevailing conditions, as indicated in their initial contact with tower. A successful autoland will require ILS to be protected to ensure a safe approach, touch down, and roll out. A 737 taking off only at 3 miles ahead would certainly interfere with the ILS. This event took place before dawn. Fatigue might have been a factor. Nevertheless, this tower controller needs to be better educated
2020 , Typhoon , Hong Kong . Declined ATC Takeoff clearance in heavy rain and X winds ( B 777 200 F , QR .) ATC then cleared a Korean Pax 777 in front of me ...he hesitated , but also declined. Silence in the frequency ...then came a full , Special Wx report . Heavy Rain - Windshear - X winds - Sev. Turbulence. I waited for 20 minutes before I felt good to go . Happily Retired now . 😉😊😎
@@andrewd1455 " Better to lose 1 minute in your life ...than your life in a minute ". United Airlines Instructor Pilot's advise during Douglas DC 8 71 Initial Training , Denver , 1993.
i recall those weather days in Hong Kong. Similar weather conditions with 35kt crosswind, runway wet. When the weather hit, there was no alternate requirement. I was the tower north controller 25R. Over the hour, we were running the normal landing rate of 35. Only one aircraft landed, it was a Singapore 777 from San Francisco. All other arrivals went around and were calling Mayday fuel and landing in China. It was one big stuff up. The airlines took up to 3 days to recover their aircraft. Likewise retired these days.
The footage shown elsewhere implied that the southwest plane was below v1 when asked to abort (74 mph). The enquiry will get to the bottom of it but if correct it won't just be the controller at fault potentially.
Tower controller from a European cargo hub here, even in normal weather conditions clearing a B737 for take-off in front of a heavy arrival at 3NM final is extremely tight, especially when the departure is at the holding point and not already lined up - that would already be an immediate take-off for me if lined up. In CAT II or III, the holding point is further away from the RWY to keep the critical area of the ILS free. Given that, the fact that the aircraft can't see each other until FDX breaks 200ft ceiling and the simple fact that the critical area is infringed... I just sincerely hope the controller had a complete blackout and this is not what tha FAA trains.
@@philipjamesparsons I've talked to colleagues about this. Despite our just culture system, we all agreed this would probably be ruled gross negligence in a court case (meaning full responsibility of the controller). We doubt any colleagues here would be comfortable working with a controller who let this happen. Retraining would be a minimum as well as physical and mental reassessment. I don't know how Austin Tower work their shifts, but we only very rarely have a lone controller working the whole airport, a minimum of two controllers are almost always on board. Much like a captain and FO the "monitoring" controller would most likely not let this have happened.
@@c42-g3h AUS is very understaffed. This past summer I was there a bunch late at night and the controller was working, APP/DEP, Tower, Ground. And there is a ton of ground traffic. Planes get parked off the gate everywhere there.
@@philipjamesparsons As a European I think they both handle low vis conditions just fine, especially at major U.S. airports that have the adequate ground radar technology. It is amazing how an Airport like ORD or ATL(two busiest airports in the world) can operate at normal levels in those conditions
According to ADS-B data the minimum height of the FedEx 767 was 75', the tail of a 737 is 41' so they came within ~30' of FedEx clipping the tail of SW. That's as close as you're going to get without actually bending metal. It's a good thing that FedEx was using a 767-300ER with older design engines, a newer jet might not have had the engines spool up fast enough to avoid the collision.
They weren't directly on top of each other - I think the separation was a maximum of 100m when you consider the actual coordinates and the center point of the aircraft. Regardless, still insane. I don't think the engines would've made a significant difference though.
Even visually that would make it tight, places like DCA is good at it but they’re not doing it IFR. And it would be unwise to accept a no delay takeoff in low vis conditions like that
@@krozareq sop’s are different at every carrier, but at the two 121 carriers I’ve worked for, I can tell you neither of which had such a rule or policy. Still silly to do such a thing in CAT III weather.
What's scary here is that it was only the FedEx pilots' situational awareness that prevented a collision, as far as I can tell. This was far too close.
Not that it's particularly relevant, but Fedex 1432 was coming from Memphis (no surprise) and Southwest 708 was going to Cancun. Also, on top of everything else this happened at around 6:40 AM so still at least partial darkness.
May have been pushing it, but SW sure took their time for knowing there was a 767 a minute out. ATC likely shouldn’t have cleared the takeoff, but definitely should have used “without delay” for takeoff clearance.
@@qwerty112311 or the US could follow the standard for runway clearances like the rest of the world. ..... Everywhere else you don't get a clearance until the runway is clear and you are the next aircraft to use it. In the US you can be 8th in line to use the runway and get clearance if the controller expects the runway to be clear by the time you get there.
@@qwerty112311 With this scenario, you would say, SW, cleared for immediate takeoff or hold short, traffic 767, 3 mile final. With this, SW may have continued holding and waited for the arrival to land.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 It is called "Anticipated separation", it works, if used correctly and traffic is moved more efficiently. Each sovereign country can decide how they wish to operate. If you are not comfortable with it, you do not use it.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 Agreed, and to be honest, thanks to this behavior I am expecting the US to be the nation where Tenerife 2.0 will occur and they really tried this year already
What should've happened there? Is ATC responsible for ensuring that an aircraft cleared for take off actually does takes off in time? Maybe we didn't hear all the comms but it feels like the only thing standing in the way of disaster was FedEx recognition of the situation and their decision to go around. Thanks VASAviation for getting this put together so quickly, awesome work Victor.
Probably should have been cleared for immediate takeoff, so SWA was prompted to get the lead out or refuse the takeoff clearance. Better still to hold SWA, if there isn't time on a CAT 3 day don't force it.
Just an armchair expert here, but I think ATC should've noticed the Southwest was still on the runway and told the FedEx to go around, and probably turn slightly to get them out of the same heading as the Southwest. Takeoff can be delayed for many reasons, and the Southwest has the right to abort its takeoff and stop dead on the runway. ATC must be ready for that.
It was a low vis situation and the SWA seemed well within the margins for a cautious takeoff to confirm they weren't outside visibility limits. They may not have picked up on just how close the FedEx was. They were at a high workload point and it was ATC's domain. Most pilots are not expecting ATC to land a plane on top of them. If controllers need them to clear the runway as fast as possible they would normally communicate it. ie "Cleared for immediate takeoff". When the controller asked the SWA is they were rolling, that's the moment he knew he had f'd up. Don't play shoulda coulda woulda with the pilots. This was 100% ATC screwup.
This operation was way too tight. I'm not saying it is impossible but it is PRETTY TIGHT and risky. 1. You clear Fedex to land GOOD. 2. SWA calls in, he cleared them for takeoff. He should have given SWA traffic information and ask if they are ready or not for an immediate takeoff. Yes/No if they are not RDY, then Hold Short of rwy and nothing happens. If the answer is YES then... 3. Provide FDX with traffic information right away, don't wait til traffic calls you asking if they still cleared to land or not to in order to provide them with the departing traffic information! 4. FDX crew recognized and reacted to the risk right away, they were very VERY professional. Not gonna blame SWA but, they could have "helped" with that right turn ASAP or just instruc them to turn right ASAP not ask (SWA probably have policies & procedures to follow but still that would have helped a lot). 5. Where was the supervisor in charge? Anyway, my man and the whole TWR crew screwed up and he did the right thing apologizing to FDX hopefully he had the chance to do the same with the SWA crew. thankfully no one got hurt. Honestly it was easier to hold SWA short of rwy, let FDX land and then you clear SWA for takeoff.
This is crazy, where I work the departing plane has to start rolling prior the approaching plane reaches 4nm from touchdown, this of course to maintain separation in case of a go around, I don’t know the rule this controller applied but when he cleared the southwest for takeoff the other one was 3 miles!
Normally Southwest is already halfway to 80 knots as they read back their clearance, but with the low visibility they were justified in not rushing the takeoff. Did the call to abort happen above or below V1?
Austin just had a historic ice storm a couple days before this which cancelled or delayed a large number of flights. I wonder if that and the resulting backlog played into the ATCs practice here.
@Dave Stephens your comment is like saying a doctor can have their desicion making affected and clouded just from a backlog of like Surgeries for example. That couldn't affect desision making.
@@ElizabethCherryBlossom unfortunately, it does... if a hospital has a huge number of ambulances waiting outside with patients and no bed to accommodate them doctors will discharge patients that might have been kept inpatients a bit longer under normal circumstances. It's an unfortunate game of balancing risk and benefit, but doctors end up taking more risk discharging patients if they are short on beds because backlog of patients waiting for that bed also incurs serious risks
@@ElizabethCherryBlossom That doesn't make sense, a surgeon doesn't have to maintain a high flow rate and have a lot of individuals on a tight schedule. Of course traffic density affects ATC practices, that's entirely normal and correct. That being said clearing a 737 for takeoff with another plane on 3 mile final is never appropriate and it doesn't sound like this airport was so teeming with traffic that they needed to do this.
@@seriouscat2231 - I do get the saying, but I disagree with the sentiment because, if you fly the aircraft properly, then the likelihood of a go-around is greatly diminished.
AUS ATC was out to lunch. That controller had NO situational awareness of what was about to happen. Hats off to the Fed Ex crew! VASAviation, awesome job putting this together.
Launching a 737 in front of a 767 on a 3-mile final is pushing it close when the weather is VFR. It's absolutely dangerous when it's low IFR. I was surprised that the controller didn't at LEAST tell Southwest, "clear for takeoff 18L, NO DELAY," but instead, he just cleared them nonchalantly for takeoff
I’m going off of voices here, but is this the same guy who was talking with that Virgin pilot in a previous video about their uncontrolled ramp? I realize that isn’t the controller’s issue, but this airfield seems to be run pretty fast and loose for an international airport.
The controller must have thought the southwest abort call had come from the south west hence the turn right when able (as in vacate the runway). FedEx obviously broke cloud and saw the southwest still rolling and tried to get them abort so they could go around safely. What a mess, hats off to the fedex crew for their situational awareness
With fog there are no clouds to break as the cloud sits on the ground. Moreover FedEx aircraft are equipped with EFVS (infrared vision system), so the crew likely saw what was going on from the beginning, and acted accordingly.
I’ve been waiting for you to post this since I heard about the incursion! Thank you; what a scary time for everyone involved-could’ve been a really bad ending!
Worst nightmare for ATC is a simultaneous Go-Around/Takeoff because both aircraft are at low energy levels and can't maneuver as quickly. ICAO standards are different from FAA but still, from the METAR, don't think this was smart at all. In my experience, even the most adventurous pilots start calling ATC out when playing it this close in bad weather. And if the end animation is to be believed and there was no other immediate arrival behind FedEx, I would absolutely have given SWA the 2minute hold that it would've taken FedEx to land safely and vacate the runway.
I guess you never watched airshow airliners demo's. They are pretty manoeuvrable at low speed if needed to. Point in case, all what was needed was a offset instruction to the Fedex going-around and another instructions to the departing Soutwest to remind him to keep runway heading "coz" other aircraft going-around just behind them. Usually it is enough to make everyone ass tide and people follow instructions accordingly.
@@YouveBeenMiddled Airliners lands at very low weight as most of the fuel is gone anyway. They certainly are very manoeuvrable in landing config and even at max weight altough at higher speed.
I would have expected frenzied screeches, and panicked pilots, but wow, the quiet and calm and chill by all concerned is mindblowing! And those was one mighty near miss!
Yknow ATC could've let FX1432 land since it was the only one on approach a few miles out. Then he could've let WN708 takeoff after 1432 clears the runway.
Captain hindsight strikes again. 11/10 times the controller would wait. Dude messed up. 2 minutes only applies to successive departures. Swa could've left as soon as Fdx vacated.
Great situational awareness by the FedEx crew. Tower should not have cleared SWA708 to takeoff while FDX1432 was on a CATIII ILS approach, because doing so put them in the path of the ILS signal, which could've degraded the accuracy of the approach. Also, tower failed to say "expedite", "immediate" or "no delay" when they cleared SWA708 for takeoff. I don't know that it's required, but it could've alerted the SWA708 crew to expedite their takeoff. SWA708 took about 45 seconds on the runway before it started accelerating, which seems like a long time with traffic so close on final approach.
So how does a controller keep their job after that? I know they're all union and that limits what can be done, but is there a "do not pass go, do not collect $200" option for when a controller comes within seconds of getting a couple hundred people killed?
Heah smart idea, fire everyone on a whim and spend another half a million $ of public money to train another controller, who will also do some mistakes along the line. Humans are not perfect mind you. maybe you are champ.
@@12345fowler Humans may not be perfect, but when it comes to decisions like this, they’d better bat damn near to 1000. Like they say, when the pilot screws up, the pilot and his passengers die. And when the controller screws up, the pilot and his passengers die…
From my ATC training, you can't line up another aircraft when you have issued a landing clearance to one on final. Remember what happened at RAAF Butterworth with the two Mirages!
ILS tech here, this was scary bad by ATC. I've seen/heard a 777 United pilot initiate a go around when cleared to land a still occupied runway at IAH. I was driving around with my air/ground radio on and the pilot was pretty tee'd off at AT. There was a departing aircraft at the departure end still rolling when 777 would've had wheels on the ground at the opposite end of the same runway. Controller just blew it off as a "spacing issue" that was caused by TRACON.
How often do things like this and the jfk recent close call happen? I'm not sure if RUclips has just started recommending more of them to me or they are actually happening more frequently in recent months
I had a tower turn me base in a 172 while Citation was on an ILS approach. I didn't have visual and told them that. It was already twilight. Finally when I got visual, I was almost right in front of them. And had to firewall, extend the base and cross in front of them. I learned that day that ATC will absolutely get you killed if they aren't paying attention or misjudge something and treat their instructions more as a suggestion than an absolute rule. I will do what I need to do to keep my AC safe and then follow instructions as able.
The digital visual is incorrect at the 1:50 + marker . The digital visual depicts the SWA 737 turning onto the runway and starting the takeoff roll. The SWA 737 Turned onto the Runway and STOPPED for several seconds per NTSB Preliminary Report. " The FO of SWA708 acknowledged theclearance with a correct readback. SWA708 proceeded to taxi onto runway 18L and lined up with the runway centerline and came to a complete stop at which point, control of the aircraft was transferred from the captain to the FO. The FO indicated that he advanced the power, checked the engines, and then released the brakes to begin their takeoff roll. At 0639:32, the pilots of FDX1432 queried the local controller to confirm that they were cleared to land on runway 18L. According to the captain of FDX1432, he asked for confirmation because he was concerned about the Southwest traffic. The controller confirmed FDX1432 was cleared to land and advised them of traffic (SWA708) departing runway 18L ahead of him"
When the controller nervously asks whether the 737 in front of you is rolling, and you can't clearly see the runway (fog), it's probably a good idea to assume a go-around. Better safe than Tenerife.
Omg.... Just listening to ATC directions from the shower I was like "omg no you did not just clear a landing and take off on the same RW so close together..." then I watched it after the shower and my heart sank. There's a number ATC needs to call this time. So thankful this did not end badly.
I’d definitely be filing an incident report on that controller. Putting another plane ahead of one on a 3 mile final, especially in weather? Yikes! Definitely give tower a number to call when he’s on the ground 😂
Be a lay person I would think the controller would take all the blame. The Southwest pilot was told the position of the Fedex jet. He also knew, or should have known, that if he couldn't expedite the take off he should have let the controller know.
WOW I cannot BELIVE they gave SW the clearance to takeoff, not it bad weather like that with a 76 on less than 3 MILE FINAL!!! Holy SMOKES ATC or Tower f'ed that one up BIG TIME. Tower should get ready to copy a number!! Holy SMOKES! Kudo to FedEx captain and co. Fantastic job they both deserve a drink on me!
Controller here, you need 2 miles when the departure rolls increasing to 3 miles. Him giving the takeoff clearance with a 767 on 3 mile final is ill advised. This means SWA has to start rolling before the 767 travels 1 more mile with reasonable assurance that the 2 miles will increase to 3. Even on a clear day when you only need SWA to be 6000ft down the runway and airborne is pretty tight if you give SWA an immediate take off.
Why didn't the tower give the pilots a number to call the director or supervisor on duty and make the corresponding report? I am sure that if it had happened the other way , that would have been the procedure. at least to notify you as the supervisor or director by the pilots of a "possible ATC deviation" I don't know if that exists at least so that the ATC on duty that day does not get rid of the situation unscathed and the corresponding measures are taken.
Doing that with a CAT III in force and Low Visibility didn't look smart to me. Any thoughts from real ATC here?
Can confirm, very unsmart. Would be tight even on a clear day. Apparently this controller is known to be a bit shit too.
Nevermind the cat iii but just the lowered vis conditions I’d figure anyone inside the faf the critical ils area to be kept clear. Was the sw even supposed to be at the short bar?
cat III is very sensitive, that's why you have a different stopping point than normal, plus restricted movement on apron/taxi ways, etc.
So i have no clue how he can clear someone to line up while the other one is on final.
Imagine if the RVR was 200m/125m/75m in BR/FG, you don't see shit until you hit minima, and only then you see, like the approach lights. They would probably not see the aircraft until it was too late.
Former ATC here. This is on ATC. He should have given the FDX missed approach instructions turning him away from the departing aircraft.
He also should have asked the SWA if he could accept an immediate takeoff. You need the separation to be at least 2 miles increasing to 3 in these scenarios.
ATC here: what the f... was that!? It was as far from smart as Marcellus Wallace was far from ok after pawn shop basement incident. Arriving traffic 3miles out, traffic with take off clearnce still not on the runway, poor visibilty, that's asking for trouble.
I would have given the tower a number to call.
That's probably why the ATC said he was appreciative of the pilot's professionalism. Although I reckon a true professional would have had something to say to the ATC even if it were only "Take a bit more care buddy."
You also have to understand KAUS doesn’t have a ground radar and the visibility was very bad, limited RVR, so the air traffic controller had no way of knowing their exact location without the pilots giving that information, the Southwest pilots said they were ready for takeoff when in reality they weren’t they stayed on the runway longer than they should have while the FedEx was on a 3 mile final.
EDIT:
I realize that the FDX 767 was on a CATIII ILS autoland and the southwest jet should’ve never been cleared to enter the runway in the first place since it can mess up the ILS receiver on the FedEx 767, this is fully on the local control.
@@j_taylor The context is that when a pilot does something stupid, they are sometimes told to call the tower on the phone so they can discuss it, especially if a regulation was broken. The turn of phrase Erik used was turning the tables on the tower.
@@j_taylor that’s common after incidents
@@j_taylor it was simply a tongue-in-cheek comment that was meant to be funny to those in the know. That is how I take it anyway.
When Fed-Ex asked for confirmation, it seems he was the only one who knew it was too close. Spring loaded for the go-around. Smart.
Yeah, the only ones ahead of the situation in this trio (or Quintet)
@@rkan2 Yes.
All pilots are trained and primed for go around on approach. Aborted landings are not rare.
@@hengleong917 I heard once said always expect go-around and any landing is a bonus
@@edmondhung6097 Not sure about landing being a bonus given that all airborne planes eventually have to land! But that's why all pilots are trained to have their hand on the throttle when they land in case they need to increase thrust for the go around.
Props to that FedEx pilot.
Was asking "are you *sure* we can land?" and then made the right call to not do so even after being reassured that they can.
That's the very reason why pilots always have final say
Yes, indeed, they saved the day.
Got that right!
he should have decided to go around sooner.
@@bilyonarelifestile2226 He had low visibility
"You have our apologies, we appreciate your professionalism."
Understatement of the year.
bro was trying to save his job for sure lol
@@rslcgrad1004 Too late for that....
And it just barely started lol
Code for .....thanks for not being an asshole even tho i almost got you killed
This could have been Tenerife 2 if we had two passenger planes.
I’ve had to wait because a 172 was on 3 mile final. This is insane.
Well that's just dumb.
@@morganghetti Nawh it’s just 1.5 min. 😊
ATC to me in a 172... "with an early right turn, cleared for immediate take off, 767 on a 3 mile final" 🤣
Mind you, there are then days when we have to wait for an ATR on a 9 mile final...
Right and they do this with a cat C/D aircraft on 3 mile shooting a cat3?! What was the controller thinking. It would have been so easy to have WN hold short for a couple mins.
I had to wait because the wife was still putting on makeup. Lol 😆
The controllers I know are PISSED about this because this was grossly ATC’s fault. There’s no justification for launching a 737 in front of a 767 on a 3 mile final. On a good day that’s pushing it. Add weather and it’s a recipe for a disaster. If it wasn’t foggy I bet they would have shit bricks if they really knew how close they were.
I’m sure their TCAS was blaring in both cockpits
Relax. It wasn’t that close. Tcas didn’t trigger.
@@LowEarthOrbitPilot So, I’m not familiar with the TCAS systems on the 737 or 767 but at least on the slowtation I fly we get TAs on the ground but not RAs for obvious reasons. That being said, it didn’t seem like Southwest was not all that concerned about the traffic that was landing behind them.
@@denniswise1460 TCAS is inhibited that close to the ground. It was very close.
@@denniswise1460 Less than 1000' vertical separation right on top of each other in CAT III conditions isn't that close? Hope you're not a pilot, or a controller.
good thing Fedex pilot was on the ball, probably expected what was going on, yet kept calm and professional. kudos to him.
Indeed, exactly.
I think as soon as he heard Southwest getting the takeoff clearance he figured it was going this way, hence the extra confirmation he had clearance to land. Super professional.
and he wanted to live to fly another day!
Most fed ex pilots are experienced prior or reservist USAF KC 10 pilots who did a lot of flying in crazy places around the world.
I’m glad he went around but damn, shoulda gone around sooner.
Near-death experience, yet their voice might reflect someone having a cup of tea in the morning and commenting on the news. Incredible professionalism from the pilots.
My husband is a pilot. Total confidence & cool as a cucumber, even when the oil pressure in his 172started dropping over the Chesapeake Bay.
listening to the voice is exactly how I could tell you this was predictable
I don't think they knew how close they were at the time.
@@Messotheliomabased
well they also can’t see anything bc of how low the visibility is .
This was way too close a call and literally seconds from a disaster. Props to FedEx for realizing what was happening.
And people try to convince themselves flying is safe. If it was so safe they wouldn't always be trying so much to convince. They love to explain in it's the safest form of travel. Yeah, okay.
@@needmycoffee lol, I don't even know where to begin addressing this
@@needmycoffee your chances of being in a plane crash are one in 1.2 million compared to your chances of being in a car crash as one in 5000
@@jamesmarshall2800 why are you trying so hard to convince? You just love to explain its the safest form of travel. Get out of here with your "data" and empirical "evidence"
@@HowBoutDemBoyzzkinda ironic considering your profile don’t you think?
FedEx Pilot gets the hero award here.
He executed a go-around. It happens often. He didn't rescue orphans from a burning building.
@@burncycle4621 .... I'll bet the captain won the bet with his FO (co-pilot) that they'll get closer than 500 feet to Southwest. He'll be buying the beers all month.
@BurnCycle it was hardly a routine go around, the only thing stopping both aircraft from crashing into each other was a measly 30 feet of vertical separation
@@brosk1s883 Not doubting this but is this a fact/confirmed by FAA or someone directly?
Well, the FEDEX pilots just did their job and didn’t do it perfectly. The non-standard call “FEDEX is on the go’ instead of ‘FEDEX is going around’ needs to be criticised. As a pilot from outside the US I note the almost constant sloppy non-standard phraseology used by US pilots which can cause confusion.
Forget the fog, this was a CLEAR ATC F-up. Wow. No panic in anyone's voice. That was a close call.
"Possible tower deviation"
Methinks that tower controller may be looking for new employment. Remember the controller at LAX early 90s who cleared regional turboprop to takeoff & US Air to land same time on same runway? Current incident was almost a repeat
@@alanholck7995 actually she didn't clear the prop to take off. She told it to sit and wait and then told US Air to land on top of it.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 what happened? Hopefully just a near miss?
@@adogonasidecar1262 nope 35 dead
ARFF was wondering why the burning 737 had propblades sticking in it
That Fed-Ex pilot is really good. Good radio calls. Speaks well and seems like a really good pilot.
Calling "Southwest abort" was a terrible call. The controller could have heard that as southwest making the call they are aborting.
@@morganghetti who cares about the controller or the origin of the transmission? The instruction is for Southwest to make sure they don't climb into FedEx. Hell at that point if I was FedEx I would have instructed South West to offset and maintain altitude to deconflict since the controller sure as hell wasn't doing anything.
Alot of Fedex pilots are ex military. Not all but alot of them are.
@@michaelhodges8312 what? Not a "good thing" in what context and by who's standard? If FedEx has better SA, ATC isn't stepping in, they can absolutely send instructions to avoid midair. South West chose not to comply. Okay. But it's better than doing nothing.
@@valerierodger7700 If the diagram is synced then I doubt they had reached V1, but that wasn't the point. The point is there is no reason AC cannot communicate directly over Tower in order to deconflict and prevent a midair.
As a 29 year retired ATC I have but one question: WTF was the local controller thinking?
He was a black male. They are rarely able to think for themselves.
Ramp is uncontrolled!
Thinking had nothing to do with it...
He Must have been Highhh on Grasssss
@@dompdompdomp This guy appears to be an ATC for one reason if you ask me...
The most polite near death experience ever. 5 stars
26 years air traffic control experience, retired. This is probably the closest I have ever seen two planes on the same runway without colliding and killing everyone on board both. Worst controller judgment I’ve ever seen, never realized what was going on in the situation and never did anything to correct the situation. Thank God for the FedEx pilot, obviously this controller was not paying attention in any way.
It feels to me like he made a bad call, but then stuck with it hoping it'd just work. At some point, "Crap, this isn't working and I need to fix it *now*" simply needs to kick in, though it doesn't look like it did here.
To me, that's much worse than having a bad plan, making a mistake, etc. That happens because humans are humans, and we mess up. But you *need* to recognize it and *need* to take the temporary hit of looking like / being very wrong, and fixing it.
@@DJFLDJFL I've worked those conditions many times. Putting SWA on the runway wasnt a bad call. It was negligence. That was never going to work and no one could see anyone. He wouldn't have known if there was an accident in those conditions.
Diversity hire
I'm currently training at MMAC, can't wait to show my instructors this video
Southwest pilot said they were ready to go, when they really weren't.
At 140 knots 3 nm out, the FedEx would take 67 seconds to land. SWA doesn’t begin his takeoff roll until 70 seconds after he has received takeoff clearance. Yikes! Hats off to a very situationally aware FedEx crew. Also, think of the wake turbulence the 737 might have encountered so close to the ground from a going-around powered-up 767 right above him. We were lucky with this one.
The video appeared to simulate the SW climbing out and the FedEx 767 heavy climbing out below him. This kind of ATC error occurs more often than is reported.
If that SW had been landing it never would have made it to a taxi way turnout.
@@ibenripped nope, SWA was under him
My thoughts exactly! SWA took too long to begin roll knowing there was a 76 coming in behind him. Shouldn't have taken over 40 seconds to being the roll
@@valerierodger7700 he was told there was a 76 on a 3 mile final. That gave him roughly 65/75 seconds to depart or, 30/40 seconds to start his takeoff roll. All which is perfectly normal. No need to say no delay, just be aware of inbound traffic
How long after the takeoff clearance do they typically start the roll? Was 70 seconds an insane outlier, or just a bit longer than normal?
That’s B.S.!
With a heavy on a THREE mile final, nothing should have been cleared to take off, unless it was already on the piano keys, in position, and ready to go!
Amen
Yep, but the SWA guys agreed to line up. Takes two to tango.
Even then, low visibility procedures are in force. FedEx said they were doing a CATIII approach, which will (normally) mean an autoland. It needs uninterrupted ILS signals to do so, so no traffic should be crossing or departing not to interfere with the localiser signal broadcasted from the end of the runway. ATC should know better.
Three miles is danger close. They’d be flying over the overflow parking at some airports.
@@nickakers7985 It is normal operating procedure in the US everyday. In most other parts of the world you don't give takeoff clearance after already giving someone a landing clearance. In the US it happens all the time.
One extra thing that should be pointed out is that FedEx was on CAT III app, so no metal should be moving around in the ILS sensitive area during his approach.
There is no ILS critical area for 18L at AUS.
@@prorobo Yes there is. Have a look at the threshold of 18L and taxiway E on the east side. There are ILS hold bars there. The GS equipment is on that side.
Exactly correct. Never should have been cleared onto the runway. Add to it that SWA was cleared with FEDEX on a 3 mile final or 60-80 seconds away, and no one in low vis just rolls right into a takeoff. May have been fine on a VFR day, but not with mid at 600 RVR.
@@mjg407I’ve heard it for runway crossing clearance, but could a “do not delay” instruction be given as part of a take off clearance? That would’ve made the critical timing more apparent, and given the take off aircraft an opportunity to call “unable” as they would know full well they’re (rightfully) gonna sit there a little while?
@@Islacrusez No delay isn’t mandatory. Also, thats fine when aircraft can see each other, but with vertical vis of 200’ and freezing fog, no one is taking off without delay.
Clearing a 737 to takeoff in CATIII with a heavy on a 3 mile final is insanity. No other way around it.
If you watch the SWA708 data on FR24, once they're off the ground and start climbing, FedEx overtakes them and you can actually SEE the pilots flinch, because very very very suddenly the climb STOPS at 375 feet.
Vertical separation as they pass on the runway, if ADS is accurate, is maybe 70ft, and that's not including the height of the 737 tailfin, or the rear of the 767 lowered due to its climb.
🤦
TCAS RA once off the ground?
Scary
It looks like it would've been about 100m (or 300ft) separation maximum once you consider the length of the aircraft and their actual position coordinates. Yeah naaaaaaaa.......
@@arjunyg4655 TCAS RA are inhibited below 1000ft AGL
Why? Why would you risk it? If I was ATC I'd get the Southwest to wait. If I was the Southwest pilot I'd let ATC know I'll wait until the Fedex has landed.
You acting like you have more atc experience than that guy
Agree. It was a one or two minute hold at most.
And that's where I think the fuckup exists on both of them. PIC has final say and SWA's crew should've recognized the danger and continued to hold short. IMO the only people showing any situational awareness in this case was the FedEx crew, and thank fuck for that.
@@aleted62 you don’t need more atc experience than this controller to know pushing a 73 when a heavy 76 is on a 3 mile in cat 3 conditions is a shit idea. He should’ve known better. You don’t even need to work in Aviation to figure that out. All you need to know is a little bit of math and ground speeds…
@@ArturoGuerraPerez
Roughly 75 seconds from 3 miles at 140 knots¹. Add time to slow and turn off would be about 2 minutes.
Would have taken them way longer than that to clean their pants afterwards.
1 - I just guessed the speed there - didn't see it in the video anywhere so I googled for typical approach speeds for 767.
While clearly ATC is at fault here, I do have to ask: why did Southwest pilots accepted departure with FedEx on 3 mile final (and closing)? Especially with FedEx clearly voicing their concern just seconds prior...
Because they are Southwest and they remain grossly inept and they’re spending all their time, energy and resources trying to cover their asses from their week from hell back in December.
I’ll take my bike before EVER flying Southwest again.
And why did SWA take their sweet time knowing a heavy was closing in and couldn't see them??
Absolutely. I don't think that will be lost on the investigators.
@@tessmoney it takes longer to taxi out and line up in low visibility. SW should have known that and declined the takeoff clearance.
Two different ATC operators. They might have been on different frequencies until fedex asked SW to aboard.
Possible ATC deviation, please advise when ready to copy the cockpit's number.
Good old Southwest, always moving at the speed of heat until you need them to
yup
You can fault Southwest here for going ahead with the approved take off, despite the FedEx aircraft being on short final. However, ATC did give the approval for take off. Even with a expedited take off, this was far too close in these conditions to approve Southwest for take off.
@@MadCard05 it sound like this is something they do regularly, which is just scary if it is.
"we appreciate your professionalism" = "ty for not making a 'possible controller deviation' joke" (i would have lol, so it's totally true, incredible professionalism from them fedex pilots)
you have our apologies.....sorry for almost putting you in the middle of a fireball....
Given the potential consequences of what almost happened, despite my sense of humor, had I been shitting in the left seat, I doubt I would have been in the mood for *any* jokes. This illiterate tower controller needs to be fired immediately.
@@volleyballjerry if youre shitting in the captains seat, youre probably getting fired too.
@@ZeCockOfTheWalk I was hoping someone would pick up on my intended pun….. LOL!
A lot of controllers I work with are pretty upset about these actions by this controller. I work at a center facility and this is just speculation, but I'm willing to bet this controller was pushed through training too quickly just to cover staffing numbers. ATC had a training and hiring pause for 2 years because of covid, in an already understaffed agency. Between that and a bunch of controllers retiring during covid we've taken a huge hit across the board. I know some facilities work 6 day mandatories during the summer with a lot of overtime. Even an approach control under my airspace called ATC 0 a couple times because of a sick hit and no one to staff the evening shift. So between a 2 year gap of no hiring or TRAINING, now we are trying to bridge the gap with a ton of trainees where management says to expedite their training. And ontop of that the FAA has a list and sends trainees to facilities where they need staffing instead of the older way of trainees picking 2 regions they want to work at. So you'll get people from Florida sent to Seattle, only to spend 4 years in training then transfer right back to Florida. So its a massive waste of time and we have to double train everybody. It's a mess
wouldn't a fairly new controller be required to be observed for a period of time?
@@stevenbeach748 New or not, we're all observing him now. 😀
So in a nutshell, government sucks at doing most things. Color me shocked.
If they didn't put an age cut off for ATC I would have applied. I get their reasoning but in this day and age, people changing careers later in life, they should accept applicants over 30 years old
I call BS.
If Southwest was lined up on runway then I think a 3 mile final on the landing plane would be enough separation. Southwest took almost 30 seconds to enter runway and start rolling. In that 30 seconds, Fedex has covered the 1.5 miles (approximately). Bad decision on ATC. Good thing Fedex was aware and confirmed they are cleared to land with traffic in front and made the go around
The animation isn't necessarily real time but yes, controller was wrong to clear them to take off when they were still only holding short and vis was so low
@@Smiley1701
The animations are created with FR24 data, as far as I understand... That means even if the airport diagrams and positions of aircraft are not accurate, the heading still should be. So since they had to roll out and turn 90 degrees, you can get a fair estimation of the time it took to line up from that heading alone.
They were expecting that classic southwest turn and burn lol. But in all seriousness it was just a really bad decision by atc to do that
The graphic specifically states that the time has not been trimmed. It took 70 seconds for SWA to begin its takeoff roll after receiving takeoff clearance. FedEx covered 3 nm at 140 knots in 67 seconds. The only entity with 100% situational awareness here is FedEx. Bravo Zulu!
Should there have been a "no delay " instruction given?
I would seriously like to know what ATC was thinking letting that Southwest go knowing a FedEx was on a 3-mile final. Common sense says that you let the FedEx come in and depart the runway before letting Southwest go. As for Southwest, he has a share in this too because he didn't wait until FedEx did his landing. How the FedEx pilot kept his cool is more than I'll ever know. Props to the FedEx crew.
Tyrone wasn’t thinking much. He was thinking he’s glad Uncle Sam gave him this job over more qualified people.
@@nsaterroristbomber66669 You aren't wrong. These types of jobs really should be excluded from the quotas.
@@uncleandy2412 Quotas? Where are you getting this?
@@nsaterroristbomber66669 damn. The more edgy words you use the more your point stands
@@VOIP4ME every industry has diversity quotas where they get more benefits and funding through the amount of poor and underprivileged blacks they hire. The FAA shouldn’t be one of them. IQ tests should be mandatory for jobs like this, that would rule out alot of these affirmative blacktion hires
For a man who knows he is about to be fired, he was very calm and professional. Those pilots are great for not tying up the radio laying into the controller.
He's not getting fired lol. That doesn't happen in the FAA
He won’t be fired. He’ll be promoted then will supervise those who can do the job. I saw that too many times to count.
he won't be fired, for the same reason he was hired in front of people with better scores and evaluations. Then later he will get a job at the FAA telling people how to do their jobs. I know that is insulting, and some other rude things, but that does not make it any less true.
The pilots knew that raising a ruckus ON THE AIR would serve no purpose after the danger had passed and could possibly get them into hot water. I'm sure they both submitted some spicy writeups that may or may not have found their way to the FAA, who may or may not have bothered to read them.
@@jayc4283 Yeah, the nature of the hire was fairly apparent. Thank goodness his incompetence didn't get anyone killed here.
Under the circumstances they should have held Southwest until FedEx landed. Bad call on ATC.
Indeed.
southwest gets to do whatever they want at that airport
@@Blyter7 I doubt that but ok.
Terrible work in the tower...3 mile final?? 😫
Black male controller. Nothing more needs to be said.
Damm, I could not believe that this ATC gave that Southwest clearance for takeoff, knowing that FedEx was on a short 3 mile final cleared to land on the same runway. If that FedEx had a sudden tailwind factor, it could have turned into a deadly disaster. This ATC was taking a huge and very dangerous gamble in Foggy conditions. 😠😠
Or if the Southwest had some kind of failure (engine, gear, etc.) and had to abort takeoff after the FedEx already landed behind them.
Or if Southwest had to reject the takeoff for some reason.
@@meoka2368 there was no landing here until later, the fedex went around.
Especially since they didn't even say something like "cleared for takeoff no delay"
I'm a little bit surprised that Southwest accepted the takeoff clearance knowing there was a heavy out there at three miles in CAT III conditions.
I've been eagerly waiting for this one. Thanks!
And that's why I don't have a fear of flying but a fear of someone having a bad day at work
I was a Ramp Agent for FedEx at MEMH some 17 or 18 years ago when ATC mistakenly put two departing flights on the opposite runways of where they needed to be. Example, FLT 841 headed East and FLT 814 headed West. The end result was two A300's crossing airspace at around 2500 ft. One had a head start over the other, so there was no chance of collision, but from the ground it looked pretty insane...
I thought they always had them take off into the wind. I don't think I've heard of them changing the direction like that. I'll take your word for it, but I never saw that when I was out there. Oh well. Stra be days we live in.
@@perryrush6563 when wind is calm or nill any runway can be utilized.
Just because you get a takeoff clearance doesn’t mean you have to. Sometimes you have to tell them you’d rather wait.
US Air 2998
@@Smiley1701 That flight was a great example of situational awareness from the flight crew that isn't discussed enough, at least in the aviation circles I'm a part of.
Getthereitis
SKW 5569
I was SHOCKED they accepted it honestly
What happens with ATC after this? I guess they make a log just like when a pilot needs to call the tower after the pilots make a mistake.
Will the ATC be relieved for a while to catch some breath and walktrough what happened?
Does the ATC go to the pilot and buy them a cup of coffee and talk about it to clear the air and apologize?
FAA launched an investigation. Everyone gets a probe in a not so fun place. 🙃
NTSB Newsroom tweeted ~22 hours ago that they are investigating the incident
Desertification and retraining.
that controller better hope he dont get fired for that
@@CMH-aviation I hope he does. That was insanely reckless. SW pilot should also be disciplined because he could’ve wait 1 minute and watch FEDEx lane.
Military ATC and commercial rated pilot/CFI here. There is such a thing as efficient controlling, but this looked way too aggressive to me. Even before I knew what the outcome, I caught my breath when he cleared the SWA with a heavy on 3 mile final with those flight conditions. In any of ATC facilities I worked in, that would have been a near certain de-certification, with the inevitable HATR investigation pointing the finger straight at ATC 100% on this one. We get blamed for a lot of incidents where it really wasn't an ATC deal, but this one is a sure-nuff deal.
Quite. Simultaneously too aggressive and too laid back. If you’re gonna give a clearance like that, which is dubious to begin with, it better be “immediate takeoff” with a “no delay” thrown in there for good measure…
@@MikeGranby +1 add to that you would ONLY allow it if you had eyes on aircraft to see if he is even on the runway.
@@andrewd1455 Quite! I believe later in the exchange the controller asks one of the aircraft to report clear of the runway, which again is indication that he couldn't see a bloody thing...
@@MikeGranby you just described black brain structure. It runs on estrogen, has low IQ, emotional/impulsive, doesn’t plan for the future. Over-confident while simultaneously incompetent. Lacking significant prefrontal cortex (judgement, higher order decision making, social control, planning into the future).
Asking as a layman. Aside from the ATC error. couldn't the Southwest pilot abort the take-off as requested by the Fed-Ex pilot? I understand if Southwest has already gone past V1, that may not be possible.
This is the same controller that was involved in the ramp incident a few weeks back. Sounds like they run a pretty loose operation down there in Austin.
Yep same guy… and Southwest was also involved
Was it literally the same guy?? Wow.
This is a direct result of the woke diversity at all costs attitude of this administration. This guy would have killed everyone on board both planes if not for the airmanship of the FedEx crew. He has no business being in an air traffic control tower. He is just a fuck up and is going to get some innocent people killed
What incident happened last week??
Id like to solve the puzzle, Pat
Situation like these illustrate why professionalism matters! Everyone stayed professional, did not increased each other stress, and had a positive outcome. We can criticize ATC decision at a later time, the pilot did a great job!!!
This. Cannot be stressed enough the professionalism displayed here
Insane. Both tower and SW apparently asleep at the switch regarding the 800/2 weather requirement to protect the CATII/III landing zone. "Cleared for takeoff, traffic 3 mile final" is really pushing it on a clear day, unthinkable in bad vis. This is as close as it gets and everyone still gets to sleep in their beds that night. Except for that poor tower guy who will not get much sleep for a long time.
The tower guy doesn't seem to realize there was a problem.
@@stargazer7644 And that's the problem.
@@stargazer7644 he knows. His voice is quivering at the end.
Southwest guy wasn't paying attention or he would have rejected the clearance and requested to wait, however Southwest pilots do NOT have a reputation of being patient.
This is the most underrated comment. Most people obviously mentioned the reduced separation, but no one mentioned the requirement to protect ILS signals in low vis operations. Fedex would most likely have to conduct an autoloand under this prevailing conditions, as indicated in their initial contact with tower. A successful autoland will require ILS to be protected to ensure a safe approach, touch down, and roll out. A 737 taking off only at 3 miles ahead would certainly interfere with the ILS.
This event took place before dawn. Fatigue might have been a factor. Nevertheless, this tower controller needs to be better educated
This is the stuff that makes you old and grey in a short span..
2020 , Typhoon , Hong Kong .
Declined ATC Takeoff clearance in heavy rain and X winds ( B 777 200 F , QR .)
ATC then cleared a Korean Pax 777 in front of me ...he hesitated , but also declined.
Silence in the frequency ...then came a full , Special Wx report .
Heavy Rain - Windshear - X winds - Sev. Turbulence.
I waited for 20 minutes before I felt good to go .
Happily Retired now .
😉😊😎
Small delay but at least you are still alive. Beware the man who puts his schedule ahead of your safety.
@@andrewd1455
" Better to lose 1 minute in your life ...than your life in a minute ".
United Airlines Instructor Pilot's advise during Douglas DC 8 71 Initial Training , Denver , 1993.
i recall those weather days in Hong Kong. Similar weather conditions with 35kt crosswind, runway wet. When the weather hit, there was no alternate requirement. I was the tower north controller 25R. Over the hour, we were running the normal landing rate of 35. Only one aircraft landed, it was a Singapore 777 from San Francisco. All other arrivals went around and were calling Mayday fuel and landing in China. It was one big stuff up. The airlines took up to 3 days to recover their aircraft. Likewise retired these days.
@@giancarlogarlaschi4388 Very true. I'm happy to know we have good guys and gals like you up front when I'm sitting in the back with my family.
@@dermick
Thanks Sir
Our First Responsibility is to our Passengers.
The footage shown elsewhere implied that the southwest plane was below v1 when asked to abort (74 mph). The enquiry will get to the bottom of it but if correct it won't just be the controller at fault potentially.
Tower controller from a European cargo hub here, even in normal weather conditions clearing a B737 for take-off in front of a heavy arrival at 3NM final is extremely tight, especially when the departure is at the holding point and not already lined up - that would already be an immediate take-off for me if lined up. In CAT II or III, the holding point is further away from the RWY to keep the critical area of the ILS free. Given that, the fact that the aircraft can't see each other until FDX breaks 200ft ceiling and the simple fact that the critical area is infringed... I just sincerely hope the controller had a complete blackout and this is not what tha FAA trains.
@@philipjamesparsons I've talked to colleagues about this. Despite our just culture system, we all agreed this would probably be ruled gross negligence in a court case (meaning full responsibility of the controller). We doubt any colleagues here would be comfortable working with a controller who let this happen. Retraining would be a minimum as well as physical and mental reassessment. I don't know how Austin Tower work their shifts, but we only very rarely have a lone controller working the whole airport, a minimum of two controllers are almost always on board. Much like a captain and FO the "monitoring" controller would most likely not let this have happened.
But not only that giving landing and takeoff clearance in this situation is absolutely ridiculous!
@@c42-g3h AUS is very understaffed. This past summer I was there a bunch late at night and the controller was working, APP/DEP, Tower, Ground. And there is a ton of ground traffic. Planes get parked off the gate everywhere there.
@@philipjamesparsons As a European I think they both handle low vis conditions just fine, especially at major U.S. airports that have the adequate ground radar technology. It is amazing how an Airport like ORD or ATL(two busiest airports in the world) can operate at normal levels in those conditions
@@c42-g3h Is clearing one aircraft to land and another to take off on/from the same runway also not allowed in European ATC?
According to ADS-B data the minimum height of the FedEx 767 was 75', the tail of a 737 is 41' so they came within ~30' of FedEx clipping the tail of SW. That's as close as you're going to get without actually bending metal. It's a good thing that FedEx was using a 767-300ER with older design engines, a newer jet might not have had the engines spool up fast enough to avoid the collision.
That doesn't even include the tail of the Fedex plane being lower due to it climbing either. So we're probably closer to 15-20 feet.
They weren't directly on top of each other - I think the separation was a maximum of 100m when you consider the actual coordinates and the center point of the aircraft. Regardless, still insane. I don't think the engines would've made a significant difference though.
This comment. 100%.
I’m sorry, I don’t understand your comment in regard to spool up time. What newer turbofans have slower spool up time than that of the 767?
It would have been nice for ATC to at least ask for a no delay takeoff. 3 mile final is way too tight for a normal takeoff call.
Even visually that would make it tight, places like DCA is good at it but they’re not doing it IFR. And it would be unwise to accept a no delay takeoff in low vis conditions like that
cant do that in low vis
Low vis SOP won't allow for a no-delay takeoff.
With visibility issues, on a 3-mile final, WN should have been held at the hold line.
@@krozareq sop’s are different at every carrier, but at the two 121 carriers I’ve worked for, I can tell you neither of which had such a rule or policy. Still silly to do such a thing in CAT III weather.
What's scary here is that it was only the FedEx pilots' situational awareness that prevented a collision, as far as I can tell. This was far too close.
I've been waiting for this all day. More professionalism than I could muster, I would make some noise about almost killing me.
Not that it's particularly relevant, but Fedex 1432 was coming from Memphis (no surprise) and Southwest 708 was going to Cancun. Also, on top of everything else this happened at around 6:40 AM so still at least partial darkness.
I'm not ATC but I do know there's no way in hell we could have expected any other outcome from this decision.
May have been pushing it, but SW sure took their time for knowing there was a 767 a minute out. ATC likely shouldn’t have cleared the takeoff, but definitely should have used “without delay” for takeoff clearance.
@@qwerty112311 or the US could follow the standard for runway clearances like the rest of the world. .....
Everywhere else you don't get a clearance until the runway is clear and you are the next aircraft to use it. In the US you can be 8th in line to use the runway and get clearance if the controller expects the runway to be clear by the time you get there.
@@qwerty112311 With this scenario, you would say, SW, cleared for immediate takeoff or hold short, traffic
767, 3 mile final. With this, SW may have continued holding and waited for the arrival to land.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 It is called "Anticipated separation", it works, if used correctly and traffic is moved more efficiently. Each sovereign country can decide how they wish to operate. If you are not comfortable with it, you do not use it.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 Agreed, and to be honest, thanks to this behavior I am expecting the US to be the nation where Tenerife 2.0 will occur and they really tried this year already
What should've happened there? Is ATC responsible for ensuring that an aircraft cleared for take off actually does takes off in time? Maybe we didn't hear all the comms but it feels like the only thing standing in the way of disaster was FedEx recognition of the situation and their decision to go around. Thanks VASAviation for getting this put together so quickly, awesome work Victor.
Probably should have been cleared for immediate takeoff, so SWA was prompted to get the lead out or refuse the takeoff clearance. Better still to hold SWA, if there isn't time on a CAT 3 day don't force it.
Just an armchair expert here, but I think ATC should've noticed the Southwest was still on the runway and told the FedEx to go around, and probably turn slightly to get them out of the same heading as the Southwest.
Takeoff can be delayed for many reasons, and the Southwest has the right to abort its takeoff and stop dead on the runway. ATC must be ready for that.
On a auto-land low visibility approach you need to leave more spacing. That would have been ok on a clear day but not on these conditions/
It was a low vis situation and the SWA seemed well within the margins for a cautious takeoff to confirm they weren't outside visibility limits. They may not have picked up on just how close the FedEx was. They were at a high workload point and it was ATC's domain. Most pilots are not expecting ATC to land a plane on top of them. If controllers need them to clear the runway as fast as possible they would normally communicate it. ie "Cleared for immediate takeoff". When the controller asked the SWA is they were rolling, that's the moment he knew he had f'd up. Don't play shoulda coulda woulda with the pilots. This was 100% ATC screwup.
This operation was way too tight. I'm not saying it is impossible but it is PRETTY TIGHT and risky.
1. You clear Fedex to land GOOD.
2. SWA calls in, he cleared them for takeoff. He should have given SWA traffic information and ask if they are ready or not for an immediate takeoff. Yes/No if they are not RDY, then Hold Short of rwy and nothing happens. If the answer is YES then...
3. Provide FDX with traffic information right away, don't wait til traffic calls you asking if they still cleared to land or not to in order to provide them with the departing traffic information!
4. FDX crew recognized and reacted to the risk right away, they were very VERY professional. Not gonna blame SWA but, they could have "helped" with that right turn ASAP or just instruc them to turn right ASAP not ask (SWA probably have policies & procedures to follow but still that would have helped a lot).
5. Where was the supervisor in charge?
Anyway, my man and the whole TWR crew screwed up and he did the right thing apologizing to FDX hopefully he had the chance to do the same with the SWA crew. thankfully no one got hurt. Honestly it was easier to hold SWA short of rwy, let FDX land and then you clear SWA for takeoff.
This is crazy, where I work the departing plane has to start rolling prior the approaching plane reaches 4nm from touchdown, this of course to maintain separation in case of a go around, I don’t know the rule this controller applied but when he cleared the southwest for takeoff the other one was 3 miles!
Those are some calm voices considering what could have gone down. My hat is off to all parties.
Normally Southwest is already halfway to 80 knots as they read back their clearance, but with the low visibility they were justified in not rushing the takeoff. Did the call to abort happen above or below V1?
Austin just had a historic ice storm a couple days before this which cancelled or delayed a large number of flights. I wonder if that and the resulting backlog played into the ATCs practice here.
Might have, but shouldn't have affected decision making
@Dave Stephens your comment is like saying a doctor can have their desicion making affected and clouded just from a backlog of like Surgeries for example. That couldn't affect desision making.
@@ElizabethCherryBlossom unfortunately, it does... if a hospital has a huge number of ambulances waiting outside with patients and no bed to accommodate them doctors will discharge patients that might have been kept inpatients a bit longer under normal circumstances. It's an unfortunate game of balancing risk and benefit, but doctors end up taking more risk discharging patients if they are short on beds because backlog of patients waiting for that bed also incurs serious risks
@@ElizabethCherryBlossom That doesn't make sense, a surgeon doesn't have to maintain a high flow rate and have a lot of individuals on a tight schedule. Of course traffic density affects ATC practices, that's entirely normal and correct. That being said clearing a 737 for takeoff with another plane on 3 mile final is never appropriate and it doesn't sound like this airport was so teeming with traffic that they needed to do this.
@@davestephens3246 Sometimes there are no systemic root causes, sometimes it's just that Steve really is an idiot.
This incident worth a formal investigation.
As Juan Browne (broncolirio channel) says- every landing is a go-around with an option to land... or something to that effect.
my fav Juan-ism is "ETOPS = Engines turn or People swim"
“Every approach is a landing with the option to go around” is more realistic.
@@EdOeuna, you did not get it. People are eager to land when they shouldn't but not eager to go around when they should.
@@seriouscat2231 - I do get the saying, but I disagree with the sentiment because, if you fly the aircraft properly, then the likelihood of a go-around is greatly diminished.
@@EdOeuna, so it's there for bad pilots?
AUS ATC was out to lunch. That controller had NO situational awareness of what was about to happen. Hats off to the Fed Ex crew! VASAviation, awesome job putting this together.
Launching a 737 in front of a 767 on a 3-mile final is pushing it close when the weather is VFR. It's absolutely dangerous when it's low IFR. I was surprised that the controller didn't at LEAST tell Southwest, "clear for takeoff 18L, NO DELAY," but instead, he just cleared them nonchalantly for takeoff
DEI hiring at work
I’m going off of voices here, but is this the same guy who was talking with that Virgin pilot in a previous video about their uncontrolled ramp? I realize that isn’t the controller’s issue, but this airfield seems to be run pretty fast and loose for an international airport.
Yep same controller
It's Texas. Fast, loose & monumentally stupid are their watchwords.
When an a/c is doing a Cat III approach don’t departing a/c have to hold at a stop line further back until the approach is complete?
Depends on which airport, some have hold line coincident with CAT III hold line.
@@AaronShenghao Thanks
what distance is “on approach”? I wouldn’t expect someone on a 15+ mile final to block all use of the runway.
Depends on which side of the runway the glideslope antenna and taxiways are.
@@arjunyg4655 Can't really do that. If the airport is busy you need to get traffic out. But this was too close.
The controller must have thought the southwest abort call had come from the south west hence the turn right when able (as in vacate the runway). FedEx obviously broke cloud and saw the southwest still rolling and tried to get them abort so they could go around safely. What a mess, hats off to the fedex crew for their situational awareness
Yes, indeed.
With fog there are no clouds to break as the cloud sits on the ground. Moreover FedEx aircraft are equipped with EFVS (infrared vision system), so the crew likely saw what was going on from the beginning, and acted accordingly.
Midfield RVR was called at 600 feet. that is about 3 secs at 140 knots.
@안댕댕 The EFVS was probably not used. It isn't required on a Cat III. It really isn't that useful in visible moisture anyway
I’ve been waiting for you to post this since I heard about the incursion! Thank you; what a scary time for everyone involved-could’ve been a really bad ending!
This was not an incursion. It was an operational error resulting from controller negligence/incompetence.
Wouldn’t this sequence have put SWA well within the ILS Critical Area during CATIII Ops?
Yes.
And we all thought the JFK incursion was close....Thanks for the upload!
Worst nightmare for ATC is a simultaneous Go-Around/Takeoff because both aircraft are at low energy levels and can't maneuver as quickly.
ICAO standards are different from FAA but still, from the METAR, don't think this was smart at all. In my experience, even the most adventurous pilots start calling ATC out when playing it this close in bad weather. And if the end animation is to be believed and there was no other immediate arrival behind FedEx, I would absolutely have given SWA the 2minute hold that it would've taken FedEx to land safely and vacate the runway.
I guess you never watched airshow airliners demo's. They are pretty manoeuvrable at low speed if needed to. Point in case, all what was needed was a offset instruction to the Fedex going-around and another instructions to the departing Soutwest to remind him to keep runway heading "coz" other aircraft going-around just behind them. Usually it is enough to make everyone ass tide and people follow instructions accordingly.
@@12345fowler Those airshow airliner demo's have few passengers and no cargo. Fuel loads are are also reduced. We're talking apples and oranges here.
@@YouveBeenMiddled Airliners lands at very low weight as most of the fuel is gone anyway. They certainly are very manoeuvrable in landing config and even at max weight altough at higher speed.
Harrison Ford 's got himself a job I see
I would have expected frenzied screeches, and panicked pilots, but wow, the quiet and calm and chill by all concerned is mindblowing! And those was one mighty near miss!
near hit. way too near hit
near hit. way too near hit
The tone of the ATC s voice tell it all. Thank you for your professionaliss. ( chokes up)
that was somewhat intense.. phew. glad they avoided the collision!
Yknow ATC could've let FX1432 land since it was the only one on approach a few miles out. Then he could've let WN708 takeoff after 1432 clears the runway.
The 737 will need to wait a minute, given FedEx is a heavy 767.
@@AaronShenghao And a minute or two is nothing in anyones life compared to a crash.
@@AaronShenghao i'd rather have 200 passengers arrive 2 minutes later than 200 dead passengers...
Captain hindsight strikes again. 11/10 times the controller would wait. Dude messed up. 2 minutes only applies to successive departures. Swa could've left as soon as Fdx vacated.
@@AaronShenghao They almost spent a minute just thinking about lol
Great situational awareness by the FedEx crew.
Tower should not have cleared SWA708 to takeoff while FDX1432 was on a CATIII ILS approach, because doing so put them in the path of the ILS signal, which could've degraded the accuracy of the approach.
Also, tower failed to say "expedite", "immediate" or "no delay" when they cleared SWA708 for takeoff. I don't know that it's required, but it could've alerted the SWA708 crew to expedite their takeoff.
SWA708 took about 45 seconds on the runway before it started accelerating, which seems like a long time with traffic so close on final approach.
Wow, knowing what was coming and seeing "real silence not trimmed " shot the anxiety meter to 💯
3:49 "sorry we almost killed you and another plane full of people. thanks for having actual situational awareness."
Blacks.
So how does a controller keep their job after that? I know they're all union and that limits what can be done, but is there a "do not pass go, do not collect $200" option for when a controller comes within seconds of getting a couple hundred people killed?
yeah.... there's a whole topic here
Heah smart idea, fire everyone on a whim and spend another half a million $ of public money to train another controller, who will also do some mistakes along the line. Humans are not perfect mind you. maybe you are champ.
@@12345fowler Humans may not be perfect, but when it comes to decisions like this, they’d better bat damn near to 1000. Like they say, when the pilot screws up, the pilot and his passengers die. And when the controller screws up, the pilot and his passengers die…
@@MikeGranby You seem to enjoy bursting open doors.
@@12345fowler Nah, I just like staying alive... :)
Wow the Southwest flight actually took off? Did not realize that.
Likely went past his takeoff decision speed and had to
So let me get this straight. ATC clears take off with FedEx on a 3 mile final in foggy conditions. Crazy!
From my ATC training, you can't line up another aircraft when you have issued a landing clearance to one on final. Remember what happened at RAAF Butterworth with the two Mirages!
I love how this channel actually subtitle's audio, unlike the news. Then go above with the positions of aircraft on the runways.
ILS tech here, this was scary bad by ATC. I've seen/heard a 777 United pilot initiate a go around when cleared to land a still occupied runway at IAH. I was driving around with my air/ground radio on and the pilot was pretty tee'd off at AT. There was a departing aircraft at the departure end still rolling when 777 would've had wheels on the ground at the opposite end of the same runway. Controller just blew it off as a "spacing issue" that was caused by TRACON.
How often do things like this and the jfk recent close call happen? I'm not sure if RUclips has just started recommending more of them to me or they are actually happening more frequently in recent months
Seems to be more frequent. At least more frequent ones that are truly close calls like this.
@@designedbybold I wonder what's changed that it's more frequent now. Makes me a little concerned since I travel for work via plane pretty often.
I had a tower turn me base in a 172 while Citation was on an ILS approach. I didn't have visual and told them that. It was already twilight. Finally when I got visual, I was almost right in front of them. And had to firewall, extend the base and cross in front of them. I learned that day that ATC will absolutely get you killed if they aren't paying attention or misjudge something and treat their instructions more as a suggestion than an absolute rule. I will do what I need to do to keep my AC safe and then follow instructions as able.
SW708 confirmed the traffic on 3 mile final. Maybe hold short and advise he will wait for the FDX on short final.
Thats what i see most pilots do. Not sure why he didnt refuse after getting traffic info
Wow! That animation really makes an impact. Thank you!
The digital visual is incorrect at the 1:50 + marker . The digital visual depicts the SWA 737 turning onto the runway and starting the takeoff roll. The SWA 737 Turned onto the Runway and STOPPED for several seconds per NTSB Preliminary Report.
" The FO of SWA708 acknowledged theclearance with a correct readback. SWA708 proceeded to taxi onto runway 18L and lined up with
the runway centerline and came to a complete stop at which point, control of the aircraft was
transferred from the captain to the FO. The FO indicated that he advanced the power, checked
the engines, and then released the brakes to begin their takeoff roll.
At 0639:32, the pilots of FDX1432 queried the local controller to confirm that they were cleared
to land on runway 18L. According to the captain of FDX1432, he asked for confirmation because
he was concerned about the Southwest traffic. The controller confirmed FDX1432 was cleared
to land and advised them of traffic (SWA708) departing runway 18L ahead of him"
worst part of the comments are the tedious phone number jokes - these need to stop holy christ
When the controller nervously asks whether the 737 in front of you is rolling, and you can't clearly see the runway (fog), it's probably a good idea to assume a go-around. Better safe than Tenerife.
the silence of twr is scary!!
he seems very tired
and has a nervous (read: terrified) voice when thanking the FedEx pilot for his professionalism
I thought the same. He really had nothing to say after that?!
@@ec7568 Probably trying to remember where he saved a copy of his résumé.
It's not unusual to have radio silence when someone is on the takeoff roll or landing roll.
Omg.... Just listening to ATC directions from the shower I was like "omg no you did not just clear a landing and take off on the same RW so close together..." then I watched it after the shower and my heart sank. There's a number ATC needs to call this time.
So thankful this did not end badly.
Non-pilot here. 2:32 Why does Southwest say "Negative" when the tower asks him to turn right?
@@mssugarwoman Yeah, it must have been confusing when the FedEX guy said "Soutbwest abort"
@@arthousefilmsagreed. The controller must have thought southwest was aborting and instructed to turn right into the taxiway
I’d definitely be filing an incident report on that controller. Putting another plane ahead of one on a 3 mile final, especially in weather? Yikes!
Definitely give tower a number to call when he’s on the ground 😂
Notice anything about ATC person's voice?
Oh this one is going on the code brown playlist
when i saw the post on Reddit+Twitter i was expecting this video. Nice done as always.
Ohhhh that last comm from FedEx when there’s the pause and then he says he’s clear of the runway, that’s the best low-key shade I’ve heard in a while!
Pilot: "Controller, let me know when you are ready to copy a number - possible ATC Controller deviation."
It is 1-800-FAA
Anyone know what actually happens? Does the pilot write a report for FedEx, and then someone there takes it to the FAA?
Be a lay person I would think the controller would take all the blame. The Southwest pilot was told the position of the Fedex jet. He also knew, or should have known, that if he couldn't expedite the take off he should have let the controller know.
WOW I cannot BELIVE they gave SW the clearance to takeoff, not it bad weather like that with a 76 on less than 3 MILE FINAL!!! Holy SMOKES ATC or Tower f'ed that one up BIG TIME. Tower should get ready to copy a number!! Holy SMOKES! Kudo to FedEx captain and co. Fantastic job they both deserve a drink on me!
Controller here, you need 2 miles when the departure rolls increasing to 3 miles. Him giving the takeoff clearance with a 767 on 3 mile final is ill advised. This means SWA has to start rolling before the 767 travels 1 more mile with reasonable assurance that the 2 miles will increase to 3. Even on a clear day when you only need SWA to be 6000ft down the runway and airborne is pretty tight if you give SWA an immediate take off.
Why didn't the tower give the pilots a number to call the director or supervisor on duty and make the corresponding report? I am sure that if it had happened the other way , that would have been the procedure.
at least to notify you as the supervisor or director by the pilots of a "possible ATC deviation" I don't know if that exists at least so that the ATC on duty that day does not get rid of the situation unscathed and the corresponding measures are taken.