Thanks to everyone who requested this incident via RUclips comments and email. What's your opinion about it? Should ATC have taken a closer look at Cathay first?
Cathey was sufficiently far away to not be at danger, then again if the controller allows them to cross whilst another has been given takeoff clearance, it may happen again at a closer intersection. Better be sure and wait.
The Cathay FO definitely screwed up saying they were "clear" of the runway, but ATC gave takeoff clearance BEFORE that transmission. Ultimately, it was ATC's mistake and fortunately, the Cathay captain was paying attention to what his FO was saying.
Actually, as someone who has taught the English language to kids for a few years my assumption was that the FO was trying to convey the message "he can't take off because we are cleared to be on the runway". Thankfully the captain caught it in time and things did not end bad.
@@axilleas Yes it sounds like the FO was trying to say "We are STILL clearing the runway" or more specifically "We have NOT cleared the runway". I could understand how that could be easily mixed up in a stressful situation.
Matthew Louis yeah, it sounds like he got stressed and his English skills, not being ingrained in his instinctual thinking, failed him and he was trying to translate a sentence he had formed in his native language into English which, apart from very rare exceptions, rarely works.
Well, I can certainly understand the Cathay FO said it wrong, because he is suddenly thrown into a _very_ stressful situation when he realises another plane has just been sent their way. He must immediately try to say something he has probably never said before. So it is understandable that his "muscle memory" of standard phrases kicks in.
Yes he was. Pilots need to listen for other aircraft transmissions. Never understood how a Useless Air 737 landed on a SA 227 years ago at LAX. The pilots of the USAir Boeing 737 should have heard that he was cleared to taxi into position and hold. Controllers aren't perfect. As a pilot I've corrected a few , but pilots can also make their job's easier
It's easy to see how the mistake could happen, though. The phrase they use is "You are cleared to cross runway 07R". Cleared means you have permission to be on the runway. So, when a non-English speaker used to hearing that suddenly needs to say they're on the runway "We are cleared runway 07R", trying to say that they have permission to be on the runway (and are on it) makes a lot of sense. The fact that the words have the opposite meaning as well is just unfortunate.
@@jonathancassels4835 I see your point. would it make better sense to use different words instead of using "cleared" to mean "vacated" and also "cleared" to mean "approved to enter".
Co pilot clearly did not communicate correctly when crossing runway, he said we’re clear of runway when he meant we’re not clear or we’re crossing the runway. Capt took over and corrected in clear English.
If they were ON the runway, it would make no sense to want to say "we are NEAR the runway". I mean, of course they are near the runway, it's an airport.
Good thing the Cathay 747 had a native speaker in the cockpit. The other guy almost screwed it up by saying "we're clear of the runway" when they weren't.
I think the First Officer panicked and started confusing words. At least the Captain reacted perfectly and made the sentence immediately understandable. That's experience! At least the First Officer heard the take-off clearance and understood immediately it was wrong (in an airport with 2 active runways, not only one). Neither of the pilots of the departing aircraft noticed that they were given take-off clearance, but nobody declared "runway cleared" before..
It proves once again how important it is to have a good command in English to operate globally and safely. On a separate note the Cathy Pacific did not report to tower on vacating the runway so the controller shouldn’t have cleared the other aircraft for take off. Poor English is the secondary element here the primary element is that the air traffic controller cleared someone for take off before receiving the runway vacated confirmation.
1) ATC should have LOOKED before clearing the airbus 2) The F/O's miscommunication could have gotten people killed. 3) Good on the captain of the 74 for jumping in and clarifying
Multiple mistakes - by ATC & the FO. However, I think the FO realized what was going on and panicked while trying to communicate. The major issue was probably at ATC first.
Dangerous call from the Cathay! The FO should learn the difference between 'clear' and 'crossing'! It's like the 2018 version of Air China 981 😂 Awesome video, looking forward to the investigation.
The amount of times I've had issues because of Asian pilots' poor grasp of the English language is unreal...I wonder how they get their English Language Proficiency certificates!
come to JFK and monitor the tower frequency on a busy evening... it always amazes me that so many foreign(Asian and European) pilots are allowed to fly with broken English like that....
The focus should be a little "less" on the First officer. He made a incorrect statement that was immediately corrected by the captain. The built in Safeguards in the system worked as designed. The Takeoff clearance was a bit premature and what happened here, validates the principle of Crew concept. The tower canceled the takeoff clearance. You guys pointing fingers need to "get a grip". No one is flying single pilot in the Airlines and flights need two individuals [ at least ] to operate. A lot of you guys don't know a 'digit' of a foreign language. How long will it take, if you had to learn Mandarin or Cantonese to keep your job.
Tom A You're right, the safety systems worked as intended! I think that the quick and heavy reactions emerged because this scenario went outside of the bubble of safety that surrounds Aviation. You can get so used to the primary security and safety (= professionalism and training) that it is possible to forget the secondary structure that surrounds this and really protect against something happening (2-crew concept etc).
ATC wholly at fault here, but what's with the pilot confirming he is clear the runway twice in same message while also contradicting himself saying he's crossing? No wonder the captain had to take over. Not impressive situational management by that no.2. Love the outlines making clear which plane is transmitting ❤️
I'm not sure that it was a matter of situational awareness as much as a matter of a lack of sufficient English skills. Thank goodness the Captain was a native speaker.
Definitely a language barrier problem. I train airline-sponsored chinese pilots in the U.S., and although they are initially selected in part because they can already speak some English, and they learn much while in training, they are only immersed in English (by being in the U.S.) for about 14 months. Then they are flying for their airlines in China. This normally isn't a problem (they meet U.S. FAA English proficiency standards), but in high-stress situations, it is not uncommon for their English speaking ability to deteriorate. I'm sure that FO was somewhat frightened by the situation and wasn't able to find the correct phrase, instead saying the more common "clear of the runway" phrase instead. It can only be rectified through experience and greater language immersion.
THAT VISUALISATION IS ABSOLUTELY AWESOMELY SPOT ON! I love following how you improve with each every video, VASA. Even clueless ( no offence ) 10 years old schoolboy/girl would understand what's going on here.
It's nice, but I don't quite get the airplanes resizing. I would get it if it was just for landing and takeoff, but while on the ground is confusing to me.
Thanks for the upload. This is a clear picture of exactly when it is appropriate for Batman to smack Robin across the face. WE ARE NOT CLEAR OF THE RUNWAY!
Cathay FO was probably shitting his pants as soon as he heard that takeoff clearance... Good thing, his captain corrected him. Bad situational awareness by the Tower controller though... Either your airport has a ground radar and you can see that the aircraft wasn't finished crossing, or you take the good old binoculars to make sure. Also (according to the graphics) the Hong Kong Airlines was lineup when they received the takeoff clearance. Usually you are able to check if the runway is clear (matter of fact, most airlines have this as part of their checklist/flows) or was the weather too bad for that?
If that's true, that the vis was 8 km, then the Hong Kong Airlines should have never read back the takeoff clearance in my opinion, but point out, that there is still traffic on the runway... Every pilot should check the approach sector before line up, identify the runway and make sure the runway is clear during lineup. If there is an obstacle or traffic on the runway I wouldn't care if ATC clears me for takeoff, I would report that traffic/obstacle to the controller and wait for a response. I really hope this is not a case of the Hong Kong Airlines pilots being afraid to tell ATC something else that they have been instructed to. I mean with 8 km visibility they should have been able to see that traffic at the end of the runway. If you are cleared for takeoff but you don't feel like it or any objections - just don't do it... its that simple. Better safe than sorry.
Not a real pilot either, but a huge aviation and flight sim geek, but I saw something similar once as a passenger, right before lineup you get a good view down the runway if you look out of the cabin windows, I remember there was a plane vacating or crossing at the end of the runway and you can clearly see it, beacon and strobe light have a really good visibility, also you (might be) able to see the bright taxi lights of the plane.
Cathay's FO really needs some communication lessons, but it was the Tower that made the mistake here by clearing the takeoff when an aircraft was still crossing. They didn't even ask Cathay to confirm
Excellent job on the highlighting of the aircraft on the video. I made things so much clearer. This was horrific to watch as I remember Tenerife vividly (from news reports and a recent account by a survivor of the Pan Am 747).
And it happened at night, with the lights of the passenger terminals and cargo terminals on both sides of you. It's around 3.8km between the HX and thr CX planes.
@@cococly Agree, there's no way the lined up aircraft is properly visual with the 747 to know it is blocking the departure end of the runway. At that distance you'd see an indistinct blur and a few lights, at best.
Boodieman72 it is procedural and also a requirement for pilots to contact ATC after the completion of the crossing. So I don’t know why ATC gave the A330 the clearance for takeoff...he should have wait and I’m glad the Captain took over Comms for that reason..
Boodieman72 , it usually goes han in hand. "Aircraft xxx, cross runway 07, report vacated.", one short RT. And if you wish, you could emphasize, "A330, in position for departure." Also, "A330, taxi into position and wait, B747, crossing departure end", now both pilots are aware of the situation. The control phraseology is in the book, all controllers should learn and use it. There is no better defense in court, than when you quote the book!
Patrick Chen & Aminisitai Koroi It has been astonishing to me the many comments that are incorrect and people take it to the bank. Ground control and tower use Radar, [ control strips for backup ] and sight to control traffic. It is NOT protocol to make transmissions AFTER crossing, you receive a clearance, you read it back, and comply. that is it. To prevent a lot of back and forth chatter on frequency radio transmissions observe some restrictive minimizations.
Osiris 3686 Yes, that is what I was saying [ having the experience ] ground and tower use radar [ this is a major International Airport ] and you read back clearances as acknowledgment of intention to execute. I am asking these enthusiast to think of it logically. When you are cleared for takeoff, you read back "cleared for takeoff", you do not have a "protocol" to report "Flight XYZ is now in the air". If the 747 had reported "clear of the runway", no one would give him grief about it. Anyhow, I am not disagreeing but I did mention by "Sight".
I would subscribe twice if I could lol you're content is just great. and continues to get better and better. I love the that you added highlighting of the aircraft that's responding! it's so much easier to now know who's talking!
Maybe Cathay was slow, maybe not, but it's still incumbent on the controller to make sure that the runway is clear before clearing a plane for take-off isn't it? Incident report linked by someone else says TO clearance was given only 30 sec after the crossing clearance was given, not much time for a big 747 to taxi from a stop I would think.
flinx I don't think it really matters how long either one takes. If the procedure says it's supposed to be clear before take off clearance is given, then the controller screwed up, regardless of how close they got or might have gotten.
Jason Mizuno yes the controller broke the rules, but you brought up the 30 seconds. So I want to know in fact how much or how little danger the jets were in.
flinx hard to say. By the map, the crossing is at the very end of the runway, by which time the TO aircraft should be well up in the air. In terms of time, it's generally about 30-35 sec from throttle up to wheels off the runway. IF nothing goes wrong with either aircraft, there's little chance of a collision.
Im going to assume the FO heard the takeoff clearance and was trying to let ATC know they were still crossing the runway at that time and to not clear the bahuinia for takeoff since the FO comes on following the takeoff clearance. The captain was paying attention and cleaned up the report and made it super clear they were still crossing.
The issue of this incident is exactly at 2:19. Why would the ATC clear the Bahuinia for the departure when he still sees the Cathay crossing the runway on this radar? The mistakes in English by the first officer of Cathay doesn't have anything to do with this incident. But to be honest, it can be very very dangerous in some other cases.
that's why civil aviation is considered very safe nowadays, most disasters were caused by not a single error but multiple errors by different parties. like in this incident, a disaster can only occur if the ATC gave the airbus take off clearance without knowing that the boeing is still crossing the runway, and the boeing captain have not corrected his copilot's english, plus the airbus then carry on its take off procedure but somehow required to abort take off due to some kind of machanical failure at the last moment. then the two planes will collide at the end of the runway.
I think that FO meant to say that they have been cleared of the runway and thus the runway should remain solely cleared to them. Being a native Chinese speaker I can definitely see where that "cleared" thing came from. It matched the Chinese logic.
ChuckNinja Kawasaki I totally agree. I'm just saying under stressful situation you can see how instincts kick in and that FO clearly did not performed well as expected. However the captain did react immediately and to me that's a great case of how aviation manage risk.
@Ewing Taiwan - Finally, some insight into the communication issue. Thanks. And it was ATC that made the really important mistake. Fortunately, nothing terrible happened. Kudos to the Cathay pilot.
Isn't this the point of having a tower, so you can visually see the planes? Also, the Cathay seemed to take FOREVER crossing the runway, but I don't know what is realistic in terms of 747 ground acceleration/speed to taxi, so it may be reasonable. Cathay co-pilot needs some English lessons.
747 does not get moving rapidly and it doesn't slow rapidly when taxiing... they have to moderate speed so they can make the turn after crossing the runway. Sure he could have crossed faster, but then he'd have been in the grass trying to make the turn. Its not a Porsche 911 and isn't going to do that 90 deg turn at 60 mph.
@@fhuber7507 yet another reason to get rid of all the Jumbo's in the sky. We keep going to smaller and smaller 200 person airplanes and we're better for it.
@@TheNondiscriminatory Those smaller aircraft still can't turn on a dime either. Besides, that's not even close to the reason they've started to phase out.
Pilots [ captains ] feel very protective of their co pilots [ first officers ] and spend time training them to be future Captains. Ultimately the Captain is responsible for all actins take on the aircraft [ even by a subordinate ]. You normally defend your junior officers errors as it represents a lack of supervision or failure to appreciate the areas where your co pilot may need support or training. After a long day of work in a foreign city, he or she normally dines with the captain and discuss ways to improve the conduct of the flight. At least that has been my observation.
even an experienced captain may not be a good trainer, so airline companies train their pilots by qualified trainers. and a captain is not responsible for all actions taken place during the flight. sometime the copilot will be the pilot flying, which means he's in control of the plane for landing/takeoff. and the captain become the pilot monitoring.
Putting a departure into "position and wait", (before it was, position and Hold'), helps to expedite departures. The thing is, the local controller, Must never forget about what he has on the runway or crossing the runway. He looks out of the tower, sees an aircraft in position for takeoff, he gets triggered to clear it for takeoff, and he did. The controller is totally at fault here. He set up the whole incident. Placed the departure into position snd wait. Had the other aircraft cross the departure end, and did not instruct it to report clear of the runway. And lastly, he cleared the departure for takeoff, without ensuring the runway was clear. He did not exercise good judgement, an error a rookie would make. His license should be pulled and assigned remedial training. The first pilot,well, i would say, he lost his english language ability, after he heard the other aircraft cleared for takeoff. We call it the "pucker factor effect". I am sure he was trying to say , we not clear, but it did not transpire that way. It was fortunate, that a natural english speaker was there to correct it immediately, or we could have had another Tenerife like accident.
Very well stated! While I realize P&H (yes, I actually am that old......lol) is a very useful tool at a busy airport, I was always a bit apprehensive with it. Whenever I'm cleared for takeoff, I will always scan the approach path then scan the runway for any traffic. While in P&H, it's not possible to see if anything is approaching; I always visualized an approaching aircraft bearing down on my back. Often gave me the willies.......
RR KNL yes, i totally sympathize with you. It is unnerving during daytime, and even worse at night time. If you have the time research the accident at KLAX. Controller puts aircraft in position and wait, it is nighttime, cleared a 737 to land. Killed all onboard the commuter, and injured many on the 737. The controller forgot about commuter airliner on the runway. Contributing factor, with all the lights around the airport, she lost the commuter aircraft in the dazzle. Also, be cautious of, position and wait, at airports with intersecting runways, playing with a hot potato!
Sort of a distant memory but is that the one where the smaller plane was making an intersection takeoff? For those who don't know, ATC will sometimes offer a plane that doesn't need the full runway length, a takeoff position from a taxiway intersection. This saves a ton of time and fuel. A small plane doesn't need a 10,000' runway, 3,000' is more than enough so this makes a lot of sense. But it can have a slight disadvantage.......lol. Even so, when I'm flying a small plane, I will readily accept an intersection takeoff.
@VASAviation This reminds me of an Incident at LSZH (Zurich), I think it was in 2011, when two aircraft were cleared for take-off with just 9 seconds or so apart on crossing runways. (16 and 28). Have you ever done a short clip on that? As Zurich has quite a difficult setup due to different regulations , Zurich is quite interessting and the reasons behind the whole thing are quite difficult to see without knowledge on the airport.
Cathay FO speaks 3 times in this clip. Only the last time made his level of English seem unsuitable. The other two times he was actually native English sounding. Also I’m a little surprised that the instruction to cross a runway doesn’t not come with a “confirm when clear” instruction
Dumile Ndlovu it sounded like one of the pilots was a native speaker and the other was not, with the non native speaker only saying the problematic we have cleared the runway early and the native speaker quickly clarifying
SnowmanTF2 Oh what I meant was that the FO (obviously Asian) does the read backs first for the hold @0:48 minutes and for crossing the runway 1:48 mins in. He was easy to understand. He is also the one who announces that they have not cleared the runway later on except at this time his English seems rather scratchy. The Captain then speaks for the 1st time to clarify.
Can you make the colored outlines bigger or just light up the whole thing when they are talking? It helped a lot, but can still be difficult to see on mobile device.
If he can't speak English under stress, then what is he doing in the cockpit of a 747? He was not at fault here, but it did show his English is lacking.
Snooby66 I agree that ATC is at fault in this case. However if ATC makes a mistake a pilot should able to communicate with them clearly and correct them
You try to speak something - that you have never said before - correctly in a non-native language you have never said before when that kind of panic sets in.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545 Sorry but that's not good enough. In any other aspect of life I agree, learning another language is difficult, I wish I could learn another language but some bad French is about all I know, so I have great sympathy and admiration for anyone struggling to learn another language. But as a pilot or co-pilot transmitting over the airways, when thousands of lives are at stake based on how clearly you are able to speak that language, there is no margin for error. You HAVE to be able to speak it with a high level of proficiency, especially under pressure, and mixing up 'cleared of runway' for 'we are still on the runway' is dangerous and he should be put on suspended duty till he has brushed up on his English. If the worst HAD happened, the pilot hadn't noticed his co-pilot's mistake and the plane had struck the other as it was hurtling down the end of the runway, what are the families of the people on board who were killed meant to say? "Well I'm very upset my loved one is dead but it wasn't the co-pilot's first language and he was in a panic, these things happen."
I think the First Officer was trying to say that he was clearing the runway but it came out wrong, this is why there are phrases already made for the pilots, because of stuff like this.
As an air traffic controller myself, atc should always be scanning their runways at all times and have complete situational awareness of their airfield. This offense should have gotten the controller suspended.
is that possible at all airports? I heard in places there are obstructions &/or blinding floodlights forcing the tower to rely either on ground-radar or on the transmissions alone... how true would that be?
Atoins .AW clearly you are not atc. You do not know the circumstances of this situation at all. How do you know it wasnt night time and pitch black? How do you know there wasnt low visibility? You are so fkn ignorant and know absolutely nothing. My ass youre ATC.
@@stanislavkostarnov2157 Good question, there are some airports where there are blind spots on the airfield, however controlled airports are built so the tower can clearly see the runway(s) and equipment and other visual cues to help the controller scan the movement areas.
You can see a catastrophe building as Cathay 1st officer does NOT clearly communicate that he is still on the runway. He is beginning to panic, and his English is becoming obtuse. He keeps saying CLEAR. Good thing the captain jumped in with clarity.
In this video, CI Plane have medical issue so not reply to Tower, that may let ATC distracted and think that CPA Cargo plane clear the runway, so clear HK Airline Airbus take off. After this event the CI Plane still headling the medical issue and communicate with Tower again,it seems that they were talking with Ambulanceman when CPA cargo plane crossed the runway. BTW, CPA cargo plane piiot too nervou to tell ATC they ware CLEARING runway (NOT "Clear" the runway coz seem big different meaning).
David's Game Channel！ David, i follow your reasoning, but, if there was a medical emergency on another aircraft, this controller would not be involved, His attention, is to the runway, the arrivals an departures, and ensuring the runway is clear for operation.
I reckon the FO realised whats going on and panic a little. He did say we are crossing but prob shitting his pants at the same time. great take over by Captain tho.
Oh, man. I had a flashback to the Tenerife disaster when I saw this, and I wasn't even alive then. This could have been a major disaster had not the Captain of the Cathay plane spoken up.
I do not think a disaster could happen though. Both planes were on opposite sides of the runway, so the departing one likely had more than enough space to take off and fly over the 74. But anyway the situation is more dangerous than it should be.
I would have liked to have read what the Cathay FO(?) said (transcript), but it's in magenta or purple on a purple or violet background and is indistinguishable. Can you fix that?
Phew the language confusion had the potential of something nasty happening. The "first officer maybe" twice said clear of the runway until "The captain?" Said not clear of the runway. The 1st pilot sounded a little flustered. What do you think ?
I think the copilot intended to say "We are still clearing the runway" but ended up saying "We are clear the runway".....lol definitely not a good look
Or something like "we were cleared onto the runway". In a lot of languages "cleared onto" and "allowed onto" is the same word, which makes it easy to say "we are clear of runway" when you mean to say "we are allowed on runway".
@@QemeH It's definitely "We are (still) clearing the runway". In many Asian languages there isn't a continuous tense like we have in English where. "I cross the runway" and "I am crossing the runway" are effectively the same thing. In some of them also, there isn't much of a tense separation like we have in English where the difference is made by later depictions of when something happens. I am absolutely certain he knew what he wanted to say, but it was a tense issue translating from his native language here, as they work (or don't really exist) in it.
@@shestewa6581 I agree. I'm a retired ESL (English as a Second Language) instructor. That type of error in tense is very common with Chinese speakers. Glad it turned out safely in the end.
Had the mistake not been realised and corrected, it may well still not have been a disaster. The crossing aircraft was on the move and had partially crossed the runway when the other began their takeoff roll. It's therefore quite likely that the crossing aircraft would have been clear before the departing aircraft reached their position at the far end of the runway. Even if not, the aircraft was crossing right at the end of the runway, and I suspect that the departing aircraft would be at the 70 feet or so altitude needed to clear it by the end of the runway, depending on runway length and other factors
"Cathay 071 is clear runway" I mean if he meant himself, the captain, and the front of the aircraft he was correct, he just forgot about the other two-thirds rolling on the runway.
OK it is an animation first off....but i do believe that the twr controller was using anticipated separation, in that CPA071 was in the process of crossing at the far end of the rwy. Let say the animation is correct in the postions of the a/c's. By the time the controller gives the t/o instructions and Bah709 starts his roll, CPA071 will be clear of rwy. Start of t/o clearance to BAH709 should have been when 2/3 of CPA071 was already across the rwy, then as BAH709 rolls, CPA071 would be clear. BUT.....i believe the controller was probably just a tad early in the t/o clearance, which freaked out the CPA071 1st officer.
Why does everyone assume the native English speaker was the Captain? I don't see any information to that effect. What bothers me is that ATC doesn't expect and aircraft do not provide confirmation after clearing the runway. Even after that bungle when they eventually did clear the runway the aircraft did not inform.
![[REAL ATC] Brickyard SUFFERS TRIM RUNAWAY | CONTROL ISSUES at Atlanta](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RzoEsM0L2CM/mqdefault.jpg)
![[REAL ATC] Brickyard SUFFERS TRIM RUNAWAY | CONTROL ISSUES at Atlanta](/img/tr.png)
Thanks to everyone who requested this incident via RUclips comments and email. What's your opinion about it? Should ATC have taken a closer look at Cathay first?
Obviously no clearance for take off should have been made prior to Cathay being cleared off the runway.
VASAviation - thanks for the awesome job you done. Its very profetional
Cathey was sufficiently far away to not be at danger, then again if the controller allows them to cross whilst another has been given takeoff clearance, it may happen again at a closer intersection. Better be sure and wait.
Tower operator needs to be fired. errors like that can kill 200 to 700 people.
The purple text for the 747 is hard to read on my phone.
I really liked how you outlined the planes when the pilots were talking.
Thanks! :)
Yes, it made following the video much easier. Good idea!
Yea! I had a even better understanding of what was going on! I highly recommend you keep it up, it’s amazing! Thanks for you hard work!!!!
It only happened like once in the whole video. I found it hard to follow.
you're blind sir
A330 Pilot: "Hey tower, I have a phone number for you to call, possible tower deviation."
Lol! I said almost the exact same thing before I saw your comment! Great minds think alike! Cheers!🥂🥂🥂🍻🍻🍻👍👍👍😎😎😎
Thought this too, you know damn well this would be a PD all day long!
Good one!
@@garybea8562 no it works every time 😏
Honestly that's what I kept thinking "this is tower mistake"
The Cathay FO definitely screwed up saying they were "clear" of the runway, but ATC gave takeoff clearance BEFORE that transmission. Ultimately, it was ATC's mistake and fortunately, the Cathay captain was paying attention to what his FO was saying.
Actually, as someone who has taught the English language to kids for a few years my assumption was that the FO was trying to convey the message "he can't take off because we are cleared to be on the runway". Thankfully the captain caught it in time and things did not end bad.
@@axilleas Yes it sounds like the FO was trying to say "We are STILL clearing the runway" or more specifically "We have NOT cleared the runway". I could understand how that could be easily mixed up in a stressful situation.
Matthew Louis yeah, it sounds like he got stressed and his English skills, not being ingrained in his instinctual thinking, failed him and he was trying to translate a sentence he had formed in his native language into English which, apart from very rare exceptions, rarely works.
Well, I can certainly understand the Cathay FO said it wrong, because he is suddenly thrown into a _very_ stressful situation when he realises another plane has just been sent their way. He must immediately try to say something he has probably never said before. So it is understandable that his "muscle memory" of standard phrases kicks in.
Yes he was.
Pilots need to listen for other aircraft transmissions.
Never understood how a Useless Air 737 landed on a SA 227 years ago at LAX. The pilots of the USAir Boeing 737 should have heard that he was cleared to taxi into position and hold. Controllers aren't perfect.
As a pilot I've corrected a few , but pilots can also make their job's easier
"is clear runway,is crossing runway" Well that's as clear as mud.
@Johnfuse wtf is that supposed to mean?
It's easy to see how the mistake could happen, though.
The phrase they use is "You are cleared to cross runway 07R". Cleared means you have permission to be on the runway.
So, when a non-English speaker used to hearing that suddenly needs to say they're on the runway "We are cleared runway 07R", trying to say that they have permission to be on the runway (and are on it) makes a lot of sense.
The fact that the words have the opposite meaning as well is just unfortunate.
@@jonathancassels4835 I see your point. would it make better sense to use different words instead of using "cleared" to mean "vacated" and also "cleared" to mean "approved to enter".
@@tchevrier English is the primary language of aviation followed by French. First Officer clearly doesn't understand the first.
Wow, who said that? That s why English is a recommended language inkl air traffic interactions
Co pilot clearly did not communicate correctly when crossing runway, he said we’re clear of runway when he meant we’re not clear or we’re crossing the runway. Capt took over and corrected in clear English.
Yea thats completely wrong, copilot was trying to say they are still crossing but come out sating they are clear- not good understanding at all
i think the co-pilot want to say "we are near the runway" but can't pronounce it correctly
If they were ON the runway, it would make no sense to want to say "we are NEAR the runway". I mean, of course they are near the runway, it's an airport.
David Chan they're not near it, they're on it. Kudos to captain for correction, can't find good help these days.
Maybe this is why a lot of CX pilots don't seem to be raised in HK. It's a shame because even Japanese pilots seem to be much better on the radio.
Good thing the Cathay 747 had a native speaker in the cockpit. The other guy almost screwed it up by saying "we're clear of the runway" when they weren't.
Axel That would’ve been Tenerife all over again. Phew!!
50% of Cathay Pacific pilots are Australian or New Zealanders
Absolutely! "We are not clearing " "We are On the rwy" Clear language when necessary.
The CX Captain sounds like LouB747.
Knowing of the criteria pilots have to go through these days, I really wonder how such people even get hired honestly.
Very scary language issues with the Cathay FO. Not reassuring at all.
He should have said something like cancel departure clearance or STOP!
That's why I never fly with Cathy
I think the First Officer panicked and started confusing words. At least the Captain reacted perfectly and made the sentence immediately understandable. That's experience!
At least the First Officer heard the take-off clearance and understood immediately it was wrong (in an airport with 2 active runways, not only one).
Neither of the pilots of the departing aircraft noticed that they were given take-off clearance, but nobody declared "runway cleared" before..
Bore off and add some adverts
Very scary ICAO phraseology uses words like "clear", which has two opposite meanings in a case like this.
Agreeing with everyone else, the plane-outlining when it's communicating is an excellent addition!
I hear your suggestions! Actually read them :D
It proves once again how important it is to have a good command in English to operate globally and safely. On a separate note the Cathy Pacific did not report to tower on vacating the runway so the controller shouldn’t have cleared the other aircraft for take off. Poor English is the secondary element here the primary element is that the air traffic controller cleared someone for take off before receiving the runway vacated confirmation.
1) ATC should have LOOKED before clearing the airbus
2) The F/O's miscommunication could have gotten people killed.
3) Good on the captain of the 74 for jumping in and clarifying
0 (before 1): ATC should have gotten clearance from the crossing airplane. "xxx has cleared the runway" or something similar.
2) Could it have people killed, or was context enough to attract the ATC attention and solve the issue, even with the wrong words?
@@antoy384 Maybe, or it could have made the situation worse
As a Hongkonger, that FO clearly doesn’t have a Cantonese (HK) accent, it is putonghua. He is not a local for sure.
Multiple mistakes - by ATC & the FO. However, I think the FO realized what was going on and panicked while trying to communicate. The major issue was probably at ATC first.
I really like this format of video, the aircraft talking is highlighted and the audio is in real time! Keep up the good work!
Thank you! :)
Agreed. The highlighting of the transmitting air plane helps me so much!
Dangerous call from the Cathay! The FO should learn the difference between 'clear' and 'crossing'! It's like the 2018 version of Air China 981 😂 Awesome video, looking forward to the investigation.
The amount of times I've had issues because of Asian pilots' poor grasp of the English language is unreal...I wonder how they get their English Language Proficiency certificates!
ssyynntax It is indeed unbelievable that they are qualified to fly with this level of English!
come to JFK and monitor the tower frequency on a busy evening... it always amazes me that so many foreign(Asian and European) pilots are allowed to fly with broken English like that....
The focus should be a little "less" on the First officer. He made a incorrect statement that was immediately corrected by the captain. The built in Safeguards in the system worked as designed. The Takeoff clearance was a bit premature and what happened here, validates the principle of Crew concept. The tower canceled the takeoff clearance. You guys pointing fingers need to "get a grip". No one is flying single pilot in the Airlines and flights need two individuals [ at least ] to operate. A lot of you guys don't know a 'digit' of a foreign language. How long will it take, if you had to learn Mandarin or Cantonese to keep your job.
Tom A You're right, the safety systems worked as intended! I think that the quick and heavy reactions emerged because this scenario went outside of the bubble of safety that surrounds Aviation. You can get so used to the primary security and safety (= professionalism and training) that it is possible to forget the secondary structure that surrounds this and really protect against something happening (2-crew concept etc).
Love this design with the aircraft showing the airline on them and them getting an outline when they are talking!
I always read your comments and take note of good feedback and ideas ;)
Love this visual, especially being able to see holding points!
Awesome! Love these graphics! So much better than previous video.
ATC wholly at fault here, but what's with the pilot confirming he is clear the runway twice in same message while also contradicting himself saying he's crossing? No wonder the captain had to take over. Not impressive situational management by that no.2. Love the outlines making clear which plane is transmitting ❤️
I'm not sure that it was a matter of situational awareness as much as a matter of a lack of sufficient English skills. Thank goodness the Captain was a native speaker.
Probably an ab initio 2nd officer with very little hours. Those pilots never actually learn English, they only learn phrases to respond with.
Definitely a language barrier problem. I train airline-sponsored chinese pilots in the U.S., and although they are initially selected in part because they can already speak some English, and they learn much while in training, they are only immersed in English (by being in the U.S.) for about 14 months. Then they are flying for their airlines in China. This normally isn't a problem (they meet U.S. FAA English proficiency standards), but in high-stress situations, it is not uncommon for their English speaking ability to deteriorate. I'm sure that FO was somewhat frightened by the situation and wasn't able to find the correct phrase, instead saying the more common "clear of the runway" phrase instead. It can only be rectified through experience and greater language immersion.
I think he was trying to say something along the lines of "you cleared us"
@Johnfuse Almost certainly native. That's an American accent. CPA (thankfully) has a lot of expat American and Aussie pilots.
The NTSB should hire you for clear and concise visualizations..
I'd be pleased! Go tell'em :P
VASAviation - Damn! I’d be happy the NTSB gave the same kind of public info as this, on a larger scale, perhaps like the CSB!
@@antoy384 There are investigation reports available! ;-)
THAT VISUALISATION IS ABSOLUTELY AWESOMELY SPOT ON!
I love following how you improve with each every video, VASA.
Even clueless ( no offence ) 10 years old schoolboy/girl would understand what's going on here.
That's so much appreciated! :)
I agree. I am clueless about this stuff. But I keep watching ur videos and it makes sense.
It's nice, but I don't quite get the airplanes resizing. I would get it if it was just for landing and takeoff, but while on the ground is confusing to me.
@@AndreSomers agree
nice team work from Cathay pilots, intentionaly slowing down crossing runway to force Bauhinia to give his turn to company :p
Rafi Makaro grow up fool!
that was just a joke you sad human...
Ruben Villanueva Ruben is a miserable loser in every comment
I feel the love...
Ruben Villanueva Wow you're a miserable and stupid human being
Thanks for the upload. This is a clear picture of exactly when it is appropriate for Batman to smack Robin across the face. WE ARE NOT CLEAR OF THE RUNWAY!
Cathay FO was probably shitting his pants as soon as he heard that takeoff clearance... Good thing, his captain corrected him. Bad situational awareness by the Tower controller though... Either your airport has a ground radar and you can see that the aircraft wasn't finished crossing, or you take the good old binoculars to make sure.
Also (according to the graphics) the Hong Kong Airlines was lineup when they received the takeoff clearance. Usually you are able to check if the runway is clear (matter of fact, most airlines have this as part of their checklist/flows) or was the weather too bad for that?
marcel1416 oh, yes, you better believe that!
That night vis was 8km
If that's true, that the vis was 8 km, then the Hong Kong Airlines should have never read back the takeoff clearance in my opinion, but point out, that there is still traffic on the runway...
Every pilot should check the approach sector before line up, identify the runway and make sure the runway is clear during lineup. If there is an obstacle or traffic on the runway I wouldn't care if ATC clears me for takeoff, I would report that traffic/obstacle to the controller and wait for a response.
I really hope this is not a case of the Hong Kong Airlines pilots being afraid to tell ATC something else that they have been instructed to. I mean with 8 km visibility they should have been able to see that traffic at the end of the runway. If you are cleared for takeoff but you don't feel like it or any objections - just don't do it... its that simple. Better safe than sorry.
marcel1416 can you really tell that lights 2km down the runway are on it or the taxiway right next to it? honest question, I'm not a pilot.
Not a real pilot either, but a huge aviation and flight sim geek, but I saw something similar once as a passenger, right before lineup you get a good view down the runway if you look out of the cabin windows, I remember there was a plane vacating or crossing at the end of the runway and you can clearly see it, beacon and strobe light have a really good visibility, also you (might be) able to see the bright taxi lights of the plane.
Cathay's FO really needs some communication lessons, but it was the Tower that made the mistake here by clearing the takeoff when an aircraft was still crossing. They didn't even ask Cathay to confirm
Another great job. Brilliant editing.
ATC: * Did not see CPA071 and yet clears the other for takeoff*
CPA071: HEY IM WALKING HERE!!!
This is a perfect example of where Runway Status Lights (RWSL) would have saved ATC from having a “deal.”
Awesome work you do guys with all the diagrams and visuals in general. Thanks a lot!
My pleasure! :)
Excellent job on the highlighting of the aircraft on the video. I made things so much clearer. This was horrific to watch as I remember Tenerife vividly (from news reports and a recent account by a survivor of the Pan Am 747).
Even when I'm cleared for take off. I still look for myself if it actually is clear.
You're not the only one.......
Always look, always.
pilotho that is usually taught on the first day of flying lessons!
Having said that, it's not always possible when the runway is almost 4km long and the vis might be down.
Always listen out also
And it happened at night, with the lights of the passenger terminals and cargo terminals on both sides of you.
It's around 3.8km between the HX and thr CX planes.
@@cococly Agree, there's no way the lined up aircraft is properly visual with the 747 to know it is blocking the departure end of the runway. At that distance you'd see an indistinct blur and a few lights, at best.
ATC should have asked to be notified when the aircraft crossing the runway was clear before allowing a takeoff.
Boodieman72 it is procedural and also a requirement for pilots to contact ATC after the completion of the crossing. So I don’t know why ATC gave the A330 the clearance for takeoff...he should have wait and I’m glad the Captain took over Comms for that reason..
Aminisitai Koroi i agreed! I think a lot was because the China Airlines hes been trying to reach was not getting back to him LOL
Boodieman72 , it usually goes han in hand. "Aircraft xxx, cross runway 07, report vacated.", one short RT. And if you wish, you could emphasize, "A330, in position for departure." Also, "A330, taxi into position and wait, B747, crossing departure end", now both pilots are aware of the situation. The control phraseology is in the book, all controllers should learn and use it. There is no better defense in court, than when you quote the book!
Patrick Chen & Aminisitai Koroi It has been astonishing to me the many comments that are incorrect and people take it to the bank. Ground control and tower use Radar, [ control strips for backup ] and sight to control traffic. It is NOT protocol to make transmissions AFTER crossing, you receive a clearance, you read it back, and comply. that is it. To prevent a lot of back and forth chatter on frequency radio transmissions observe some restrictive minimizations.
Osiris 3686 Yes, that is what I was saying [ having the experience ] ground and tower use radar [ this is a major International Airport ] and you read back clearances as acknowledgment of intention to execute. I am asking these enthusiast to think of it logically. When you are cleared for takeoff, you read back "cleared for takeoff", you do not have a "protocol" to report "Flight XYZ is now in the air". If the 747 had reported "clear of the runway", no one would give him grief about it. Anyhow, I am not disagreeing but I did mention by "Sight".
I would subscribe twice if I could lol you're content is just great. and continues to get better and better. I love the that you added highlighting of the aircraft that's responding! it's so much easier to now know who's talking!
And I would welcome you twice. Thanks! :D
Jeffery Antioquia what subscribe twice?
Click subscribe button twice meand unsub lol
Love the new visualization
A bit concerning that the FO of Cathay Pacific said they were clear of the runway then the Captain said they weren't!
Seemed as though the FO had a bit of a language barrier issue, confusing "clear" and "crossing." Good thing the captain was paying attention.
Maybe Cathay was slow, maybe not, but it's still incumbent on the controller to make sure that the runway is clear before clearing a plane for take-off isn't it? Incident report linked by someone else says TO clearance was given only 30 sec after the crossing clearance was given, not much time for a big 747 to taxi from a stop I would think.
Jason Mizuno also VHHH is equipped with surface radar. 100% negligence by ATC
How many seconds does a 747 need to cross? How many seconds does an A330 take to reach the end of the runway?
flinx I don't think it really matters how long either one takes. If the procedure says it's supposed to be clear before take off clearance is given, then the controller screwed up, regardless of how close they got or might have gotten.
Jason Mizuno yes the controller broke the rules, but you brought up the 30 seconds. So I want to know in fact how much or how little danger the jets were in.
flinx hard to say. By the map, the crossing is at the very end of the runway, by which time the TO aircraft should be well up in the air. In terms of time, it's generally about 30-35 sec from throttle up to wheels off the runway. IF nothing goes wrong with either aircraft, there's little chance of a collision.
Im going to assume the FO heard the takeoff clearance and was trying to let ATC know they were still crossing the runway at that time and to not clear the bahuinia for takeoff since the FO comes on following the takeoff clearance. The captain was paying attention and cleaned up the report and made it super clear they were still crossing.
Are we back in the canaries or what!
SIRR Productions without the very dense Fog of "Los Rodeos"!
GasBéjar GasBéjar Yes!!!
Thinking the same thing over here!
Missing the insane pilot, though.
SIRR Productions This isn’t 1977 either!
The issue of this incident is exactly at 2:19. Why would the ATC clear the Bahuinia for the departure when he still sees the Cathay crossing the runway on this radar? The mistakes in English by the first officer of Cathay doesn't have anything to do with this incident. But to be honest, it can be very very dangerous in some other cases.
atc made a mistake...
if memory serves i think there was a good amount of fog?
that's why civil aviation is considered very safe nowadays, most disasters were caused by not a single error but multiple errors by different parties. like in this incident, a disaster can only occur if the ATC gave the airbus take off clearance without knowing that the boeing is still crossing the runway, and the boeing captain have not corrected his copilot's english, plus the airbus then carry on its take off procedure but somehow required to abort take off due to some kind of machanical failure at the last moment. then the two planes will collide at the end of the runway.
@@dgdanielgoldman you're thinking of Tenerife. Different incident and that was fatal.
Disagree - the mistake in English does have a lot to do with this incident - its outcome.
I think that FO meant to say that they have been cleared of the runway and thus the runway should remain solely cleared to them. Being a native Chinese speaker I can definitely see where that "cleared" thing came from. It matched the Chinese logic.
EwingTaiwan yes you may be correct but as you’ll know in aviation whatever you say must be precise and clear and the FO wasn’t precise.
ChuckNinja Kawasaki I totally agree. I'm just saying under stressful situation you can see how instincts kick in and that FO clearly did not performed well as expected. However the captain did react immediately and to me that's a great case of how aviation manage risk.
@Ewing Taiwan - Finally, some insight into the communication issue. Thanks.
And it was ATC that made the really important mistake.
Fortunately, nothing terrible happened. Kudos to the Cathay pilot.
xie xie for that. :)
But he doesnt have a chinese accent tho?
Great depiction as always 👍
Great quick reactions 👍👍
I wonder if that captain slapped the co-pilot in the back of the head...
Maybe not the pilot but I'm sure Cathay did.
It looks to me as though the tower cleared Bahunia for take off BEFORE asking the crossing aircraft whether he was clear or not...dodgy.
Nice visual, love it
YES! Thanks you for the big planes! now I can see what happened clearly. But maybe you should make the "talk outline" bigger.
Isn't this the point of having a tower, so you can visually see the planes? Also, the Cathay seemed to take FOREVER crossing the runway, but I don't know what is realistic in terms of 747 ground acceleration/speed to taxi, so it may be reasonable. Cathay co-pilot needs some English lessons.
747 does not get moving rapidly and it doesn't slow rapidly when taxiing... they have to moderate speed so they can make the turn after crossing the runway.
Sure he could have crossed faster, but then he'd have been in the grass trying to make the turn.
Its not a Porsche 911 and isn't going to do that 90 deg turn at 60 mph.
@@fhuber7507 yet another reason to get rid of all the Jumbo's in the sky. We keep going to smaller and smaller 200 person airplanes and we're better for it.
The 747 is a molasses when taxiing.
@@AEMoreira81 yes but still its something to behold what humans can build
@@TheNondiscriminatory Those smaller aircraft still can't turn on a dime either. Besides, that's not even close to the reason they've started to phase out.
The pavement for holding point J10 & J11 is a bit soft.
It takes some time to accelerate from fully stop.
I bet Cathay pilot beat up his co-pilot really hard after parking :D
And deservedly. Not sure that guy is suitable for the job. How would he handle an in-flight emergency?
That is probably against company rules and there would be a pink slip if he did
Pilots [ captains ] feel very protective of their co pilots [ first officers ] and spend time training them to be future Captains. Ultimately the Captain is responsible for all actins take on the aircraft [ even by a subordinate ]. You normally defend your junior officers errors as it represents a lack of supervision or failure to appreciate the areas where your co pilot may need support or training. After a long day of work in a foreign city, he or she normally dines with the captain and discuss ways to improve the conduct of the flight. At least that has been my observation.
even an experienced captain may not be a good trainer, so airline companies train their pilots by qualified trainers. and a captain is not responsible for all actions taken place during the flight. sometime the copilot will be the pilot flying, which means he's in control of the plane for landing/takeoff. and the captain become the pilot monitoring.
@@steveyeung4764 - Doesn't the Captain retain command at all times, even when he delegates charge or control? Or is that just Navy terminology?
Putting a departure into "position and wait", (before it was, position and Hold'), helps to expedite departures. The thing is, the local controller, Must never forget about what he has on the runway or crossing the runway. He looks out of the tower, sees an aircraft in position for takeoff, he
gets triggered to clear it for takeoff, and he did. The controller is totally at fault here. He set up the whole incident. Placed the departure into position snd wait. Had the other aircraft cross the departure end, and did not instruct it to report clear of the runway. And lastly, he cleared the departure for takeoff, without ensuring the runway was clear. He did not exercise good judgement, an error a rookie would make. His license should be pulled and assigned remedial training. The first pilot,well, i would say, he lost his english language ability, after he heard the other aircraft cleared for takeoff. We call it the "pucker factor effect". I am sure he was trying to say , we not clear, but it did not transpire that way. It was fortunate, that a natural english speaker was there to correct it immediately, or we could have had another Tenerife like accident.
Very well stated!
While I realize P&H (yes, I actually am that old......lol) is a very useful tool at a busy airport, I was always a bit apprehensive with it.
Whenever I'm cleared for takeoff, I will always scan the approach path then scan the runway for any traffic. While in P&H, it's not possible to see if anything is approaching; I always visualized an approaching aircraft bearing down on my back. Often gave me the willies.......
RR KNL yes, i totally sympathize with you. It is unnerving during daytime, and even worse at night time. If you have the time research the accident at KLAX. Controller puts aircraft in position and wait, it is nighttime, cleared a 737 to land. Killed all onboard the commuter, and injured many on the 737. The controller forgot about commuter airliner on the runway. Contributing factor, with all the lights around the airport, she lost the commuter aircraft in the dazzle. Also, be cautious of, position and wait, at airports with intersecting runways, playing with a hot potato!
Sort of a distant memory but is that the one where the smaller plane was making an intersection takeoff?
For those who don't know, ATC will sometimes offer a plane that doesn't need the full runway length, a takeoff position from a taxiway intersection. This saves a ton of time and fuel.
A small plane doesn't need a 10,000' runway, 3,000' is more than enough so this makes a lot of sense. But it can have a slight disadvantage.......lol.
Even so, when I'm flying a small plane, I will readily accept an intersection takeoff.
RR KNL yes, it unfortunately was.
"Line up and wait" now is the accepted clearance, but you're right in saying that it was (before September 30, 2010) "[taxi into] position and Hold".
@VASAviation This reminds me of an Incident at LSZH (Zurich), I think it was in 2011, when two aircraft were cleared for take-off with just 9 seconds or so apart on crossing runways. (16 and 28). Have you ever done a short clip on that? As Zurich has quite a difficult setup due to different regulations , Zurich is quite interessting and the reasons behind the whole thing are quite difficult to see without knowledge on the airport.
Cathay FO speaks 3 times in this clip. Only the last time made his level of English seem unsuitable. The other two times he was actually native English sounding. Also I’m a little surprised that the instruction to cross a runway doesn’t not come with a “confirm when clear” instruction
Dumile Ndlovu it sounded like one of the pilots was a native speaker and the other was not, with the non native speaker only saying the problematic we have cleared the runway early and the native speaker quickly clarifying
SnowmanTF2 Oh what I meant was that the FO (obviously Asian) does the read backs first for the hold @0:48 minutes and for crossing the runway 1:48 mins in. He was easy to understand. He is also the one who announces that they have not cleared the runway later on except at this time his English seems rather scratchy. The Captain then speaks for the 1st time to clarify.
That's probably the panic. He's also saying something that he's not used to saying, as fast as he can. Hard to think.
My dad: Go to bed early tonight Me at 1am: * Watching VASAviation - *
2:31am here . lol
This could have been a repeat of the Tenerife disaster
So nice to hear Fedex pilot said Happy New Year to the ATC
Luckily one of the two crew members in that CPA 747 spoke proper English.... Hope a report was filed.
Can you make the colored outlines bigger or just light up the whole thing when they are talking? It helped a lot, but can still be difficult to see on mobile device.
Mobile users are driving me crazy.
This mobile user enjoys these videos.
That Cathay FO sure lost his mind when his captain told him to call the tower and tell them they're still crossing.
A very well done video/audio of this would be tragedy. Good use of those eyes and brains.
"Tramampoline!!! Trabampoline!!!"
Poor Cathay F/O was so shocked in that situation that he couldn't get the right words to come out of his mouth.
If he can't speak English under stress, then what is he doing in the cockpit of a 747?
He was not at fault here, but it did show his English is lacking.
The flight number for Hong Kong Airlines should be HX709 rather than HK709.
The IMPERATIVE for 'Clear, Articulate and Comprehensible Communication was ever thus.
Takes me back to the time when I used to train pilots for Air China.. some of them only knew enough english to order a salad.
This channel is great
Thanks for watching! :)
Some pilots need to learn better english before getting into cockpits.
In this case it does not really matter - ATC should not have given takeoff clearance until the 747 was clear
Snooby66 I agree that ATC is at fault in this case. However if ATC makes a mistake a pilot should able to communicate with them clearly and correct them
Exactly.
You try to speak something - that you have never said before - correctly in a non-native language you have never said before when that kind of panic sets in.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545 Sorry but that's not good enough. In any other aspect of life I agree, learning another language is difficult, I wish I could learn another language but some bad French is about all I know, so I have great sympathy and admiration for anyone struggling to learn another language.
But as a pilot or co-pilot transmitting over the airways, when thousands of lives are at stake based on how clearly you are able to speak that language, there is no margin for error. You HAVE to be able to speak it with a high level of proficiency, especially under pressure, and mixing up 'cleared of runway' for 'we are still on the runway' is dangerous and he should be put on suspended duty till he has brushed up on his English.
If the worst HAD happened, the pilot hadn't noticed his co-pilot's mistake and the plane had struck the other as it was hurtling down the end of the runway, what are the families of the people on board who were killed meant to say? "Well I'm very upset my loved one is dead but it wasn't the co-pilot's first language and he was in a panic, these things happen."
Wow! We are clear of the runway, crossing the runway, clear of the runway all in under 3 seconds. I’ve not seen a 330 taxi that fast before
Aussie pilot so chilled out
At 3:29 it is "... We do have - we can calculate speeds for JULIET-2. ..."
That makes sense ;)
Wow, your ears...! :O :D
idk if its because im Australian but i could understand that pretty easily
Clear sounds very similar to clearing, which is probably what he wanted to say. An easy mistake for someone with English as a second language.
I think the First Officer was trying to say that he was clearing the runway but it came out wrong, this is why there are phrases already made for the pilots, because of stuff like this.
It feels like Captain is babysitting ATC and his FO.
As an air traffic controller myself, atc should always be scanning their runways at all times and have complete situational awareness of their airfield. This offense should have gotten the controller suspended.
is that possible at all airports? I heard in places there are obstructions &/or blinding floodlights forcing the tower to rely either on ground-radar or on the transmissions alone... how true would that be?
Atoins .AW clearly you are not atc. You do not know the circumstances of this situation at all. How do you know it wasnt night time and pitch black? How do you know there wasnt low visibility? You are so fkn ignorant and know absolutely nothing. My ass youre ATC.
Atoins .AW your profile picture is a LAPD Lamborghini. You are probably 13 years old 🤣
@@stanislavkostarnov2157 Good question, there are some airports where there are blind spots on the airfield, however controlled airports are built so the tower can clearly see the runway(s) and equipment and other visual cues to help the controller scan the movement areas.
@@6z0 Reference my reply to Stanislav's valid question.
Did no one notice how they managed to get their enormous wings slide directly over each other somehow? THAT is beautifull airmannship my friends!
The automatic CC are hilarious on this video 😁
You can see a catastrophe building as Cathay 1st officer does NOT clearly communicate that he is still on the runway. He is beginning to panic, and his English is becoming obtuse. He keeps saying CLEAR. Good thing the captain jumped in with clarity.
Meanwhile passengers on right window seat of 747 :
Wait what
In this video, CI Plane have medical issue so not reply to Tower, that may let ATC distracted and think that CPA Cargo plane clear the runway, so clear HK Airline Airbus take off.
After this event the CI Plane still headling the medical issue and communicate with Tower again,it seems that they were talking with Ambulanceman when CPA cargo plane crossed the runway.
BTW, CPA cargo plane piiot too nervou to tell ATC they ware CLEARING runway (NOT "Clear" the runway coz seem big different meaning).
David's Game Channel！ David, i follow your reasoning, but, if there was a medical emergency on another aircraft, this controller would not be involved, His attention, is to the runway, the arrivals an departures, and ensuring the runway is clear for operation.
Actcally that is ATC false for sure...Cathy Cargo plane NOT report leave the runway ATC should never clear HK Airline Airbus Take off.
This made me think of the KLM/Pan Am runway collision. At least in this situation by Vas, excellent situational awareness indeed.
I reckon the FO realised whats going on and panic a little. He did say we are crossing but prob shitting his pants at the same time. great take over by Captain tho.
Oh, man. I had a flashback to the Tenerife disaster when I saw this, and I wasn't even alive then. This could have been a major disaster had not the Captain of the Cathay plane spoken up.
I do not think a disaster could happen though. Both planes were on opposite sides of the runway, so the departing one likely had more than enough space to take off and fly over the 74. But anyway the situation is more dangerous than it should be.
I wonder what the visibility was during this incident. Tower should’ve seen that 747 still crossing.
Thanks.
Even if visibility was lower, the controller should’ve cross checked that the 747 was clear of the runway on their ASDE/A-SMGCS monitor.
I would have liked to have read what the Cathay FO(?) said (transcript), but it's in magenta or purple on a purple or violet background and is indistinguishable. Can you fix that?
Good job on the graphics :)
Possible ATC deviation. We have a number for you to call......
Very interesting
Phew the language confusion had the potential of something nasty happening. The "first officer maybe" twice said clear of the runway until "The captain?" Said not clear of the runway. The 1st pilot sounded a little flustered. What do you think ?
“Tower, possible controller deviation, advise when ready to copy my cell number”
I think the copilot intended to say "We are still clearing the runway" but ended up saying "We are clear the runway".....lol definitely not a good look
Or something like "we were cleared onto the runway". In a lot of languages "cleared onto" and "allowed onto" is the same word, which makes it easy to say "we are clear of runway" when you mean to say "we are allowed on runway".
Not easy when you are under big stress (another plane coming at you in high speed)
Xanthopteryx Oh ok. The co-pilot only gets unintelligible when there’s stress involved? That’s definitely 100% acceptable in this community!
@@QemeH It's definitely "We are (still) clearing the runway". In many Asian languages there isn't a continuous tense like we have in English where. "I cross the runway" and "I am crossing the runway" are effectively the same thing. In some of them also, there isn't much of a tense separation like we have in English where the difference is made by later depictions of when something happens.
I am absolutely certain he knew what he wanted to say, but it was a tense issue translating from his native language here, as they work (or don't really exist) in it.
@@shestewa6581 I agree. I'm a retired ESL (English as a Second Language) instructor. That type of error in tense is very common with Chinese speakers. Glad it turned out safely in the end.
Bahuinia 709: "No worries, we'll retract gear early, should avoid Cathay. G'day!"
Bet that co-pilot got a right bollocking from his captain.
Best animation so far!!
Whelp, that FO will now be flying rubber dog shit outta Hong Kong.
SMaze17 my man ! Lol
Awesome movie.
The 747 Captain selected low low low gear or what?
It's a 747. Takes quite a bit of power to get it going, but you can't use too much power or it'll be going too fast for the turn.
Had the mistake not been realised and corrected, it may well still not have been a disaster. The crossing aircraft was on the move and had partially crossed the runway when the other began their takeoff roll. It's therefore quite likely that the crossing aircraft would have been clear before the departing aircraft reached their position at the far end of the runway. Even if not, the aircraft was crossing right at the end of the runway, and I suspect that the departing aircraft would be at the 70 feet or so altitude needed to clear it by the end of the runway, depending on runway length and other factors
great airmanship for Cathay 071!
"Cathay 071 is clear runway" I mean if he meant himself, the captain, and the front of the aircraft he was correct, he just forgot about the other two-thirds rolling on the runway.
What airport is this that there are so many accents? I hear Australian American and Chinese. And what airline was it that was cleared to take off?
Hong Kong Airlines (google crk airline code next time)
Raquil Morgan Hong Kong airport
If you have the proper credentials as an Air traffic controller you can obtain employment through out the world.
Quite a lot of Australian Pilots work for Cathay Pacific. It’s in the OneWorld alliance with Qantas
The controller messed the whole thing up. Even worse, he did not show any guilty or express any apology. I hope he has had been severely punished.
HKG! The airport and city which makes me proud!
Purple on purple/blue - not the best choice ;)
Once again, communication is the key. I wouldn't expect such a mistake from pilots flying with Cathy 🙁
OK it is an animation first off....but i do believe that the twr controller was using anticipated separation, in that CPA071 was in the process of crossing at the far end of the rwy.
Let say the animation is correct in the postions of the a/c's. By the time the controller gives the t/o instructions and Bah709 starts his roll, CPA071 will be clear of rwy.
Start of t/o clearance to BAH709 should have been when 2/3 of CPA071 was already across the rwy, then as BAH709 rolls, CPA071 would be clear.
BUT.....i believe the controller was probably just a tad early in the t/o clearance, which freaked out the CPA071 1st officer.
It's not allowed anyway.
Why does everyone assume the native English speaker was the Captain? I don't see any information to that effect.
What bothers me is that ATC doesn't expect and aircraft do not provide confirmation after clearing the runway. Even after that bungle when they eventually did clear the runway the aircraft did not inform.
Because we read the caption at 2:38.