Plane ENTERS RUNWAY while Airbus IS ROLLING FOR TAKEOFF at Orlando Sanford
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2024
- Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASAviation
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Flying Eyes 10% OFF: flyingeyesoptics.com/?ref=Vas...
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
Please, give a big LIKE to support and for more videos like this!! :)
He was requesting progressive taxi instructions for a reason...
... he can't see?
when N9240L can't even follow progressive taxi instructions.... he needs to be done flying. He's trying to taxi while following instructions instead of writing it down, looking at a chart or foreflight then follow progressive.
Yes I agree, even as a solo student pilot, you should be able to read and interpret airport signs, markings, and be able to use an airport diagram.
I’d like to see if anything comes of this, there’s so much wrong here. The RT on both controller’s parts isn’t good and the Grumman pilot seems completely lost, did he not have any aerodrome plates at all? And the phrase “cancel takeoff clearance” seems silly to me, here in the UK we’d say “stop stop stop” and we never have these issues
@@elbobo3251 The ICAO approved phraseology seems to be: "Big Jet 345 stop immediately"
well dang. days without runway incursion: 0
At least it wasn't ATC deviation this time...
@@cibularas3485 lol clown. the ATC is an old dude. and so is the pilot.
@@cibularas3485not even close.
@@cibularas3485Can’t pass up a chance to blame those pesky minorities now, can we?
@@josephspinner4231, They are trying to inject politics into the conversation. Yeah, theyre a dummy. v
Lets reset the timer
Might have to change it to minutes since last incursion
At lest it wasn't the tower this time
Controller 1: Something feels off today...
Controller 2: Have you had your daily Runway Incursion yet?
Controller 1: Aaah that's it! Mine's late...
More like has the pilot had their daily runway incursion
Sad but true.
@@joshuamitchell3441 (cue Minions pretending to be pilots scene where they drive across four active runways and strafe tower) "La-la-la-la-la la-la la-la..."
Laughable 🤦🏾♀️
Seriously feels like there’s been 5 major incursions in the last week
I 100% bet my own pilot's license that this pilot didn't have the airport diagram on him the entire time.
That's not an excuse though, especially with those instructions. The taxi instructions were clear enough for a 10 year old to follow
@@waholoopesorry74 the controller over splained. The pilot clearly messed up, but the controller ignored his request for progressive, then gave excessively detailed standard taxi. Over splain has contributed to accidents before. The pilots big mistake was not missing the instructions, but failing to refuse the taxi instructions given
More then likely it was at night, I’m not giving excuses BUT airports can be confusing at night with all the taxiways looking alike and like dark holes
We need flashy Follow Me cars for GA pilots who can't write and can't read simple letters.
@@jaywung7616entering a runway you’ve not been given permission to is not acceptable though. Nothing ATC did excuses this mistake
The pilot requested ATC instruction, but then failed to follow almost every instruction given...
ATC did say to cross a runway....
@@TedSchoenling ATC did say to cross runway 27C, NOT 27R.....
He probably wasnt familiar with center@@Flies2FLL
He asked for progressive and the controller gave standard taxi instructions in a way that was even MORE complicated and potentially confusing. Doesn't absolve the pilot from missing the runway hold markings and taxi signs, and failing to ask for more help, of course
He wasn’t given progressive instructions, he was given normal instructions. Progressive instruction is one taxiway/intersection at a time, wait for him to stop and then the next taxiway/intersection. Not the full thing up front. This was on the controller.
"It is happening again. It is happening again."
Yeah but this time it wasn't the controller's fault
@@waholoopesorry74 On my work, when person asks for assistance, and further down shows lack of knowledge, if I do not intervene he is a disaster waiting to happen. And since we cannot "cancel takeoff clearance", if left unattended he is now without an arm, hand, or possibly without a head. What do you think now of the ATC's responsibility?
He's coming right at us!
I’ll add a new comment. The ground controller DID issue progressive taxi instructions plus he kept a close eye on the Grumman because he was correcting the pilot’s taxi mistakes. As for the pilot, he notified ground controller that he was unfamiliar with the airport and he requested progressive instructions. I am a retired ATC and I can tell you that it can get confusing when you are on the airport at ground level. I am not a pilot. We had five runways at one particular facility where I worked many years ago. Tower controllers have to be intimately familiar with everything on the field. Runway length, taxiways, location of all the FBOs, etc. But we are looking down at the airport from the control tower. One of my supervisors used to arrange for an airport employee to take controllers for a ride on the runways after dark. Why? So that the tower controllers had the opportunity to see the airport from the perspective of a pilot in a small aircraft. We are familiar with the airport but it’s a different ball game when you are riding along in a pickup truck. You no longer have a plan view (looking down on the airport from above) The runways are 150 feet wide. Not the ribbons of concrete that you see at a distance from the tower. There is a sea of lights. Runway edge lights and taxiway lights. It can be confusing in daylight as well. Plus airport runways may not be completely flat. Runways are a mile and a half to two miles or longer unless you are at a smaller field. In other words if you are in a vehicle or a short aircraft and are at one end of the runway you may not be able to see the far end because it is at a slightly lower elevation. This event occurred at approximately 2350Z so that means that it was 7:50 PM, almost at sunset. It was a runway incursion. The pilot simply made a mistake. The ground and local controllers were both vigilant. My two cents.
My experience taxiing at night as a Student Pilot definitely was not confidence building. We went to a Delta and once on the ground, yeah, it was a sea of lights and I was completely lost without my CFI. It was like being on an alien planet. Once back at our untowered home airport with one small runway and one taxiway I felt more at ease... until I turned onto the high speed taxiway exit only to find it was grass between the lights! I think I'll skip flying at night, haha.
Thanks for that information.
new or not, he's responsible to have a lot more ability than he showed to be at that airport. Stick to small airports if you can't hack it
Thank you for showing pilot empathy when no one else seems to be able to do. It’s easy to make mistakes like these, regardless of how dire they can be. The most we can do is learn from them.
How were those progressive taxi instructions? They didn't start giving him correct progressive taxi instructions until he had already had the runway incursion.
Very nice, calm controller. No histrionics or yelling
His Kilo Bravo Romeo is so soothing😆
Y'all are missing the fact that at 0:59 , Ground tells the Grumman to take the next left onto L, cross 27C at Lima. It is entirely possible he mistook 27C as another taxiway and though 27R was 27C.
You can call him stupid as much as you want, and yes, he should have been more prepared, and maybe Ground should have said "unable" and sent him back to the FBO to print some charts, but I think this is very understandable incident and he likely doesn't have 2 radios to monitor tower.
That being said, head-checking the runway is a good practice before crossing, even when you ARE given clearance...
I'd have thought if he really wasn't familiar with the airport he'd have made sure he had the airport diagram with him and if he wasn't sure, asked at the local FBO or aero club for a briefing first. To just blunder about when you know you have no idea where you're going seems reckless at best to me
It probably doesn't help that rw 27C is not labeled as "27C" @ L but rather "9C". The first rw that says "27" on it at a L intersection is 27R
His next instruction is to turn right on B, which he proceeded to miss ... even if you think you're not that far along, you should probably check if the taxiway you're approaching is where you're supposed to turn.
Runways are painted very differently than taxiways with obvious hold short lines. Not an excuse at all.
Controller was very patient with the Grumman 40L (and spoke slowly!). Good call cancelling the take-off clearance for the departing Allegiant.
After all that confusion, you’d think the controller would only give the telephone number after the guy reaches the holding point and is stopped.
Not while taxiing and approaching another runway.
Friendly reminder that the depictions aren't necessarily accurate. He could've been holding short when he got issued the number the 2nd time.
As a pilot, it is ultimately my responsibility to follow ATC instructions and to prevent runway incursions. What follows is my perspective, and in no way excuses the pilot for the mistake - just to offer an explanation for some of the folks calling for his license to be revoked:
Note how tiny Runway 9/27C is, and how it is aligned with the taxiway Charlie. We can see runway markings on the satellite view, but from the cockpit in the ocean of colored lights, it is surprisingly easy to get mildly disoriented on the ground. 9/27C has no centerline lighting, no touchdown zone lighting - only medium intensity edge lighting and end identifiers, which are primarily aimed out at approaching aircraft, NOT at the taxiways. Althoughtl there is a hold short bar, it does not appear to be lighted nor do there appear to be "wig-wag" caution lights on that runway.
What i suspect happened is that, being unfamiliar with the airport, the pilot confused RWY 9L/27R for 9/27C. When he taxi'd across 27C, i expect he thought it was just another taxiway (or part of the ramp - its very close to the ramp and its hard to see grass in the dust/dark) and may have missed the indications. Then, when approaching 9R/27L which was more clearly marked as a runway, he thought he was cleared to cross because he thought it was 9/27C.
Again, responsibility for double-checking that you are where you think you are falls to the pilot, FULL STOP. My iPad will alert me over my bluetooth-enabled headset when approaching any runway, and has a geo-referenced diagram of the airport that shows me the position at all times. But that is an expensive subscription, and it is possible the pilot was referencing a paper chart or using a lesser EFB product/cheaper subscription - all of which are fully legal to do.
Before calling for the pilot's license to be revoked, it is important to understand what we can learn from the situation, and what couldnhave been done differently. The controller could have given the pilot better instructions - he asked for progressive taxi, but the controller gave him a full set of instructions to his departure intersection, including a crossing clearance. The controller could have given him true progressive instructions - that is, turn-by-turn. The pilot could have stopped at any turn and confirmed, and the controller could have checked in when the Grumman missed the right turn on Bravo before the incursion. The airport could invest in better lighting, or chart the "Hot spot" like the do on the other end of 9/27C to better inform pilots about the dangers of confusing the two runways, especially at night.
Pulling the pilot's license wont teach anyone anything. Better to have a conversation about what went wrong and how the lessons learned here can increase safety for EVERYONE. The Grumman pilot survived, and will potentially be able to relate this very poignant lesson to his peers.
Every time I hear "Grumman" on the radio, I listen very closely, find it, and keep an eye on it. More often than not, shenanigans ensue.
Dear god, so true.
TRUE....usually the pilot is at least 110 years old....
Saaaay what?
Or worse…….RV pilots
Can I call the tower at Lakeland? 😂
I'm sure you could call them. Make sure you have a relevant reason. All the calls are recorded. Dont think you'd want to get a call or visit from the FBI. v
@@virginiatyree6705 A visit from the FBI? For calling a tower? Yeah that's not how that works. I called the tower literally last week at a field I was operating out of for a couple of days to ask for clarification about some unique local procedures. Had a good chat, shot the shit briefly. The next day I called to ask if they wanted some leftover snacks/sandwiches we had from an event we catered. They said absolutely and invited me up. No FBI visits, shocking as that may be to you.
@@ss-tx-rx2860 , Of course a person can call the tower. I also wrote it should be relevant to a specific situation. They're busy. To call & shoot the breeze or harass them, isnt a good idea. v
Only if you intend on landing on the taxiway, 3 days before Sun-n-Fun starts.
Pretty sure he was asking whether he should call the Sanford Tower before departing Sanford or after arriving at Lakeland. :) In most cases, you call after arrival, so that you're not distracted by the call while flying or taxiing. Since he hadn't departed yet, though, and things were still a bit dicey, controller wanted him to call before departing in this case (which is also completely fine as long as the aircraft is parked somewhere safe at the time, which I'm sure the Tower coordinated.)
A lot of comments here saying that ATC didn't give the pilot progressive instructions like he asked. The pilot was told to turn right on Bravo and he went straight ahead onto an active runway instead. Progressive instructions only work when a pilot actually obeys them.
Progressive instructions generally work like this “your next right is bravo, turn right on bravo”.
The only progressive he got was Lima and then was told to turn in bravo. After the first mistake, ATC should’ve given him progressive instructions the entire way there.
@@vitaly6312progressive taxi instructions are subjective, there is no standard. You give it based on what you hear/see coming from the crew
@@vitaly6312 No, as @KitHunn said, that was progressive taxi instructions. Despite what the name may imply, "progressive" just means "more detailed".
@@HiddenWindshieldyou're describing an evolved colloquial use of the phrase in current day, but it doesn't change the intended meaning, which is... progressive, or as you progress.
@@vitaly6312I think you and I are the only people who noticed this discrepancy. Theses are not progressive instructions
Great edit, thank you 🙏
This pilot seems to be completely disorientated.
Not disoriented; just up in age
Well if you're old and u r not fit to fly then stay away from the plane?
@@martinnikolov2363so just because you’re old, you shouldn’t be able to fly?
@@jhsevs He said "just up in age" , meaning that he is just old and that's why he made the mistake , like it is an excuse..Also if you read my comment carefully you will see that i also said "and u r not fit to fly" ...
@@jhsevs Yes. If you're making excessive errors. YES. Age should stop you from flying.
The pilot screwed up, that's clear. However, he knew that he din't know his way around! For everyone commening aboput how he should just have followed the markings I commend you to watch the FAA RUclips video "From the Flight Deck - Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB)" and look at just how (in)vibible the markings are from a light aircraft. He DID screw up but this wasn't helped by the airport layout/signage. It might also have helped if ATC had cleared him to cross 9C rather than 27C as the markings from his direction only say 9C and its narrower than most of the taxiways.
I always teach my students to pull the taxiway diagram and make sure they understand the clearance before they even start moving.
ANOTHER ONE! holy cow! It's dangerous out there.
Progressive taxi doesn’t include a litany of taxiways! The guy was asking for help and ATC set him up for failure. But as a pilot, if you are not 100% sure of where you are going, set the parking brake! And sure as hell don’t cross an active runway!
I came here to say basically this. He asked for progressive but didn’t really get it. I’m saying it’s a shared fault between pilot and ATC.
yeah if the pilot was unsure of where he was he should be stating that over the radio, or asked again for progressive taxi. I wouldn't call that shared blame. We can always come with something the ATC could do better, but the buck stops at the pilot.
Ummm...no. He was literally ON K...yet even after saying he was unfamiliar, he did not ask where K was...
Yea… this was NOT a good example of getting progressive taxi. Definitely shared fault here.
No, progressive taxi instructions are usually issued like standard taxi instructions, then they have their hand held each step of the way. Just like here. The pilot is the issue here, not the ATC.
That’s sad Sanford is such a nice place with ATC
Controller was a contributing factor, never heard any instruction to hold short of the active runway.
ATC did say "on Kilo ..... that's straight ahead" - When Charlie looks more straight ahead and Kilo is a left turn. (Or if you see it the other way, Kilo is left and Charlie is right and there is NO straight ahead).
However, even without familiarity of the field, shouldn't they have the airport diagrams required for their flight plan? That would've also helped the pilot see the ATC error I observed and prevent disorientation by simply being in a state of good SA.
Yup, he absolutely should have had any relevant charts for the planned trip. Not having charts for a small plane would be forgivable if they had to divert in an emergency. Even then you need to copy down clearances and confirm runway markers before crossing.
@@RichFreeman No, it's not forgivable. It's 2024. Nobody should be flying without ForeFlight.
@@llaughridge Pretty sure that only runs on a single brand of hardware (Apple). EFBs in general aren't legally mandatory for any category of flying as far as I'm aware (certainly not for general aviation), let alone a specific vendor's software.
In any case it is a bit moot here as there was no reason for this pilot not to have the appropriate chart for this airport.
The pilot asked for progressive taxi instructions, which is basically one step at a time. The controller then gave the pilot three taxiways and a runway intersection. The pilot is still at fault for the runway incursion, but the controller could have given him better progressive instructions.
Found the inept pilot white knight.
I agree. That was not progressive.
The pilot should have asked for directions every time he reached an intersection.
Both ATC and pilot at fault.
"Hello everyone, this is youuuuuur daily dose of runway incursion..."
Seems he needed a car to trail to get him around the airport...
I think he actually needed a pace car to lead him.
That is just about the most calm-sounding ATC guy I’ve ever heard on your videos, especially considering the circumstances.
This channel is soon the be renamed "Daily dose of runway incursion"
"No, definitely here." LOLOL
Pilot got confused where to taxi. Seems to be a lot of those lately.
Oh boy! Another one! We just can't go a week without a runway incursion.
when N9240L can't even follow progressive taxi instructions.... he needs to be done flying. He missed taxiway K, incorrectly turned onto C, failed to realize he crossed 27C and assumed that the runway in front of him was 27C when it was really 27R.
Honestly, seems like he's using the "i'm new to this airport" as an excuse to not do preflight study and/or not have a chart open while taxiing.
Even though he has eyes to see he is crossing 27R (blame on him no doubt), he requested progressive taxi and never got it.
He didn't give him progressive taxi instructions, ATC was def telling him too much. Progressive means just one instruction at a time.
@@DISOPtv No, "progressive" taxi instructions just means "more detailed", e.g. including which way to turn.
Yeah, I assumed since he clipped the end of 27C on Lima he didn't realize it was the runway he was cleared across (disoriented and confused) so when he got to what looked like his first runway (but was actually 27R) he assumed it was the one he was cleared across. And since he was never given a hold short instruction, he wasn't expecting to come upon a runway probably. I'd put this 75% on the pilot and 25% on the ATC not giving clear instructions to someone who was clearly needing them.
@@HiddenWindshieldquit commenting this; it's wrong
Tower: Here is the progressive GROUNDING instructions, first call the tower. I'll tell you the next instruction on the phone.
LMAO, gotta emphasize on that "-ing"
Days since no incursion: 0
How come ,The ATC asked the Alligent to taxi to Rwy 9L via Bravo ,Alligent read back the same but he went on to go to Rwy 27R??
Yup
Btw people this is KSFB not KLAL. Although the entire Orlando area is way too busy.
He was going to LAL. He just wanted to know do I call now or when I get to LAL.
Small one at KCFO on 04/24/24. cessna tried to land wrong direction (35) as a helicopter was landing (17)
Never good to get the phone number. Thanks for the FAST upload!
We're a few months away from a major disaster
A co-pilot can help; also, studying the airport map before you light the fires and kick the tires might also be an idea. Granted, for me, if Victor didn’t have the graphics all laid out for me, I’d be as lost as this pilot, but I thought charts and things were part of their whole learning to fly process. 🤷♀️ At least he gave early heads-up that he was unfamiliar.
Taxi Kilo, right on Bravo, then left on Romeo - bloody hell, I'm not a pilot but can see this on the chart.
How the hell could he be so confused? It’s like he literally didn’t know what a taxiway sign looked like, or what they mean.
Probably some boomer 23 months from his last flight review with 5 hours logged in the last year flying on basicmed who has absolutely no business flying until he gets some remedial training.
haven’t had notifications for this channel in a long time
wtf youtube
They do the same bs to me too. I had to go back to the channel & reset the settings. Maybe, that might work for you, maybe...v
I advise you watch the latest videos. They have gone viral and are of extreme importance for aviation
@@VASAviation I will catch up after My treatment this morning
@@virginiatyree6705 it’s bullsh!t!
@@Valspartame_Maelstrom , Agreed. Do your best. v
Everyday we see a rwy incursion.
none yesterday
At least this one didn't have the usual ATC influence we've seen in recent videos. This was 100% pilot error.
I wonder why
Another close call... Not good, but looking forward to Juan's video on this. Thank you Victor for always being on top of these, you're #1 man! Take care!
I've encountered some pilots who only fly from their own airstrips but had to come into a larger airport (NZHN, not that big really) for maintenance who have no idea what they were doing. One guy couldn't even read back his clearance properly and had no idea what QNH was and after five goes the controller gave up. I was inbound and listening to this and when he pulled out in front of me while I was on short finals I was not even a little bit surprised, and I was ready for him and went round. Absolutely no clue at all.
This'll end in tears...
Here we go again!
I had to chuckle at the "We did get takeoff clearance, right?"
It's scary, even at a smaller airport, how a plane could cause safety of 100+ passengers. Thanks to ATC they were ready!
Wow what's up with all these runway incursions
this one was a GA doing it on his own vs. the JFK scenario where two different controllers gave conflicting instructions. Very different root causes so your question can't be answered in one response.
People being distracted or tired. It'd be nice to hear about the follow-up on these situations. v
Makes for good RUclips content!
I do believe I've talked to that controller before. When the guy ran out of fuel and landed on I4. He was preparing to get his plane fueled and was going to take off from I4. Controller called and told us not to let him do that. Fun times.
Looks like the Grumman planes are equipped with Tesla’s Summon feature now!
Far 91.103 states to Be familiar with airport environment of intended takeoff and landing. That includes airport diagram and hot spots. Complacency is a killer in aviation
This was at night.
All ground lighting was turned off.
And the N9240L skipper was taxiing IFR.
Seems legit.
Even if he was confused you’d think he’d be able to tell he was entering an active runway (or at least crossing a runway (active or not))
Maybe he thought 27R was 27C, of which he was cleared to cross (and presumably didn’t register that he crossed 27C?) Seems unlikely though
@@JsausageandbunEaterWithoniOn i agree with this conclusion. I don't think he realized he crossed 27C and assumed the runway in front of him was 27R. Regardless he should be able to read the runway sign 27R.
@@JsausageandbunEaterWithoniOnthis is 100% what happened
@@JsausageandbunEaterWithoniOn I think this is definitely what happened. Because 27C is not marked as 27C on the 9C end of the runway. It's marked as 9C. So he crosses 9C, then he sees 27-whatever and proceeds to cross. That's no excuse for crossing 27R without a clearance. Pilot should have asked for clarification when he arrived at 9C, which he wasn't explicitly instructed to cross.
This happened late twilight, 7:30 PM local. That's about the time where the sky light is dim but the ground lights might not be on yet. Easy to get lost in that 10 minute stretch on the ground.
I guess Allegiant knew what tower meant when they wanted him to taxi to 9L? At least they didn't try to send him to 27L lol. STOL.
We have gates on roads for rail crossings.
Wingspans on some planes makes rail crossing style gates impractical at best. There are signs and markings on the taxiways to alert a pilot. Also, you should still look both ways before crossing a runway, even if you know it's not active. You may have the wrong runway in your head.
Many bigger airports (bigger than this one, think JFK, FLL or ATL) even have red lights on the pavement that turn on when it the runway is occupied and people still blow past them.
@@jackielinde7568 Excuse me? No they don't. You move them farther apart and give them a bigger beam, what? How on earth would it not work? Blows my mind when people do NOT think at ALL like this
For some reason cattleguards sprung to mind when i first saw this comment, and then my furtive sense of humor was replaced by reflecting maybe if something caused that *bump-bump-bump* discomfort when one crosses a cattleguard at slow speed might alert the taxier that he is heading onto a runway?
On the other hand, the alert would probably be lost on the truly clueless.
Or just get better pilots
Grumman pilot screwed up clearly mistook 27R for 27C. BUT 27C looks more like a taxiway than a runway and the hold line is marked as 9C on the ground where he crossed. The next taxiway along has the hold line marked 9C/27C
Question for the pilots/controllers here. The ATC's instructions once he saw N9240L going the onto taxiway C instead of K was to turn left on L and cross 27C. The markings at this intersection say 9C not 27C. Is this a mistake by ATC? The pilot obviously should be asking for clarification numerous times and since he got clearance to cross 27C should he have asked if he has clearance to cross 9C when he got to that intersection since ATC did not give clearance to cross that specific runway designation?
My guess is the pilot assumed he had clearance to cross a runway labled 27X and the first one he came to that had 27X was 27L. Yes, he was supposed to turn right on Bravo and not even get to the threshold of 27L and this is definitely on him, but I can see where there was a confluence of mistakes by both.
9C is 27C in effect
I find your guess very plausible. Whatever caused the pilot to be distracted conspired with the 'RWY 27X thought glitch' you describe. Maybe in the future when giving progressive taxi instructions have the aircraft hold short of every single runway one at a time. Sure it will be a bit more radio communication, and the taxi will take a bit longer, but on the other hand, asking for progressive taxi is (I am guessing here) pilot-speak for "could I have a bit of extra help today please".
ATC are taught to mention a runway by direction of flow (so a pilot knows which way they will fly and expect traffic from).
As for markings, I wouldn’t be surprised if the ends start saying both directions soon enough. I’ve seen this mentioned before.
@@VASAviation Yes, but it's marked as 9C at L. If I got an instruction to cross 27C but I encounter 9C, I'm holding short and asking for clarification.
Ok I'll give the guy a break on K/C it's not an intersection it's a curve coming out of spot 5 unfamiliar you better be paying attention. The question I have is how the hell did he get to the FBO in the first place? I think it's harder to get from the runway to the FBO...
Why so many active runway incursions lately? This is scary…
PIC’s fault, but it was clear that PIC asked for progressive instructions at an airport and had already made a mistake.
If I were ATC, I’d say “make your next left” or “continue straight” and “stop there”.
ATC definitely has a portion of fault for not providing progressive instruction when asked for it. That doesn’t absolve a PIC who should have a runway diagram and be able to follow instructions. But ultimately ATC is in charge of the airport environment and they dropped the ball also.
ATC gave progressive. Part of being a pilot is navigating an airport. And being responsible to not cross a runway unless you are 100% clear you have permission. If the pilot can't navigate with left/rights and taxiway letters, they shouldn't be flying.
It's absolute insanity that this keeps happening.
Hoping that you will post on the Lufthansa 747 hard landing at LAX yesterday
Working on it
"… And that's runway 27 R at Romeo, kilo, bravo, and Romeo." Where was the "hold short of 27 right?" Granted, the new pilot screwed this up, but the controller also never advised whether he was going to hold short or lineup and wait.
You're required to get permission to enter/cross any runway. If unsure of what the controller specifically wants, then you're always more than welcome to as the controller specifically for clarification
...so are the instructions incomplete because they don't specify "hold short" at the end, or are they not progressive because they give too many steps ahead of time? Seems like folks here can't make up their minds.
Geez, this is happening on the daily now
"I'm new at this airport". And taxiing. And following instructions.
With the technology available today. you'd thing that they could put up Stop, Go, Turn Here and so forth, signs for aircraft that change as planes pass by...
He was unfamiliar with the airport, OK - I understand that. But was he also unfamiliar with how taxiways are marked with big bold yellow and black signs and thick, yellow taxiway centerline markings?
That ramp is not clearly marked. I’ve been there. However the pilot should have stopped and asked the controller before every turn.
And that's the way you do it.
Maybe I’m imagining it but it seems like this kind of thing is happening more and more often. Is there hard data on this?
I bet that ground controller could go through anything and still sound the same.
This is left 👈🏻
This is right 👉🏻
This is straight ahead 👆🏻
This is stop 🛑
On tomorrow’s lesson we will cover looking out the fucking window.
And asking the FBO if you can print off an airport diagram if you're not familiar with it... It's crazy what some of these pilots are doing.
@@TheFlyingZulu There’s multiple apps that literally give your exact position of your aircraft, like to the foot, on the taxi diagram. There’s absolutely no excuse nowadays to “get lost” at an airport.
Yeah I bet several ipads were hanging out obstructing the view. 🤣🤣🤣
I'd rather look _into_ the fucking window ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
haha
Repeating a comment from a thread, the pilot was never given the requested progressive taxi instructions. Instead he got “You’re gonna go right on Kilo, then right on bravo, then left on Romeo.” That’s not progressive, that’s a full taxi clearance. Yes the pilot screwed up several times. He did what many of us do not wanting to look stupid in that he just tried to figure it out on his own. Any/every time he felt lost, he should’ve stopped right there and asked for guidance. He was particularly bad at following taxi instructions and that’s not somewhere you can just try and fake it. I flew my small airplane out of Newark one day (KEWR, the big one) and during the long taxi to the active, I made damn sure to ask ground control multiple times “turn here?” even while getting progressive taxi instructions. I had no desire to get it wrong there.
What? Controller kept giving him next steps as he completed previous ones - that's exactly what progressive taxi instructions are. In particular, he was literally told to turn right on B as he crossed 27C - the L/B intersection was the next intersection in front of him, and he missed that turn, sending him straight onto 27R.
Every day this happens….. sigh.
If a pilot can't follow simple taxi instructions and isn't using an airport diagram, they shouldn't be flying.
Aaaand there it is: The weekly runway incursion in Murica 🦅🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸✈️✈️
There is no excuse for not having an airport diagram available in 2024
As a a completely casual observer of this channel, and I mean I may watch a video or two every few weeks, this exact situation seems to be happening at an alarming rate.
You know I get the confusion of not being familiar with an airport but personally, that makes me want to be extra careful when reading signage and making sure I’m not crossing any hold short makers without verifying the runway is clear and I have been cleared to cross.
This plane appears to be registered to an FAA Safety Officer out of the Orlando FSDO. Wow if true.
Oh good, here's the daily video of a plane entering a runway while another plane is taking off or landing. This DEFINITELY isn't happening too often lately.
I haven't seen this mentioned too much in the comments, but shouldn't Ground have added "Hold Short Runway 27R" after he told him to Taxi Bravo and left on Romeo. While the Grumman never turned on Bravo, that "Hold Short 27R" would have stayed with him (probably) and most likely he would have held short, even if at the wrong intersection. Seems odd to taxi him onto Romeo without giving a hold short instruction.
This is alarming something needs to be done .
I don't understand how you make a mistake like that.
So how many runway incursions do we this year in murica alone again? I lost count, like a 100?
Johnny Bravo
It has been 0 days since the last runway incursion.
I think I've had enough runway incursions for one month.
Is he new to this airport?
Or is he new to airports in general?
Cause he doesnt seem to understand taxiway/runway ID signs.
How do these people end up in cockpits honestly.
Yikes!
H had clearance to cross runway on Lima....I get it he was having a difficult time, but this seems like a controller issue, does it not? How is it not when they both have clearance?
I think he should have stopped after the first missed step. He was clearly either distracted or disoriented, either way the only cure is to stop safely and give yourself time. Kudos to the other pilot for checking his own work and staying professional instead of jumping to conclusions.
So sorry for this guy. I'd be embarrassed to death...
There are airport diagrams for a reason. Jeessss. It's not like it's that hard to find.
I'd be willing to bet money that someone doesn't have their 10-9 plate in front of them...
"here or at Lakeland?" oh my goodness the lack of self awareness lmfao.