Airplane Crosses Runway in Front of Departing Aircraft at Orlando Sanford Airport. REAL ATC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 май 2024
- 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.
Source of communications: www.liveatc.net (usage permission)
#REALATC #AIRTRAFFICCONTROLL #AVIATION 
Авто/Мото
He did ask for “progressive” instructions but was given numerous instructions all at once.
He was never told to go onto Charlie. Pilot fault from the get. If he can’t remember K, he has a broader problem.
At 1:18 N9240L is clearly given the instruction Turn "cross runway 27c at Lima". This is not the pilots fault. He stated he is unfamiliar with this airport and asked for assistance, and he followed the directions given him.
No. That's runway 27R that he was not cleared to enter. 27C is the small runway you can see he crosses correctly, because its so small I suppose he didnt realise.
It was the pilot’s fault, all day long. The man can’t read signs or airport maps, he wants the controller to help him navigate. It’s his job, controller only authorizes, advises, and assists. Pilot needs to do his homework, and brush up on airport markings. Your argument would hold true only if it was a blizzard with minimal visibility and he was an IFR flight. This sure looks VFR. But if he can’t read a map and an airport sign, and there is no BFR (blind flight rules).
I originally blamed this one on the controller too - though he seemed to be operating professionally with good intentions. From the areal photo, 27C could be mistaken for a taxiway. So, I can at least somewhat understand how an oversight could occur. However, one should keep a gun pointed down range, even when it’s “safe”, and one should take a good, hard look at signage/stop bars when nearing an active runway - especially with other active traffic - even when you’re pretty sure you’re in the clear. And, if you encounter seemingly unmarked pathways or unreadable(e.g., blocked by vegetation) at an intersection, it’s time to make that super easy call to ATC for clarification.
By the book, the pilot was definitely in the wrong. Homework would have helped, for sure, and should have been done, full stop. At the same time, the pilot did ask for a degree of assistance and perhaps wasn’t given the full benefit of the controller’s experience and visual contact. What seemed obvious to one person clearly was not to another. Given the fact that at least three people (us commenters), with no distractions, initially came to different conclusions when listening to the same audio as the pilot, I have some compassion for those involved.
Unlike the disturbing near-misses and gross errors that we see on the channel all too often, this looked much more like a fairly innocent mistake - one which unfortunately had the potential to be of high consequence, were the timing were a bit different and/or the critical mistake left uncaught. A good reminder to RTFM, genuinely pay attention, check your assumptions and admit any uncertainties - questions are free, collisions are not. A simple, yet interesting case.
I don't know anything about airports really. But it seems like this will go down as "pilot deviation" except it feels like there should be a new category for when the ATC person gets sloppy.
I'm sorry, but the guy asked for progressive instructions. Also there was a key moment where ATC said hold short and the response, at least according to the recording, was un-intelligible static.
No one should be giving a take off clearance in that situation on just the *assumption* that the other plane heard and will respond appropriately.
Again, I don't know what the official protocol is, but I would say it makes sense to *never* issues a take-off clearance when some other plane that is still moving *could* enter the runway imminently. Err on the side of caution-- assume that *every* plane directly approaching the runway and still moving will attempt to enter the runway until you confirm it is stopped.
But of course this would mean the airport couldn't get through as many flights as fast.
Is ATC being paid by the plane now or something???
The ATC and the ground controller (GC) are usually on different frequencies to avoid signal overlap. What you are hearing in the video is excerpts from both frequencies being spliced together. It is the GC's responsibility to make sure runways are safe for traffic to cross not the ATC. It would be far too distracting for the ATC to try and monitor the GC's channel especially with them being responsible for monitoring the airspace around the airport. More importantly, the private plane was never supposed to cross runway in the first place. He was supposed to turn right onto Bravo before eventually entering the runway at the same location as the Allegiant flight did before lining up for take-off.
"I would say it makes sense to never issues a take-off clearance when some other plane that is still moving could enter the runway imminently" Do you actually think this is possible at the busy airports where planes are constantly landing, taking off and moving around? Almost half a million planes pass through Heathrow Airport in the UK every year. A plane lands or takes off from Heathrow every 45 seconds. On average, a plane takes off or lands at Chicago O'Hare every 30-40 seconds during hours of operation.
There are four runways at this airport: 18, 27L, 27C and 27R. The two runways that are relevant in this incursion are 27R and 27C. It appears that the N9240L pilot got confused and thought 27R was 27C resulting in him entering 27R instead of turning right onto Bravo.
From the top:
Taxiway Alpha (4- taxiway at the top where N9240L turns right after the runway incursion)
Runway 27R (3- runway the Allegiant was using to take off and N9240L entered without permission)
Taxiway Bravo (2- where N9240L was supposed to turn right but instead kept going straight)
Runway 27C (1- thin runway the ground controller gave N9240L permission to cross)
Taxiway Charlie
Airport Tarmac and Airport Terminal
The two at fault for the incursion were the pilot and the ground controller with the majority falling on the ground controller. The pilot clearly requested progressive (aka step-by-step) instructions and stated that he was new at the airport and the ground controller acknowledged that but for whatever reason failed to give progressive instructions and instead repeatedly gave him several steps at once without making sure the pilot clearly understood them. The pilot does get a little of the blame for failing to speak up. If one is ever not sure about instructions given by a controller (whether ATC or ground controller) one is supposed to speak up and request confirmation.
Even if the controller said Kilo to Bravo, the shortest possible progressive instruction, the pilot would have blown it, went straight onto Charlie. C’mon, don’t defend this bad a pilot. He may have been fine to fly this way in the 60s or 70s.
[cross post from another thread] I originally blamed this one on the controller too - though he seemed to be operating professionally with good intentions. From the areal photo, 27C could be mistaken for a taxiway. So, I can at least somewhat understand how an oversight could occur. However, one should keep a gun pointed down range, even when it’s “safe”, and one should take a good, hard look at signage/stop bars when nearing an active runway - especially with other active traffic - even when you’re “pretty sure” you’re in the clear. And, if you encounter seemingly unmarked pathways or unreadable(e.g., blocked by vegetation) / an intersection, it’s time to make that super easy call to ATC for clarification.
By the book, the pilot was definitely in the wrong. Homework would have helped, for sure, and should have been done, full stop. At the same time, the pilot did ask for a degree of assistance and perhaps wasn’t given the full benefit of the controller’s experience and visual contact. What seemed obvious to one person clearly was not to another. Given the fact that at least three people (us commenters), with no distractions, initially came to different conclusions when listening to the same audio as the pilot, I have some compassion for those involved.
Unlike the disturbing near-misses and gross errors that we see on the channel all too often, this looked much more like a fairly innocent mistake - one which unfortunately had the potential to be of high consequence, were the timing were a bit different and/or the critical mistake left uncaught. A good reminder to RTFM, genuinely pay attention, check your assumptions and admit any uncertainties - questions are free, collisions are not. A simple, yet interesting case.
He was given permission to cross 27C. Thag runway is tiny and not very easy to make out. That being said, as a pilot he should know that. Wouldnt be surprised if this very deviation occurs often.
He did tell the ground controller that he was new to the airport and requested progressive, or step-by-step, instructions. The ground controller acknowledges his request but instead repeatedly gives him multiple steps at once and fails to keep close eye on the pilot's progress (ex. "Ok you just crossed 27C and are coming up on Bravo where you need to turn right).
@@jormugand5578 Yeah, what was obvious to the controller wasn’t so obvious to the pilot, obviously. That said, the pilot should have verified each of his actions against signage and markings, double-checking due to lack of familiarity and triple checking upon reaching any runway, which should have been quite clearly marked, even if the runway itself wan’t,fully striped. By the book, definitely the pilot’s error. Still, the controller, while probably well-intentioned, added to the workload of someone who had requested more assistance, making such an oversight more likely. Both parties have some opportunities to improve their handing of future situations. Thankfully, the cost of this incident was low.
Um, that controller sounded like my 12 year old nephew.
Amazing. This is one of the most intense hand-holding sessions I have ever heard and he still didn't get it right.
Wouldn't hand-holding have involved the ground controller giving the requested progressive, or step-by-step, instructions to the pilot?
@@jormugand5578 Yeah. From the comfort of RUclips, the pilot kinda looks like a loose cannon. However, he openly stated his lack of familiarity and respectfully requested assistance. The controller wasn’t unprofessional but also didn’t provide as much help as they probably should have. It’s harder to excuse the pilot’s failure to note signage and markings, but we weren’t there and don’t know their condition. Basically innocent mistakes on the part of two people that, were the timing a bit different, could have had much higher consequences. Glad no paint was traded. So, instead of a disaster, it’s only a learning opportunity.
Taxi on kilo, then on Bravo then left on Alpha, then on lima, then on zulu then on mike, the on kilo again then on charlie but dont make a right, make a right instead, then reverse on delta. repeat instructions.
I'm confused, was there a communication error between ground and tower? Light aircraft clearly told to cross the runway by ground whilst the other aircraft is cleared for takeoff by tower.
Have I missed something obvious to the actual pilots commenting here?
Told to cross 27 Centre and turn, instead crosses 27 centre and continues onto 27 Right.
@@liam3284 Ah, I see. Thanks
Your comment highlights that what is obvious to some is not obvious to all, including the pilot in this case. Controller could have been more helpful and provided progressive instructions, as requested, while the pilot wan’t paying proper attention to signage and markings.
The pilot was told "Cross runway 27" @1:04 there is no pilot deviation.
Edit to say.. unless there was a hold short and read back all runway crossings. TBD (which we could all have read before)
He was told to “cross 27 Center” then turn right on bravo. 27 center is that little line he crosses when he turns left off of charlie. Zoom in you can see 27C at the end of the runway
@@41devod46 You're right, looked like a taxiway in the video had to really zoom in, and I missed the "Center". I'd be getting a phone number to call as well LOL.
I don't get it with all these runway incursions recently, we were always taught to clear left and right when entering or crossing an active runway.
This guys should not have a pilots license
Sometimes it seems as if there are too many humans involved in aviation.
Yep, scary.
Put a date on these videos. This happened weeks ago at least.
Again??!!! This is happening way to often...
This happened a few weeks ago
yikes
Just to be clear, the one at fault is the tower right, he did say cross runway 27c, not hold short...
He crossed 27C the thin tiny runway, then he should have turned on B the right turn before 27R, but he kept on going, he still should have visually checked when crossing a runway
You seem to be getting the ground controller (GROUND) and the ATC (TOWER) confused. In the video, the ground controller was the one communicating with the private plane while the ATC was communicating with the Allegiant plane. Despite acknowledging that the pilot was unfamiliar with the airport and requesting step-by-step (or progressive) instructions, the ground controller failed to give him the extra attention such a pilot would normally warrant.
@@jormugand5578 You got that right, my bad
Will a pilot explain what happens after “I have a number…”?
In this situation the pilot obviously made an error, could it have been grave, yes, But he wasn’t mad or upset. Is this something that would be handled at the tower/AP level or is it elevated to FAA.
I guess i’m asking the general procedure
Everyone writes reports about what they saw and did. All that gets forwarded to the FAA for review and possible disciplinary action if warranted, and/or procedure review and modification if warranted.
It's essentially what happens in every occupation in every field. It's not about punishing people. It's about examining what made a situation dangerous and what could be modified in the future to reduce danger.
Be careful when you say things like "...the pilot obviously made an error...". Those kind of judgements should be made after evidence/reports/testimony are provided, not based on a 4 minute edited audio clip. That too is what happens in every occupation in every field.
@@CraigLumpyLemke I see. But be careful when you say things like “happens in every field” because I can’t assure you it does not. I bet your smugness does well at parties.
And duh! I’m sure people do jump to conclusions but as I eluded to there are different attitudes and issues with pilots but this was a mistake. Search this YT page and find the videos titled “Pilot argues with…” completely different interactions that would obviously be escalated.
It's handed up to the FAA (well, the tower works for the FAA, but it's handed over to another department). Tower submits a report on what happened in their opinion, and pulls the tapes. The phone call is just to get the pilot's name, license and contact info to include in the report - no attempt at determining facts or fault is supposed to happen on that phone call (but if you run your mouth it'll totally go into the report). Technically the pilot is not obligated to make that call at any specific time, if at all, but if you make the FAA investigator track you down from the tail number, they will likely be annoyed.
@@Noone-jn3jp Making life choices based on RUclips videos. Good times!
@@CraigLumpyLemke what are you even talking about? I asked a question about procedure, with an observation about the facts based on other information, and you have gone to life choices? You need to get off the internet.