I know these tight sequences take action almost everyday in small and major airports across the USA, but I'm having the impression that sometimes they're approved so automatically that the logical reasoning leaves the equation leaving a gap to only uncertainty. Thankfully ATC realized the margin was so small that he told Jetblue to stop but some day somewhere that Jetblue and that Southwest will meet close in the air. Hopefully not.
Or, more likely, the Jetblue's brakes will fail and catch on fire. Rejecting a takeoff is not a trivial matter on these heavy planes. The pilot seemed VERY calm, though.
It's important to remember that LGA requires pilots to go through additional training/supervision to land there because of it's unique clearances, tight air space, short runways, congestion, etc. Anticipated separation is used there regularly. I believe DCA in Washington also requires additional training/supervision.
@@TDOBrandano - that is insanely dramatic. I am an airline captain - “more likely JetBlue’s brakes will fail” - what? Brakes failing during an aborted takeoff is not a thing any more than them failing on landing - it is not “likely”. Second, yes the brakes can heat up, but that tends to be a problem at high speeds, and that happens after the stop, it doesn’t prevent us from stopping.
One thing I will tell you folks, if you are "cleared for takeoff", as soon as you move the thrust levers (throttles) at all, if tower calls you and cancels your takeoff clearance, you NOW HAVE TO DO PAPERWORK. Yes, it is all done on your laptop/iPad, but at my airline you have to notify the DUTY OFFICER, or person who is always on call and on premises when any part 121 airline is flying an airplane.
I like these flightradar24 maps with terrain photo. Much more illustrative for the general public than those technical air map drawings where it is quite difficult to see where is the airport and its runways.
They are what ATC is looking at in their radar screens. It's simplified to just the dangers/flight paths in the airspace they are controlling. None of the distracting ground clutter they have to worry about.
@@ericgulseth74 But ATC is always watching the same screens, while we as RUclips viewers get videos about different airports all the time (OK, some airports a lot more than others). We do not know where the airport is, where the runways are, etc. The ATC people do. So it is very helpful to actually see where they are flying to, what terrain they are over, what would be possible places to land (in the case of small planes losing engine), etc.
US ATC is drowning in its own traffic. This coupled with unsafe clearances that are strictly forbidden elsewhere (clearing aircraft in advance on occupied runways) is an accident waiting to happen.
@@Republic3D You racist losers have been saying this for year, yet the FAA continues to deliver accident-free air traffic control year after year after year. For being such a superior race, you guys sure aren't the brightest when it comes to looking at data.
5 месяцев назад+22
@@2025at The US isn't the only country with lots of air traffic, you know...
I know ATC is grossly understaffed right now, but I understand the FAA is addressing that. It seems there needs to be an additional controller in the tower MONITORING both ground and tower frequencies and can step in an override when there is a possible conflict brewing. Those of us who have followed aviation for years know that it usually takes a major disaster to get new laws enacted. It's time to let common sense, and not blood, be the deciding factor in changing the rules and maybe it can be done without losing lives. I know that traffic separation seems to be an issue these days.
It's not just aviation it's transportation in general. Just try to get a stop sign or speed limit sign or a traffic signal put in by the city on a stretch of road or an intersection that's dangerous. You will be told we really can't do anything until somebody gets killed there. That's unacceptable as far as I'm concerned for any type of transportation issue. 100% right that it shouldn't take blood in order to get changes that are obviously needed.
I flew into and out of LGA for about 20 years and loved that airport! It was the most challenging airport ever for a 757 pilot. The ATC controllers were the best. That airport would kick your ass if you weren't on your game. That wind he is giving 320 gusting to 26 knots landin on Runway 22 is a prime example of why this was the most difficutl airport I ever flew into while I was a captain for United. That is a 100 degree crosswind, slight tailwind component, no headwind component, on a 7,000 foot runway. I alway joked to my copilots when I made a nice landing at LGA, that I would pay for it the next time, and I always did!
Hey Cowboy, i dont want airports to be so challenging. That's how incidents happen. One radio block of that "cancel takeoff clearance" here could have led to disaster.
With winds at LGA being 320 gusting to 26 knots in this incident, I'm surprised that they were landing on Runway 22. Usually LGA lands planes on the runway best aligned to the wind, and uses the best aligned crosswind runway for takeoffs. In this case it would normally be to land on Runway 31 and depart on Runway 4. Or, if the wind got even stronger, land and depart exclusively on Runway 31 (incurring delays). Perhaps there was some kind of obstruction or airspace restriction preventing Runway 31 arrivals. The tower controller may not have previously experienced the 31 up/22 down configuration while winds were so strong from the northwest. It made departure ground speeds slower, and arrival ground speeds faster with pilots adding airspeed for the crosswind and the reported 5 knot loss on final.
None of this would be an issue if civilian airports implemented carrier style catapult launches. It would teach those cheeky passengers who get up to grab something out of the overhead lockers on takeoff a lesson too.
I know you're just being cheeky about the catapult system... but now I kind of want to see it. Can you imagine a Cessna 172 or a Boeing 747-800 being launched into the air? (And now I want to write a sister script to Airplane!)
@@DrBreakalot 7003 ft. And I suspect the "2 mile" call is a bit exaggerated, to subtly remind the departing aircraft that delays are not acceptable. But go watch some time, it gets pretty close on occasion.
@@DrBreakalot it works because JetBlue is accelerating while the arrival is decelerating, and we commonly round down the amount on final to give the departure a little "step on it"
@@Jmjbs At 2 miles, approach speed is stable at around 140 KTAS to the ground. The deceleration happened at the last flap setting. B6 had about 40 seconds to get clear of the intersection. It might have worked, but it's like trying to beat the light at an intersection. At 150 MPH.
I kinda understand this idea of giving multiple clearances for single runway at once and handing responsibility for separation out to the pilots. But how is it allowed to give simultaneous clearances for intersecting runways where pilots can't really maintain visual separation, especially at night?
Issuing multiple clearances to a single runway is in no way shape or form handing the separation responsibility to the pilots. Unless “maintain visual separation” is stated then the separation responsibility is on ATC. There are also restrictions on when ATC can ask a pilot to maintain visual separation - runway separation for instance is not a scenario where ATC can have pilots apply visual separation.
@insomnia20422 i disagree. if the video is synced up correctly then it looks like jetblue starts moving as soon as the clearance is issued. the spacing is too tight
Imagine a radio failure or someone blocking the "cancel takeoff" transmission. These anticipated clearances ("cleared to land, there might be 20 people taking off, landing on the intersecting runway or crossing your runway, though") are really a weird American habit.
I think the traffic situation at these busy airports could be greatly reduced by investing in alternatives like high speed rail for regional flights, freeing up airports for more transcontinental and international traffic. It's just a waste of airspace having eg New York to DC or Boston flights
@@pal2011 we've got brightline being built in three different states, and (not enough) federal funding to improve existing Amtrak routes, so clearly it's possible. Caltrain too but that's a bit of a disaster so far
Clearly you have a magic money tree just ready to shed its fruit for you. Might not good local rapid trans to a better located, better sized airport be a better solution in some cases?
Controller here. Controller was behind on timing, it appears, assuming that the audio/video are correctly synced and accurate. But more importantly I just want to say 99% of the comments here are nonsense. Please don't get freaked out by reading them. The people commenting have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
I will tell you what i do know. Flying retail is one of the worst routine experiences in my entire life. The way the entire experience has been flushed down the toilet and normalized is a crime against humanity. Its unspeakable.
Two ended sword. A naturally aspirated lycoming has no get up and go whatsoever, now a Cessna citation, different story. That said, if landing traffic is going even more slowly than the takeoffs can get rolling, less of a problem.
On takeoff, should a compressor separate from its axis, you might end up with an aborted takeoff aircraft sitting in the middle of the intersection. Any RTO could be a mess. Running calculus in your head all day takes its toll! With everyone running perfectly, one gets away with it. Anything goes wrong and all bets are off. The cascading sequence of inconveniences would be overwhelming. Best give extra space.
Difference between LGA and DCA is at LGA they are only using 1 runway for takeoff, and the other for landing only. At DCA they were using 2 intersecting runways for both takeoffs and landings, adding an extra dimension for the tower controller to keep track of and remember who's cleared for what.
If I’m JetBlue 46, and I hear aircraft is cleared to land on, runway 22, that’s 2 miles out, there’s no way in hell I’m accepting that take off clearance! With the way, ATC is these days, we pilots must be on our A game constantly. Complacency kills.
LGA does that all day, every day. It works. The pilots needed to be ready to go, when you hear tower start to call your name, you know the clearance is coming, you spool up so that when they clear you, you “pop the clutch” and go. JB was taking their sweet time and missed their chance to go. Next time, maybe they’ll be ready.
“ATC these days”? Come on man, ATC is fine. Makes me wonder what kind of pilot you are. This happens everyday at LGA, hundreds of times a day. It works. JetBlue didn’t start to roll quick enough. You snooze you lose.
If you're JetBlue 46 and you denied that clearance, I'd tell you it's going to be a 60+ minute delay to build a larger gap for you to depart. There's nothing wrong with that clearance.
This FAA environment at major metro airports is ripe for a catastrophic system accident a la Tenerife. When private/commerical ships adopted their own radar systems, ships went faster because they felt too confident with the abundance of data and there was a counter-effect of ships, both having radar, steering into each other and colliding. In a tightly-coupled environment with this many near-misses, it is only a matter of time before the holes in the swiss cheese line up. I highly recommend the book Normal Accidents by Charles Perrow, which talks about how many related concepts, among which is that complex environments with layers of technical safety just end up creating new territory for system accidents due to the mix of technical complexity and human nature/error.
@@FliesLikeABrick I don’t think there is a bad FAA environment. Except for the whole Boeing certification debacle. I feel safe flying in the USA. I don’t see a difference from when I started, over 3 decades ago. The only difference is social media. Everything is now recorded and shown on social media.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I was using "FAA wnvironment" as a shorthand to refer to their policy and enforcement domain (united states airspace, pilots, rules/regulations, oversight and enforcement) including the rules used for airport ground and traffic management - I did not mean or say "bad". I am merely trying to say that all of the circumstances we have seen around the many close calls over the last few years are the fabric similar to many other system accidents in aviation and other industries. Too many situations are coming up too often that rely on safeties and luck to avoid bad outcomes, instead of the day to day safety coming from the routine procedures. There should not be this many non routine means of preventing accidents, so it feels like only a matter of time before one slips through the few remaining layers of defense
If it continues this way it's only a matter of time before something terrible happens. We already have two (I think?) very close calls in very recent history.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 How close was that one Southwest to colliding with the FedEx/UPS? I don't remember the entire thing, but I do know it was pretty damn close.
And handling far more traffic than Europe more efficiently with fewer controllers. If you sent those Europeans over here the entire NAS would collapse within a day 😂😂
There are airports that you need to be completely ready to go when you take the runway. As you finish reading back, “Cleared for Takeoff” the aircraft better be rolling. It’s situational awareness that develops with experience. That said, when traffic is that tight, these types of events will occasionally occur.
@@se-kmg355no, it doesn’t. They know what is safe and what is not. When JetBlue delayed his take off, the margins became too close, so the take off was cancelled.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183I’m sure the flight radar data isn’t 100% accurate but jet blue seems to be moving within 2-5 seconds after getting take off clearance Is that considered a delayed take off? There’s only about 18 seconds between the time the take off clearance is issued and the time it’s cancelled
@@SlimChanceDubs and add a few more seconds for the pilots to react, so let’s say 20 to 22 seconds. Yet the pilots didn’t require to cool their brakes. Which means they were not at high speed. Not even medium speed. Plus he pulled off the runway at taxiway Mike. That’s barely down the runway. So no, he didn’t start rolling in time.
I have a video departing LaGuardia where this nearly happened. Landing traffic was pretty much over the threshold by the time we crossed 22. It’s common to keep departures really tight. Sometimes they can get the timing wrong. Made a mistake, caught it, solved it. It’s really not the worst thing that could’ve happened.
That's what happens when you use corssing runways and you clear everyone to land / for takeoff at the same time. It's imposible for an airliner to take off and vacate the runway with a traffic 2 miles on final... That's unimaginable in many countries, but in USA it's normal. And the controller talking so fast and the numbers in the FAA's phaseology don't help. :)
@@TyecoK I think that's the point: In the best case scenario, 500 flights a day means one flight every 3 minutes. But because there is no overnight traffic and even during the day, traffic comes in peaks and valleys, the actual interval is even shorter when the airport is busy.
LGA handles closer to 1,000 flights per day. The first four months this year, Jan-Apr 2024 LGA handled over 115,000 flights. If you count GA overflights (Hudson River route), it's 133,000 flights.
This is a normal sequence that isn't necessarily unsafe or unusual. The only problem with it is that it requires pilots to hit the gas as soon as they're told "cleared for takeoff", which a lot of pilots don't seem to really understand. When you're flying in and out of major airports in the US you need to move expeditiously.
I clearly understand why I can't be a pilot. Even though I mostly understand fast speaking English... I don't understand anything from those exchanges. Anything!
Used to fly a lot more some years ago into class Charlie and Bravo airports. I don't recall ever hearing anyone getting a takeoff clearance with traffic less than a 3 mile final.
lol if a controller says cancel takeoff clearance to an aircraft past V1 (AKA rotating), they would be stupid to say it while looking at the nose gear coming up
Controller should have given 5817 a continue at 1:18, cleared JetBlue 46 the takeoff clearance, then gone back to 5817 and read them the "wind shift" dialogue. That extra 20 seconds killed the whole sequence.
Unpopular opinion: remove the landing clearance at all, to free space on frequency. It doesn't mean anything substantial in the US, so why fill the radio with unnecessary words? As well as the "traffic holding in position" just to give exactly that traffic a takeoff clearance?
It’s madness. Makes for a great game, but for real life system of safely shifting aircraft on and off the ground… naa i’ll stay away from that thanks. TBF to the controller, noticing when something’s not going to work, and having the confidence to fix it (no matter the commercial inconvenience) is one of the harder parts of the job, and one which I saw numerous trainees fail at demonstrating
@@michaelmoses8745 it’s not a near miss. There is nothing to concern about. ATC gave JetBlue a take off clearance. JetBlue wasn’t ready somehow and took their time to start the roll. When they finally started moving, the controller realized they snoozed too long and cancelled their take off. There was no near miss. There was no drama. JetBlue learned a good lesson: when ATC clears you, you go.
Not near miss nor is it an incident. No report was filed and no investigation. Those terms are way over-used right now. I don't deny that the system is starting to show it's weak points, but this was definitely not a big issue. Unforunetely, media sites will dramatize everything.
There is too much traffic at these airports!!! The flying public has gotten spoiled with a flight every hour to the destination of their choice with RJs! Years ago there were 4 flights in bigger a/c to a destination not 12!
Depends on the situation. If it is a towered airport, it is legal to fly over an active runway only when ATC tells you to do so. If it is untowered, it is legal to do so any time, but you have to make sure there are no traffic conflicts when doing so
"Be ready to go" is an oft-used signal to a flight holding in position. And "cleared for immediate takeoff" is the gentler version of "punch it." This one, as so many have been recently, is on the tower controller.
This was definitely not the controller. JetBlue was sitting on the runway for a long time. When the tower finally cleared him, there is no reason why JetBlue would not start moving immediately. But he didn’t. Was his fault. You snooze you lose.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 1:25 the controller tells the landing plane he just cleared on 22 that traffic is holding position on 31. No reason to tell the landing plane that unless they should expect that traffic to hold position until he is clear.
This is the least dramatic of the recent posts. I’ve flown in and out of LGA for 7 years. These controllers work their butts off trying to manage the odd airspace and runway configuration. The controller saw it wasn’t going to work any more and stopped it. The planes weren’t close, and he still had the option to send Southwest around. You all need to calm down with the “US worst ever” BS.
@@doc0core - it’s one of four airline airports operating in one of the largest cities in the world. I think JFK should’ve added runways into the bay and LGA bulldozed, but I don’t control the airport infrastructure there, sadly.
Yes, they caught it but in a safe environment there shouldn't have been anything to catch. That's why people are reacting. If you've paid attention lately you'll see that there are too many incidents like this, some a lot closer. The root cause is the same though. Too many planes in too little time.
@@skycaptain3344I agree with you. There was no drama here. JetBlue wasn’t ready. I never understand pilots who get on the runway, but aren’t ready. NY controllers are great in my opinion. I’ve never had an issue with them.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183, that’s not what I said. What proof do you have JetBlue was not ready? I’ve heard LGA tower call out pilots for dragging their feet, but there’s no evidence of that here
@@skycaptain3344 When was the last time you heard of something going on like this in the UK? The most congested air space in the world yet you dont have this stuff happening daily like im America
This did not seem like a big deal to me, better if it did not happen, of course. If people don't want tight clearances like this they better be willing to accept less flights and more expensive tickets. IMO, this issue and the issue at DCA recently could be avoided if we put some money into getting rid of the crosswind runways and putting in additional parallel runways. Not a cheap or easy solution for LGA or DCA. I know people like to talk about the clearances, but that is really not the issue, imo. Maintaining and correctly anticipating separation is the issue.
@@VASAviation If I do, can you make a compilation video of the incidents and get the bad recorder guy to play Danger Zone as the background music? (Why, yes, I am a horrible troll. Why do you ask?)
If JetBlue had continued I don't think the result would have been an actual collision. At that phase of flight the landing plant would have been 20 feet of the ground and the JetBlue would have been 400 AGL. Sure, it would have generated reams of paperwork, but no actual harm.
Thankfully in aviation we don't need an actual crash to start talking about things and take considerations on what could go wrong and what we could improve on it.
The measure of safety is not 'actual harm in this instance', it's sustainability over a longer time. But even in this situation, I wouldn't be confident. If everything would go exactly to plan, I still think a go around/abort would be inevitable. I think alarms would be going off, probably both on the ATC and the plane. If not, I think either pilot would have aborted because that's absolutely the thing you should do if you're that close. And as for the harm: late abort/go around procedures would usually not directly harm the passengers, which is good, but at the very least is not great for the planes. So that itself should be something you want to avoid, purely from cost and maintenance alone. But then I could also imagine that the split second confusion and the delay in response from the planes could mean that the landing plane is higher (doing a go around) and/or the departing plane is lower or slower from either an emergency procedure or even just delaying rotate for a moment because things are going on. Putting them much more in harms way. (And... trying to minimise impact is still a good call - on actual collissions they have saved some lives. But that's only if things have already gone horribly wrong. Don't put two planes in critical procedures so near each other that those things are part of the equation, rather than very, very rare exceptions. Just don't.)
That is, of course, if the departing aircraft doesn't hit a bird before V1 and abort the takeoff. Or the landing aircraft doesn't hit some windshear and decides to do a go around. Hurling two cabins full of passenger at each other and hoping everything goes as planned is not a good idea.
One idea to alleviate such congestion is to NOT make every flight go through "hub" airports and start having more direct flights to less congested airports.
@@a2j3 Right? “The sky’s falling, the sky’s falling!!!” These sorts of events, or “incidents” have been happening multiple times, daily, for decades. The optics of having RUclips coupled with LiveATC recordings give people the impression it’s a new thing. It’s not, and it works very well in 99.99% of cases, just like it did here. This was an absolute snoozer of a video, highlighting exactly why it worked the way it should. Leave the professionals to it. I’ll bet that the LGA controller involved would have a grand old time laughing at the comments here.
The US has been playing with fire for a while now. A ground collision will happen if this is allowed to continue. There's just too many things happening in too many places and with too many or not enough people involved. Why would a plane be cleared for landing on an intersecting runway while a plane has been cleared for take off or vise versa? Because there's too many planes not to. We already know what that looks like when it goes wrong. Expand the airports or build more.
Yeah, a lot of places have runways that cross at angles. I'm so lucky that most of the airports in the Phoenix Metro area are all parallels. Three at KPHX, three at KIWA, two at Luke AFB, Two at KSD. KBLX and KGEU are single strip airparks. Don't know what Deer Valley and Goodyear are. But you don't get too many cross runway incursions in the valley.
@@yoopernow Oh, I know how to find the charts. Like I said, I was tired and it was a long day. And my point stands that most of the airports/airparks in the Phoenix area are parallels, not crossing runways. :P Also, Hi fellow Zonie!
I have seen this kind of absurd arrangement and mistakes many times on this channel, but it seems to be completely acceptable and not a major security concern for the USA. What do I, an outsider, know? Surely, there's nothing to worry about, right?
United States Airline Crash Statistics: 2014: 0 2015: 0 2016: 0 2017: 0 2018: 0 2019: 0 2020: 0 2021: 0 2022: 0 2023: 0 There has not been a fatal airline crash in the United States since February 12, 2009.
@@jqxok Umm, Atlas Air 3591 2/23/2019 3 dead. Southwest 1380 4/17/2018 1 dead. UPS 1354 8/14/2013 2 dead. Asiana 214 7/6/2013 3 dead, 187 injured. And that doesn't count all the smaller carrier accidents. If you add those in, 48 people have died in commercial air accidents in the US since 2009.
I'm surprised we're not there yet. All routing decisions (air, ground, takeoff, landing) should be made by software. Have a person in the loop to relay the information to the pilots and ensure proper readback. Also, software would immediately flag any deviations and give commands for safest resolution.
I believe when there is wind shear, it can be a gain or a loss. I flew into Raleigh once and they kept saying "Wind shear alert." They had each pilot report whether they had a headwind or tailwind and how many knots it was.
This video is silly. LGA runs these tight squeezes for decades all the time. Its the only way LGA can exist and run traffic. Go watch from the terminal, as the 22 arrival is flaring the 31 departure is crossing the intersection. This wasn't even going to be an issue. The controller was conservative and stopped the departure at a taxi speed likely because the plane takeoff roll was slow and he was being safe with everything going on lately and didn't want to chance it even though it was going to work. Put LGA anywhere in Europe and it would run half the operations it does.
Heathrow, CDG and Istanbul all have significantly more traffic than LGA. Now I get that most of the recordings that get posted here are from the US so it makes US ATC seem more incompetent as it creates a bias, but saying that LGA would run at half the capacity in Europe is ridiculous lmao
JB46 was told to "line up and wait." They had several minutes to get ready. They should have the SA to know the flow and to be ready when they got their clearance. WTF WAS GOING ON IN THAT FLIGHTDECK? All they should have needed to do was release the brakes, arm the TOGA and advance the throttles. Absolutely no excuse for this kind of incompetence.
@@VASAviationthey absolutely delayed the take off. This is why they were cancelled, they took too long to accelerate. This is why he didn’t need to cool the brakes. Had he gone faster, it would’ve worked. Had he gone faster and somehow not worked, he wouldn’t have cancelled the take off clearance, he would’ve made the SWA do a go around instead.
absolutely not. You may be confusing AI with Machine Learning. ML could help to flag possible conflicts with a very high succes rate. And then what ? Won't change the fact that these places are over capacity.
!["CANCEL TAKEOFF CLEARANCE!"; Kennedy Controllers Prevent Collision on Runway [ATC audio]](/img/1.gif)
I know these tight sequences take action almost everyday in small and major airports across the USA, but I'm having the impression that sometimes they're approved so automatically that the logical reasoning leaves the equation leaving a gap to only uncertainty. Thankfully ATC realized the margin was so small that he told Jetblue to stop but some day somewhere that Jetblue and that Southwest will meet close in the air. Hopefully not.
Or, more likely, the Jetblue's brakes will fail and catch on fire. Rejecting a takeoff is not a trivial matter on these heavy planes. The pilot seemed VERY calm, though.
@@TDOBrandano indeed. They could have had hot brakes and that might have been the end of their flight.
It's important to remember that LGA requires pilots to go through additional training/supervision to land there because of it's unique clearances, tight air space, short runways, congestion, etc. Anticipated separation is used there regularly. I believe DCA in Washington also requires additional training/supervision.
In this case jet blue was slow to roll and that’s the mystery here.
@@TDOBrandano - that is insanely dramatic. I am an airline captain - “more likely JetBlue’s brakes will fail” - what? Brakes failing during an aborted takeoff is not a thing any more than them failing on landing - it is not “likely”. Second, yes the brakes can heat up, but that tends to be a problem at high speeds, and that happens after the stop, it doesn’t prevent us from stopping.
Meanwhile 2624 is in their own little world just idle doing a flyover of the airport.
Hoping to get aerial footage of the carnage no doubt…
Is that why he cancelled the take off? I thought it was because of the traffic on final 😂
@@radm1510it was because of the traffic on final
One thing I will tell you folks, if you are "cleared for takeoff", as soon as you move the thrust levers (throttles) at all, if tower calls you and cancels your takeoff clearance, you NOW HAVE TO DO PAPERWORK. Yes, it is all done on your laptop/iPad, but at my airline you have to notify the DUTY OFFICER, or person who is always on call and on premises when any part 121 airline is flying an airplane.
They should just remember to shout "Punch it" and everyone would be fine
LOL
That movie is probably a realistic portrayal of the U.S. ATC
This guy! 🤣🤣
SEND IT
Save the spray for the return trip.
I like these flightradar24 maps with terrain photo. Much more illustrative for the general public than those technical air map drawings where it is quite difficult to see where is the airport and its runways.
I just watched one video and plan to watch more about how to understand those maps, I think called VFR, because I can't make heads nor tails of them.
They are what ATC is looking at in their radar screens. It's simplified to just the dangers/flight paths in the airspace they are controlling. None of the distracting ground clutter they have to worry about.
@@ericgulseth74 But ATC is always watching the same screens, while we as RUclips viewers get videos about different airports all the time (OK, some airports a lot more than others). We do not know where the airport is, where the runways are, etc. The ATC people do.
So it is very helpful to actually see where they are flying to, what terrain they are over, what would be possible places to land (in the case of small planes losing engine), etc.
US ATC is drowning in its own traffic. This coupled with unsafe clearances that are strictly forbidden elsewhere (clearing aircraft in advance on occupied runways) is an accident waiting to happen.
add in the obummer hiring practices
@@jamescollier3 Always a good DEI at the FAA.
@@Republic3D You racist losers have been saying this for year, yet the FAA continues to deliver accident-free air traffic control year after year after year. For being such a superior race, you guys sure aren't the brightest when it comes to looking at data.
@@2025at The US isn't the only country with lots of air traffic, you know...
@@2025at I did, quite a few times in Europe and he's right, it is absurd to clear an aircraft to land on an occupied runway
I know ATC is grossly understaffed right now, but I understand the FAA is addressing that. It seems there needs to be an additional controller in the tower MONITORING both ground and tower frequencies and can step in an override when there is a possible conflict brewing. Those of us who have followed aviation for years know that it usually takes a major disaster to get new laws enacted. It's time to let common sense, and not blood, be the deciding factor in changing the rules and maybe it can be done without losing lives. I know that traffic separation seems to be an issue these days.
It's not just aviation it's transportation in general. Just try to get a stop sign or speed limit sign or a traffic signal put in by the city on a stretch of road or an intersection that's dangerous. You will be told we really can't do anything until somebody gets killed there. That's unacceptable as far as I'm concerned for any type of transportation issue. 100% right that it shouldn't take blood in order to get changes that are obviously needed.
The tower supervisor usually does that but due to chronic understaffing it’s not the case anymore.
You are asking for critical thinking and white Anglo’s struggle with that concept in general.
I flew into and out of LGA for about 20 years and loved that airport! It was the most challenging airport ever for a 757 pilot. The ATC controllers were the best. That airport would kick your ass if you weren't on your game. That wind he is giving 320 gusting to 26 knots landin on Runway 22 is a prime example of why this was the most difficutl airport I ever flew into while I was a captain for United. That is a 100 degree crosswind, slight tailwind component, no headwind component, on a 7,000 foot runway. I alway joked to my copilots when I made a nice landing at LGA, that I would pay for it the next time, and I always did!
Hey Cowboy, i dont want airports to be so challenging. That's how incidents happen.
One radio block of that "cancel takeoff clearance" here could have led to disaster.
With winds at LGA being 320 gusting to 26 knots in this incident, I'm surprised that they were landing on Runway 22. Usually LGA lands planes on the runway best aligned to the wind, and uses the best aligned crosswind runway for takeoffs. In this case it would normally be to land on Runway 31 and depart on Runway 4. Or, if the wind got even stronger, land and depart exclusively on Runway 31 (incurring delays). Perhaps there was some kind of obstruction or airspace restriction preventing Runway 31 arrivals. The tower controller may not have previously experienced the 31 up/22 down configuration while winds were so strong from the northwest. It made departure ground speeds slower, and arrival ground speeds faster with pilots adding airspeed for the crosswind and the reported 5 knot loss on final.
None of this would be an issue if civilian airports implemented carrier style catapult launches.
It would teach those cheeky passengers who get up to grab something out of the overhead lockers on takeoff a lesson too.
I know you're just being cheeky about the catapult system... but now I kind of want to see it. Can you imagine a Cessna 172 or a Boeing 747-800 being launched into the air? (And now I want to write a sister script to Airplane!)
lol the 172 will have an overspeed structural breakup by the end of the launch
@@scose To be fair, neither aircraft was designed with a catapult system in mind. But one can dream of the hilarity. :)
@@jackielinde7568 We have parachutes so why not catapults?
They'd also need an arresting system for landing aircraft. Airplane III will be awesome.
Why did I expect the controller to say "I do this every day"
It's fucking New York
Go arounds are considered an insult at KLGA
Under his breath I bet you he is cursing the JetBlue flight for not taking off fast enough
That's why you tell them "no delay" before you say cleared for takeoff.
1:44 ..."traffic's 2 miles final"
(o.O)
Yeah, isn't the runway like 2 miles long? How is that ever going to work
@@DrBreakalot 7003 ft. And I suspect the "2 mile" call is a bit exaggerated, to subtly remind the departing aircraft that delays are not acceptable. But go watch some time, it gets pretty close on occasion.
Yeah 2 mile final is 600 ft above touchdown. That’s an ambitious crossing clearance even at LGA, let alone takeoff clearance from 31.
@@DrBreakalot it works because JetBlue is accelerating while the arrival is decelerating, and we commonly round down the amount on final to give the departure a little "step on it"
@@Jmjbs At 2 miles, approach speed is stable at around 140 KTAS to the ground. The deceleration happened at the last flap setting. B6 had about 40 seconds to get clear of the intersection. It might have worked, but it's like trying to beat the light at an intersection. At 150 MPH.
I kinda understand this idea of giving multiple clearances for single runway at once and handing responsibility for separation out to the pilots. But how is it allowed to give simultaneous clearances for intersecting runways where pilots can't really maintain visual separation, especially at night?
@insomnia20422you are 100% correct.
Issuing multiple clearances to a single runway is in no way shape or form handing the separation responsibility to the pilots. Unless “maintain visual separation” is stated then the separation responsibility is on ATC. There are also restrictions on when ATC can ask a pilot to maintain visual separation - runway separation for instance is not a scenario where ATC can have pilots apply visual separation.
Tower-applied visual separation
@insomnia20422 i disagree. if the video is synced up correctly then it looks like jetblue starts moving as soon as the clearance is issued. the spacing is too tight
Imagine a radio failure or someone blocking the "cancel takeoff" transmission. These anticipated clearances ("cleared to land, there might be 20 people taking off, landing on the intersecting runway or crossing your runway, though") are really a weird American habit.
Nothing weird about it. The cancel take off, if it had been blocked, it still would’ve worked.
And send the arrival around, really no biggie
@@alexkoble9303 Assuming no faults with the coms gear or another aircraft stepping on them.
Yes, that's one barrier less in the swiss cheese. Should not be the norm or normalized.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183If it had been blocked, as in not received by JB, how would it have worked?
I think the traffic situation at these busy airports could be greatly reduced by investing in alternatives like high speed rail for regional flights, freeing up airports for more transcontinental and international traffic. It's just a waste of airspace having eg New York to DC or Boston flights
high speed rail in America?😂 Even if somehow it was magically paid for, the NIMBY’s would never allow it built.
@@pal2011 we've got brightline being built in three different states, and (not enough) federal funding to improve existing Amtrak routes, so clearly it's possible. Caltrain too but that's a bit of a disaster so far
Clearly you have a magic money tree just ready to shed its fruit for you. Might not good local rapid trans to a better located, better sized airport be a better solution in some cases?
@@JimWhitaker nobody worries about where the money is coming from when it's military expenditure
Controller here. Controller was behind on timing, it appears, assuming that the audio/video are correctly synced and accurate. But more importantly I just want to say 99% of the comments here are nonsense. Please don't get freaked out by reading them. The people commenting have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
I will tell you what i do know. Flying retail is one of the worst routine experiences in my entire life. The way the entire experience has been flushed down the toilet and normalized is a crime against humanity. Its unspeakable.
Job spec: You will speak incredible quickly and direct large aircraft to nearly crash in to each other
More videos like this showing approach and departure traffic patterns please!
Miracle On The Hudson!!!
Waiting until the intersecting runway traffic is on 2 mile final to initiate a takeoff is a little tight for jets. It might work well for light GA.
Apparently it normally works, but still too tight in my opinion. Too little room for safety.
Two ended sword. A naturally aspirated lycoming has no get up and go whatsoever, now a Cessna citation, different story. That said, if landing traffic is going even more slowly than the takeoffs can get rolling, less of a problem.
It works a lot better when departing 13. 31 is usually pretty tight since the intersection is all the way at the end
On takeoff, should a compressor separate from its axis, you might end up with an aborted takeoff aircraft sitting in the middle of the intersection. Any RTO could be a mess. Running calculus in your head all day takes its toll! With everyone running perfectly, one gets away with it. Anything goes wrong and all bets are off. The cascading sequence of inconveniences would be overwhelming. Best give extra space.
@@VASAviationsorry, again you are wrong in your opinion. This isn’t too tight. JetBlue simply waited too long before he started rolling.
“Without delay”
That were quick two miles final :)
2 mile final with intersecting runways is indeed very very tight.
They do this daily, it's how LGA is able to even operate
@@Jamesdhudson92maybe LGA shouldn't be operating if this is somehow necessary. the airport can be replaced. the people can't.
Just like DCA it's just a matter of time.
Difference between LGA and DCA is at LGA they are only using 1 runway for takeoff, and the other for landing only. At DCA they were using 2 intersecting runways for both takeoffs and landings, adding an extra dimension for the tower controller to keep track of and remember who's cleared for what.
If I’m JetBlue 46, and I hear aircraft is cleared to land on, runway 22, that’s 2 miles out, there’s no way in hell I’m accepting that take off clearance! With the way, ATC is these days, we pilots must be on our A game constantly. Complacency kills.
LGA does that all day, every day. It works. The pilots needed to be ready to go, when you hear tower start to call your name, you know the clearance is coming, you spool up so that when they clear you, you “pop the clutch” and go. JB was taking their sweet time and missed their chance to go. Next time, maybe they’ll be ready.
“ATC these days”? Come on man, ATC is fine. Makes me wonder what kind of pilot you are. This happens everyday at LGA, hundreds of times a day. It works. JetBlue didn’t start to roll quick enough. You snooze you lose.
It's LGA everyday procedure
If you're JetBlue 46 and you denied that clearance, I'd tell you it's going to be a 60+ minute delay to build a larger gap for you to depart. There's nothing wrong with that clearance.
It’s okay guys, he probably flies a Skyhawk or an Aztec or something and think he’s an actual pilot
This FAA environment at major metro airports is ripe for a catastrophic system accident a la Tenerife. When private/commerical ships adopted their own radar systems, ships went faster because they felt too confident with the abundance of data and there was a counter-effect of ships, both having radar, steering into each other and colliding. In a tightly-coupled environment with this many near-misses, it is only a matter of time before the holes in the swiss cheese line up. I highly recommend the book Normal Accidents by Charles Perrow, which talks about how many related concepts, among which is that complex environments with layers of technical safety just end up creating new territory for system accidents due to the mix of technical complexity and human nature/error.
No, it’s not “ripe for a catastrophic event”. Don’t be over dramatic.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I specifically said system accident
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I did specifically say "system accident" - if that changes your perception of what I was saying
@@FliesLikeABrick I don’t think there is a bad FAA environment. Except for the whole Boeing certification debacle. I feel safe flying in the USA. I don’t see a difference from when I started, over 3 decades ago.
The only difference is social media. Everything is now recorded and shown on social media.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I was using "FAA wnvironment" as a shorthand to refer to their policy and enforcement domain (united states airspace, pilots, rules/regulations, oversight and enforcement) including the rules used for airport ground and traffic management - I did not mean or say "bad". I am merely trying to say that all of the circumstances we have seen around the many close calls over the last few years are the fabric similar to many other system accidents in aviation and other industries. Too many situations are coming up too often that rely on safeties and luck to avoid bad outcomes, instead of the day to day safety coming from the routine procedures. There should not be this many non routine means of preventing accidents, so it feels like only a matter of time before one slips through the few remaining layers of defense
Possible controller deviation, call the jet
Too many close calls recently. Thankfully the tower noticed in time but I feel like something terrible is going to happen if anything isn't changed.
If it continues this way it's only a matter of time before something terrible happens. We already have two (I think?) very close calls in very recent history.
hiring unqualified people today in the twilight zone
@@gazoo-pl4nxridiculous. Everyone is qualified.
@@IncorrigibleBigotrynothing terrible is going to happen. People create too much drama.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 How close was that one Southwest to colliding with the FedEx/UPS? I don't remember the entire thing, but I do know it was pretty damn close.
What does gain and loss of 5 knots mean ?
It's a windshear report which affects aircraft performance
They pride themselves on their non standard R/T, speed talking expertise and clearing everyone within 100 miles to land.
Fighter pilot talk seems to be the New Way nowadays.
And handling far more traffic than Europe more efficiently with fewer controllers. If you sent those Europeans over here the entire NAS would collapse within a day 😂😂
@@FAR91.144 "Our controllers are overworked and our safety margins are way too tight. USA USA USA!!"
@@FAR91.144 and yet who has less incidents and more overall safety? (its europe)
@@bridishbirb source?
“Yeah I’m gonna need a phone number”
Shooting the gap back in the old days at La guardia
There are airports that you need to be completely ready to go when you take the runway.
As you finish reading back, “Cleared for Takeoff” the aircraft better be rolling.
It’s situational awareness that develops with experience.
That said, when traffic is that tight, these types of events will occasionally occur.
Pushing margins down to seconds is just asking for an incident to happen.
@@se-kmg355no, it doesn’t. They know what is safe and what is not. When JetBlue delayed his take off, the margins became too close, so the take off was cancelled.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183I’m sure the flight radar data isn’t 100% accurate but jet blue seems to be moving within 2-5 seconds after getting take off clearance Is that considered a delayed take off? There’s only about 18 seconds between the time the take off clearance is issued and the time it’s cancelled
@@SlimChanceDubs and add a few more seconds for the pilots to react, so let’s say 20 to 22 seconds. Yet the pilots didn’t require to cool their brakes. Which means they were not at high speed. Not even medium speed. Plus he pulled off the runway at taxiway Mike. That’s barely down the runway. So no, he didn’t start rolling in time.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Until someone misses something. Would not be the first time and they have had some close calls LGA.
I just made the same mistake on the game "Mini Airways" on the KLGA map
The system is crying out for relief, it's when not if at this point
More population requires more airports. MCI type of airports way out.
As a Queens resident, I see scores of TOGA's every day from my window. I could never have that job.
I have a video departing LaGuardia where this nearly happened. Landing traffic was pretty much over the threshold by the time we crossed 22. It’s common to keep departures really tight. Sometimes they can get the timing wrong. Made a mistake, caught it, solved it. It’s really not the worst thing that could’ve happened.
People here are all wound up from recent incidents, so they’re here for drama, unfortunately.
The swiss cheese holes are starting to line up.
This happens way too often.
Everything was fine. No drama here. JetBlue learned a lesson. When you get cleared for take off, you go. You don’t wait 10 seconds.
That's what happens when you use corssing runways and you clear everyone to land / for takeoff at the same time. It's imposible for an airliner to take off and vacate the runway with a traffic 2 miles on final... That's unimaginable in many countries, but in USA it's normal. And the controller talking so fast and the numbers in the FAA's phaseology don't help. :)
honestly i bet the controller got baited by 737 approach speeds, which i believe are considerably higher than most other narrowbodies
LaGuardia handles about 500 flights per day, that's one every 3 minutes assuming it's equally busy all night.
There are no late night flights due to noise abatement in LGA.
@@TyecoK I think that's the point: In the best case scenario, 500 flights a day means one flight every 3 minutes. But because there is no overnight traffic and even during the day, traffic comes in peaks and valleys, the actual interval is even shorter when the airport is busy.
LGA handles closer to 1,000 flights per day. The first four months this year, Jan-Apr 2024 LGA handled over 115,000 flights. If you count GA overflights (Hudson River route), it's 133,000 flights.
3 minutes is plenty of separation.
This was closer to 40 seconds.
@@TyecoK Noise abatement for certain climb outs but Ive landed plenty after midnight.
Ouch 2.5 miles is the standard. Only really get away with 2 miles if departing 13. Definitely to tight for a takeoff
This is a normal sequence that isn't necessarily unsafe or unusual. The only problem with it is that it requires pilots to hit the gas as soon as they're told "cleared for takeoff", which a lot of pilots don't seem to really understand. When you're flying in and out of major airports in the US you need to move expeditiously.
I clearly understand why I can't be a pilot. Even though I mostly understand fast speaking English... I don't understand anything from those exchanges. Anything!
Do they train pilots to mumble and whisper when on the radio?
People doing their jobs well?? Yea!!!!
Used to fly a lot more some years ago into class Charlie and Bravo airports. I don't recall ever hearing anyone getting a takeoff clearance with traffic less than a 3 mile final.
Okay? This type of thing happens daily around the NAS....
Dreaded cross runway action. Hate to add delays but a collision is inevitable.
How long before an aircraft is told to cancel takeoff clearance when they're past V1?
Yesterday's video nearly
lol if a controller says cancel takeoff clearance to an aircraft past V1 (AKA rotating), they would be stupid to say it while looking at the nose gear coming up
Controller should have given 5817 a continue at 1:18, cleared JetBlue 46 the takeoff clearance, then gone back to 5817 and read them the "wind shift" dialogue. That extra 20 seconds killed the whole sequence.
This airport was built to relieve traffic congestion for JFK.
What's going to relieve IT'S traffic congestion?
Kinda laughed at the the pilot said "about 2 minutes"
Only a matter of time. LGA and BUR get sketch
JetBlue took too long to
Unpopular opinion: remove the landing clearance at all, to free space on frequency. It doesn't mean anything substantial in the US, so why fill the radio with unnecessary words? As well as the "traffic holding in position" just to give exactly that traffic a takeoff clearance?
FAA need to take examples in other parts of the world where close calls aren’t happening on regular basis. It’s getting too much.
This was not a close call. And it happens in other places too. Also the US is dealing with much more traffic.
Jetblue 46 sounds kinda dead inside.
Nothing out of place here, just interesting.
They really out here playing Airport Madness 4 huh
It’s madness. Makes for a great game, but for real life system of safely shifting aircraft on and off the ground… naa i’ll stay away from that thanks.
TBF to the controller, noticing when something’s not going to work, and having the confidence to fix it (no matter the commercial inconvenience) is one of the harder parts of the job, and one which I saw numerous trainees fail at demonstrating
Would’ve worked if he didn’t answer RPA5817 and smoked JBU46 as EDV5011 was touching down on rwy 22.
So, is this the second incident in four days?
This is not an incident.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 near miss then. If nothing else this is a concerning pattern IMHO.
@@michaelmoses8745 it’s not a near miss. There is nothing to concern about.
ATC gave JetBlue a take off clearance. JetBlue wasn’t ready somehow and took their time to start the roll. When they finally started moving, the controller realized they snoozed too long and cancelled their take off. There was no near miss. There was no drama. JetBlue learned a good lesson: when ATC clears you, you go.
Not near miss nor is it an incident. No report was filed and no investigation. Those terms are way over-used right now. I don't deny that the system is starting to show it's weak points, but this was definitely not a big issue. Unforunetely, media sites will dramatize everything.
There is too much traffic at these airports!!! The flying public has gotten spoiled with a flight every hour to the destination of their choice with RJs! Years ago there were 4 flights in bigger a/c to a destination not 12!
I don't see the big deal here. Jet Blue was told to takeoff, and they weren't ready, so they got sent back around. good controlling
There is no consistency to how everyone sets thrust. Not saying itvshould be that tight, but a factor.
Is this even legal to fly over an active runway in a small plane?
Depends on the situation. If it is a towered airport, it is legal to fly over an active runway only when ATC tells you to do so. If it is untowered, it is legal to do so any time, but you have to make sure there are no traffic conflicts when doing so
@@Civ33 thanks for your explanation!
All that coupled with sub standard pilots
what happened
At this point other nations should issue travel warnings for flying to US airports. They are playing with lives here.
Are you joking? LaGuardia is always tricky to sequence. The controller saw it wasn’t going to work any more and stopped it.
"Be ready to go" is an oft-used signal to a flight holding in position. And "cleared for immediate takeoff" is the gentler version of "punch it." This one, as so many have been recently, is on the tower controller.
I usually get "cleared for takeoff, no delay"
This was definitely not the controller. JetBlue was sitting on the runway for a long time. When the tower finally cleared him, there is no reason why JetBlue would not start moving immediately. But he didn’t. Was his fault. You snooze you lose.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 1:25 the controller tells the landing plane he just cleared on 22 that traffic is holding position on 31. No reason to tell the landing plane that unless they should expect that traffic to hold position until he is clear.
@@overhead18 no, it’s a normal call. I get that same call all the time.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 You are told traffic is holding when it is not holding?
Smoothbrains in shambles since they can't use their "DEI" dog whistle on this one 🤔
This is the least dramatic of the recent posts. I’ve flown in and out of LGA for 7 years. These controllers work their butts off trying to manage the odd airspace and runway configuration. The controller saw it wasn’t going to work any more and stopped it. The planes weren’t close, and he still had the option to send Southwest around. You all need to calm down with the “US worst ever” BS.
Well LGA is really outdated for any modern major city.
@@doc0core - it’s one of four airline airports operating in one of the largest cities in the world. I think JFK should’ve added runways into the bay and LGA bulldozed, but I don’t control the airport infrastructure there, sadly.
Yes, they caught it but in a safe environment there shouldn't have been anything to catch. That's why people are reacting. If you've paid attention lately you'll see that there are too many incidents like this, some a lot closer. The root cause is the same though. Too many planes in too little time.
@@skycaptain3344I agree with you. There was no drama here. JetBlue wasn’t ready. I never understand pilots who get on the runway, but aren’t ready. NY controllers are great in my opinion. I’ve never had an issue with them.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183, that’s not what I said. What proof do you have JetBlue was not ready? I’ve heard LGA tower call out pilots for dragging their feet, but there’s no evidence of that here
ONLY in America
Should we create a channel that reports on all the European airport ATC incidents? I’m sure NOTHING ever happens there…
@@skycaptain3344 When was the last time you heard of something going on like this in the UK? The most congested air space in the world yet you dont have this stuff happening daily like im America
Wait... This guy thinks European air traffic is busier than US? Yikes
@@SpliffProductions Might want to re-check your stats on that...
@@algernonftw42 The UK's is the busiest relative to its size, hence why I said congested. But you didn't want to read that
I'll say it a thousand times, I don't like "Line Up And Wait". "Hold Short" was simple and the pilots could see arriving traffic.
So 2 miles at 160 knots is 40 seconds.
What the hell did ATC think was gonna happen?
Was he expecting a 50 knot glider at La Guardia?
This did not seem like a big deal to me, better if it did not happen, of course. If people don't want tight clearances like this they better be willing to accept less flights and more expensive tickets. IMO, this issue and the issue at DCA recently could be avoided if we put some money into getting rid of the crosswind runways and putting in additional parallel runways. Not a cheap or easy solution for LGA or DCA. I know people like to talk about the clearances, but that is really not the issue, imo. Maintaining and correctly anticipating separation is the issue.
Can you start putting a counter of occurrence number in the thumbnail since the start of the year?
I've lost count. Check my videos and help me
@@VASAviation If I do, can you make a compilation video of the incidents and get the bad recorder guy to play Danger Zone as the background music? (Why, yes, I am a horrible troll. Why do you ask?)
It's like pouring 6 gallons of water into a 5 gallon bucket.
If JetBlue had continued I don't think the result would have been an actual collision. At that phase of flight the landing plant would have been 20 feet of the ground and the JetBlue would have been 400 AGL. Sure, it would have generated reams of paperwork, but no actual harm.
Thankfully in aviation we don't need an actual crash to start talking about things and take considerations on what could go wrong and what we could improve on it.
The measure of safety is not 'actual harm in this instance', it's sustainability over a longer time.
But even in this situation, I wouldn't be confident. If everything would go exactly to plan, I still think a go around/abort would be inevitable. I think alarms would be going off, probably both on the ATC and the plane. If not, I think either pilot would have aborted because that's absolutely the thing you should do if you're that close. And as for the harm: late abort/go around procedures would usually not directly harm the passengers, which is good, but at the very least is not great for the planes. So that itself should be something you want to avoid, purely from cost and maintenance alone.
But then I could also imagine that the split second confusion and the delay in response from the planes could mean that the landing plane is higher (doing a go around) and/or the departing plane is lower or slower from either an emergency procedure or even just delaying rotate for a moment because things are going on. Putting them much more in harms way.
(And... trying to minimise impact is still a good call - on actual collissions they have saved some lives. But that's only if things have already gone horribly wrong. Don't put two planes in critical procedures so near each other that those things are part of the equation, rather than very, very rare exceptions. Just don't.)
That is, of course, if the departing aircraft doesn't hit a bird before V1 and abort the takeoff. Or the landing aircraft doesn't hit some windshear and decides to do a go around. Hurling two cabins full of passenger at each other and hoping everything goes as planned is not a good idea.
Am I a Monster that i just kinda wait until something really happens?
Not a big deal.
Once again, the wonders of US ATC
You a controller?
Tight margins, but the controller was on top of it all the way. The pilots know the deal - the cancelled takeoff was taken in stride...
One idea to alleviate such congestion is to NOT make every flight go through "hub" airports and start having more direct flights to less congested airports.
Hubbing is very cost effective. There would have to be an economic incentive to shift to more origin & destination flights.
@@jqxok The economic incentive is going to be the payouts to families of victims
@@bd5289 That's not the airline's cost. They were following ATC instructions. Good luck suing the government.
What are these mythical "less congested airports?"
@@stargazer7644 Could fly through TNM.
Some US airports are turning into a Russian roulette.
Which ones? I haven’t heard about plane crashes in a while
@@a2j3 Right? “The sky’s falling, the sky’s falling!!!” These sorts of events, or “incidents” have been happening multiple times, daily, for decades. The optics of having RUclips coupled with LiveATC recordings give people the impression it’s a new thing. It’s not, and it works very well in 99.99% of cases, just like it did here. This was an absolute snoozer of a video, highlighting exactly why it worked the way it should. Leave the professionals to it. I’ll bet that the LGA controller involved would have a grand old time laughing at the comments here.
The US has been playing with fire for a while now. A ground collision will happen if this is allowed to continue. There's just too many things happening in too many places and with too many or not enough people involved. Why would a plane be cleared for landing on an intersecting runway while a plane has been cleared for take off or vise versa? Because there's too many planes not to. We already know what that looks like when it goes wrong. Expand the airports or build more.
Expanding the airports doesn't really help with this problem when the runways all intersect.
I never realized how LGA and SFO have basically the same runway setup.
Yeah, a lot of places have runways that cross at angles. I'm so lucky that most of the airports in the Phoenix Metro area are all parallels. Three at KPHX, three at KIWA, two at Luke AFB, Two at KSD. KBLX and KGEU are single strip airparks. Don't know what Deer Valley and Goodyear are. But you don't get too many cross runway incursions in the valley.
@@jackielinde7568 Deer Valley has two parallels, one rather short for anything but light singles & twins....
@@yoopernow Thanks for the correction. Been a long day and I was too tired to look it up. 👍
@@jackielinde7568 Pretty easy, lol. I was based there from 1996-2004 with a C310R, then an L39ZA. Never used the short runway...
@@yoopernow Oh, I know how to find the charts. Like I said, I was tired and it was a long day.
And my point stands that most of the airports/airparks in the Phoenix area are parallels, not crossing runways. :P
Also, Hi fellow Zonie!
Non-event
2 miles is probably a little too tight, but it also might have worked if jetblue wasn't snoozing on the runway
I have seen this kind of absurd arrangement and mistakes many times on this channel, but it seems to be completely acceptable and not a major security concern for the USA. What do I, an outsider, know? Surely, there's nothing to worry about, right?
United States Airline Crash Statistics:
2014: 0
2015: 0
2016: 0
2017: 0
2018: 0
2019: 0
2020: 0
2021: 0
2022: 0
2023: 0
There has not been a fatal airline crash in the United States since February 12, 2009.
The runway configuration at LGA is certainly a safety threat, but a security concern? No…
@@jqxok Umm, Atlas Air 3591 2/23/2019 3 dead. Southwest 1380 4/17/2018 1 dead. UPS 1354 8/14/2013 2 dead. Asiana 214 7/6/2013 3 dead, 187 injured. And that doesn't count all the smaller carrier accidents. If you add those in, 48 people have died in commercial air accidents in the US since 2009.
We must have got to the point where automation will do a safer job than this.
I'm surprised we're not there yet. All routing decisions (air, ground, takeoff, landing) should be made by software. Have a person in the loop to relay the information to the pilots and ensure proper readback. Also, software would immediately flag any deviations and give commands for safest resolution.
lmao most brain dead take on here so far.
Shouldn't "Gain and loss of 5kts" be "Gusts of 5kts", or is this FAA approved terminology?
Gain loss is a pirep as experienced by the pilots on final, the gusts are as reported by the anemometer
I believe when there is wind shear, it can be a gain or a loss. I flew into Raleigh once and they kept saying "Wind shear alert." They had each pilot report whether they had a headwind or tailwind and how many knots it was.
Gains and losses is different than gusts
Gains and losses is a reference to pilot reports of speed changes on final due to wind shear
@@m4nu507 Thanks. Ive watched many vids of European aviation and never heard it.
@@shaneboulds5240 Yeah. Just checked ICAO phraseology and it is windshear related
This video is silly. LGA runs these tight squeezes for decades all the time. Its the only way LGA can exist and run traffic. Go watch from the terminal, as the 22 arrival is flaring the 31 departure is crossing the intersection. This wasn't even going to be an issue.
The controller was conservative and stopped the departure at a taxi speed likely because the plane takeoff roll was slow and he was being safe with everything going on lately and didn't want to chance it even though it was going to work.
Put LGA anywhere in Europe and it would run half the operations it does.
Heathrow, CDG and Istanbul all have significantly more traffic than LGA. Now I get that most of the recordings that get posted here are from the US so it makes US ATC seem more incompetent as it creates a bias, but saying that LGA would run at half the capacity in Europe is ridiculous lmao
This isn’t that bad…..
And, second
JB46 was told to "line up and wait." They had several minutes to get ready. They should have the SA to know the flow and to be ready when they got their clearance. WTF WAS GOING ON IN THAT FLIGHTDECK? All they should have needed to do was release the brakes, arm the TOGA and advance the throttles. Absolutely no excuse for this kind of incompetence.
What are you talking about? How could you know the time they delayed in commencing takeoff roll?
@@VASAviationthey absolutely delayed the take off. This is why they were cancelled, they took too long to accelerate. This is why he didn’t need to cool the brakes.
Had he gone faster, it would’ve worked. Had he gone faster and somehow not worked, he wouldn’t have cancelled the take off clearance, he would’ve made the SWA do a go around instead.
Were you there to determine that, from the moment they received the clearance until the moment they applied TOGA was a "took too long" moment?
Just stopped in for the eurocommunist comments.
I'm not an AI proponent but it could be used in ATC
absolutely not. You may be confusing AI with Machine Learning. ML could help to flag possible conflicts with a very high succes rate. And then what ? Won't change the fact that these places are over capacity.
@doobybrother21 admittedly I'm out of my element here. So I can concede to you. But I will say more money needs to be invested in ATC
You people and your "AI". You think everything is "AI". You don't have any idea what Artificial Intelligence actually is.