If they were unsure where to vacate the runway, they just had to ask ATC "confirm next one to the right". On such a busy airfield it is a very bad idea to stop on the runway.
Why is the tower controller left to do the approach controllers job re traffic awareness and speed control on final? Elsewhere (non-US) this happens on apch freq.
I think this is unique for JFK, due to JFK's unique position with two other major airports very close by, notably LaGuardia just 10 miles away (and Newark is 20 miles away). Because of how close JFK and LGA are to each other, there are a lot more limitations than usual on where one can fly during departures and approaches, and I would guess that having them switch to tower when they do is to make things simpler for both ATC (which has all aircraft in the immediate airspace on one frequency) and the pilots (who are able to switch to tower frequency more than a few miles out). Additionally, some approaches - namely Canarsie visual for runway 13R) has a sharp turn to final right before landing so having them not be on tower frequency by that point would be a bit more risky
Because they are within the tower’s control zone. They were already sequenced by approach, and now they are on the final leg cleared for the approach and switched to tower. The tower controller now must keep the airplanes separated on final.
Have heard other ATC's be much more firm or harsh in situations like this. Anyone who flies any commercial airliner from any country must know that especially at large hub airports, you do not stop on a runway! I even know that, and I haven't even been a passenger on a plane in over twenty years. Sometimes I'm just amazed how clueless and unaware some of these pilots are.
ATC missed the incorrect read back. They were told to "turn right on Mike Charlie, right on Papa and join Bravo" but read back "right on Mike, Charlie, right on Papa to Bravo". They added a comma between Mike and Charlie that wasn't supposed to be there. I can understand ATC missing such a subtle error in the read back, but that was the problem. They didn't have a problem with the aircraft. They were looking for Mike and realised they had already passed it before eventually realising their mistake. They then blamed it on the aircraft out of embarrassment. (I can't say any of that for certain, of course, but it seems pretty clear to me. There is a definite pause in the read back. The system for taxiway names should probably be changed to something less liable to be confused. The controller doesn't control that, though, so I would suggest just saying "take the first available exit on the right" when there is following traffic on short final. Perhaps there is a reason they needed to be on MC specifically, but I doubt it.
I wouldn't say that ATC "missed" the readback, given the radio communication, the accent of the pilot and ATC, and the way things get shortcutted by pilots. Still, there is a reasonable likelihood that the pilots got confused by Mike and Charlie as a single taxiway and decided to stop rather than pull into what could be the wrong taxiway. The slow approach suggested they were uncertain, and some language issues also contributed.
Some Airlines using John F Kennedy do not allow the co-pilot to be at the controls and the Captain on the radio. at least till they have significant experience at large airports. The Avianca A320 was doing 150 kts on final which is a somewhat low speed, [ what we refer to as dragging it in.] One crewmember has to keep up an awareness of intersection names because when the controller instructs you to turn off the runway, he will assign an intersection by name. JFK is a safe airport, but it is also overloaded at times and somewhat challenging to put back in sync with approach control when things get botched. I love the way that the controller in the tower apologized even though his instructions were correct and needful.
Requesting an aircraft to vacate at a particular point is just that, a request. ATC can’t instruct a pilot to vacate at a certain point. Such details will be listed in the airport charts, where preferred exits are listed. Pilots use these to set the aircraft up correctly.
@@EdOeuna ATC can certainly instruct an aircraft to use particular taxiways at a controlled airport. If you can't slow down fast enough to take the instructed exit then you can respond "unable", but just because the pilots may be unable to follow the instruction doesn't mean it isn't an instruction.
@@EdOeuna Let's be honest now !! at certain airports, San Francisco, you exit at the high speed, In Oakland its Whiskey 5. You can do that all day long safely. It's always the Ball braker who thinks only he has a concern of safety, [ and a mommy who loves him ] who will make a problem about that. Listen guys, you may be doing four legs a day for the next 20 years, be wise, keep the Aircraft on profile and at speed on the approach, and you will not need a pocket big enough to carry about all those excuses about you being the captain.
@@neilkurzman4907 Jup, still too much questioning and talking on freq for me, when the priority was traffic vacating the rwy and having the next plane land. Then again, I'm also against lengthy taxi instructions before vacating - especially with foreign pilots. I'm not saying he did something wrong, merely offering improvement in communication. He did take time to ask why they stopped and in the same breath asked them to continue. Having them move first, ask questions later would avoid overloading them and have them act faster. Btw, the guy above you is known for trolling in comments. TLDR: While atc did nothing inherently wrong, there can be improvements made. First priority is having the plane vacate the rwy (if not damaged). Since this is time-critical and the pilots not native English speakers, asking for information at the same time should be avoided. Same principle as not asking the reason of a go around while giving missed approach instructions at low altitude.
They apparently had an issue with the aircraft (which they said). How are they supposed to let tower know beforehand if the issue happened when landing?
Because there are two pilots and one of them has a radio. If they had even one iota of situational awareness, they'd realize there was another airplane bearing down on them and about to kill 300+ people if they tried to land. So they should have said something.
yeah but you wanted to land and get to your hotel quickly, so does the plane behind you. If you screw all that up you're going to get an attitude. The whole system crumbles if the pilots suck at their job. The expectation with how the traffic is scheduled is that the pilots are competent.
Because there are a LOT of planes. If you don't do this you have to restrict your capacity a LOT. The pilots know there is a plane ahead of them and they're expected to watch for it. The pilots would have done the go around on their own if the tower hadn't instructed it.
Well, aviator navigate and communicate, if they had an issue, ATC is last on the pecking order. It went how it should do, he had an issue ATC spotted it and they sent the next around, ATC got upset for having to be alert and do their job, This cleared to land before the runway is clear isn’t the best way of doing things either, But still, the situation panned out out it should.
@@N1120Asure, but you could wait until the preceding aircraft left the runway. And if an aircraft is starting its flare while there's still an aircraft on the runway, it should've already been a go around.
@@alex2143 "there's still an aircraft on the runway, it should've already been a go around" Sometimes it's right on the edge, e.g. a Hughes Airwest DC-9-30 (the yellow bananna look of the current Spirit A320) started its flare and then held altitude briefly about eight feet off the runway as leisurely Cessna pilot at the far end was SO close to completely clearing but didn't quite. An extra second spent in ground effect for what might well have worked out, vs another fifteen minutes in one of the world's more crowded airspaces pre-transponder/ACAS.
ANC is over-used. It’s really only applicable in the initial response to a time critical situation, and even then communication doesn’t always come last.
@@OfficeLinebacker - you need situational awareness, but that’s about it. This whole “aviate, navigate, communicate “ is a clever pilot thing that has been blown out of proportion by budding pilots and aviation fans alike. It’s really only applied to time critical situations like an engine failure on take off. Beyond that there are plenty of times when communicating is more important than aviating or navigating.
Yes it's 100% the pilots' fault. You don't come to a complete stop on an active runway at one of the busiest airports in the world. Close separation is normal ops at big airports.
They are South American, European aviation sometimes have trouble adapting to the standard found at JFK. They often get caught out by the standard expected in the US.
@@YouCanSeeATC technically, Avianca group is registered in the UK, so that make them European, at least on paper. :) oh, wait... did the UK leave EU only? or did they leave Europe as well? 😅🤣😂
Aviate, navigate, communicate. Notice how communicate is last. I could care less about who’s on short final or talking to tower when I’m dealing with an issue on my airplane. This controller needs remedial training on his role.
ANC is really only for emergencies when there is a life and death situation going on. In this situation, when there isn’t an emergency, communication is urgently required. If they’ve stopped there is no aviating or navigating.
@@EdOeunaNope. It applies at all times. I will always bring my passengers and crew to the gate safely (aviate). That applies when we’re on the ground or in the air.
@@neilkurzman4907 -the controllers can only advise which exit to take. The pilots have the final say in where they actually vacate, using various forms of guidance, of course.
@@EdOeuna So you’re saying, aircraft can travel around the airport at their discretion and not notify ground control. They were given directions, they accepted the directions.
If they were unsure where to vacate the runway, they just had to ask ATC "confirm next one to the right". On such a busy airfield it is a very bad idea to stop on the runway.
People are often too slow to ask for directions. Pilots are no exception.
There’s nothing to the left… take any taxiway to the right dude…
Don't mess with NY area controllers!
"You talkin ta me? You talkin ta ME?!"
Does this count as break checking?
break checking? they are taking a break after a long flight on the runway? or did you mean brake checking, as in road rage? 😍😂😂
It would be Brake checking. Break means broken.
@@S_Paolirubbings racing
@@S_Paoli At least I had the correct characters. Next time I'll aim for the right order 🙄
@@1320fastback yup, right characters, wrong order.
Why wasn't he given a phone number?
Probably was given it on the last freq he was given...
Someone is already down the stairs about to punch the pilot flying in the face. The ring mark will say " INY"
Why is the tower controller left to do the approach controllers job re traffic awareness and speed control on final? Elsewhere (non-US) this happens on apch freq.
I think this is unique for JFK, due to JFK's unique position with two other major airports very close by, notably LaGuardia just 10 miles away (and Newark is 20 miles away). Because of how close JFK and LGA are to each other, there are a lot more limitations than usual on where one can fly during departures and approaches, and I would guess that having them switch to tower when they do is to make things simpler for both ATC (which has all aircraft in the immediate airspace on one frequency) and the pilots (who are able to switch to tower frequency more than a few miles out). Additionally, some approaches - namely Canarsie visual for runway 13R) has a sharp turn to final right before landing so having them not be on tower frequency by that point would be a bit more risky
@@andrew-m There are also at least 2 other General Aviation airports close by as well
Because they are within the tower’s control zone. They were already sequenced by approach, and now they are on the final leg cleared for the approach and switched to tower. The tower controller now must keep the airplanes separated on final.
Have heard other ATC's be much more firm or harsh in situations like this. Anyone who flies any commercial airliner from any country must know that especially at large hub airports, you do not stop on a runway! I even know that, and I haven't even been a passenger on a plane in over twenty years. Sometimes I'm just amazed how clueless and unaware some of these pilots are.
Good save.
ATC missed the incorrect read back. They were told to "turn right on Mike Charlie, right on Papa and join Bravo" but read back "right on Mike, Charlie, right on Papa to Bravo". They added a comma between Mike and Charlie that wasn't supposed to be there. I can understand ATC missing such a subtle error in the read back, but that was the problem. They didn't have a problem with the aircraft. They were looking for Mike and realised they had already passed it before eventually realising their mistake. They then blamed it on the aircraft out of embarrassment. (I can't say any of that for certain, of course, but it seems pretty clear to me. There is a definite pause in the read back.
The system for taxiway names should probably be changed to something less liable to be confused. The controller doesn't control that, though, so I would suggest just saying "take the first available exit on the right" when there is following traffic on short final. Perhaps there is a reason they needed to be on MC specifically, but I doubt it.
I think you nailed it
LOL, I seriously hope you are trolling. "They added a comma between Mike and Charlie" OMG
@@JohnSmith-zi9or They did. Listen to it. There is a definite pause.
I wouldn't say that ATC "missed" the readback, given the radio communication, the accent of the pilot and ATC, and the way things get shortcutted by pilots. Still, there is a reasonable likelihood that the pilots got confused by Mike and Charlie as a single taxiway and decided to stop rather than pull into what could be the wrong taxiway. The slow approach suggested they were uncertain, and some language issues also contributed.
@@JohnSmith-zi9or You're not as intelligent as you think you are. Thomas got it right.
Some Airlines using John F Kennedy do not allow the co-pilot to be at the controls and the Captain on the radio. at least till they have significant experience at large airports. The Avianca A320 was doing 150 kts on final which is a somewhat low speed, [ what we refer to as dragging it in.] One crewmember has to keep up an awareness of intersection names because when the controller instructs you to turn off the runway, he will assign an intersection by name. JFK is a safe airport, but it is also overloaded at times and somewhat challenging to put back in sync with approach control when things get botched. I love the way that the controller in the tower apologized even though his instructions were correct and needful.
Requesting an aircraft to vacate at a particular point is just that, a request. ATC can’t instruct a pilot to vacate at a certain point. Such details will be listed in the airport charts, where preferred exits are listed. Pilots use these to set the aircraft up correctly.
What airline does this?
@@EdOeuna ATC can certainly instruct an aircraft to use particular taxiways at a controlled airport. If you can't slow down fast enough to take the instructed exit then you can respond "unable", but just because the pilots may be unable to follow the instruction doesn't mean it isn't an instruction.
@@thomasdalton1508 - exactly, pilots can refuse ATC commands and do what is safe for them and their aircraft.
@@EdOeuna Let's be honest now !! at certain airports, San Francisco, you exit at the high speed, In Oakland its Whiskey 5. You can do that all day long safely. It's always the Ball braker who thinks only he has a concern of safety, [ and a mommy who loves him ] who will make a problem about that. Listen guys, you may be doing four legs a day for the next 20 years, be wise, keep the Aircraft on profile and at speed on the approach, and you will not need a pocket big enough to carry about all those excuses about you being the captain.
Why no PILOT DEVIATION???
Everybody controller sounds like the legendary Kennedy Steve at JFK.
I'd call that a reasonable reaction. Possible improvement: "Vacate right, no delay" instead of asking why they stopped.
Do you drive for Greyhound?
@@RLTtizME Sorry, I do not sell bus tickets :)
I am good at analyzing time-critical comms, though.
@@lyaneris We'll be the judge of that.
@@lyaneris
And the controller was analyzing time critical information in real time.
@@neilkurzman4907 Jup, still too much questioning and talking on freq for me, when the priority was traffic vacating the rwy and having the next plane land. Then again, I'm also against lengthy taxi instructions before vacating - especially with foreign pilots.
I'm not saying he did something wrong, merely offering improvement in communication. He did take time to ask why they stopped and in the same breath asked them to continue. Having them move first, ask questions later would avoid overloading them and have them act faster. Btw, the guy above you is known for trolling in comments.
TLDR: While atc did nothing inherently wrong, there can be improvements made. First priority is having the plane vacate the rwy (if not damaged). Since this is time-critical and the pilots not native English speakers, asking for information at the same time should be avoided.
Same principle as not asking the reason of a go around while giving missed approach instructions at low altitude.
They apparently had an issue with the aircraft (which they said). How are they supposed to let tower know beforehand if the issue happened when landing?
They said they had an issue with the aircraft after he asked.
So obviously, the radio worked
Because there are two pilots and one of them has a radio. If they had even one iota of situational awareness, they'd realize there was another airplane bearing down on them and about to kill 300+ people if they tried to land. So they should have said something.
Don't aircraft at the head of the landing sequence have priority over the aircraft behind them? And does this not apply to freshly-landed aircraft?
Sure. It's their runway. Still, if you readback an exit and taxi instructions, understand that to mean you get off the runway.
If you tell ATC that you're going to exit the runway, and then you stop on the active runway, doesn't ATC have the right to ask why you stopped?
yeah but you wanted to land and get to your hotel quickly, so does the plane behind you. If you screw all that up you're going to get an attitude. The whole system crumbles if the pilots suck at their job. The expectation with how the traffic is scheduled is that the pilots are competent.
May someone please let me know why American ATC's clear more than one aircraft to land?
Because there are a LOT of planes. If you don't do this you have to restrict your capacity a LOT. The pilots know there is a plane ahead of them and they're expected to watch for it. The pilots would have done the go around on their own if the tower hadn't instructed it.
@zachansen8293 Seems silly and dangerous. Other extremely busy airports around the world don't do this and manage just fine.
@@davidgraham7932 and jfk manages just fine doing it this way. All of you people like "well we do it this way so why don't they?" 🙄
The procedure is stupid. In the us landing clearance is largely a formality. It’ll change with an accident.
Approach controller error , not enough space between them . Operational error more than likely with less than 3 miles separation
Haarscharf.
Well, aviator navigate and communicate, if they had an issue, ATC is last on the pecking order.
It went how it should do, he had an issue ATC spotted it and they sent the next around,
ATC got upset for having to be alert and do their job,
This cleared to land before the runway is clear isn’t the best way of doing things either,
But still, the situation panned out out it should.
It isn't the best way of doing things to wait till the flare to clear an airplane to land.
@@N1120Asure, but you could wait until the preceding aircraft left the runway. And if an aircraft is starting its flare while there's still an aircraft on the runway, it should've already been a go around.
@@alex2143 "there's still an aircraft on the runway, it should've already been a go around" Sometimes it's right on the edge, e.g. a Hughes Airwest DC-9-30 (the yellow bananna look of the current Spirit A320) started its flare and then held altitude briefly about eight feet off the runway as leisurely Cessna pilot at the far end was SO close to completely clearing but didn't quite. An extra second spent in ground effect for what might well have worked out, vs another fifteen minutes in one of the world's more crowded airspaces pre-transponder/ACAS.
@@marcmcreynolds2827 this sounds like putting efficiency before safety.
Yes, they needed to navigate themselves off the runway.
If they wanted to park, they should’ve done it on a taxi way
.. all of a sudden his English is broken... 'sumthing wrong wid da plane' clown.
sorry, but: aviate, navigate, communicate.
That expression is new to all of us.
ANC is over-used. It’s really only applicable in the initial response to a time critical situation, and even then communication doesn’t always come last.
I'm not a pilot so please explain to me how much aviation and navigation is going on when the plane is STOPPED on the GROUND?
@@OfficeLinebacker - you need situational awareness, but that’s about it. This whole “aviate, navigate, communicate “ is a clever pilot thing that has been blown out of proportion by budding pilots and aviation fans alike. It’s really only applied to time critical situations like an engine failure on take off. Beyond that there are plenty of times when communicating is more important than aviating or navigating.
@@OfficeLinebacker The guy sells underwear for a living. You can disregard his posts.
Just a few seconds of separation .... is the pilot at fault really ? .....
Yes it's 100% the pilots' fault. You don't come to a complete stop on an active runway at one of the busiest airports in the world. Close separation is normal ops at big airports.
It's a busy frickin' airport. They don't just magically get all the planes in and out without getting them in efficiently.
@@zachansen8293 I understand, more efficient sure is not making it any safer
Ok I’m sorry
Im guessing that wasnt pilot deviation
It was pilot retardation
It still could’ve been.
Or maybe ATC didn’t think it was serious enough to warrant it
Another avianca incident.. clowns should be nowhere near USA airports
USA is clowns
Oof
it's always these European airlines causing chaos at JFK lol
The are not from Europe.
They are South American,
European aviation sometimes have trouble adapting to the standard found at JFK.
They often get caught out by the standard expected in the US.
@@YouCanSeeATC technically, Avianca group is registered in the UK, so that make them European, at least on paper. :) oh, wait... did the UK leave EU only? or did they leave Europe as well? 😅🤣😂
🤣👍
Its always Americans who display geographical ignorance
Aviate, navigate, communicate. Notice how communicate is last. I could care less about who’s on short final or talking to tower when I’m dealing with an issue on my airplane. This controller needs remedial training on his role.
ANC is really only for emergencies when there is a life and death situation going on. In this situation, when there isn’t an emergency, communication is urgently required. If they’ve stopped there is no aviating or navigating.
He’s on the ground, he needs to navigate off the runway.
How is that the controllers problem?
@@EdOeunaNope. It applies at all times. I will always bring my passengers and crew to the gate safely (aviate). That applies when we’re on the ground or in the air.
@@neilkurzman4907 -the controllers can only advise which exit to take. The pilots have the final say in where they actually vacate, using various forms of guidance, of course.
@@EdOeuna
So you’re saying, aircraft can travel around the airport at their discretion and not notify ground control.
They were given directions, they accepted the directions.
Latinos