DANGEROUS MANEUVER on Final Approach at JFK Airport. REAL ATC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 сен 2023
- 25 AUG 2023
A JetBlue Airways Airbus A320, registration N568JB, performing flight from Tampa International Airport (KTPA)
to New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (KJFK).
Was on final approach runway 22 left but the Tower
controller instructed them to go around and to turn left on heading 180 but the crew started the right
on heading 280. As a result, they crossed the final of runway 22 right where another aircraft was
descending towards JFK.
Main playlists:
EMERGENCY - • EMERGENCY
REAL ATC - • REAL ATC
CRASHES - • Crashes
If you enjoyed please support channel by subscribing and hitting the notification bell to get notified on new uploads.
DANGEROUS MANEUVER on Final Approach at JFK Airport. REAL ATC
Source of communications: www.liveatc.net (usage permission)
#REALATC #AIRTRAFFICCONTROLL #AVIATION
Endeavor was cool as a cucumber. I would have been sh*tting bricks listening to that exchange on the radio.
There was no RA. That means it wasn't even close to close, as you get an RA before it's "close"
(Disclaimer: not a pilot) I was wondering the same - but, at the same time, when you're in the clouds, I'm gonna guess that your best chance is to do exactly what controllers tell you and to trust TCAS as a last resort.
They were IMC nothing they can do but get ready to quickly respond to TCAS.
@@brandonadams7837 I knew they were IMC. That's what makes it worse!! You can't see anything, but you can only hear the urgency. And not hearing a TCAS really didn't help either!
ATC is supposed to catch the readback as being incorrect, right? Isn't that the purpose of having them read it back?
That is exactly correct, we listened to every readback to make sure they did what we said,
That is in theory what is supposed to happen. The reality is in a situation such as this the controllers work load skyrockets with the need to coordinate with other airspace. Normally fly runway heading buys some time, but in a case like this it looks like Jet Blue was overtaking the traffic. My guess was that this controller became saturated and even if she heard the incorrect read back it never registered as her mind was 6 places at once. This is not an excuse, in fact this is a good training tool to help new controllers understand the need to focus on the most important task,in this case the correct read back. I’m pretty sure she went to the watch desk totally confident she heard the correct read back and it was a pilot deviation. In my 30 years of controller experience I have seen this many times. In fact missed read backs were, and probably still are the number 1 controller error
They are, but there is a thing called "confirmation bias" where you expect to hear something, so when you hear something else that's close to it, particularly if you have a high workload, your brain ignores the discrepancy. It sounds like that's what happened here. The JetBlue pilot should have questioned it, though - to be given go-around instructions that would take you directly into the approach path of the parallel runway would be dangerous, so if they thought they heard "turn left 280", the first question is "erm, that's right, not left" and the next would be "and 280 takes me right into the approach path of the parallel runway". That should have been enough for the pilot to have requested clarification from tower. There are two pilots in that cockpit, and it amazes me that this occurred to neither of them.
@@efoxxok7478very quick to blame a female..
Listen again, first ATC, the one that issued the go around AND correction, was male.
@@efoxxok7478 That doesn't matter, they still need to be vigilant and ensure that they are hearing the correct readback.
If the pilot said “right turn** 280” maybe that controller would recognize incorrect read back … note to self always repeat left or right turn to assigned heading .
Isn't it technically required in the readback?
technically not required, it may not have helped ATC catch it.. I used to control, and when I first started in radar I did miss a few incorrect readbacks and the pilot even gave the incorrect direction a few times. It happens... you'd be surprised.
Seems like JBU was fixating on remembering his flight number.
This is a perfect example why standardized and standardized only language should be used at all times by everyone,
It significantly reduces the workload of everyone involved and makes communication precise and clear.. You don't have to think how to say what you want to say and the other side doesn't have to decipher what they just listened to.
The pilot in this case responded casually and omitted to read back if it was a left or a right turn, which is half the information needed. Communicating like that is amateurish behavior when doing a job that demands extreme professionalism.
It pretty much was standardized. The 280 turn instead of the 180 was the issue.bad read back that didn’t get caught. Happens 🤷♀️
@@garett2892ya, I didn’t even catch it.
@@57Jimmy it happens even to the best controllers lucky enough to have extra safety features in this job
I think the JetBlue pilot had a death wish
@@garett2892no, the turn was supposed to be to the left. The pilot did not clarify right or left and just turned right. If they had said, “right 280” instead of just 280, the controller may have caught the mistake earlier. Any heading change both the controller and pilot should clarify to the left or right.
I'm not a pilot but a train driver mainly in a big shunting yard here in Germany. We do readbacks as well when given the next instructions to make sure everything's clear. Sometimes when a signal does not work properly we are allowed to pass that "Stop" signal when the traffic controller allows it by saying "(e.g.) Loco 1 may proceed to cross signal XY."
One day I had such a situation and I said to him where I was. He thought I was at another signal, telling me to cross that one. I read back the Signal I was standing in front of and he didn't correct me or even noticed that he was talking about the wrong signal. Long story short, I noticed his mistake right before I headed into parked railway carriages ... we're all humans but sometimes that's not enough
An omitted item on the readback is as good as an incorrect readback. It was an odd instruction to turn LEFT but there was a purpose for that. My instrument instructor drilled paying attention to details like that. If it seems like an odd instruction or you are not sure, inquire. Being in IMC and knowing there is another aircraft out there has to have a pretty high pucker factor.
Unless otherwise instructed, left turns are the expected normal.
Jet Blue sounds like he's trying to stay awake. And, if the video and audio are in sync he was very slow to start the left turn back to the SE.
And?
And this is why you are supposed to actually listen to the readback...
This is also why standard phraseology is important, instead of rubbish like "280 on the heading"
Wow. Phew
Your other left!
Considering that it's IMC, workload on pilots and controllers is higher, hence the incorrect readback was missed.
I don't believe there was any pilot deviation here, as they did what was readback, and the controller never corrected them
Readbacks don’t transfer responsibilities back to controllers. Pilot is always ultimately responsible, so this was definitely pilots deviation.
did that Jet blue get a number to call..?
"280 on the heading" is non-standard and should NEVER be used. "heading 280" is much more precise and less bs
Tcas has activated?
Split S would've been cool
🤣
The CRJ could probably pull off an Immelmann.
That’s the last thing you should do, Endeavour’s right on your tail
You don't have time to think up there. If you think, you're dead. :)
Wouldn't the Endevor have to worry about wake too?
No. The heavy is so far ahead that its not even a factor.
The tower controller clearly said 'turn left heading 180'. How could the two Jetblue pilots miss the two key words: LEFT and 180?
"clearly" based on radio reception used in the video. That's NOT from the plane's radio. Also you don't know who else was talking at the time on the plane. The question is why didn't ATC catch that the readback was not correct? You do know they weren't just watching a youtube video on the plane, right?
It's called inexperienced pilots. It's just a matter of time before lives are lost.
How could they miss it? Very easily. Happens all the time. That’s why we read back and confirm.
@@zachansen8293Well he clearly didn’t here the correct in’s so he made something up. Why did he ask again?
@@zachansen8293 Of course radio reception based on the REAL ATC video, but I'm sure it is exactly the same as in the pilots' headsets.
Isn't this why you usually hear "fly runway heading" initially?
I guess they were catching the aircraft in front, so runway heading would have still had them catching. In the event of a go around by the aircraft in front, there could have been a conflict. That's why an immediate turn was required.
@@thomasdalton1508but it would be runway heading while climbing. Thus avoiding conflict.
@@micahgreene4573 I specifically said the issue would be if the aircraft in front went around. That means that aircraft is climbing too. If it climbs at a faster rate or doesn't stop climbing before reaching the altitude they levelled out at, they could come into conflict.
The problem plane was runway heading in front of them. What if that plane needs to go around?
@@micahgreene4573 what if there's an engine failure and they can't climb?
Flying is getting more dangerous.
Zigged when he should've zagged.
Wow!!
280 is not 180, why did he miss that read back
"Just continue" sounds too much like "discontinue, " does it not? What is the purpose of the word "just"?
There's no such word as "discontinue" in the ATC lexicon. "Cancel" would be the appropriate word.
Readback was ?80. Controller should have asked readback to be repeated. Pilot needs to enunciate.
Why didn't Controller just tell JB 2 slow the hell down, he was 5-6 miles behind the 78 but caught up to him like he needed to go take a shit.....
probably because he did...
You might want to go back to 00:04 in the video and read the disclaimer.
@@fascinatingtome Why?
@@SethDykstra Had the liquid shitters...
@@fascinatingtome F the Disclaimer, i'm going by what ATC said, caution wake turbulence 6 miles 787... if ATC told him to slow the hell down then he would of maintain separation.
Too bad we don’t get to hear when ATC says “possible pilot deviation“
Yeah I was waiting to hear that!
@@PetersPianoShoppe This will unfortunately will be party to blame on the controller... he missed the clearly stated read back error of "280"
Is it a deviation if he reads it back wrong but the controller doesn't catch it?
@@TheFlyingZuluresponsibility is with the pilots. Readbacks are there to potentially catch mistakes, not to transfer responsibility to the controllers.
Yea I always read back what the controllers tells me... "Climb and maintain" 2000 or "left" 180... It make take like two more seconds but those two seconds are worth it to me...
"we have a number for you when you're ready."
I get paid $1.00 for every time this comment is made. So far I have collected $52, 342 and I am going to the Genesis dealer today to spend it. Thanks for your support. You're the best.
@@RLTtizME i know, thank you.
Is it me or do these situations happen more often these days?
I mean, probably. With ATC shortages they are understaffed and some might be getting through training with less than desirable qualification.
They’ve likely always happened, but with social media and access to recorded data the info gets put out there so it appears more frequently.
There is a shortage because they refuse to raise the maximum starting age. Until they wake up from that, it will get worse.
@@user-tk3fq9md6i what min starting age?
Simple math suggests, of course they happen more often. We have more planes in the air, we're going to have more incidents.
.....Curses are like Chicken, they come home to roost
The amount of these issues that could have been saved if the controller had paid attention to the readback, The whole reason the readback exist to to stop the mess up.
Or the JetBlue crew not being in lala land.
I'm not an aviation professional so please be kind. How can an aircraft be given "Clear to Land" when another aircraft is flying the approach ahead of them. Surely "Clear to Land" means that there is an un-obstructed approach path and Runway. Surely a more appropriate instruction would be "Continue Approach" followed by "Clear to Land" when the aircraft ahead has cleared the Runway. Please can someone with more knowledge explain.
Thanks.
Uhh you ever see planes coming in to land at a busy airport on a Sunday night? You have to stack the planes a couple miles apart in order to accommodate the landings, then monitor speed so they don't run in to one other or hit too much wake turbulence.
To answer your question, the air traffic control handbook makes it very clear that you should not withhold a landing clearance to an aircraft if there's reasonable assurance that a preceeding aircraft will be clear of the runway by the time a succeeding aircraft crosses the landing threshold.
Anticipated seperation my dude. We use it everyday.
Because it's the USA, it doesn't happen everywhere.
im sure they have a fucking phone number they need to call. this isnt tolerable.
Read back was bad. Bad on pilot. ATC missed the bad read back. Bad on them. Failure on all parties.
Sloppy go around instructions to begin with…. Caused all this.
too complacent
Panic makes things worse. Being calm in the face of fuckups is good, not bad.
Like your postings.
Too complacent. Kind of like your sloppy attempt at forming an English language sentence.
controller missed the wrong readback...thats why we as pilots READBACK....jetblue made a mistake...swiss cheese model...jfk just another shitshow day
pretty obvious it's only a matter of time till there's a major disaster - I just hope nobody I love is on the planes that crash
How is that obvious? I think you should look at air traffic accidents and tell us the mathematical possibility.
Could you be a little more dramatic? Do those loved ones of yours drive cars?
I watched this twice, sorry but the JB guys screwed this up big time.
ÔMG Anuzzér Teénnéř Řéêfē Mité bé Hãppüńs
That Jet Blue totally can’t follow instructions
He did exactly what he read back to ATC
While Jet Blue didn't get the right heading, tower missed the incorrect read back. Had they caught the incorrect read back they could have corrected Jet Blue immediately.
@@leeclemens879 ATC told him to turn LEFT and he did not read that part back and turned right. Not reading back the complete instruction using standard phraseology is just sloppiness of the worst kind. The correct (and shortest) read back would be "cancel approach, left 180, climb 2000". This pilot wasted air time by saying things like "OK" and "on the heading", which don't provide any information, and omitted the direction.
Also, it should be pretty damn obvious to a pilot that you don't cross another final at a busy airport. If he didn't hear the instruction clearly or it didn't make sense, he should have asked the tower to confirm while flying the original heading. Yeah, ATC might get a bit annoyed if you constantly ask them to repeat every instruction, but it's much better to do that than compromise safety.
As someone who has no clue, I naturally offer my opinion. Two things wrong. 1. The aircraft was an Airbus. 2. The airline was JetBlue. It could only have been worse if the airline was Spirit! Thank you.
Broken system. The end.
Really? We fly millions of passengers and tons of cargo daily. You declare the system broken just because one controller didn't listen to the readback?
You should slow down on the caffeine.
No, I declared it broken because it can't handle the load it is being asked to carry.
A system of back and forth radio chatter is fine with few planes and everyone speaking the same language. It doesn't work with high workload and hundreds of different accents.
That's why planes are going to be remote controlled in the future using AI. A computer can handle operations much faster than a human can.
Instead of "go here, do this", and then waiting for a human to do it, the computer will just do it instantly.
@@CraigLumpyLemke
Really sloppy on both parts; to not hear, or listen to the read-back is complacent. I get it, 99.9 percent of the time it's correct, but you HAVE to confirm, otherwise, why have it, at all?
It's not "sloppy" that the pilot heard 280 instead of 180. The pilot read back what he heard.
@@CraigLumpyLemke Which is why I said 'both parts'. If you don't hear the read-back as incorrect, that is just as sloppy