Low Altitude Alert! WN4069 KOKC 19 June 2024
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июн 2024
- LINKS:
VasAviation: • Southwest DESCENDS DAN...
Blancolirio LGA: • SWA#147 LGA 23 March N...
Aviation Herald: avherald.com/h?article=51a2a3...
MERCH: blancoliriostore.myspreadshop...
Flying Eyes 10% OFF: flyingeyesoptics.com/?ref=Bla...
PATREON: www.patreon.com/user?u=5295000
GEFA Aviation Scholarship: goldenempireflyingassociation...
Learning The Finer Points -10% OFF! www.learnthefinerpoints.com/g...
Theme: "Weightless" Aram Bedrosian
www.arambedrosian.com 
Наука
![Megan Thee Stallion - Otaku Hot Girl [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/USxIYOaIpig/mqdefault.jpg)
![mgk - Sun to Me (Zach Bryan Cover) [Live from Cheshire Cottage]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ZnbTEs4O6U/mqdefault.jpg)
As a retired SWA, I can only say this. There is no excuse for this. Even if there is no approach to the runway, you can/should pull up the runway in the FMS, extend the centerline to 5 miles, and look what that provides. Yep, an altitude to cross that point and thereafter a 3 degree/700 fpm profile to the runway.
Complacency is never your friend, and this smacks of just that. By the way - we weren’t a bunch of “cowboys”. We were proud of our hand flying skills. But that should never take precedence over Safety of Flight.
Yup, basic math!
I agree as a retired SWA pilot. No excuse to deviate from company procedure when all the nav aids are available. This is any easy airport to fly to. Using this runway was a short cut to save some time. Night flights are increased risk when you short cut procedures.
And this one actually has an approach and I bet the FMS can provide vertical guidance as well.
Do they still hand fly airplanes? That was a skill in the Stone Age.
@@bw162 hand flying is one thing. They do that on nearly every takeoff and landing. The issue here is using guidance
That aircraft passed over my daughter’s house in Yukon! She said it rattled everything as it went over! Glad ATC was paying attention! 😳
Maybe the crew was thinking that it would be more entertaining to land at Wiley Post. 😊
I don't remember the airport being that close to the airport.. Used to live on Mustang road next to the highway
Did your daughter offer the passengers any snacks?
@@Turd_Furgeson Wiley Post is close to both Yukon and Mustang, right next to Lake Overholser…unfortunately Will Rogers was about 10 miles away for the SWA pilots! 😵💫
@gregmiller7123 dang. Looked at the chart and they go right over the highway to land. Garth's parents still live in Yukon?
The public media was completely confused on this flight, my first thought was, I will get the accurate information from Juan Brown. Thanks, a thorough job as usual.
The media people seem to be confused about a lot of things, especially aviation related stuff.
Amen to that, I see headline then await Juan with the goods.
Same here. When I hear of incidents like this, I tell myself "wait a day and let's see what Juan has to say." If anyone can explain these things to this layman, it's Mr. Browne.
Journalists aren't aviation experts. They aren't transportation experts, climate experts, financial experts...
Get my drift?
Expecting them to be experts when reporting news is a failure on your part, they just report what is told to them.
Seriously, reading comments in various places by the general public about this are hilarious. MCAS nearly killed them, diversity hires, overworked so they fell asleep, they were trying to descend to breathable oxygen.... every idea under the sun
When I hear about incidents, first thing I say is “I wonder if Juan has a video yet” 9/10…. there it is. Thanks for your efforts!
Me, too, haha!
EXACTLY. I don't bother reading the (no doubt) poorly written and uninformed "COPY-PASTE" story from the media.
Me, too. I retired from the industry. You won't find a better analysis than what Juan delivers. All of my buddies watch as well.
I agree! And the fact the Juan already has a job and family he loves makes me trust him more because he's not trying to massage the algorithm to get more views.
He's just a guy with a strong sense of responsibility. If he were my neighbor he'd never have to shovel the snow in his driveway! 😁
Exactly me too!!!!
As a retired FedEx B-777 Captain I would always put the end of the runway into one of the fix pages so that I can do simple math of 3-1 to calculate whether I’m high or low on a three degree glideslope. These guys were just asleep at the wheel.
Perhaps literally.
At my 121 company we are required to back up all visuals with an instrument approach, and at night must have the terrain map up. Situations like these remind is why these measures are so important.
IMHO, any pilot (Part 121 especially) should be backing up the approach with an instrument approach loaded in the FMS, 100% of the time, regardless of company policy. It ain’t that hard!!
Indeed, modern GA GPS as well as airline FMS systems all have the ability to draw a visual to most runways anyway. At a minimum, there's no reason to leave that off.
@@pauljones6321 Exactly and it makes things so much easier!
Same here and I never do anything significant at night with AP off SID/StAR or any approach. WHY MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT NEEDS TO BE? Just not worth it.
Same where I used to work. Plus I just kinda liked the notion of staying alive.
IIRC within the past couple of years, a Lufthansa crew approaching KSFO was cleared for a visual to the 28’s at night and refused the clearance. I believe they said their FOM specifically prohibited night visual approaches. They requested vectors for an ILS. This caused the NORCAL controllers a bit of upset to their routine and they were not happy. The resequencing for the ILS was time consuming to say the least. To their credit, the LH crew followed their company procedures even after the long, long flight from Germany.
exactly. thank you. that's the right thing to do.
Great airline.
Actually that LH flight diverted to Oakland - that's the amount of "resequencing" that was required!
Hi Juan, Thanks for the great report on this potential tragedy. During my 31+ years at SWA, which was mostly PM flying, I always made sure to back up my visual approaches with a precision approach, if available. In this case, because of my infrequency in using rwy 13, I would have probably asked for 17L/R. As you mentioned, there are a lot of new, young, mostly great pilots coming in to the majors, and as Captains, we need to be especially vigilant about monitoring and teaching the newer guys and girls in the intricacies of arrivals at night, and backing up our visual approaches.
Right on. "mentor" is the key here. Two things need to happen:
1) Senior captains must get bonus or extra pay for being mentors.
2) Any pax who checks their luggage at the counter and doesn't even carry so much as a backpack on board must get extra loyalty program credits or points.
#2 will not only greatly help and speed up the boarding process, but will also dramatically improve on-time perrformance because gate time won't be wasted checking bags at the jetway, etc; I've mentioned this idea to many crew and submitted this idea to SWA a few times now.
@@paulsherman51 Good comments, but, I must disagree with you on a couple of points. As a Captain, being a mentor demonstrating and instructing our newer FOs the intricacies of the terminal environment, when to slow down, descend, configure, etc, is all part of the job in my opinion. That's why you get paid the big bucks. For example, the 737 is obviously not the fastest airliner out there but it can be a difficult airplane to slow down and get ready to configure while in the terminal area.
2. Passengers used to check their bags in the 'old days' before the advent of roller bags. That how SWA was able to pioneer the '10 minute turn'. Of course, we also pushed back with passengers still in the isle way back then. It would be next to impossible to get passengers to give up the convenience of roller bags and bringing your luggage on board for the overhead bins. I just don't see that happening.
I have full faith in the airline that Capt. T. J. Schultz flew for. Looking forward to flying it again soon.
I've done that approach from DEN/SLC to OKC many times and often around midnight. OKC was always very difficult to visually identify coming from that side and runway 13 was poorly light up and difficult to see until inside of 5 miles. I tried to always brief this and the threat of the many surrounding airports that can be mistaken. My airline also requires a instrument approach be flown at night even when in visual conditions.
Very useful, thank you.
Good thing there aren't any tall radio antennas in Oklahoma.
Recently retired, the last 10 years or so I almost always refused visual approaches at night, even if it was a familiar airport. Getting vectors for a published approach is just smart. With nothing to prove, the last thing you need at that point is a professional challenge. Stabilized and boring is my cup of tea.
There are TV antennas - The Edmond towers as they are called, even though they are all in North OKC just south of Edmond. The station I worked at was 1750’ AGL before it was taken down.. However there are no towers to speak of close to Will Rogers…
@@jcak552Fun fact, KWTV in OKC had the tallest structure in the world for a short time when their old tower was built in the 50s. WTV stands for World’s Tallest Video. It was the first structure built that surpassed the height of the Empire State Building.
There are huge towers in OKC. 1600' towers just north east of KOKC
Not a pilot, and total agree that stabilised and boring is definitely the cup of tea to have. BUT as every time there is an incident there are always lots of people saying the pilots should have been better aviators and not rely on the computers. I wonder if they felt is was a good night to have a refresher training? The didn't sound panicked, and had already decided to do a go around, and not going to try and get down at all costs from where they were at, to me sounds like they are pretty experienced.
There's no tall radio antennas in Ok? THANKS! I'll just ignore the NOTAMS thanis a lot cheif pilot.
Over at VASAviation, @jethro70 came up with the best explanation imho: if you look at the satellite view of the map, it appears they were thinking Old Highway 4 was runway 13. There’s a couple of crossing highways in just the right spot to be mistaken for the parallel rwys 17-35.
If that's the case it reminds me of a story I heard of a O'Hare jet mistaking Glenview Naval Air Station and coming in low over Northbrook. But I think that was during the day.
Man, if that's true they need some landmark to say, "I'm not a runway"!
Juan hinted that GPWS may have alerted the crew (who sounded dog-tired) but one wonders how many similar roads on approach look like runways? Any stories or summaries of accidents or near-accidents caused by this, and ways they have been addressed?
As an aside, this is an area where AI may help uncover commonalities in accidents. No one person at this point can have detailed understanding of all airplane accidents to this point. Machines will be able to pick out things we can't see, just too much data for one human mind to process.
@@craigmiller332 airplane mishaps are possibly the most scrutinized events of the postwar world. The system we have developed via that scrutiny to prevent mishaps works. There is zero need to allow large language models into it. Stop trying to fix what isn’t broken, take this technoworship drivel elsewhere.
Makes sense. Only other reasonable alternative is they lost visual awareness ( depth perception) over a darkened landscape.
@cynvision Probably about 20 years ago in London there was a plane that lined up, at night (or fog?) to land on the A4 highway that is parallel to the main runways at LHR. Thankfully that was aborted for a go-around.
When I heard the voices from the cockpit on VASaviation, that pilot sounded like he was 2 seconds from complete sleep. It was the voice of my husband saying, "I'm just resting my eyes. "
It’s the same voices you hear on Comair 5191.
the controller did not sound much more awake. He could have raised his voice for the altitude alert.
definitely reminds me of those microsleep moments where you almost drive off the road and decide you needed to pull it over and hour ago
Who cares about your husband. He's a nobody
Southwest still squeezing like mad for profits. The shenanigans airline.
Back in April, My wife's southwest flight had a low altitude alert coming into land in Lubbock. They got down to 450ft AGL at 5 miles before finally arresting the descent. When the tower called out the low altitude alert, you could hear the alarm going off.
Could the passengers hear that or is your wife one of the pilots?
@@cassandratq9301 sometimes on some Boeing planes you can actually hear the cockpit alerts in the passenger cabin, I don't think you can adjust the alert volume, so maybe it's lack of sound proofing. I've heard the disconnecting autopilot warble at times
@@cassandratq9301 the OP might have been referring to something like a LiveATC feed as well. If there's a low altitude alert happening (or a traffic conflict alert, etc.) at the controller's station, the alarms are often audible when the controller transmits. You'd hear that on the recording.
@@Mulcher737 you’ve never heard an alert beeper going off in the background of an ATC transmission? Or are you talking about low altitude-related alerts specifically? I don’t know if the beeper goes off for them when somebody is too low on the approach. If you want to call that “BS,” that’s a little crotchety, but fine. I was only trying to be helpful. You hear this pretty often for traffic alerts.
@@Mulcher737 not the ATC alert obviously, but the airplane's own alerts for sink rate or GPWS that would be sounding
Juan's last remark hit the nail on the head. There are a lot of new pilots coming on board at the airlines, and that is probably a factor in these incidents. New pilots may think they know all there is to know, but they don't. This crops up in a lot of industries. There is no substitute
for experience, coupled with the right work ethic and solid values. The school of life teaches
two valuable qualities: competence and humility.
Yeah those little Gen Z's, Millenials = talk a lot of shit but CAN'T DO IT, ANOTHER FAILURE
Arrogance and ignorance will kill a lot more passengers
But after some experience in the airlines you don't want any part of it. "Work ethic" suggests you do what everyone tells you or you're money motivated which is not an actual "work ethic." As a safety first CFI, the FAA and aviation regs don't support your view except for the humility and proficiency ("competence") concerns.
There are new pilots coming on board. That is NOT a factor here. This is a case of accepting a less the favorable alternative. Its a lack of PIC skill and ability. There is a published instrument approach to 13. Complete with course, altitudes and vertical guidance. The PIC CHOSE not to use it. Thats the problem. The controller undoubtedly assigned a visual approach and the crew accepted it! The crew permitted ATC to fly the aircraft for them. This is the problem. Its not new. Its an old problem. Its a crew accepted visual approach induced unstable approach. Look at statistics concerning unstable approaches.
This is how you fix the problem: “requesting vectors to the RNAV 13 approach”. Or if you don’t want that runway then say “requesting vectors to the ILS 17R”. Or if you don’t want that one then say “requesting vectors to the ILS 17L.”
Fixing these repeated issues is a matter of exercising PIC authority after deciding on the best course of action.
Those reading can decide if that occurred here.
No, new doesn't not mean incompetent. These pilots are incompetent.
I am concerned that the First Officer did not know what was going on either. That is why he is there. To ensure no pilot error and a backup pilot for emergencies.
About 20 years ago I was in the parking lot at work and the weather was cold, foggy and visability was 0.......out of nowhere, a Southwest 737 appeared, and it looked unreal! Then the engines spooled up and it was loud and powerful. My head rattled and every car alarm went off! The jet disappeared back into the clouds.
It was a missed approach
That sounds terrifying.
@@erickborling1302 At about 1000 feet and about 8 miles from the airport?
Wow, one wild moment!
thank you, exactly: the 737 should have been retired in the 1980'ies.
Retired controller here (Boston Center 1985-2016). This is definitely ATC automation at work. We provided approach control services in many areas that had no underlying TRACON. A low altitude alert, which we called an MSAW alert, was to be treated as a critical event which took precedence over most any other responsibility. That OKC controllers phraseology was the exact one we were to use in the event of an MSAW warning. That SWA crew sounded dog tired...
Great job as always JB.
Thanks @AtCDave1 spot on here. I might fathom a guess that it's masters of capitalism and for-profit private enterprise who are beating those SWA crew dogs senseless with fatigue. This event is a clear and prime example why signicantly more heavy-handed federal regulation is necessary. Skies were much safer before the Reagan '80s, we all remember that fiasco.
Juan I ask for ILS at night even when "its clear blue and 22". Have been for over 40 years. Thank you for reaffirming that night is "instrument" conditions. No cowboy stuff here!
The way southwest is going, maybe a passenger alerted them for the low altitude😂
Uh... you've fallen victim to the news
saw a guy on the ground pointing up
John McClane was waiving with 2 burning jackets on a top of a house. 🤭
"Why are there radio tower lights above us?"
And what's that cow doing on that cloud!
@@captcol8335the far side. Whats a mountain goat doing up here?
There is a long wide road (just north of I 40) that runs in the same orientation as runway 13 approximately 5 miles to the Northwest from the airport. It could be possible that they mistook the road as the runway similar to the DreamLifter incident in Wichita a few years ago.
Quite possibly. Also, absolutely insane to imagine a commercial airplane full of passengers almost landed on a road and not a runway. Absolutely unacceptable.
I think this is probably right. The road also appears to run through a section of wasteland, too - which would have appeared to the pilots as a patch of dark surrounded by the lights of suburbs/city - much like airports do.
The classic 'black hole' effect...
It p1ssed me off so bad that the memo was leaked to social media and then a reporter got a hold of it. I argued with the same reporter about the consequences of him getting greedy in terms of breaking the news but he didn’t understand how this leak was going to destroy the ASAP confidentiality that in turn was going to hurt the pax themselves.
We live in times where the accuracy of the “news” doesn’t really matter, as long as it comes to you at lighting speed.
Thanks for sharing your frustration about the Lihue incident as well.
You imply the news report was inaccurate. I'm not saying it wasn't -- and I certainly understand your concerns re: ASAP -- but I didn't get what was inaccurate about it. So what was the inaccuracy? Thanks.
@@RMR1 it was a general statement. This OKC news was reported by local media as 737 Max initially. That’s what I was referring to.
@@KaptanBaha Ah, okay, thank you. Didn't realize it was reported as a MAX.
Most passengers don't even know what plane they're on. My ex, who has flown alot said she didn't know what an Embraer or Canadair is and she has undoubtedly flown on at least one of the two.
As someone that works in information security I think that anonymous reporting and no-blame policy is critical to improving both safety and security regardless of industry. Aviation have shown us that in a way that can't be disputed. On the other hand we live in a society where you have to count on that information leaks and if it is interesting enough it will be sensationalized, put thru the drama spin and be presented with a click-bait title. Given the recent events with the MAX everything that Boeing have touched will be interesting to report and will be sensationalized. Media have found a villain and will milk everything it can from that story. One might think that media should have a responsibility to report news in a balanced and truthful way but those concepts are unfortunately long gone. The only thing that matters now is creating value for the shareholders in the short term.
The best way to counteract this is to control the narrative the best you can while still protecting the vital anonymous process. That means reporting the incidents yourself before the information leaks but doing it in a controlled way and be very careful how much you report. Too little and you open up the whole leaking cycle while adding a conspiracy spin against you, too much detail and you destroy the reporting process.
In the end everybody suffers...
Not the wheel you want to fall asleep behind. Reminds me of an Alaska Air approach to 07R into ANC many years ago, on a bright clear day with low overcast in the valley and over the airport on a B727. I was setting next to a bush pilot in business class as the aircraft was at very low power and sinking extremely fast towards top of the fog deck, and just as we dropped into the overcast at what felt like 6,000fpm. A chill shot up my spine as the bush pilot setting next to me said: "This don't feel right!" And just then the crew added max power and a rapid pitch-up as I saw trees appear about 200ft below followed by the shoreline of Fire Island about 3mi off the end of 07R . We did a high power climb and basically what WN4069 did, and came back for a stabilized approach and landing in very low RVR.
At the gate the cockpit door remained closed and the bush pilot and I remained seated waiting to the chat with the flight crew, and after the cabin was empty the flight deck door opened and the three crew plus a jump-seat pilot prepared to exit, I asked the captain "what happened over Fire Island out there?" and he sheepishly said, "Ah we ah, we caught it in time" as the other three crew members slipped past with heads down and not a word.
The bush pilot and I guessed they got the GPWS alert at about 500ft and by the time they took action we were very near an unrecoverable situation. I later called a friend who was at the time chief pilot for AK Air and he said he would speak with the crew and he mentioned basically the same thing you did Juan about using automation.
Weather at ANC was probably below CAT II minimums and At the time I think 07R and the B727 were equipped to fly CAT-1, and I wondered if the crew might have been hand-flying a CAT-1? And somehow everybody got distracted?
The best pilots are the ones in the back of the plane. They always know more about what’s going on than the crew in the cockpit.
Fewer Grumman Cheetas means fewer Grumman Cheeta accidents. More Cessna 172s means more CE-172 accidents. Lots and lots of 737s, so obviously gonna be more 737 concerns at the threshold of public scrutiny.
@@erickborling1302 Brilliant and way to put the public panic into perspective. When was the last time your heard of a Tupolev smashing into a Soviet Apartment bloc?
You guys were lucky, the B727s were notoriously under-powered and those JT8Ds took forever to spool up.
@@jackoneil3933if there were a million Tupolevs, do you think you would hear about this? Russia is not known for publicizing their disasters. We would never have heard about Chernobyl if the radiation hadn't set off radiation detectors in either Finland or Sweden.
Very well said. I am a Captain and LCA for a major US airline...I teach my students the same thing...just get vectors for the ILS (or approach of your choice) at night. There are just too many traps out there to do otherwise.
This is how that Southwest flight a few years ago landed at a county airport when they were supposed to land in Branson, Missouri. Visible approach at night again.
The localizer is your dear friend.
I remember that one! They landed at M. Graham Clark Airport which is only 3700 feet long!!! That one was damn near a disaster.
While watching this episode, a jet flew over the house at VERY low altitude (the noise rattled some items). We are not located in a flight path.
Great commentaries and visuals. I am a retired 767 Captain teaching CRM. I use these instances as examples of NOT what to do. Very low time folks in these cockpits these days. Screw this DEI SH$!. Between ATC and crew mishandling in the cockpit, a major accident is coming. In the cockpit or watching ATC. IF YOU SEE SOMETHING SAY SOMETHING THEN WRITE AN ASAP !!! GO AROUND!!!!! Watching these and hearing situations at my own airline, I feel like the Dutch boy trying to stop leaks in the Dike. 🤔 You know what I mean.
@dcartier100 thank you for not just kicking back and enjoying life. I once recruited instructors, and another recruiter made a smart remark about them all being old. I made it very clear these are the people who need to be teaching young pilots. You have seen and lived a lot. All aviation professionals should give back to the industry that has given so much to them.
You people have some decent criticisms about the current state of things and yet for some reason you're addicted to blaming it on the buzzword of "DEI" as if female or black pilots are the problem and not executives cost cutting on training/staffing for maximum profits.
@@OldDistantHermit Agree with you - the "DEI" stuff is just shorthand for "I'm a racist".
@@davidg3944 Pretty much. Pilot in this video even sounded like a white guy and this commenter above still felt like blaming the bogeyman.
What kind of discipline do the pilots get?
“As an old pilot…”
Is that a reference to:
There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.
Yes.
That sounds about right, yeah.
I guess the third part of that statement is 'don't fly so old it becomes bold again'.
In light of recent tragic crashes.
Jesus Christ how many time are people going to quote that stupid saying
@@desertdwellerpete It gets tedious, but sometime it may sink in with some young bold pilots, and save lives.
On Ward Carroll’s channel today, there was a US military training video from the 60s, which spoke to the deceptive nature of visual approaches to carriers at night, when the pilot focused on the deck lights (think runway lights) instead of the meatball (carrier glide slope visual indicator). The message was your eyes deceive you into approaching too low. I wonder if the same thing, combined with the fatigue Juan mentions, led to flying lower than they should…
The Navy has the "APPROACH" magazine with a section called "Anymouse".. originally called " Anonymous ", but thanks to a misspelling, by a reader .. " Anymouse " was adopted as the sections title.
Do you remember the old "Grampa Pettibone?" USN, 68-74, NAS Miramar, 70-74, ETR-2, maintained GCA and TACAN
And the navy has an admirable policy of calling all accidents and incidents "mishaps" to equilibrate the attention that both deserve.
Juan, when you overlayed the KML data on Google Earth, it looked like they were lined up almost perfectly with a road. It'll be interesting to see if they believed that the road was the runway. At my airline, if a published approach is available, we have to use it to back up a visual approach. Many years ago, we had a similar thing happen. After a log day of flying we were cleared for the visual, the guy I was flying with said he the had the field in sight, but what he thought was the runway was a road that paralleled the runway. I kept asking if he had the runway in sight, because we were too high. I realized he must be looking at something else, and pointed out where the runway was. He was shocked when he realized he was looking at a road. We asked ATC for vectors back to the ILS as there was no way we could salvage the approach. This all occurred when we were on an extended base and did have the ILS to back it up, so eventually that would've made us realize the error, but it was a bit eye opening on what can happen after a long day of flying and being influenced by fatigue.
My home airport is about 30 miles south of OKC. A few years ago I was doing touch and go's at our 5000ft strip (KCHK) and a pilot comes on the radio and says "Southwest Flight 7***, short final Runway 18", which was pretty shocking considering that I was in the pattern and there is no tower at our airport. It turns out the guy actually was a Southwest Airlines pilot but he was on his day off landing his SuperCub, and force of habit, he called out his Southwest flight rather than his Cub tail number. I'm starting to wonder if this was the same guy?🤔😀
I used to live south of MCO more than 3 nm out I think right on approach. One time, as I was in the back yard with the dog, the weather was getting bad as a front was moving in. It wasn't raining yet but the temperature was dropping and the winds picked up. I looked up to see the belly of a beautiful 747 and I stopped to see it fly by except it wasn't flying by. It looked like it was floating in mid air.
After a few seconds I realized this 747 was just getting bigger and bigger. As I came to the realization that this plane was falling on me I just ran full speed to my house while screaming at my dog to follow. I lived on a ranch so my house was a ways away full sprint. As I got to my porch I can hear the engines spool up and the plane gained altitude. That moment scared me so bad that I had vivid nightmares of planes crashing in my back yard with massive fireballs for weeks. Even remembering the nightmares still freak me out to this day.
Oh my Gosh
Back before LAX closed the roads going up Sandpiper hill to the west of the airport, on reverse ops days the planes would come out of the west and land heading east into the winds. I was standing at the top of the hill watching a 747 come in on approach and it was basically coming right at me, they cleared those hills by maybe 100 ft or so, I started to run down the hill a bit, it's a shocking thing seeing a plane like that seemingly headed right for you.
Maybe you experienced time compression.
My neighbor had a dream, every night for weeks, that a plane crashed behind our homes. And it was always a big passenger jet..we live nowhere near an airport that supports those kinds of aircraft. Lots of crop dusters and medical helicopters in the area...but nothing like in his dream. It's still freaky to think about.
That crackly “I’m to cool for you to be in my presence” pilot voice drives me nuts.
Comair 5191 cvr has the same exact voice and look what happened to them.
Of course you should keep flying commercially as long as you feel good about it. But afterwards, you should become part of the NTSB, part time, maybe 2 days a week? You help make flying safer for everyone.
I grew up in Yukon oklahoma so to hear it on this channel is a lit concerning. I talk to Dad and about that time he heard a plane go over which is very unusual as Yukon is not normally in the landing path of Will Rodgers account the normally straight out of the south wind direction. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you Juan. I always withhold my immediate reaction until I hear what you have to say. I'm not a pilot; but I thoroughly enjoy aviation in general.
There really wasn't much to say, if it wasn't for atc there'd be a lot of dead people and an obliterated town.
I grew up in OKC. Looks like they were lined up to land on S Ranchwood Blvd,, which runs about 130º in line with 13 at Will Rogers. Wonder if they had set the flaps set and if gear was down when the alert sounded. Lot of TV towers around OKC.
Over residential area at night when street lights are on. Visual approach means looking out the window. One can estimate above ground altitude by looking at the street lights going by especially at around 500 feet above ground. I'd have had their blood drawn and checked for 'shrooms.
Far out maan!
It's so crazy cuz this is something that would've resulted in a crash 20-30 years ago but thankfully we've built in enough safety measures since then that this was caught early enough to save everyone on board.
I live 5 miles north of this runway. Directly under the approach path. At my location those pilots are supposed to be at 1000 feet. I can guarantee you that at least once a day we get a plane under 1000 feet. It’s so common place that we’ve become accustomed to the shaking of our house and many times can’t tell the difference between an earth quake, which we get often as well.
It’s not just southwest. Military aircraft flying into the national guard base attached to will Rogers, fed ex planes, delta, and pretty much all of them do this.
I retired 11years ago from a major carrier. I put in 35 years. We were well versed in the FAR requirements that mandated an air carrier crew MUST tune identify and display the most accurate approaches for the intended landing runway regardless of a visual approach or not. You are also mandated to not descend below the posted final fix altitude till passage of that fix. This applies even on a visual approach. Doesn’t look like the SW crews believe in this FAR.
Or followed it...
What is this reg that you speak of? Do you have the number?
As a captain for a major airline, as well as retiring in about 1yr, knowing I can be wrong, I encourage my fellow pilots to call me out if they believe I am wrong. I truly believe this is a GREAT policy/ procedure but DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS AN FAR...
I will have to admit I searched the AIM and could not find that requirement. I know for 35 years it was our company requirement. These type of requirements are usually FAR driven. It could be in TERPS but I do not have that. I personally met a C-130 crew in base ops still covered with dirt after crashing into the Nevada desert 6 miles short of the runway on a night VFR landing and had a former squadron member hit trees 8 miles from the runway on a night VFR approach. He landed safely. I am a believer in loss of depth perception at night!
Sure! SWA crews implying all give me break man!
I was recently cleared for the ILS at PBI in my Aztec. Heavy to extreme rain reported short final. Two aircraft ahead of me -- the closest Spirit Airlines -- shot the approach with a smooth ride and landed. As I approached what should be glide slope intercept these was no glide slope. I reported no glide slope and continuing on the Localizer approach. Controller asked Spirit if they had a glide slope on the approach. They answered No. Thanks a whole hell of a lot Spirit. What approach were you flying?
Gracias Juan! Your analyzes are so clear and concise. These incidents touch you deep inside, it can be seen in your voice.
I've been in the airlines for 10.5 years now. Including the one in question. To this date, I've never done a visual approach without some sort of approach guidance when it was available. When I don't have guidance I always draw a 3 and 5 mile ring on the MFD so I know visually where I need to be configured and at 1000'. I'm not here to prove anything other than I can hopefully retire on a birthday rather than on the news. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of pilots out there who think seat of the pants flying and being a bad ass is a good idea in a transport category airplane.
or worse … they never learned how to do a proper approach.
I’ve only flown general aviation for 25 years and currently fly a Cirrus. I always fly approaches to the airport if it’s available regardless if it’s day VFR but especially at night. It provides much greater SA and keeps me protected from obstacles and terrain.
They were lined up to land on a road...if you look at the map overlays they perfectly lined up with a road......
I fly into this airport often on a different aircraft type. This case was especially dangerous with obstacles around the airport. If you take a look at the plates, there are TV towers as tall as 2700ft MSL around the airport. Even for runway 13, there are towers as tall as 1900ft on its extended final. It's almost vital to stay at or above MSA (3800ft) until you are sure that you are clear of those towers.
that flight plan routing in full - TIRED > KATCHA > WABUT > NOSEE > DARRK > WELOW > OOPSY > PHEWE > OHSOW > LUCKY
😂
Strangely enough, the voice of the pilot did not noticeably change between the transmissions he made when he was just fatigued and the later transmissions when he was fatigued and also knew that he had just crapped in his own mess kit.
That's exhaustion.
So many arm chair pilots please stop.
this a major warning sign. changes should be made.
another 737!? PLEASE GROUND ALL 737!!! THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON TOO LONG!
reminds me of that far side cartoon where the pilots look out and say, hey, what's that goat doing up here in the clouds.
As an old pilot... I hear ya, brother. 😅 On the bright side, that NOTAM for that tower, 500' above the ground, 9 west of the field, finally comes into play. 😂
FAA certificated commercial helicopter pilot.
Thanks for your detailed analysis. The NTSB reports won't make anyone happy. WN needs to fix their 6.
Again, thanks for calling it like it is, and yes, there are words between the lines we don't say. A go around with a deviation report is 136+ people who lived.
Should always remember rule #9 of RULES OF THE AIR. When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No one has ever collided with the sky.
Great analysis Juan. I studied the sectional chart to see if I could find a lighted feature that could have tricked the crew into thinking they were looking at a runway. I couldn't find one. For the non-aviation folks- as pilots we often refer to the 3 to 1 rule. It's actually more like 18 to 1. It's three nautical miles (about 18,000') travelled to 1K' of altitude. Cheers
Good on them for not trying to salvage a bad situation. Getting in 15 minutes late is a small price compared to some of the stories we've seen where they know it's going bad and just press on.
Juan, you threw me for a minute when you said, "a three-to-one glide slope." After rewinding, I could figure out you originally said, "three nautical miles to one thousand feet"-which is roughly an 18,000' to 1,000' ratio, or just above a 3° glide slope ...a very helpful rule of thumb, will remember that one, thanks!
Hey, a 3-to-1 glide ratio is not much worse than the space shuttle, and significantly better than a flying squirrel ;-)
It’s not a glide ratio. It’s a standard approach path angle. 3 degrees.
The 3 to 1 rule is a ratio with mixed units of nautical miles distance and thousands of feet altitude, which coincidentally is the same as a 3 degree glide slope.
If the EGPWS (Enhanced) hadn't gone off yet, it probably was about to do so. At night, I would have had whatever approach available for said runway, pulled up and in use. But, as Juan said, i would fly a few more miles and use the ILS to 17R.
Great review Juan! I could easily see the frustration on your face when pilots revert to the easy wrong or lazy wrong instead of the hard right. Juan, your recommendations to program and use the instrument approach procedures as a back up are spot on and makes viewers wonder why the airlines wouldn’t mandate it for night approaches to prevent disorientation with street lights and runway lights. Regardless your recommendations are best practices for additional situation awareness.
"As an old pilot..." I gotcha! We're on the same page. I think I now belong in the "old pilots club"
The good pilots age.
Err on the side of safety, EFF the operational pressures, they're not worth it
There are bold pilots and there are old pilots. But there are no bold, old pilots.
I hate that pesky way point wabbit🐰!
I expected the pilot's name to be Lucy cause she's got some 'splainin to do... LOL
Capt. E. J. Fudd and F.O. W. E. Coyote? 😄. They were chasing the Wabut down the hole! 🕳️
…I say, that’s a joke, son, ya missed it!
Not making fun of the flight crew, just the comment above, and that waypoint name. Hopefully, the investigation will find out just what went wrong and do something positive, not punitive to ensure it doesn’t happen again. Are the flight crews overworked and fatigued? Fall half asleep?
Shhhh... Be vewy vewy quiet...😂
@@ca3340h3993😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂. Based on some of the accident analysis videos I have seen, I think allowing the flight and cabin crews to commute has contributed to the fatigue issue. They sometimes fly in to their base and then try to sleep in the crew lounge because they can't afford to get a hotel room for every flight, or it's already been a long day because their commute was a long one. They also don't always get the required amount of rest on a layover because the flight is delayed and lands late, reducing their rest time.
For the first incident it seems like they mistook something on the ground as the airport. Why would they have a stable 8 -900 ft decent rate 9 miles from the airport?
I wish you had rotated that view to see what they might have been seeing during their “approach”.
So glad they did a go-around. Kelsey is always saying _if in doubt, go around_ and it sounds like these guys didn't hesitate. So many disaster debriefs / accident reports come to the conclusion _they shouldn't have tried to land this, they had the fuel to try again._
Initially I thought they lined up on Wiley Post airport which is just east of Yukon. But they were even too far from it to be at 500 feet. Glad they landed safely.
I did that ONCE..... it was on my First solo to another airport. I was lined up with the Charter Oak Bridge. HFD tower asked me if i was on Final and i said Yes...... then they cranked up the runway lights to max. I was like "Oh therrrrre it is"
I don’t know, Juan. I’m a captain on a junior fleet at a major airline, and I fly with a disproportionate amount of new-hires as a result, and I’ve found them to be well trained and prepared. And they certainly aren’t eager to fly night time visual approaches with no autopilot. The turnover is a threat, but nowhere near the threat that fatigue is (and has always been) in the industry.
One pilot depending on SOP had to have the Nav display selected to VSD, which shows the profile. Even with a wrong QNH it will show you it will fly you short of the Rwy.
My mom sent this story to me this morning and I instantly thought about Eastern Airlines 401 from 1972.
Different technology, very different circumstance but it has similar parallels.
If you're not familiar w/ the Eastern 401 mishap, the crew flew an L-1011 into the Everglades at night. The captain and FO were trying to get the nose gear light to illuminate while the FE was in the equipment bay trying to see if the nose gear was down. While reaching across to the right side of the instrument panel, the captain accidentally brushed his control column, disengaging the AP. No one heard the chime. Bad stuff can happen when no one is flying the airplane.
That was a painful one to read about.
3:54 "...Out here at Wabut..." That wascawwy wabbit.
Ehhhh. They shoulda turned left at Albuquerque!
Juan-Can you please do a follow-up with the differences between Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) and the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASARS)?!
That low approach to LaGuardia must have been pretty frightening for the residents of Queens. There are a lot of buildings around there that are at least 6 Floors if not more. Even the light posts on the Grand Central Parkway dip down to about 10 feet just as you see the signs for low flying aircraft!
Quite the life lesson for that crew. I got nothing that will beat that.
Reading some comments from pilots who are familiar with the area, it sounds like they possibly lined up with a road that had bright lights.
Good job controller! Sounds like he was working approach combined in the Tower Cab.
Thank you Juan. Your professionalism is unmatched.
I look forward to your analysis of the June 17 crash of the Cessna 421 in Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
We do love your practice of not wasting any time during your safety reviews. Waay too many youtube creators spend 90% of the video on fluff or other nonsense.
Juan, it was mentioned in the comments on VAS that they were likely lining up for Old Oaklahoma 4... check it out on the map. It's exactly where they did their go around. It makes sense! Using google earth pan around into the same approach they were on, you will see it.
Fatigue is a very dangerous physiological condition and I've been averaging a call to scheduling to drop the 'F' word 3 to 4 times a year since starting this particular 121 employer, mostly due to flips from night to day or day to night (cargo). I just won't do it. Having said that, I hand fly at night all of the time when I'm feeling alert, climbing AND descending, it's an important skill to keep under your fingers and in your eyes and scan, but you have to be alert. You have no business flying, autopilot or none, if you're tired, 121, GA or military. OF COURSE, whether day or night, back yourself up with the ILS or Vnav approach and brief, brief, brief what you intend to do... and then DO it. I keep my 'significant other' in the loop and I keep a running narrative on what I'm doing and what I'm planning to do (i.e. "I'll call for the gear in another 2 miles"). I will count down the 3-to-1 slope when I need to, and a SOP callout is altitude crossing the FAF anyhow, 1000' stable and 500' speed/sink rate. I always communicate when I'm visual and leaving the G/S to follow the PAPI (or VASI) and this is usually around 300 feet, especially when the angles don't coincide. I proactively call out 'correcting' airspeed deviations when I'm hand flying and I fly my own thrust levers too because I can correct a deviation faster than the autothrottles can (as in gusty conditions). You're right: lots of newbs out there and at least 2 generations of flight deck wisdom have been flushed down the lav. It's going to get worse before it gets better, and over reliance on automation is NOT going to fix it.
Right on main man. I don't fly airlines since they tried to ram me through the training to the flight line while I was still not comfortable with the operation and they don't give a shiznit about it.
@@erickborling1302 Well, airline training has always been 'drinking from the firehose' and it does get easier the more experience you accrue. You eventually start seeing patterns and know what to expect generally speaking from the training dept. I've flown for 9 airlines at this point, from regionals to cargo to international (China, India and Japan), so I consider myself fairly experienced. I have been teaching in the sim on my days off for the last 3 years for my previous employer, passing whatever I have down to the next generation. I look out for all of my students and give them what they need to pass and be successful; more often than not it boils down to an instrument scan, and all too often it boils down to the primary-supporting technique. I want to know what the heck the GA instructors are teaching these days because it's... agricultural, as my old UK buddy would say. Very agricultural. Nobody looks at their VSI any more. Excellent instrument, once you get it in your scan (and know how to trim) you can hand-fly +/-10'.
Sure looked like he was lining up for landing at KPWA before making that last turn to join final, which has a similar runway configuration as KOKC. After the go around the controller was being very explicit about him looking to his right and to his 1:00, specific distances, etc.
"This is not a MAX aircraft" - the fact that this had to be pointed out speaks volumes.
I feel I have to comment on this, as a person who loves to fly as much raw eyeball visual approaches as possible, I’ve always found the culture in the USA of giving visual approaches to landing traffic, often in not good visual conditions, a recipe for possible disaster. I have no idea why USA ATC favour this approach strategy, as opposed to in Europe where we are always offered a procedure or vectors to an instrument approach. In that case, in suitable conditions you can then request the visual if you wish. I was flying into the East coast airport and was regularly amazed at the weather conditions for which visual approaches were given and accepted, because for many of those days, it was not visual conditions. So ok, back then it was obvious to me, that those pilots were not actually flying visually, they were constructing or using some FMC or ILS approach to get near the assigned runway. I can’t help feeling that’s it’s just an imbedded culture in the USA that nobody has woken up to. Instead, they will tighten SOP’s in response to these incidents, putting further onus on the pilot. ATC needs to look at this. But what do I know, it’s just the feeling I got operating into there. And this is not about lacking a macho can do attitude, it’s about the fact that at certain times, with reference weather, day/night, traffic flow and density, arbitrarily issuing visual approaches, are not the right way to go. If you can’t clearly see and identify the runway, or at very least the field in a well known familiar airport, it’s not a visual approach.
when every good pilot retires it's like another reliable shop closing
Rule #18 of the RULES OF THE AIR. "You start with a bag full of luck and an empty bag of experience. The trick is to fill the bag of experience before you empty the bag of luck."
There is a MANDATORY Age-Related Retirement for Pilots for a REASON -- even the BEST PILOT in the world eventually has too slow of a Brain Reaction and too slow of a muscle reaction to keep ahead -- we just recently lost one of the top ten pilots in the world -- DUE TO PILOT ERROR ..
@@BradHartliep-kn9ud so true. It's reality, and like it or not you need to face it and accept it. I'm 68, so I'm not being ageist. Recognizing your limitations is one of the unpleasant parts of getting older. I hate to think about having to give up driving, I can't imagine what it would be like to have to give up flying when you love it.
As I watch your excellent coverage of incidents like these, I think of my mom who said to every plane she saw or heard in the sky, without fail, “Stay up there, plane!”. It makes much more sense to me now than it did as a child; though that habit of hers unfortunately has contributed to my fear of flying. ✈️
You had me at, “As an old pilot……”
I veto almost every request by first officers to fly visually unless it’s operationally required. These aircraft are not for use as our personal playthings. Passengers deserve the peace of mind that they are in safe hands at all times, not unwilling participants in a pilot joyride, hand-balling a jet around for his own personal pleasure. The autopilot is there for a reason in these machines.
Hey Blancolirio, please do a video about the mid air collision of 2 crop dusters out here in Idaho this past week, one of the pilots was my nephews flight instructor and unfortunately it took his life and the other pilot is in critical condition right now
I live in the OKC / Yukon area, and although I am not a pilot, my gut assumption is they were lined up on old Hwy 4 which is almost directly lined up with R13 about 8km out. That whole area is saturated in the communities lights EXCEPT for this little section just after the High School! (well lite and Texas sized football stadium btw). That area is basically oddly forested and from the air at that time of night, likely looked like an island of property not lit and a lit up runway at the same degree direction as the runway. I am interested in hearing more to see if my hunch is correct.
Visual approaches are part of an IFR flight. I have taken the visual over shooting an approach many times during a part 91 operation. Doing so in a part 121 operation maybe fine in daylight into a very familiar airport. At night not so much.
Juan explains well!!❤🎉
begs the question if they were doing a visual approach (therefore not monitoring instruments) how could it be that they allowed the airplane to descend to within 500 ft of the ground in an area that apparently had sources of illumination?
“LNAV, VNAV, VNAV Path, cleared for the approach, set the minimums”
It’s a catchy jingle that keeps you out of trouble. 1700’ would be set for the minimums on the 737 since the published mins are 1640. I would suspect probably not in VNAV regardless of the autopilot being on or off
I wish the ATC audio started a few seconds earlier so we could hear their last assigned altitude. Seems to me the lowest they could have been vectored was 2800 msl, but they were at 2200-2000 when cleared the visual. ( if that audio is synched to the radar). I’m wondering if they might have had the RNAV 13 built, set minimums while a long way out expecting to intercept the VNAV path, then inadvertently hit FLCH instead of VNAV. I just saw someone do this in a sim trainer. I agree it doesn’t look like they were on AP, maybe just following the pitch bar blindly. Just a thought.
Man, that Southwest pilot sure sounded sleepy/tired! Nice report, Juan - as always.
It's not any fault of any pilot or crew -- it's capitalism and the industry forcing these insane schedules. Competition and profit have gotten way out of control. Unions and organized labor today aren't helping much, either.
Thanks for sharing. This pilot sounded downright tired. How long had he been at it prior? Overwork is a common problem in many professions. Needs improvement. Another profession where this can be a serious problem - medicine. This business of expecting a doctor or nurse to be superhuman and continue to function well on no sleep for days is hogwash. I want my pilots to be rested and together, thank you very much, just as much as I would a doctor who held my life in their hands. Otherwise, all bets are off. I'll fly the danged plane and everybody else can do their own math.
He always sounds like that.
Well, at least airline pilots get mandated time off. Mechanics in airlines do too.
Too bad it doesn’t trickle down, I’ve worked a 3 day shift with 3 hours sleep at best in between (not actually turning wrenches) in GA maintenance.
shhhhhhhh be very very quiet, i'm hunting wrabbit..........
Yeah, I won't be surprised if the cockpit voice recorder reveals that the incident was caused by a sterile-cockpit violation related to jokes about that waypoint.
Young pilots may not know about wascally wabbits, or BR549
Love it!❤
WABUT
No Its wary wary quiet.....
Looking at the satellite map view, there is a major road, in Yukon, running in the same direction as Rwy 13. Wonder if they confused that road with the runway.
Thanks Juan, always look forward to your videos.
Juan great video but just a heads up, SWA is a 100% NON-WAAS fleet... so all LP and LPV minimums are PROHIBITED at SWA. they would use the LNAV mins and convert the MDA to a DDA (add 50ft to the MDA and treat it like a DA). So the minimums would be 1750 MSL. They would then fly the aircraft in LNAV and VNAV PTH mode down to the LNAV mins DDA.
All that being said, SWA rarely actually sets minimums on the EFIS. If they are doing a visual approach OR a straight in instrument approach but weather is VMC, they will set touchdown zone elevation (TDZE) for the minimums. This is what the AOM says to do.
Let me know if you have any questions. Other than that, great video sir!
What do you think happened? Equipement failure?
Oh boy, here we go again! We had a similar night visual GPWS incident at my airline at OAK night visual RWY 30. My last 15 years with tighter stabilized approach criteria, I have not ever flown any VISUAL approach without an UNDERLINING approach procedure. Always I request a named fix on the approach no closer than 10 miles out, noting that PUBLISHED ALTITUDE STEP DOWN my lowest let down altitude. Any terrain issues or unfamiliarity with the area, I follow the LINKED ROUTING to the approach, NEGATING get home/hotel pressure. At night time, AUTOPILOT is essential with terrain and fatigue issues. I can not recall any airport runway that we service that does not have an PUBLISHED APPROACH PROCEDURE.
The first "clear to land" from the controller, sounded like he was "below mins".
I just learned that the most dangerous time in the flight is right during the approach to landing phase! the workload starts to go up since you are going from a cruise environment to a terminal environment and you are at your lowest energy levels meaning usually max fatigue. This flight was a perfect example of this.
But you would have learned that during private pilot training it's right there in the PHAK.