Again really poor coordination between GND and TWR controllers. GND controller (male) even is replaced by female controller (supervisor, instructor?) when the incident takes place. Thankfully the radios worked again and the both were told to stop immediately. Had a radio not have worked or a transmission been blocked...
There was a suggestion put up on another channel that (paraphrasing) any communications with any aircraft that is subject to movements involving a runway should all be directed by one entity. Only the tower should be telling planes to cross, not ground.
@@rona4960 that's how it's normally done in Europe. You switch to Tower frequency (if the runway is active and in use), Tower will cross you and then switch you back to Ground if more taxi instructions are to be given. Best example is Zurich, when you go back and forth on frequencies depending where you are and what you cross. It's tedious, but it's safe.
"Radios worked"! Of course, they've "worked" since the 1940's. They are perfect for ONW-WAY communications!😱 You young folks want everything immediately! What do you think radios are? They are not phones! 😳
And i will die on that hill: An active runway should allways only be controlled by one controler TWR. If you have to cross, GND will hand you to TWR, you get your clearence and on the other side witch back to ground. Or, parts of the taxiway are controlled by TWR. EDDF for example has M between the two runways but it is only used by landing aircraft on the south runway if they want to get to the gates in the north, only once they have crossed the center runway are they handed over to a ground controller. And dont tell me this is only possible in small low frequency airports Frankfurt is one of the busiest airports in the world.
Definitely agreed. This is a non-standard situation at SAN currently because part of the normal route to the runway (taxiway B) is closed for construction, so that's why planes are having to cross the runway on their taxi route. But no question, the tower controller MUST be the one and only person clearing planes to cross the active runway.
Can’t believe controllers in the US use “cancel takeoff clearance” in such a critical scenario. The ICAO “stop immediately, I say again stop immediately, acknowledge” is so much better.
@@mijo3642 Sadly the phraseology could change for each nation: An example of German IFR clearance on radio is: "DLH414, München Delivery, *CHECK INFORMATION B,* STARTUP APPROVED, CLEARED TO Stuttgart, *VIA* RIDAR 4E DEPARTURE, FLIGHT PLANNED ROUTE, CLIMB VIA SID TO FL070, squawk 1000" while in Italy could be "UAE4PV, Malpensa Delivery, cleared to New York via NELAB6B then AOSTA5J transition, runway 35L, Intial Climb 5000, squawk 1000". In Italy I know that for this scenario they say "cancel takeoff clearance, I say again, cancel takeoff clearance, acknowledge"
@@mijo3642it’s the correct phraseology if the aircraft hasn’t started the takeoff run. If it has, it is ‘“[callsign] stop immediately, [callsign] stop immediately”, to be spoken with a clear voice indicating urgency’.
Okay, so the miscommunication between TWR and GND are already kinda bad, but what REALLY grinds my gears here is the nonchalant way of TWR to deal with this. Her way: "Southwest 1478, cancel takeoff clearance" - wait 30 seconds - "Hey Southwest, did you copy about the [mumble] departure clearance?" - airplane saying they didn't understand, but she still says "cancel takeoff clearance" and then "sorry about that" in a chipper tone as if she just dropped her pen or bumped into you on a crowded bus... Correct way: "Southwest 1478, STOP STOP STOP!" She almost Teneriffed them, not because of the conflicting clearances, but because she didn't take decisive action to resolve the problem when she realized it.
She's an Ent... “But I spoke hastily. We must not be hasty. I have become too hot. I must cool myself and think; for it is easier to shout stop! than to do it.”
The tower controller is asking if the departing plane received the clearance cancellation, in the middle of a clear conflict situation, with the same casual tone you’d expect when asking a customer if they have a loyalty card at a supermarket. Big yikes.
@@mijo3642when learning standard phraseology in ATC, you also learn to put emphasis on words or sentences depending on the situation. This was such a situation.
It took more than 20s for the crew to understood ATC…way too long at such a critical stage. But ATC is taking to another guys and is asking rather than saying STOP 😂 Eh
@@mijo3642 No need to panic, however repeat the instruction rather than ask whether they received it. Also clear phraseology like STOP IMMEDIATELY, I repeat STOP IMMEDIATELY please acknowledge (as used in most of the world) will be heard and understood the first time it is said.
As a Airline Pilot, I'm getting sick an tired of non standard phrasology. I dont't care if it's permitted or not. In this case it is "STOP! STOP! STOP!. Everyone stops. Its that easy. Just like in the air its "MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY"
It my be standard phraseology but as a planespotter I have heard the cancel takeoff clearance used at SFO and LAX. I guess the FAA doesn't periodically review ATC tapes to make sure everyone is complying. To issue a cancel takeoff clearance means that a specific flight may be instructed. But, in this case STOP! STOP! STOP! would indicate that all aircraft stop immediately. It's odd that this would happen at the world's busiest single-runway airport. I wonder if the ground and takeoff/landing Controllers are in the same room. The ground controller should be able to visibly see the taxiways, not just on radar.
@@TheGospelQuartetParadiseAll airplanes stopping is the appropriate action when hundreds of people are about to die. Its why the phraseology exists. Cancelling take off clearance may be acceptable when someone hasn't taken position or the ATC changes their mind for their flow, but when planes are rolling its too late to be seeking confirmation. My point is we are playing fast and loose with some of the phraseology. I'm not saying she is wrong, I'm saying it can be done a lot better.
@@tpspc03 I understand what you're saying because you are on the front lines and see it everyday. What I was saying is that it appears that using non-standard phraseology is more widespread than it should be. I have heard some pilots say that San Diego is a disaster waiting to happen. This controller should have just said EVERYBODY stop, since both aircraft were Southwest. If it had been, say a Southwest on the takeoff and a Delta cleared to cross, the ground controller could have said DELTA STOP. I just pray that ATC communications get better worldwide.
It is happening every country in every industry, accelerated cognitive decline and long term sickness and increase absences with declining productivity and more mistakes at work. Mass brain degeneration caused by repeat infections by the virus governments want us all to think is now harmless so we will keep going to school and work without demanding the installation of HEPA filters. It is a cover up by just not mentioning it despite massive long term sickness and mistakes and accidents at work increases being in the news, the known cause talked about in science papers does not come up so we will keep getting reinfected without complaining
@@spidey2085 bc we have prob the most flights in a single country in the world? plus this is a channel for english-speakers, so obv they get it from english-speaking countries. doesn't mean french speaking places don't have issues.
Don't worry, one day the third world will be able to afford to record and publish their own errors instead of just relying on the USA as they do for technology, culture and national defense.
@@spidey2085they need to move a lot of planes. From what I have seen from this channel. To solve this, they seem to allow lineup before the runway completely clear.
I was in San Diego when this happened. We pushed back from the gate, then held for an hour as we were #16 in line for takeoff. The story from the flight deck was that fog was causing landings to be opposite from departures so everything was slow. All engines were powered off on a number of planes while we waited. While both explanations could be true, the coincidence is interesting
KSAN turns into a zoo when they have to bring anyone in from the ocean direction. They've started moving planes in big groups, like they'll bring in 10 planes for arrival and during that time anyone departing gets parked somewhere out of the way, and pilots will turn off the engines to save fuel. Then the center and tracon controllers will start spinning planes in holding patterns way out to make a space for all those planes waiting to depart. It's even worse when they're taking off runway 9 because there's nowhere to park planes waiting to take off - it's just a total jam of arriving and departing planes not able to go anywhere.
Oh. That's much worse than the other report I saw. That didn't mention the delay in actually communicating effectively. Hopefully the NTSB will look at this, even if the FAA said it's not a problem because nobody died. The rules say everything after the hold short line is technically the runway. So they put two planes on the same runway and nearly got everyone killed. That's a huge issue.
Even if the NTSB looks into it, they cannot actually do anything since the lack power to enforce changes. FAA has got to pull their heads out of their butts and do something before someone dies.
Like I posted somewhere else: How cute of the FAA to say the second plane never "entered" the runway when anyone who's ever been in the cockpit knows if you get anywhere within 5 inches past the short line you'll get a phone number.
The local FAA fsdo used to distribute little runway incursion pamphlets that had a picture of a hold short line that read If you crossed the line then you crossed the line. But no big deal when it’s on there side apparently.
Railways have had interlocking to prevent this from happening for almost 100 years. Electronics these days, mechanical back then... to prevent conflicting paths to be cleared at the same time at all times. As a student pilot I'm surprised at how primitive some of this critical stuff really is...
This just doesn't happen nearly as often in the rest of the world, but the americans think they know better and really need the ground controller to be able to clear people to cross a runway rather than the runway being solely owned by the tower controller. Don't tell them that there are busier airports that manage it just fine.
This exact scenario happened to me at SAN. Cleared to takeoff while a 767 was just beginning to cross the runway. CAVOK conditions. Awful ATC services at this airport. They also love to vector VFR GA traffic across final in front of airlines, seemingly having learned nothing from the 727 midair years back.
By my watch it was 20+ seconds between 1478’s initial takeoff clearance CANCELLATION and 1478 finally rejecting - after another call for clearance cancelled and 1478 with a “say again.” My guess is this would be a nothing to see here instead of a brakes-smoking high speed RTO if the first cancellation call had registered on 1478. Glad to see that SAN Ground and Tower retain such good spirits even after they try to run two airplanes into one another. 😮
No, communication is the last step in responding to any event. How many times have you heardAviate, navigate, communicate. That’s exactly what’s going on here. Stop exaggerating it.
@@Jimmer-Space88 lololol please kindly explain the important "aviate" and "navigate" tasks while on takeoff that carry such a high workload as to preclude a crew from communicating...
The problem was the nonchalant and conversational way in which ATC canceled the takeoff clearance. 1478 didn't copy it, possibly because they didn't really hear the message and it didn't sound like an emergency. In this case, "communicate" is the top of the pyramid on ATC's side, and they failed miserably to communicate the gravity of the situation to the air crew.
Mass brain degeneration caused by repeat infections by the virus govenments want us all to think is now harmless so we will keep going to school and work without demanding the installation of HEPA filters. It is a cover up by just not mentioning it despite massive long term sickness and mistakes and accidents at work increases being in the news, the known cause talked about in science papers does not come up so we will keep getting reinfected without complaining
She had no clue on what was going on. She would have asked the same way if she had dropped a pen, and would have liked you to pick it up for her - basically clueless, scary clueless and unengaged.
I love flying, and don't worry about much. When I do worry, it's while the plane is on the ground. Once we're safely away from the airport I can relax.
And yet another instance of ground issuing a clearance to cross an active runway. When will the FAA wise up and stop this practice. The runway should be controlled by 1 controller. The tower controller. Its very simple to switch frequencies to cross and then go back to ground on the other side. Happens all the time outside the US. JFK, DCA, and now SAN. I'm sure there are others I missed, those are just the most recent ones.
why did it take the Tower ATC so long to get 1478 to stop?????? She was terribly unclear in what she was saying in her nearly ineffective attempts to stop him.
Tower controls the runway and access onto/crossing it. Ground controls the aprons and taxiways up to the hold short bars. Any airport that is designed to have (even on a temporary basis) a taxiway queue that crosses an active runway needs to have that crossing managed by the tower only!
In the rest of the World, if you hear STOP IMMEDIATELY, it means that if u r on the take-off roll, u have to stop. If u hear the ATC speaking normally during takeoff roll odds are u won’t even register it in your brain. What is the USA waiting to adopt more modern, safer phraseology??
The reason the rest of the world uses this is because they read the ICAO phraseology list. It’s also why we have “pan pan” and “mayday” calls where US pilots have a tendency to use “we’re declaring an emergency”. Unfortunately, it’s likely to require one or more major accidents to change this, even though the phraseology list was bought in because of one specific accident, specifically Avianca 052.
How in the world do you mess that up? There's one runway! Also, San Diego desperately needs a new airport. Having one runway to serve a major city with no room for expansion is a recipe for disaster.
The south side of Miramar would be perfect for an expanded terminal. It's open DOD land, no training facilities there, close proximity to several freeways and less houses to fly over. I have no idea why they just don't work out an agreement. many airports are joint DOD and civilian run.
@@ansteve1 MCAS Miramar is a rather busy military airport. If they had to suddenly deal with a lot of civilian traffic that close to the base, I imagine it would create a lot of restrictions on their ability to fly around the base. Not saying they couldn't/shouldn't do it, but that would be a reason for them not to want it.
To my mind this is what happens when you’re routinely giving multiple aircraft take off and landing and even crossing clearances for the same runway. Adopt the European system! One aircraft cleared at a time.
Landed a couple of weeks ago from Hawaii on a Thursday evening. An hour and a half later we got to our gate following a Conga Line of some 8 or 9 planes I could see when we cross the runway. Maybe, just maybe, the airport is over capacity. Is the answer, add another Terminal?
They are building a new terminal, that's part of the issue here. B is partially closed due to the construction, so every departing plane has to cross the runway.
Another issue caused by the different frequency between Ground and Tower: This seems to happen very often, but usually in larger and more complicated airports, and quite rare in a single-runway airport.
ATC is overworked, underhired, and undertrained. It's not the controller's fault. It's the FAA. They hire so few at a time it barely accounts for attrition. Overtime is rampant, most controllers work 6 days a week, many of them doing 12 hour days. It's unsustainable. We need more controllers, we need a pathway to train more of them. So many parts of the Controller Training are Pass/Fail with no way to get back in if you fail, so good candidates are tossed away when in reality if they were given a bit more attention they could have passed with flying colors. I made a comment on some forum a few months ago that, if this continues, at some point we are going to see another Tenerife. And that almost happened here. I am honestly more afraid of an ATC failure than literally any other thing in the aviation industry.
@@Atlasworkinprogress that is true the one thing that is not a good excuse for is the really bad attitudes and unprofessional attitudes that I’m hearing in air traffic controllers along the way also. I’m hearing a lot of just flat bad attitudes from some of them toward pilots when they are giving us horrible instructions. It is very dangerous. We have to look out for ourselves as pilots and listen closely and watch what’s happening around us.
I see these all the time. This exact problem, and I see aviation experts explaining that the solution is only allowing the tower to clear across an active runway. I just cannot understand why our leaders in aviation safety (NTSB and FAA) don’t DO something. This will result in fatalities and faa is acting like it’s not a big deal.
If that was a railway junction, there would be hardware signals and interlocking such that the signallers *could not* clear two conflicting moves. This has been standard for more than 100 years. The aviation industry needs to catch up and stop relying on unclear, spoken instructions for ground movements across runways.
@@tommaxwell429 That's good to hear, but presumably Lindbergh Field doesn't have the system yet. Two controllers in the same tower could get most of the safety improvement by a physical token passed between them: only the controller holding the token is allowed to speak a runway clearance into the radio. The token doesn't have to be special, a cuddly toy from the airport gift-shop would do. Anything that's unique and unmistakable in the controllers' environment.
Do they not have monitors which clearly show planes CLEARED TO CROSS RUNWAYS and MOVING in BRIGHT RED on a monitor and planes LINING UP TO WAIT on an active runway in BRIGHT GREEN in 2024?? Maybe technology needs to keep up to prevent POTENTIAL issues and CONFLICTS before the human ATC folks really cause a tragedy....
You would be surprised at how much the FAA, NATCA leadership and especially congress denies several equipment upgrades for controllers. They want everything done at the lowest possible cost they can achieve.
With the construction going on at KSAN, why is there not a dedicated controller whose job it is to watch BOTH the ground and tower to make sure this insanity doesn’t KEEP happening (this is far from the first time).
Why doesn’t a ground controller? Ask the tower controller for permission, before clearing. And so cavalier about it and obnoxious. 180 people just got inconvenienced for three hours. Never mind the risk.
This is a single-runway airport. Does TWR not scan the runway before clearing for takeoff/landing? Forget departing traffic diverging course, your runway is NOT clear. What is going on?
@@mijo3642 Wrong. It's common for GND to give a runway crossing clearance, but only after coordinating that with TWR. This is either a case of GND doing something without coordination, or TWR having forgotten she gave GND a crossing clearance.
@@VASAviation but they can switch frequencies to tower to get cleared to cross. That is what happens outside the US and it should be standard practice here. But the FAA is so far out of touch they can't see that.
Do you people how busy San Diego is??? The small GA airport I'm at has Multiple people for ground and tower and sometimes they get very busy with traffic which mostly consists of small aircraft. The comments are so stupid here.
At most of the airports a fly to, runway crossings are done on tower frequency, with instructions to contact ground once you're across. Why isn't this a standard?
Seems likke this could be avoided by placing authorization for crossing a runway solely with Tower, not Ground. We're just one hole in the swiss cheese away from a disaster.
Again an example as to why having 2 controllers controlling access to a live runway is a bad idea!! Its only a matter of time I'm afraid before it goes really wrong.
Any reason you left out the construction that had the normal taxiway closed and required an unusual taxi procedure that involved crossing the runway? Likely a major factor in this incident.
@@cjmillsnun You are correct, most of the non-pilot audience that watches these videos will certainly understand the standard taxi instructions in San Diego and the "X" on the chart. Could be an oversight or could be intentional, but normally he highlights major factors in an incident by placing bold writing across the screen, that did not happen here.
They sit next to each other inside the control tower. Tower just stop takeoffs and tells the Ground controller to cross one or more airplanes. Once the cross is complete, takeoffs resume. That process over and over again... until a piece of the chain breaks and this happens.
I don’t understand why they don’t hand the crossing traffic to the TWR controller to clear it across, that’s what we do in the U.K. The tower controller owns the runway. Terrible co-ordination by the controllers, but had the crossing traffic been on the same frequency the departure would’ve heard his clearance to cross which would add another layer of safety. Something nasty is going to happen in the US if they don’t get a grip.
Exactly, with this runway layout, ground should only be responsible for traffic on the airport side of the runway. As soon as you get within 100ft of that runway you should be under tower control only.
Interesting. I’ve been in aviation maintenance for almost 40 years and have to go on ATC GRD freq regularly for aircraft moves. Back then if anyone came anywhere close to screwing up ATC let you have it. They were very clear you screwed up. This lady sounded like she was making a suggestion not a command. People these days are getting scared to be loud and assertive. There’s still a time and place for that and this was one of them. She should have commanded the pilot to “ABORT TAKEOFF IMMEDIATELY!” Followed by “Prepare to copy tower phone number”.
Often I see the plane that aborts, run a checklist, allow brakes to cool down and then proceed. Any info why after some time they had to return to the terminal?
Seems like I can’t remember a time and place when that wasn’t true. Oh, wait… that’s because, unless we completely stop flying planes, your empty statement _is_ always true.
Can someone explain why after canceled takeoff they need to return back to the gate? When all the checklist is completed shouldn’t they be able to takeoff again? Thanks in advance
This and the 「 clear to land 」 on an occupied runway happen often enough that I can't help but think that it's only a matter of time before disaster :-/
Could the implement some form of positive train control? Or even traffic signals? Signals have physical wiring that prevents signals from conflicting. So those movie scenes where everyone has a green signal due to a hacker are bunk.
All planes that are using or crossing an active runway should be on the same frequency..I've heard a lot of ground controllers instructing the crossing plane to monitor the tower frequency before issuing the crossing clearance..
Over 300 people about to die in a catastrophic fireball within the minute and this controller brushes it off in an idle 'cancel takeoff clearance' in an attempt to resolve it. Unbelievable.
Why and since when are they using taxiway C for departures at SAN??? Aircraft landing on 27 almost always roll out to nearly to the end of the runway anyway due the displaced threshold, so they’re rarely in conflict with traffic taxiing for departure. Why use the taxiway on the opposite side if you’re just creating conflicts without meaningfully alleviating congestion?
FAA needs to do something with this simultaneusly RWY management by GND and TWR. It`s a matter of a time when major accdident will happen somewhere in US.
How do tower and ground controllers normally coordinate to prevent conflicts? Is there a standard for this, or does it vary by region, or by airport? Is there a common mimic board or piece of software that allows them to mark sections of the tarmac as in-use? Do they issue permits or other guarantees to each other?
Do US towers use A-SMGCS? Even something as simple as the RWY turning red on the A-SMGCS at their display when occupied would really help prevent this sort of thing happening…
What a dangerous system! A runway should controlled by ONE controller, and no-one enters it without a clearance from that one controller (TOWER). Also "cancel t/o clearance" doesn't cut it in that situation; "STOP STOP STOP" would be the way to do it.
SAN Tower, Southwest 1478, possible controller deviation, I have a 300 numbers for you to call... because this time YOU can explain this to the passengers YOURSELF!!!
I have to ask, why is it for most of these incidents, the plane that has rejected the takeoff has to return to the gate? Why can’t they just taxi back to the runway? Is it something related to the brakes?
Who's keeping count of how many of these occurrences happened over the last year? It's clear that the FAA is not taking this seriously enough. You'd think after the first few they would put something in place to eliminate this problem.
Bravo has been undergoing maintenance for several months, hence the X markings between Bravo 4 and Bravo 6 on the plan shown at the beginning. There is a NOTAM and markings on the ground, although the satellite image that the animation is based on is from earlier, before that construction work started. But the real idiocy here is that crossing clearances are given by a ground controller on one frequency while all other runway operations are controlled by a tower controller on a different frequency, making it very hard for anyone to keep a mental picture of what is going on and where. How difficult is it for the ground controller to obtain clearance from tower before issuing a crossing clearance, or at least have a way to flag the runway as obstructed until the crossing has been completed, and in the other direction, to indicate to the ground controller that a takeoff or landing clearance has already been issued and no conflicting movement is allowed? Give me two red lights or LEDs, some cable and switches and I could knock something together in minutes, or double the red light sources and include failover switches if you need redundancy. Because it seems the concept of a traffic light is too difficult for the FAA.
Saying STOP could apply to any aircraft and if you didn't quite catch the callsign because your engines are at max power you may not realise its for you. If you say "cancel takeoff clearance" that's only going to apply to one aircraft so you know its for you
@@k1mgy maybe no physical harm but if you’re taking off and hear “stop” but turns out you misheard the callsign (or there was no callsign) and it wasn’t for you, you can imagine how annoyed you’re going to be now you have hot brakes and potentially have to go back to refuel
Again really poor coordination between GND and TWR controllers. GND controller (male) even is replaced by female controller (supervisor, instructor?) when the incident takes place. Thankfully the radios worked again and the both were told to stop immediately. Had a radio not have worked or a transmission been blocked...
Even though I knew the end result, I was still like, “wait is anyone gonna stop”
There was a suggestion put up on another channel that (paraphrasing) any communications with any aircraft that is subject to movements involving a runway should all be directed by one entity. Only the tower should be telling planes to cross, not ground.
@@rona4960 that's how it's normally done in Europe. You switch to Tower frequency (if the runway is active and in use), Tower will cross you and then switch you back to Ground if more taxi instructions are to be given. Best example is Zurich, when you go back and forth on frequencies depending where you are and what you cross. It's tedious, but it's safe.
@@VASAviation Thought that was standard. The only way to cross the active should be via TWR.
"Radios worked"! Of course, they've "worked" since the 1940's. They are perfect for ONW-WAY communications!😱 You young folks want everything immediately! What do you think radios are? They are not phones! 😳
And i will die on that hill: An active runway should allways only be controlled by one controler TWR. If you have to cross, GND will hand you to TWR, you get your clearence and on the other side witch back to ground. Or, parts of the taxiway are controlled by TWR. EDDF for example has M between the two runways but it is only used by landing aircraft on the south runway if they want to get to the gates in the north, only once they have crossed the center runway are they handed over to a ground controller. And dont tell me this is only possible in small low frequency airports Frankfurt is one of the busiest airports in the world.
This 100%. A given runway should be owned by one, and only one, controller at a time. You wan’t to cross my runway, you talk to me.
Someone’s going to die on that hill eventually if this isn’t fixed. Far too many close calls.
Gets even more interesting if one plane is cleared for take off on runway 27 and another is cleared to cross runway 9.
Definitely agreed. This is a non-standard situation at SAN currently because part of the normal route to the runway (taxiway B) is closed for construction, so that's why planes are having to cross the runway on their taxi route. But no question, the tower controller MUST be the one and only person clearing planes to cross the active runway.
I can’t disagree with the practice. That said, a controller represents a single-point of failure, and I’m not sure this is ideal either…
Can’t believe controllers in the US use “cancel takeoff clearance” in such a critical scenario.
The ICAO “stop immediately, I say again stop immediately, acknowledge” is so much better.
Because that is the correct phraseology
@@mijo3642 Yes exactly that’s the problem
@@mijo3642 Sadly the phraseology could change for each nation: An example of German IFR clearance on radio is: "DLH414, München Delivery, *CHECK INFORMATION B,* STARTUP APPROVED, CLEARED TO Stuttgart, *VIA* RIDAR 4E DEPARTURE, FLIGHT PLANNED ROUTE, CLIMB VIA SID TO FL070, squawk 1000" while in Italy could be "UAE4PV, Malpensa Delivery, cleared to New York via NELAB6B then AOSTA5J transition, runway 35L, Intial Climb 5000, squawk 1000". In Italy I know that for this scenario they say "cancel takeoff clearance, I say again, cancel takeoff clearance, acknowledge"
@@alien216 I can tell you that this is not used in ITALY. Italy follows ICAO regulations and the standard is "STOP IMMEDIATELY, STOP IMMEDIATELY"
@@mijo3642it’s the correct phraseology if the aircraft hasn’t started the takeoff run. If it has, it is ‘“[callsign] stop immediately, [callsign] stop immediately”, to be spoken with a clear voice indicating urgency’.
Okay, so the miscommunication between TWR and GND are already kinda bad, but what REALLY grinds my gears here is the nonchalant way of TWR to deal with this.
Her way: "Southwest 1478, cancel takeoff clearance" - wait 30 seconds - "Hey Southwest, did you copy about the [mumble] departure clearance?" - airplane saying they didn't understand, but she still says "cancel takeoff clearance" and then "sorry about that" in a chipper tone as if she just dropped her pen or bumped into you on a crowded bus...
Correct way: "Southwest 1478, STOP STOP STOP!"
She almost Teneriffed them, not because of the conflicting clearances, but because she didn't take decisive action to resolve the problem when she realized it.
Standard icao phraseology is "Southwest 1478, Stop immediately"
Yes, muddled even in emergency.
Girls will be girls
She's an Ent...
“But I spoke hastily. We must not be hasty. I have become too hot. I must cool myself and think; for it is easier to shout stop! than to do it.”
They need to make a new "abort abort abort" verbiage
The tower controller is asking if the departing plane received the clearance cancellation, in the middle of a clear conflict situation, with the same casual tone you’d expect when asking a customer if they have a loyalty card at a supermarket. Big yikes.
There is no reason to panic and get bent out of shape. Although it was a mistake, calmness is a necessity otherwise more mistakes will follow
@@mijo3642 It's fine to remain calm internally, but a much more urgent and attention-grabbing vocalization was in order here.
@@mijo3642when learning standard phraseology in ATC, you also learn to put emphasis on words or sentences depending on the situation. This was such a situation.
It took more than 20s for the crew to understood ATC…way too long at such a critical stage. But ATC is taking to another guys and is asking rather than saying STOP 😂
Eh
@@mijo3642 No need to panic, however repeat the instruction rather than ask whether they received it. Also clear phraseology like STOP IMMEDIATELY, I repeat STOP IMMEDIATELY please acknowledge (as used in most of the world) will be heard and understood the first time it is said.
As a Airline Pilot, I'm getting sick an tired of non standard phrasology. I dont't care if it's permitted or not. In this case it is "STOP! STOP! STOP!. Everyone stops. Its that easy. Just like in the air its "MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY"
The lackadaisical and half mumbled "cancel takeoff clearance" with an implied "if it's not too much trouble" doesn't work for you? Weird.
It my be standard phraseology but as a planespotter I have heard the cancel takeoff clearance used at SFO and LAX. I guess the FAA doesn't periodically review ATC tapes to make sure everyone is complying. To issue a cancel takeoff clearance means that a specific flight may be instructed. But, in this case STOP! STOP! STOP! would indicate that all aircraft stop immediately. It's odd that this would happen at the world's busiest single-runway airport. I wonder if the ground and takeoff/landing Controllers are in the same room. The ground controller should be able to visibly see the taxiways, not just on radar.
@@TheGospelQuartetParadiseAll airplanes stopping is the appropriate action when hundreds of people are about to die. Its why the phraseology exists. Cancelling take off clearance may be acceptable when someone hasn't taken position or the ATC changes their mind for their flow, but when planes are rolling its too late to be seeking confirmation. My point is we are playing fast and loose with some of the phraseology. I'm not saying she is wrong, I'm saying it can be done a lot better.
@@tpspc03 I understand what you're saying because you are on the front lines and see it everyday. What I was saying is that it appears that using non-standard phraseology is more widespread than it should be. I have heard some pilots say that San Diego is a disaster waiting to happen. This controller should have just said EVERYBODY stop, since both aircraft were Southwest. If it had been, say a Southwest on the takeoff and a Delta cleared to cross, the ground controller could have said DELTA STOP. I just pray that ATC communications get better worldwide.
STOP is not by 'cancel takeoff clearance' standarts
Honey wake up, it’s the weekly near collision in the US!
It is happening every country in every industry, accelerated cognitive decline and long term sickness and increase absences with declining productivity and more mistakes at work.
Mass brain degeneration caused by repeat infections by the virus governments want us all to think is now harmless so we will keep going to school and work without demanding the installation of HEPA filters. It is a cover up by just not mentioning it despite massive long term sickness and mistakes and accidents at work increases being in the news, the known cause talked about in science papers does not come up so we will keep getting reinfected without complaining
haha true, so many of these happening in the US its insane
@@spidey2085 bc we have prob the most flights in a single country in the world? plus this is a channel for english-speakers, so obv they get it from english-speaking countries. doesn't mean french speaking places don't have issues.
Don't worry, one day the third world will be able to afford to record and publish their own errors instead of just relying on the USA as they do for technology, culture and national defense.
@@spidey2085they need to move a lot of planes. From what I have seen from this channel. To solve this, they seem to allow lineup before the runway completely clear.
I was in San Diego when this happened. We pushed back from the gate, then held for an hour as we were #16 in line for takeoff. The story from the flight deck was that fog was causing landings to be opposite from departures so everything was slow. All engines were powered off on a number of planes while we waited. While both explanations could be true, the coincidence is interesting
Thanks for sharing your experience
I was in San Diego only 15 miles away from the runway when this happened. I heard about it a couple days later. Terrifying for me.
I'd expect it WOULD be opposite directions, BKN005 is below LOC27 minimums (680/1). With that and the B4-B6 closure, must have been a REAL mess...
KSAN turns into a zoo when they have to bring anyone in from the ocean direction. They've started moving planes in big groups, like they'll bring in 10 planes for arrival and during that time anyone departing gets parked somewhere out of the way, and pilots will turn off the engines to save fuel. Then the center and tracon controllers will start spinning planes in holding patterns way out to make a space for all those planes waiting to depart.
It's even worse when they're taking off runway 9 because there's nowhere to park planes waiting to take off - it's just a total jam of arriving and departing planes not able to go anywhere.
In El Cajon?
Oh. That's much worse than the other report I saw. That didn't mention the delay in actually communicating effectively. Hopefully the NTSB will look at this, even if the FAA said it's not a problem because nobody died. The rules say everything after the hold short line is technically the runway. So they put two planes on the same runway and nearly got everyone killed. That's a huge issue.
Even if the NTSB looks into it, they cannot actually do anything since the lack power to enforce changes.
FAA has got to pull their heads out of their butts and do something before someone dies.
Like I posted somewhere else:
How cute of the FAA to say the second plane never "entered" the runway when anyone who's ever been in the cockpit knows if you get anywhere within 5 inches past the short line you'll get a phone number.
The local FAA fsdo used to distribute little runway incursion pamphlets that had a picture of a hold short line that read If you crossed the line then you crossed the line. But no big deal when it’s on there side apparently.
The double standard of government. It’s never THEIR fault. Just YOURS.
Juan Brown said the same thing. If a pilot had done that, they’d be in a lot of trouble.
I was hoping the pilots would give ATC a number to call
Oh, I'm sure Company already has the tower number and called it...
Wow, never heard this „number to call“ joke before … 🙄
wow...clear for takeoff and clear for crossing the runway at the same time, AGAIN
Railways have had interlocking to prevent this from happening for almost 100 years. Electronics these days, mechanical back then... to prevent conflicting paths to be cleared at the same time at all times. As a student pilot I'm surprised at how primitive some of this critical stuff really is...
Crews should now ask "Confirm runway clear", before applying thrust.
This just doesn't happen nearly as often in the rest of the world, but the americans think they know better and really need the ground controller to be able to clear people to cross a runway rather than the runway being solely owned by the tower controller. Don't tell them that there are busier airports that manage it just fine.
The time it took for the rolling plane to respond, I half-expected the response to be "unable".
This exact scenario happened to me at SAN. Cleared to takeoff while a 767 was just beginning to cross the runway. CAVOK conditions. Awful ATC services at this airport. They also love to vector VFR GA traffic across final in front of airlines, seemingly having learned nothing from the 727 midair years back.
It's ok folks. The FAA will possibly take action to sort stuff like this AFTER you have another Tenerife.
They're too busy slowrolling SpaceX projects because their boss doesn't like Elon Musk.
By my watch it was 20+ seconds between 1478’s initial takeoff clearance CANCELLATION and 1478 finally rejecting - after another call for clearance cancelled and 1478 with a “say again.” My guess is this would be a nothing to see here instead of a brakes-smoking high speed RTO if the first cancellation call had registered on 1478.
Glad to see that SAN Ground and Tower retain such good spirits even after they try to run two airplanes into one another. 😮
SAN ATC is like „Some of you might die, but that’s a sacrifice we‘re willing to make“
No, communication is the last step in responding to any event. How many times have you heardAviate, navigate, communicate. That’s exactly what’s going on here. Stop exaggerating it.
@@Jimmer-Space88 lololol please kindly explain the important "aviate" and "navigate" tasks while on takeoff that carry such a high workload as to preclude a crew from communicating...
The problem was the nonchalant and conversational way in which ATC canceled the takeoff clearance. 1478 didn't copy it, possibly because they didn't really hear the message and it didn't sound like an emergency. In this case, "communicate" is the top of the pyramid on ATC's side, and they failed miserably to communicate the gravity of the situation to the air crew.
Thank you for providing such a crystal clear, real time visualisation, of a rapidly developing, and potentially catastrophic event.
This is happening far too much.
But thanks to that they can keep tight schedules and serve more aircrafts!!!111one
Mass brain degeneration caused by repeat infections by the virus govenments want us all to think is now harmless so we will keep going to school and work without demanding the installation of HEPA filters. It is a cover up by just not mentioning it despite massive long term sickness and mistakes and accidents at work increases being in the news, the known cause talked about in science papers does not come up so we will keep getting reinfected without complaining
DEI = DIE
Not according to the FAA. Nothing will be done by the FAA until and unless there's another Teneriffe incident.
She almost asked "Can you please and kindly cancel your take off?" amatuers
She had no clue on what was going on. She would have asked the same way if she had dropped a pen, and would have liked you to pick it up for her - basically clueless, scary clueless and unengaged.
I love flying, and don't worry about much. When I do worry, it's while the plane is on the ground. Once we're safely away from the airport I can relax.
And yet another instance of ground issuing a clearance to cross an active runway. When will the FAA wise up and stop this practice. The runway should be controlled by 1 controller. The tower controller. Its very simple to switch frequencies to cross and then go back to ground on the other side. Happens all the time outside the US. JFK, DCA, and now SAN. I'm sure there are others I missed, those are just the most recent ones.
I think I know the answer: the faa will take action after the crash that is statistically inevitable occurs. Killing hundreds of people. 🤷🏻♀️
why did it take the Tower ATC so long to get 1478 to stop?????? She was terribly unclear in what she was saying in her nearly ineffective attempts to stop him.
“She”
Oh just grow up
Tower controls the runway and access onto/crossing it. Ground controls the aprons and taxiways up to the hold short bars.
Any airport that is designed to have (even on a temporary basis) a taxiway queue that crosses an active runway needs to have that crossing managed by the tower only!
In the rest of the World, if you hear STOP IMMEDIATELY, it means that if u r on the take-off roll, u have to stop. If u hear the ATC speaking normally during takeoff roll odds are u won’t even register it in your brain. What is the USA waiting to adopt more modern, safer phraseology??
Just like they’re still not using SI units, but stick to yards, inches, feet…
The FAA, like usual.
@@bbbeezy the brits lead these improvements. They do speak English
The reason the rest of the world uses this is because they read the ICAO phraseology list. It’s also why we have “pan pan” and “mayday” calls where US pilots have a tendency to use “we’re declaring an emergency”. Unfortunately, it’s likely to require one or more major accidents to change this, even though the phraseology list was bought in because of one specific accident, specifically Avianca 052.
@@thegreyarea-WPP the US is starting to lag and fall behind in the evolution of some important stuff.
Another day in the Office - and fortunately another day with Good Luck! - Thank you very much for picking this incident up!👍
" Tower, when ready I have a number for you to call".
That's the kicker here. Unless the pilots raise hell through their company, nothing will come of this incident.
Hey Jack, did you make this joke up by youself? 🙄
@@herrpausr7008 Nah, you were the inspiration, remember Herr Hauser?
A funny guy.
When this happens, Quick guess is always "US Airports".
Tower controllers are really taking these perfection motivational posters to heart, aren't they?
How in the world do you mess that up? There's one runway!
Also, San Diego desperately needs a new airport. Having one runway to serve a major city with no room for expansion is a recipe for disaster.
There was a line of 8-10 planes in that portion of C and more waiting to cross. That's definitely a busy departure queue there...
The south side of Miramar would be perfect for an expanded terminal. It's open DOD land, no training facilities there, close proximity to several freeways and less houses to fly over. I have no idea why they just don't work out an agreement. many airports are joint DOD and civilian run.
@@ansteve1 MCAS Miramar is a rather busy military airport. If they had to suddenly deal with a lot of civilian traffic that close to the base, I imagine it would create a lot of restrictions on their ability to fly around the base. Not saying they couldn't/shouldn't do it, but that would be a reason for them not to want it.
@@ansteve1I was thinking converting the Naval Air Station on Coronado would be possible since Miramar is so close.
@@johnhutto71 logically it would work. But it's a rich area so that will never happen
To my mind this is what happens when you’re routinely giving multiple aircraft take off and landing and even crossing clearances for the same runway.
Adopt the European system! One aircraft cleared at a time.
Landed a couple of weeks ago from Hawaii on a Thursday evening. An hour and a half later we got to our gate following a Conga Line of some 8 or 9 planes I could see when we cross the runway. Maybe, just maybe, the airport is over capacity. Is the answer, add another Terminal?
They are building a new terminal, that's part of the issue here. B is partially closed due to the construction, so every departing plane has to cross the runway.
San Diego is a scary airport. Too small in a very congested area.
Another issue caused by the different frequency between Ground and Tower: This seems to happen very often, but usually in larger and more complicated airports, and quite rare in a single-runway airport.
The controllers are in the same blooming room! If they can't coordinate in that environment, then shut it down!
I am just getting horrible dangerous service out of air traffic control these days. It’s getting worse than I’ve ever seen in all my years of flying.
More noticeably the past year and half ago
ATC is overworked, underhired, and undertrained. It's not the controller's fault. It's the FAA. They hire so few at a time it barely accounts for attrition. Overtime is rampant, most controllers work 6 days a week, many of them doing 12 hour days. It's unsustainable. We need more controllers, we need a pathway to train more of them. So many parts of the Controller Training are Pass/Fail with no way to get back in if you fail, so good candidates are tossed away when in reality if they were given a bit more attention they could have passed with flying colors. I made a comment on some forum a few months ago that, if this continues, at some point we are going to see another Tenerife. And that almost happened here. I am honestly more afraid of an ATC failure than literally any other thing in the aviation industry.
@@Atlasworkinprogress that is true the one thing that is not a good excuse for is the really bad attitudes and unprofessional attitudes that I’m hearing in air traffic controllers along the way also. I’m hearing a lot of just flat bad attitudes from some of them toward pilots when they are giving us horrible instructions. It is very dangerous. We have to look out for ourselves as pilots and listen closely and watch what’s happening around us.
@@Atlasworkinprogresssounds like law enforcement…
@@Cutedge2 Yeah, and then the time you *want* ATC to raise their voice to you.....they casually say "cancel takeoff clearance" with zero urgency!
I see these all the time. This exact problem, and I see aviation experts explaining that the solution is only allowing the tower to clear across an active runway. I just cannot understand why our leaders in aviation safety (NTSB and FAA) don’t DO something. This will result in fatalities and faa is acting like it’s not a big deal.
If that was a railway junction, there would be hardware signals and interlocking such that the signallers *could not* clear two conflicting moves. This has been standard for more than 100 years. The aviation industry needs to catch up and stop relying on unclear, spoken instructions for ground movements across runways.
It's already available.
@@tommaxwell429 That's good to hear, but presumably Lindbergh Field doesn't have the system yet. Two controllers in the same tower could get most of the safety improvement by a physical token passed between them: only the controller holding the token is allowed to speak a runway clearance into the radio. The token doesn't have to be special, a cuddly toy from the airport gift-shop would do. Anything that's unique and unmistakable in the controllers' environment.
Do they not have monitors which clearly show planes CLEARED TO CROSS RUNWAYS and MOVING in BRIGHT RED on a monitor and planes LINING UP TO WAIT on an active runway in BRIGHT GREEN in 2024?? Maybe technology needs to keep up to prevent POTENTIAL issues and CONFLICTS before the human ATC folks really cause a tragedy....
You would be surprised at how much the FAA, NATCA leadership and especially congress denies several equipment upgrades for controllers. They want everything done at the lowest possible cost they can achieve.
With the construction going on at KSAN, why is there not a dedicated controller whose job it is to watch BOTH the ground and tower to make sure this insanity doesn’t KEEP happening (this is far from the first time).
It'd cost more and the US is full of people with low surface area brains who think that government should operate like a business.
Why do you need a controller watching both of them. Tower gives runway clearance. Ground does not.
@@catprog because *clearly* they’re not communicating with each other. Otherwise these kinds of things wouldn’t be happening over and over and over.
Why doesn’t a ground controller? Ask the tower controller for permission, before clearing. And so cavalier about it and obnoxious. 180 people just got inconvenienced for three hours. Never mind the risk.
This is a single-runway airport. Does TWR not scan the runway before clearing for takeoff/landing? Forget departing traffic diverging course, your runway is NOT clear. What is going on?
@VASAviation According to avherald, WN-1478 had a delay of 3 hours, not just 1 hour.
Kudos on the prompt video w/ animation!
That is not correct. The aircraft departed the gate again less than an hour later.
How can ground controller give the runway crossing clearance?
they cannot, Both were on tower frequency for the crossing
@@mijo3642 Wrong. It's common for GND to give a runway crossing clearance, but only after coordinating that with TWR. This is either a case of GND doing something without coordination, or TWR having forgotten she gave GND a crossing clearance.
@@mijo3642 That is incorrect. Please watch the video. They are separate frequencies that are superimposed for the purpose of making the video.
Bad system and bad controllers
Welcome to USA
Pretty sure UK airports only allow the tower controller to issue crossing clearances for this reason.
Everywhere in the world, just not the USA.
Cancel take off clearance?? The plane was already on take off!
Damn. 2 ATCOS at the same time (lady and gent)
This airport has one runway, why are there even separate ground and tower controllers. They need to reduce the workload if that's a problem.
The traffic is so busy you cannot combine both positions, it would be a complete mess - if it's not already with long queues of planes to depart.
@@VASAviation Main taxiway partly closed and opposite direction operations due to weather and the lack of an ILS on 27.
@@VASAviation but they can switch frequencies to tower to get cleared to cross. That is what happens outside the US and it should be standard practice here. But the FAA is so far out of touch they can't see that.
Do you people how busy San Diego is??? The small GA airport I'm at has Multiple people for ground and tower and sometimes they get very busy with traffic which mostly consists of small aircraft. The comments are so stupid here.
My first thought was - another one?
At most of the airports a fly to, runway crossings are done on tower frequency, with instructions to contact ground once you're across. Why isn't this a standard?
Seems likke this could be avoided by placing authorization for crossing a runway solely with Tower, not Ground. We're just one hole in the swiss cheese away from a disaster.
That is how it is supposed to be
that was crazy. saludos Iberian
Again an example as to why having 2 controllers controlling access to a live runway is a bad idea!! Its only a matter of time I'm afraid before it goes really wrong.
An embarassing and shameful performance from ATC. There should be suspensions.
They don't have enough staffing as it is. I guarantee a valuable lesson was learned, and they move on.
@@eazymoneyracing I guarantee a valuable lesson was not learned, and they move on.
@@eazymoneyracing valuable lesson was learned,? What lesson
They made this page and that's something none of us want to do
Firings.
Ground and departure controllers need to COMMUNICATE with each other.
Here we go again.....How long til it isn't just a close call?
What kind of punishment will either GND or TWR get for this careless action?
Punishment doesn't fix bad systems.
Any reason you left out the construction that had the normal taxiway closed and required an unusual taxi procedure that involved crossing the runway? Likely a major factor in this incident.
He didn't. 0:30 shows an overlay of the Jeppesen chart with the closed section marked with x x x x
@@cjmillsnun You are correct, most of the non-pilot audience that watches these videos will certainly understand the standard taxi instructions in San Diego and the "X" on the chart. Could be an oversight or could be intentional, but normally he highlights major factors in an incident by placing bold writing across the screen, that did not happen here.
Just wondering why they use the verbiage Lindbergh tower in lieu of San Diego tower? Easier / quicker to say?
Where I live no one enters the active runway unless they're talking to the tower.
Pretty much the rest of the world.
So, how do TWR and GND normally coordinate to prevent this, and what went wrong this time?
They sit next to each other inside the control tower. Tower just stop takeoffs and tells the Ground controller to cross one or more airplanes. Once the cross is complete, takeoffs resume. That process over and over again... until a piece of the chain breaks and this happens.
Tower controls the runway, period
I keep thinking anything related to an active runway should be managed by a single controller, Tower.
@@VASAviation exactly correct. It’s a process that works until it doesn’t when a human makes a mistake.
US ATC is gone to sh!t. A disaster is inevitable at this rate.
I don’t understand why they don’t hand the crossing traffic to the TWR controller to clear it across, that’s what we do in the U.K. The tower controller owns the runway. Terrible co-ordination by the controllers, but had the crossing traffic been on the same frequency the departure would’ve heard his clearance to cross which would add another layer of safety. Something nasty is going to happen in the US if they don’t get a grip.
What’s the rush to switch over to ground frequency while still crossing runways ???!!! 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Exactly, with this runway layout, ground should only be responsible for traffic on the airport side of the runway. As soon as you get within 100ft of that runway you should be under tower control only.
Interesting. I’ve been in aviation maintenance for almost 40 years and have to go on ATC GRD freq regularly for aircraft moves. Back then if anyone came anywhere close to screwing up ATC let you have it. They were very clear you screwed up. This lady sounded like she was making a suggestion not a command. People these days are getting scared to be loud and assertive. There’s still a time and place for that and this was one of them. She should have commanded the pilot to “ABORT TAKEOFF IMMEDIATELY!” Followed by “Prepare to copy tower phone number”.
Often I see the plane that aborts, run a checklist, allow brakes to cool down and then proceed. Any info why after some time they had to return to the terminal?
Probably to refuel
Literally one single runway to manage there at SAN and they can’t even get that right. Sheesh.
It's only a matter of time.
Seems like I can’t remember a time and place when that wasn’t true. Oh, wait… that’s because, unless we completely stop flying planes, your empty statement _is_ always true.
@markhamatra1083 wow. Having a bad day and taking it out on the RUclips comments section, huh? Way to go.
@@GigglesClifton9 Having a pretty good day, actually. But I am tired of the stupid comments that get endlessly repeated on this channel.
"Sorry about that" - unacceptable.
“…we almost killed a couple hundred people…our bad”.🤦🏻♂️
@@malekodesouza7255 exactly.
DEI
Can someone explain why after canceled takeoff they need to return back to the gate? When all the checklist is completed shouldn’t they be able to takeoff again? Thanks in advance
Do you not usually visually clear left and right when crossing and active runway?
Runways have slopes and weather has fog
I’m sorry but that little emoji face in the thumbnail is cracking me up 😂
This and the 「 clear to land 」 on an occupied runway happen often enough that I can't help but think that it's only a matter of time before disaster :-/
Could the implement some form of positive train control? Or even traffic signals? Signals have physical wiring that prevents signals from conflicting. So those movie scenes where everyone has a green signal due to a hacker are bunk.
We could call it 'Iluminated Red Stop Bars'
All planes that are using or crossing an active runway should be on the same frequency..I've heard a lot of ground controllers instructing the crossing plane to monitor the tower frequency before issuing the crossing clearance..
They need some numbers to call
Simple fix. Single tower freq controls all runway movements including downfield crossings. One controller responsible for all runway movement.
Over 300 people about to die in a catastrophic fireball within the minute and this controller brushes it off in an idle 'cancel takeoff clearance' in an attempt to resolve it. Unbelievable.
USAL frist time?
Why and since when are they using taxiway C for departures at SAN??? Aircraft landing on 27 almost always roll out to nearly to the end of the runway anyway due the displaced threshold, so they’re rarely in conflict with traffic taxiing for departure. Why use the taxiway on the opposite side if you’re just creating conflicts without meaningfully alleviating congestion?
FAA needs to do something with this simultaneusly RWY management by GND and TWR. It`s a matter of a time when major accdident will happen somewhere in US.
very fresh!
In the Swiss cheese model, the FAA is the mouse.
One of the SWA should call out "I need you to copy a number"!
And it's like nothing happened! If that had been a pilot error it would be a different story. FAA sort your ATCO's out for pity's sake.
Exactly what Juan Brown said. If it had been a runway incursion, ho boy.
i'm a noob. How would TWR know that GND allowed a plane to cross and vice versa ? what triggered the alert for them ?
How do tower and ground controllers normally coordinate to prevent conflicts? Is there a standard for this, or does it vary by region, or by airport? Is there a common mimic board or piece of software that allows them to mark sections of the tarmac as in-use? Do they issue permits or other guarantees to each other?
they are literally sitting next to each other. They just talk and coordinate.
Oh Dear.
The number of incidents coming out of America is too many. Cancel Take off clearance should be replaced with ICAO standard phrase of STOP IMMEDIATELY
Do US towers use A-SMGCS? Even something as simple as the RWY turning red on the A-SMGCS at their display when occupied would really help prevent this sort of thing happening…
This is why GND doesn't or shouldn't be giving clearances to cross active runways...
Wow…KSAN is a single runway airport. Not that complicated people.
Useless controllers
I wonder if the controllers noticed first or automation caught it first.
What a dangerous system! A runway should controlled by ONE controller, and no-one enters it without a clearance from that one controller (TOWER). Also "cancel t/o clearance" doesn't cut it in that situation; "STOP STOP STOP" would be the way to do it.
SAN Tower, Southwest 1478, possible controller deviation, I have a 300 numbers for you to call... because this time YOU can explain this to the passengers YOURSELF!!!
This is getting way too common these days. It seems like there is at least one near miss each week.
I have to ask, why is it for most of these incidents, the plane that has rejected the takeoff has to return to the gate? Why can’t they just taxi back to the runway? Is it something related to the brakes?
The brakes overheat and need to be checked over to make sure they're good before they go again.
They might not have enough fuel either, depending on how lean the company operates.
Who's keeping count of how many of these occurrences happened over the last year? It's clear that the FAA is not taking this seriously enough. You'd think after the first few they would put something in place to eliminate this problem.
Maybe the insurance companies should start issuing exclusions to the air carriers certificates for these airports? Lives matter...
Maybe I’m missing something but why are they lining up on Charlie when they could use Bravo without having to cross an active runway?
Bravo has been undergoing maintenance for several months, hence the X markings between Bravo 4 and Bravo 6 on the plan shown at the beginning. There is a NOTAM and markings on the ground, although the satellite image that the animation is based on is from earlier, before that construction work started.
But the real idiocy here is that crossing clearances are given by a ground controller on one frequency while all other runway operations are controlled by a tower controller on a different frequency, making it very hard for anyone to keep a mental picture of what is going on and where. How difficult is it for the ground controller to obtain clearance from tower before issuing a crossing clearance, or at least have a way to flag the runway as obstructed until the crossing has been completed, and in the other direction, to indicate to the ground controller that a takeoff or landing clearance has already been issued and no conflicting movement is allowed? Give me two red lights or LEDs, some cable and switches and I could knock something together in minutes, or double the red light sources and include failover switches if you need redundancy. Because it seems the concept of a traffic light is too difficult for the FAA.
Ahh thank you, I totally missed that.
So, does this get an NTSB investigation/recommendations or is it too commonplace?
NTSB is investigating
This is becoming normal for San Diego. Very dangerous
Did they lower the standards for ATC or are they just overworked?
dei
I thought the phraseology after the takeoff roll was started was CALLSIGN stop immediately. Cancel takeoff clearance is before the roll
You're correct. Just another indication of poor training and lack of necessary basic skills.
Saying STOP could apply to any aircraft and if you didn't quite catch the callsign because your engines are at max power you may not realise its for you. If you say "cancel takeoff clearance" that's only going to apply to one aircraft so you know its for you
STOP IMMEDIATELY is the correct standard phraseology
@@tomstravels520 BOTH should stop. There is no harm in stopping everything, including tours of the tower.
@@k1mgy maybe no physical harm but if you’re taking off and hear “stop” but turns out you misheard the callsign (or there was no callsign) and it wasn’t for you, you can imagine how annoyed you’re going to be now you have hot brakes and potentially have to go back to refuel