Typically inaccurate, misleading opening sentence, showing typical journalistic ignorance and lack of attention to precisely articulating the truth of a topic: "An aborted takeoff . . . is raising concerns about safety . . . " The aborted takeoff isn't raising concerns about safety; the near miss is. The aborted takeoff was the correct response in the situation and was executed correctly, a critical action among others which avoided disaster. The fact of the aborted takeoff isn't the issue or cause of concern; the circumstances that made the aborted takeoff required in order to avoid a disaster are the issue.
To be fair, it wasn't a near miss.. at best it's a runway incursion. Is it an issue? yes. It's an issue likely stemming from the tower as a whole getting too comfortable. Complacency.
I think that's not a hugely important detail to the average viewer that this is marketed to. I mean dude they went a lot further in trying to provide step by step recount of what happened including diagrams, that's above and beyond what most media outlets would provide.
Lmao, 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.
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson. I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals. Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved. Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!! Regards from Switzerland ✈. .
I'm surprised your outlook / opinion of technology is so low. The error here, clearing one aircraft for takeoff while another cleared to cross, is an entirely human mistake. An oversight, a lapse of situational awareness. Human errors are inevitable - but a computer / automated system would never have made the same mistake. It would be as simple as entering all runway-related clearances into a computer and have that display any conflicts *before* passing the info to the pilots. Is that practical with the current workloads and workflows? It would require changes, sure. But my point is: it would be absolutely trivial for an automated system to prevent (or alert on) such conflicts (and much more).
@@tom4794 Yes and no. If everything worked as you describe, then fine. But this event happened (in all likelihood) as a result of too much workload (ie-more things happening in not enough time). If yet another automated system is instituted (such as "entering all runway-related clearances into a computer and have that display any conflicts before passing the info to the pilots" adds more required tasks/requirements into a system that already suffers from too much going on in too short a period of time. It would add more people into the loop (entering more stuff into a computer, since the controllers there now are already task saturated), and would likely just more grinding to the process. The folks there now should slow down when they feel rushed or feel like they are falling behind. It is the rushing to get greater throughput and more planes moving through the system that spawns these errors. It may seem counter intuitive, but when you feel rushed, SLOW DOWN. It is when we humans try to speed up to overcome perceived need to hurry up that accidents often will happen. Just IMHO . . .
Situational awareness is absolutely the critical component in safely operating airplanes. Yes, all parties successfully trapped and mitigated the error. But an error that involves R/W conflict and a rejected T/O is anything but a “ non-event”. (your words captain). I do agree that the “non event” was trapped and mitigated by the professionals on duty. As far as retraining, thats all on the debrief. So yes, there should be retraining. Maybe all parties on same frequency so the SW crews would have known of the potential conflict.. Cheers
First of all it's called "taxiway" not taxipath. Second it's not called a near miss. There was no "miss" and they didn't even got "near" to each other. Professionals call something like that a runway incursion. Most important question no one asked. Were they both on Tower frequency or was one crew talking to ground control and the other one talking to tower? If they were both on the same freq the incidence raises eybrows about controller training and the situational awareness of both crews involved. If they were on seperate freqs they also need to look at controller training and their local procedures. Just my 2 cents. You had your flightinstructor to comment. Why not ask him for the correct terminology. Journalism at its best.😂
Sounded like one was with ground and the other with tower/local. If I want to give the benefit of the doubt, ground likely got the verbal clearance from local and local upon getting the call for takeoff clearance forgot they had given that clearance.. Many use a flight strip holder that simply says Foul Deck as a reminder for those two. Ultimately, my take is the tower as a whole likely got a little too comfortable and when someone else noticed, they both issued their abort takeoff and hold position since they were still on separate frequencies.
@@dannyvernon1098 near miss what pleb? the plane never even took off, takeoff was rejected and the crossing plane stopped. Past the hold line but regardless, still stopped, It is why ATC said hold position regardless because the other plane taking off was not anymore and would be routed off the runway and put back in line once they cleared that up they would then would tell the crossing plane they are cleared to finish the crossing.
It's a near miss. No, they are not talking on the same freq. People preparing to take off talk to the tower, same as people landing. People driving around on the taxiways talk to ground control. It's a completely different frequency. So the people on approach and in the pattern don't get stepped on by people on the ground. A near miss is whenever there would have been a collision if corrective action was not taken, as well as if the aircraft come within certain limits of each other while flying. If corrective action had not been taken, those aircraft would have collided. And yes, there were TWO aircraft on the runway. The runway STARTS at the hold-short line. Once you cross it, you're on the runway. Pilots do monitor what's going on around them, but when you're on two different frequencies, you can't do that as you're already monitoring TWO different frequencies (ground and guard, or tower and guard). I'm a trained pilot, I know how this works. Did it for years. You obviously are not, nor do you understand how it works. It is a very different world, it is not at all like hoping in a car and driving down the road.
@@vanstry No, it's not a near miss. It was a runway incursion. You're right, ACFT taxiing on taxiways are usually talking to Ground. Whenever they need to cross an active runway they are handed over to TWR/Lcl controller for the x-ing clearance. At least that's how it works in most parts of the world. It most probably wouldn't have happened when both crews were on the same freq. And kindly stop explaining ATC to me. Doing that for almost 30 years now.
Seldom do any reporters know about the subject they are covering. They simply make up stuff or are given the script to read. This is why I seldom listen to them. There are several areas where I have knowledge, so in those areas I can pick out the sophomoric comments, then I extrapolate to areas I do not have good knowledge of and wonder, is this really correct.
“We called a flight instructor with 43 years of experience flying Cessnas. In his expert opinion, the two Airbus 737’s almost collided, which would’ve killed all 957 passengers onboard.”
So much disinformation. The McDonnell Douglas 737 (Now known as Folkair) has a max passenger configuration of 412 seats. With two of them involved in this incident, simple math tells us there were no more than 889 total passengers on both planes.
@@larrybruce4856 Human errors will always occur. However, the system did as it should, note the female voice, probably a supervisor monitoring the situation, and the check worked. Too close, but none the less, was corrected by the oversite.
A “say again” under these circumstances is the worst case scenario! “Southwest 1478, stop immediately, Southwest 1478, stop immediately!” at a slower pace would have been so much better for an aircraft on the move. It stands out from all other transmissions and will certainly draw more attention. It’s also in accordance with ICAO rules, so it will be understood by all pilots.
The prediction about SD being the next major catastrophe, 100% BS. Go look at the super busy, older airports. Intersecting runways, also overburdened ATC and a constant stream of flights, tons of new pilots, it could be any airport or none of them.
@@jdcaldwell5088 I didn't say there was no risk, but one runway at least means no intersecting runways, taxiways are fairly straightforward. This was a miscommunication between ground & tower which can happen anywhere (shouldn't, but could).
And after Tower tells you to step aside for a commuter tells you you're clear for departure then as soon as you line up and start your roll tells you you have a twin on short final behind you says without delay sir after the twin on approach is now not responding yeah about crapped my pants that day and went looking for a neck to wring
Not sure what you are saying here, that it is the pilot's responsibility? Given the complexity of the situation, that is one hopeful, but not a given. I have take off from more than one runway where there is a crown in the center, impossible to see one end from the other.
@@EllsworthJohnson-ui1xmwell I sure am human as well attempt to answer you and edit another LOL I was not indicating any pilot error here ground and Tower were responsible for separation I was always taught to look regardless of expectation of visibility but you are correct not always possible how was merely indicating that it wasn't incursion and not a near Miss which as you know would be a airport environment issue the last airport environment near Miss I witnessed one plane was on departure with gear going up the other plane was a cowboy not using the radio obviously and an inactive Runway that crossed it departing appeared fully loaded with passengers and fuel barely cleared the tale of the cowboy and fought it all the way across the airport environment barely clearing the fence I and a buddy of mine had just stepped aside for him as he was impatient and I don't like people breathing down my neck peace love and chicken grease my friend
I was worried the story was about planes crashing down on the surrounding city. I swear you can stand in the parking structure across the street and get hit in the head with landing gear.
As a fellow pilot, it's great to see someone spreading awareness about this. These so-called "aviation experts" are just spreading lies to make people scared of flying.
You are absolutely right. My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson. I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals. Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved. Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!! Regards from Switzerland ✈. .
@@brianshaffer7578If people are scared of flying, take a train. If more scared, take a drive. If extremely scared, take a walk. When all else fail, stay home…. People make money while others spend them. Welcome to the world of journalism.
It’s a bit suspicious when big business interests want to build a larger airport elsewhere in San Diego. They have been trying for over 5 years to make it happen. There is a laundry list of reasons San Diego wouldnt benefit in any significant ways from a new larger airport. The majority of the public doesn’t support it, but they will never stop trying though.
If we want to talk about safety look at GA vs the airlines. We basically have a fatal everyday from pilot error in that sector. The airlines are the safest way to travel right now.
@@nedflanders1559 very true instead they kill about 43k people a year in the United States alone. That's equivalent to about 187 Boeing 737 MAXX aircraft per year. Your point?
The system worked well and that San Diego international airport may be a dangerous airport, but it's also the most safest airport but it's held a fantastic record for how long it's been in San Diego downtown. Too much fear-mongering going on. I've worked this at this airport for over 35 years. I would know.
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson. I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals. Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved. Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!! Regards from Switzerland ✈. .
This is why people no longer trust media. This was a routine operation and I am sure that this happens all the time at airports all the time. The controllers did their job.
This happens when the ground controller is expecting one thing and the tower controller another, but there was never any significant danger. At San Diego, they almost never cross the runway, but looking at the current taxi diagram, taxiway Bravo is closed between B4 and B6, so they are crossing to use Charlie to get to the end of 27. However, looking at flightradar24, they are now doing some interesting taxing on Alpha, where it looks like they have rerouted part of alpha onto what was ramp area, to go around the construction.
It’s not a short runway by any means.. I flown 4 types of large planes L1011,727,757,767, into SAN and it has plenty of runway even with the displaced threshold .
then you know how overblown this was given the takeoff was rejected pretty much immediately regardless if the crossing plane was over the hold short line and why ATC said hold position regardless because there was plenty of space/time to abort and get routed off the runway letting the other plane eventually still cross.
@@oldRighty1 yes-runway 9 is 9400 feet long-27 is 7400 feet-due to that wonderful ever so useful parking structure built in the 1980's @ Laurel & Kettner.
@@stevenrobinson2381never mind the parking structure. Look at those hills a couple miles further east. Flying a heavy at max weight, taking off that direction, I’d say “unable”, and wait for a break in the traffic pattern.
Excuse my French but no shit one of mine grabbed the controls on departure and shook the plane so damn hard the freaking Cessna full Rich started puking on me the look on his face was pure evil as well then he said what did you do another one tried to throw his dead batteries from his fancy noise canceling headset out the window over a lake full of about 2000 fishermen there is certainly a large difference between us all when it comes to Common Sense and maturity
That reporter was like listening to a group of screaming small children dragging their fingernails down a chalkboard. Yikes. Who hired that guy and did they ask him to read anything prior to the job?
San Diego is not a dangerous airport, difficult and limited from a pilots POV, but the runway isn’t that short, there are plenty of international flights from Europe and Japan that operate out of that airport. Runway crossing are rare at San Diego because of the single runway and most vacate towards the gate. Guy wanted his spotlight, SFO is far worse and more dangerous
@@chrisschack9716 Same... looking at the current taxi diagram, taxiway Bravo is closed between B4 and B6, so they have to cross and use Charlie to get to the end of 27.
“I” was a a military and civilian air traffic controller for 42 years. This incident scared the hell out of me. Clearly a loss of separation and remedial training is needed and, right now. The tower was not very busy and when not busy, that is the most dangerous time.
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson. I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals. Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved. Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!! Regards from Switzerland ✈.
He was spot-on about the plane being on the runway, the FAA just seems disingeneous. Right that it was a problem in the Tower, too. The rest, I'm not so sure...
Without having the exact timestamps of the communications and positions of the plane, it is hard to have an opinion on whether there was really a risk or not. Was the 785 at the Hold Short line when cleared to cross the runway? It is obvious that 1478 was still on the taxiway when they were cleared for takeoff. is it possible that the ATC believed that 785 had already crossed the runway when he cleared 1478 for takeoff? Of he did not make the effort to stand and check the runway was clear before authorizing takeoff? This "News" has so little context that it should not even have been presented...
Damn! This reported has a jarring voice. Also the phone guy is a little extra. It's not a difficult airport, it's definitely NOT a short runway, and from this incident, it was mitigated pretty quickly.
There is always someone out there willing to overdramatize the potential when an incident occurs. I'm sure the FAA will work to minimize future problems at this airport.
The instructor is correct a Runway incursion did occur as Crossing traffic was allowed to pass the hold short I have always had a problem understanding a separation between ground and Air traffic control for commercial flights as soon as an airport accepts commercial flights duties there should be singular control far too many lives at stake these aren't little GA planes On the other hand if it were on short final Approach this would be an accident investigation lucky they caught it so fast and it's lucky that the pilots weren't distracted with roll lists I had a backyard Barn flyer roll out under me on short final at an uncontrolled here in Florida I repeated my short final announcement then announced a go around moved left and paralleled and that idiot announced don't get your panties in a wad pulled up his biplane up underneath me and just missed my left wing we both almost got what he deserved I won't use an uncontrolled Airport anymore endless for fuel I consider them off field emergency Landing zones
@@ernestgalvan9037 There are many satisfying flying jobs out there that you can make a career out of. Military, government, corporate, etc. Teaching in a flight school for 40 years is something that happens when your career does not go as planned.
@@TheUtuber999 Having friends that went on to teach, including two professors, that is exactly how I feel. Are you familiar with aviation? Do you fly? You teach flying to gain hours. Doing it as a career is like being a tennis pro at the local club or a golf instructor. Sure you can make a living out of it and it’s an honest living but that wasn’t what you set out to do originally was it?
On runways...Takeoff/Landing AND Crossing should be controlled by Tower....You have two controllers in-charge of same space. They might be standing next to each other but that, obviously, doesnt always work...
This is the ground controller's fault. You have two controllers on two different frequencies. They are called Ground and Tower. Tower controls the runways. Ground controls the taxiways. This is a breakdown between the ground and tower controller. The Ground cleared a plane to cross a runway without clearing it with the tower frequency controller. Also, the instructor they interviewed has a chicken little complex to make himself look more important than he is. The controllers aborted actions as trained. The controller sensationalized so that it could possibly get San Diego International expanded.
Women have a hard time being air traffic contollers!. I was on USAir Flight 1493 coming into LAX when a woman cleared us to land on top of a Metroliner! She killed everybody on the Metroliner and a fourth of everyone on my plane!
That's why you never take opinion from someone not on scene. It's soooo easy for anyone (and i'm not doubting his experience or expertise) to over exaggerate the severity of the situation. I will believe him when I see the runway path of the planes instead of his statement. That shitty animation cbs did didnt help at all.
The comments by the flight instructor are wrong. The hold-short lines are an added distance from the runway that controllers and pilots use to provide an increased level of safety. There are controller rules that say they are not allowed to use the runway to land or takeoff when another aircraft has passed the hold-short line. Since the crossing aircraft had not entered the runway when told to stop and the departing aircraft was also told to stop his takeoff, this was “not” a near miss. When controllers make a mistake they can correct the mistake by having the crossing aircraft hold short of the runway and the aircraft on the runway stop the takeoff. If it had been a landing aircraft the controller would have had the landing aircraft go around. These are rare but not uncommon occurrences.
so at a traffic intersection when you cross the stop bar you are not actually in the intersection? Well you are technically. I would suspect it is the same way at an airport runway/taxiway.
@@jimmiller5600 correct you are, however, if the controller tells you to cross you are not and the controller has different rules that have nothing to do with your rule. Controller cannot allow another aircraft to takeoff or land on the runway while you are across the line. Nobody took off or landed while the aircraft was across the hold line and short of the runway.
Ah, the "Fox News Approach" to promoting bias when you don't have any facts to back it up: Phrase it as a question. Does prejudice have anything to do with you asking your question, even as you profess certain ignorance? I guess we'll never know, will we(?)
I rarely comment on videos, But the fact that you spun an everyday Air traffic controller conversation into some sort of narrative about public safety concerns is disgraceful. There are plenty of other things you could’ve spent your time discussing that would actually make people feel good and safer living in San Diego.
The controllers really should have a status board. A green runway would indicate aircraft landing, a blinking green runway would be aircraft taking off. A yellow runway would be idle, and red runway would be aircraft crossing or stopped on the runway.
"The second Southwest aircraft never entered the runway." In other words "nothing happened." And....that.....reporter.....needs.....to....brush....up.....on....his....speaking....skills.....
As an amateur aviation enthusiast, it is still useful to read about these incidents. Why were there two air traffic controllers manning the same single run way? Maybe it is to provide an extra pair of eyes to a stressful job. I was at Vancouver International Airport and saw a lot of planes taxiing across the runway in between takeoffs.
So.. two controllers weren't manning the same position or runway. One is local/tower that deals with takeoff/landing and aircraft in the immediate airspace. The other is ground that coordinates taxiing before takeoff and after landing, along with any movement around the airport. What happened here is ground was likely given verbal clearance from tower for one aircraft to cross the runway at x position. From there ground issued the clearance. Another aircraft called up tower for takeoff.. tower likely slipped their mind they just gave clearance to cross. (the amount of time between these events is not clear based on the reporting, it makes it seem instantaneous but it likely isn't) Someone in the tower notices both have been given clearances and tells ground and tower to cancel clearances. At most this is a runway incursion. Not great but not some near disaster that is being described in the story.
Your instructor is over dramatic. A single runway operation is only complex when having to cross as was the case here. In my opinion the crossing should be handled by local and not through coordination with ground but that’s a local San tower discussion. With departure gaps provided by SCT (Southern California TRACON) the towers job is quite simple. The most dangerous and complex airports are those with crossing runway configs like Houston hobby, Chicago midway, and San Francisco. Bottom line here- there was a communication breakdown regarding the crossing of the runway by the controllers. They recognized their mistake and corrected it.
An aircraft between the holding position and the runway is considered to be on the runway as far as ATC operations are concerned. However, we don’t know if SW785 was physically on the runway after crossing the threshold and then stopping.
There’s also a common denominator that nobody wants to discuss either. One only has to listen to the near disaster at Reagan International last spring to understand who.
I have a couple of questions? Number 1 why was the tower giving taxi instructions that is grounds job and number 2 why were there 2 people on the same frequency in the tower talking to planes on the ground? Tower should have never been talking to the southwest aircraft taxing once it cleared the active and crossed the hold short lines.
It is not an incursion when given clearance to cross, and I agree that it happens more frequently than most know, but totally disagree with the statement that "it is usually due to failures with air traffic control", spoken like a pilot.
Not surprising this would happen at SAN. The one runway is at absolute capacity and no room for error. Its a miracle the FAA and ATC keeps the level of operations at SAN as is.
They have shortened the air traffic controllers courses and the precept length. Great decision by Pete Buttigieg. What does a former Mayor of a small town know about transportation , oh , DEI ,again !!!degrees in philosophy and politics should take care of that .
Which ATC has priority when it comes to aircraft movement on the ground? One ATC instructed a flight to cross the runway while another ATC cleared a flight to take off. And I'm wondering if both of these planes were on different frequencies, or could they hear what was being told to other air craft? Runway incursions happen way too frequently. Way too frequently.
This is also happening at other airports around the country. Usually it seems to be a discrepancy between ground and the tower. I'm not even close to an expert, but I love watching the Reat ATC and VASaviation channels. ruclips.net/video/u-Hh2j-8MxY/видео.html
These reporters be like “ a near miss for southwest as the plane was exiting the taxi path off ramp while a Boeing 757-700 was about to takeoff on San Diego’s main runway runway 8L, we haven’t gotten any statements from the ceo of southwest who handles incidents like this. If you’re an avid air traveler we recommend you stay off southwest as this will lower their safety rating. Maybe more training for southwest pilots will improve and avoid accidents, or maybe it’s just another classic Boeing mistake. In other news a new dive bar will open in San Diego and we will spread more mis information up next at 6”
My god it was hard listening to this reporter
Agreed. He spoke like a robot.
A childlike robot...
Like David Spade AI
Welcome to the world AI
@@701Builder who voiced the plane in the movie September 11 2000FUN, starring James woods
Oof. At first I saw your comment and was like these news anchors sound fine and then I heard the voiceover. What an understatement.
Typically inaccurate, misleading opening sentence, showing typical journalistic ignorance and lack of attention to precisely articulating the truth of a topic: "An aborted takeoff . . . is raising concerns about safety . . . " The aborted takeoff isn't raising concerns about safety; the near miss is. The aborted takeoff was the correct response in the situation and was executed correctly, a critical action among others which avoided disaster. The fact of the aborted takeoff isn't the issue or cause of concern; the circumstances that made the aborted takeoff required in order to avoid a disaster are the issue.
To be fair, it wasn't a near miss.. at best it's a runway incursion. Is it an issue? yes. It's an issue likely stemming from the tower as a whole getting too comfortable. Complacency.
Well said.
I think that's not a hugely important detail to the average viewer that this is marketed to. I mean dude they went a lot further in trying to provide step by step recount of what happened including diagrams, that's above and beyond what most media outlets would provide.
"Main Runway"?!?! San Diego has only ONE runway!!
That’s why its the main runway, also they use reverse ops (R9) during not ideal weather.
I counted three if you are also including the highways around it.
@@pacman3556 LOL
Lmao, 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.
No kidding or Thou shalt have nose or tail clipped by wing
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson.
I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals.
Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved.
Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!!
Regards from Switzerland ✈.
.
👍🏻
@@sncy5303 lots of ATC quit /retired/left during Covid. Takes years to replace them. The ones that are still there are overworked.
I'm surprised your outlook / opinion of technology is so low. The error here, clearing one aircraft for takeoff while another cleared to cross, is an entirely human mistake. An oversight, a lapse of situational awareness. Human errors are inevitable - but a computer / automated system would never have made the same mistake.
It would be as simple as entering all runway-related clearances into a computer and have that display any conflicts *before* passing the info to the pilots.
Is that practical with the current workloads and workflows? It would require changes, sure.
But my point is: it would be absolutely trivial for an automated system to prevent (or alert on) such conflicts (and much more).
@@tom4794 Yes and no. If everything worked as you describe, then fine. But this event happened (in all likelihood) as a result of too much workload (ie-more things happening in not enough time). If yet another automated system is instituted (such as "entering all runway-related clearances into a computer and have that display any conflicts before passing the info to the pilots" adds more required tasks/requirements into a system that already suffers from too much going on in too short a period of time. It would add more people into the loop (entering more stuff into a computer, since the controllers there now are already task saturated), and would likely just more grinding to the process. The folks there now should slow down when they feel rushed or feel like they are falling behind. It is the rushing to get greater throughput and more planes moving through the system that spawns these errors. It may seem counter intuitive, but when you feel rushed, SLOW DOWN. It is when we humans try to speed up to overcome perceived need to hurry up that accidents often will happen. Just IMHO . . .
Situational awareness is absolutely the critical component in safely operating airplanes. Yes, all parties successfully trapped and mitigated the error. But an error that involves R/W conflict and a rejected T/O is anything but a “ non-event”. (your words captain). I do agree that the “non event” was trapped and mitigated by the professionals on duty. As far as retraining, thats all on the debrief. So yes, there should be retraining. Maybe all parties on same frequency so the SW crews would have known of the potential conflict.. Cheers
First of all it's called "taxiway" not taxipath. Second it's not called a near miss. There was no "miss" and they didn't even got "near" to each other.
Professionals call something like that a runway incursion.
Most important question no one asked. Were they both on Tower frequency or was one crew talking to ground control and the other one talking to tower? If they were both on the same freq the incidence raises eybrows about controller training and the situational awareness of both crews involved. If they were on seperate freqs they also need to look at controller training and their local procedures.
Just my 2 cents.
You had your flightinstructor to comment. Why not ask him for the correct terminology. Journalism at its best.😂
Sounded like one was with ground and the other with tower/local. If I want to give the benefit of the doubt, ground likely got the verbal clearance from local and local upon getting the call for takeoff clearance forgot they had given that clearance..
Many use a flight strip holder that simply says Foul Deck as a reminder for those two. Ultimately, my take is the tower as a whole likely got a little too comfortable and when someone else noticed, they both issued their abort takeoff and hold position since they were still on separate frequencies.
It absolutely is a "near miss".
@@dannyvernon1098 near miss what pleb? the plane never even took off, takeoff was rejected and the crossing plane stopped. Past the hold line but regardless, still stopped, It is why ATC said hold position regardless because the other plane taking off was not anymore and would be routed off the runway and put back in line once they cleared that up they would then would tell the crossing plane they are cleared to finish the crossing.
It's a near miss. No, they are not talking on the same freq. People preparing to take off talk to the tower, same as people landing. People driving around on the taxiways talk to ground control. It's a completely different frequency. So the people on approach and in the pattern don't get stepped on by people on the ground.
A near miss is whenever there would have been a collision if corrective action was not taken, as well as if the aircraft come within certain limits of each other while flying. If corrective action had not been taken, those aircraft would have collided.
And yes, there were TWO aircraft on the runway. The runway STARTS at the hold-short line. Once you cross it, you're on the runway. Pilots do monitor what's going on around them, but when you're on two different frequencies, you can't do that as you're already monitoring TWO different frequencies (ground and guard, or tower and guard).
I'm a trained pilot, I know how this works. Did it for years.
You obviously are not, nor do you understand how it works. It is a very different world, it is not at all like hoping in a car and driving down the road.
@@vanstry No, it's not a near miss. It was a runway incursion.
You're right, ACFT taxiing on taxiways are usually talking to Ground. Whenever they need to cross an active runway they are handed over to TWR/Lcl controller for the x-ing clearance. At least that's how it works in most parts of the world.
It most probably wouldn't have happened when both crews were on the same freq.
And kindly stop explaining ATC to me. Doing that for almost 30 years now.
It would be preferable to have a reporter who actually knew something about the subject matter to report on incidents. This guy is clueless.
Seldom do any reporters know about the subject they are covering. They simply make up stuff or are given the script to read. This is why I seldom listen to them. There are several areas where I have knowledge, so in those areas I can pick out the sophomoric comments, then I extrapolate to areas I do not have good knowledge of and wonder, is this really correct.
“We called a flight instructor with 43 years of experience flying Cessnas. In his expert opinion, the two Airbus 737’s almost collided, which would’ve killed all 957 passengers onboard.”
They should switch to Boeing A321s.
So much disinformation. The McDonnell Douglas 737 (Now known as Folkair) has a max passenger configuration of 412 seats. With two of them involved in this incident, simple math tells us there were no more than 889 total passengers on both planes.
Cessna C-172s 😂 can carry 957 passengers.
😂😂😂
Two airbus can’t hold that many people lol
It’s not Southwest’s fault, the fault is with the ATC at the airport.
You are correct. They need to pay more attention to what planes are coming, going, and on what runways.
@@larrybruce4856 Human errors will always occur. However, the system did as it should, note the female voice, probably a supervisor monitoring the situation, and the check worked. Too close, but none the less, was corrected by the oversite.
wow what a helpful and useful comment. Its not like they literally stated that in the video multiple times.
As George Carlin said, that wasn't a near-miss, it was a near-hit.
"A collision is a near-miss!"
he also said he won"t fly on a plane, he'll fly in it. rip george
@@stem172 "Let Evel Knievel get ON the plane! I'll be in here with you folks in uniform; there seems to be less wind in here!"
A “say again” under these circumstances is the worst case scenario! “Southwest 1478, stop immediately, Southwest 1478, stop immediately!” at a slower pace would have been so much better for an aircraft on the move. It stands out from all other transmissions and will certainly draw more attention. It’s also in accordance with ICAO rules, so it will be understood by all pilots.
She did sound a bit flustered
The guy on the phone was a bit melodramatic.
The prediction about SD being the next major catastrophe, 100% BS. Go look at the super busy, older airports. Intersecting runways, also overburdened ATC and a constant stream of flights, tons of new pilots, it could be any airport or none of them.
@@oldRighty1 one runway? Not long enough for that airport to handle that many of flights? Something is going happen soon???????????????!
@@jdcaldwell5088 I didn't say there was no risk, but one runway at least means no intersecting runways, taxiways are fairly straightforward. This was a miscommunication between ground & tower which can happen anywhere (shouldn't, but could).
They probably called a few "experts" until they found one willing to add a touch of spice to the story.
the controller picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue
I remember that movie! 🤣🤣🤣 Airplane!!
A video to smoke cigarettes by ...
Roger, Roger.
@@kdhander 🤣
😂
Pilots are trained to look both ways crossing a runway, much like we do on roads, for this very reason.
And after Tower tells you to step aside for a commuter tells you you're clear for departure then as soon as you line up and start your roll tells you you have a twin on short final behind you says without delay sir after the twin on approach is now not responding yeah about crapped my pants that day and went looking for a neck to wring
Not sure what you are saying here, that it is the pilot's responsibility? Given the complexity of the situation, that is one hopeful, but not a given. I have take off from more than one runway where there is a crown in the center, impossible to see one end from the other.
@@EllsworthJohnson-ui1xmwell I sure am human as well attempt to answer you and edit another LOL I was not indicating any pilot error here ground and Tower were responsible for separation I was always taught to look regardless of expectation of visibility but you are correct not always possible how was merely indicating that it wasn't incursion and not a near Miss which as you know would be a airport environment issue the last airport environment near Miss I witnessed one plane was on departure with gear going up the other plane was a cowboy not using the radio obviously and an inactive Runway that crossed it departing appeared fully loaded with passengers and fuel barely cleared the tale of the cowboy and fought it all the way across the airport environment barely clearing the fence I and a buddy of mine had just stepped aside for him as he was impatient and I don't like people breathing down my neck peace love and chicken grease my friend
Excellent drifting by the 785 crew into Bravo 6!
"There's no parking in the RED zone"
The red zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only. There is no stopping in the white zone.
@@michaelarlen7805Listen Betty, don’t start up with your “white zone” sh*t again.
I was worried the story was about planes crashing down on the surrounding city. I swear you can stand in the parking structure across the street and get hit in the head with landing gear.
@@michaelarlen7805don’t give me that red zone crap
lol this ain’t news.
Us pilots know what’s up. These news stations have nothing good to talk about.
As a fellow pilot, it's great to see someone spreading awareness about this. These so-called "aviation experts" are just spreading lies to make people scared of flying.
You are absolutely right. My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson.
I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals.
Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved.
Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!!
Regards from Switzerland ✈.
.
@@brianshaffer7578If people are scared of flying, take a train. If more scared, take a drive. If extremely scared, take a walk. When all else fail, stay home…. People make money while others spend them. Welcome to the world of journalism.
It’s a bit suspicious when big business interests want to build a larger airport elsewhere in San Diego. They have been trying for over 5 years to make it happen. There is a laundry list of reasons San Diego wouldnt benefit in any significant ways from a new larger airport. The majority of the public doesn’t support it, but they will never stop trying though.
If we want to talk about safety look at GA vs the airlines. We basically have a fatal everyday from pilot error in that sector. The airlines are the safest way to travel right now.
Imagine if the news reported every time a vehicle accident almost happened…
A vehicle accident does not kill 3 or 4 hundred people.
@@nedflanders1559 very true instead they kill about 43k people a year in the United States alone. That's equivalent to about 187 Boeing 737 MAXX aircraft per year. Your point?
In case it’s more like 240 fyi 737-700s carry just around 120.
0:32 Sick drift!
😂😂😂😂😂😂
The system worked well and that San Diego international airport may be a dangerous airport, but it's also the most safest airport but it's held a fantastic record for how long it's been in San Diego downtown. Too much fear-mongering going on. I've worked this at this airport for over 35 years. I would know.
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson.
I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals.
Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved.
Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!!
Regards from Switzerland ✈.
.
@@Renato.Stiefenhofer.747driver Very well said sir.
System worked.
Stories like this is a reason i never really pay attention to what the news has to say. A rwy incursion isnt a near miss.
Why is this a rwy incursion when it was a clearance to cross?
It's going to be the scene of a major accident... Dramatic much?! 😂
This is why people no longer trust media. This was a routine operation and I am sure that this happens all the time at airports all the time. The controllers did their job.
This happens when the ground controller is expecting one thing and the tower controller another, but there was never any significant danger. At San Diego, they almost never cross the runway, but looking at the current taxi diagram, taxiway Bravo is closed between B4 and B6, so they are crossing to use Charlie to get to the end of 27. However, looking at flightradar24, they are now doing some interesting taxing on Alpha, where it looks like they have rerouted part of alpha onto what was ramp area, to go around the construction.
It’s not a short runway by any means.. I flown 4 types of large planes L1011,727,757,767, into SAN and it has plenty of runway even with the displaced threshold .
then you know how overblown this was given the takeoff was rejected pretty much immediately regardless if the crossing plane was over the hold short line and why ATC said hold position regardless because there was plenty of space/time to abort and get routed off the runway letting the other plane eventually still cross.
9400 feet. Not the longest, but compared to DCA which is
@@oldRighty1 yes-runway 9 is 9400 feet long-27 is 7400 feet-due to that wonderful ever so useful parking structure built in the 1980's @ Laurel & Kettner.
@@stevenrobinson2381 for landings, but it's full length for takeoffs, right?
@@stevenrobinson2381never mind the parking structure. Look at those hills a couple miles further east. Flying a heavy at max weight, taking off that direction, I’d say “unable”, and wait for a break in the traffic pattern.
Media sensationalism. ATC worked as it should. Never been real impressed with many flight instructors.
Excuse my French but no shit one of mine grabbed the controls on departure and shook the plane so damn hard the freaking Cessna full Rich started puking on me the look on his face was pure evil as well then he said what did you do another one tried to throw his dead batteries from his fancy noise canceling headset out the window over a lake full of about 2000 fishermen there is certainly a large difference between us all when it comes to Common Sense and maturity
Standard pilot answer. The fault doesnt lie with the pilot but with ATC. No one was blaming the pilot but you just had to cover down on that
Agree, as a pilot for over 53 years, heard it all the time. Most of the time that is correct, but not always.
Humans make mistakes!! Look how many planes are in motion in our country!! We are pretty safe !!
Here here
That reporter was like listening to a group of screaming small children dragging their fingernails down a chalkboard.
Yikes. Who hired that guy and did they ask him to read anything prior to the job?
Did sound a bit like somebody left the cockpit door open
San Diego is not a dangerous airport, difficult and limited from a pilots POV, but the runway isn’t that short, there are plenty of international flights from Europe and Japan that operate out of that airport. Runway crossing are rare at San Diego because of the single runway and most vacate towards the gate. Guy wanted his spotlight, SFO is far worse and more dangerous
I was wondering why the SWA was crossing the runway in the first place ... both taxiways lead to the runway, might be sequencing?
It is one of the busiest airports for its size actually
@@chrisschack9716 Same... looking at the current taxi diagram, taxiway Bravo is closed between B4 and B6, so they have to cross and use Charlie to get to the end of 27.
@@daniellarsen3271 true it is one of the busiest single runway airports is the US but that doesn’t make it dangerous.
@@Pax217man yes it does make it dangerous lol. You just contradicted yourself
Near miss or near hit?
“I” was a a military and civilian air traffic controller for 42 years. This incident scared the hell out of me. Clearly a loss of separation and remedial training is needed and, right now. The tower was not very busy and when not busy, that is the most dangerous time.
Is that the same woman controller involved in a previous incident at KSAN?
A "near miss" is a hit. This is just a miss.
the word near could be taken as meaning "almost", or it could mean it was a miss, that was close by. i.e. the opposite of "missing it by a mile"
It's still safer to fly than it is to drive. Especially in San Diego.
The expert was a tad dramatic in his bullshit conclusions 😂😂
My five cents as an active 747 captain with many years of experience with air traffic controllers worldwide: Situations like this one in San Diego can and will happen again. We are human beings and even the best technology is just a backup. And it will be for a long, long time. Situational awareness is part of our daily life in our cockpits and on the control towers. Fact is: The San Diego air traffic controllers did a very good job in saving the day on this demanding, single runway airport. The pilots reacted in a calm and professional way, too. I would call it a non event. All of us were given a valuable lesson.
I hope everyone involved in this incident are back in their jobs without additional training and without inquiry or inspection! It's part of our profession to serve the demanding public and press... Since none of these have a clue about the complexity of aviation, we should not listen to them, at all. To broadcast a "personal opinion" of an "instructor" highlights their (the media) goals.
Fact is: The problem was solved excellently by all professionals involved.
Would I fly on Southwest or would I fly my jumbojet to San Diego international airport at night in foggy conditions? Yes, of course!!
Regards from Switzerland ✈.
It was so stupid. Mumbai airport is also single runway and handles twice the volume as SAN without major incidents
He was spot-on about the plane being on the runway, the FAA just seems disingeneous. Right that it was a problem in the Tower, too. The rest, I'm not so sure...
Ok baby huey
Right? The scene of the next major catastrophe was pretty dramatic
Without having the exact timestamps of the communications and positions of the plane, it is hard to have an opinion on whether there was really a risk or not. Was the 785 at the Hold Short line when cleared to cross the runway? It is obvious that 1478 was still on the taxiway when they were cleared for takeoff. is it possible that the ATC believed that 785 had already crossed the runway when he cleared 1478 for takeoff? Of he did not make the effort to stand and check the runway was clear before authorizing takeoff? This "News" has so little context that it should not even have been presented...
Damn! This reported has a jarring voice. Also the phone guy is a little extra. It's not a difficult airport, it's definitely NOT a short runway, and from this incident, it was mitigated pretty quickly.
No, “San Diego is one runway and is operating waaay over capacity” AND is expanding terminal infrastructure.
The FAA still doesn’t seem to get that promoting aviation is second to promoting aviation safety.
Almost like Teneriff!! SCARY!! Be safe out there!
Was it a DEI hire in the tower?
Been seeing a lot of these types of incidents lately at other airports. The VASaviation YT channel does a great job of showing these.
This is a big nothingburger.
“It’s going to be the scene of the next Major accident” ok bud
There is always someone out there willing to overdramatize the potential when an incident occurs. I'm sure the FAA will work to minimize future problems at this airport.
Yeah, that was a totally unnecessary comment . . . complete Barbara Streisand . . .
You can say that about half the freeways in LA but they aren’t reporting on that.
Yeah they really should have called a commercial instructor for an opinion
It entered the runway environment but not actually on the runway.
I feel like this is happening more and more often
The instructor is correct a Runway incursion did occur as Crossing traffic was allowed to pass the hold short I have always had a problem understanding a separation between ground and Air traffic control for commercial flights as soon as an airport accepts commercial flights duties there should be singular control far too many lives at stake these aren't little GA planes On the other hand if it were on short final Approach this would be an accident investigation lucky they caught it so fast and it's lucky that the pilots weren't distracted with roll lists I had a backyard Barn flyer roll out under me on short final at an uncontrolled here in Florida I repeated my short final announcement then announced a go around moved left and paralleled and that idiot announced don't get your panties in a wad pulled up his biplane up underneath me and just missed my left wing we both almost got what he deserved I won't use an uncontrolled Airport anymore endless for fuel I consider them off field emergency Landing zones
40 years as a flight instructor means he can't get a job at the airlines.
Not EVERY pilot wants a job at the airlines.
@@ernestgalvan9037 that would be me. Not the route I chose.
@@ernestgalvan9037 There are many satisfying flying jobs out there that you can make a career out of. Military, government, corporate, etc. Teaching in a flight school for 40 years is something that happens when your career does not go as planned.
@@thebigmon Maybe some people like to teach? I suppose you probably think that teachers teach because they are failures in their area of expertise.
@@TheUtuber999 Having friends that went on to teach, including two professors, that is exactly how I feel. Are you familiar with aviation? Do you fly? You teach flying to gain hours. Doing it as a career is like being a tennis pro at the local club or a golf instructor. Sure you can make a living out of it and it’s an honest living but that wasn’t what you set out to do originally was it?
On runways...Takeoff/Landing AND Crossing should be controlled by Tower....You have two controllers in-charge of same space. They might be standing next to each other but that, obviously, doesnt always work...
Bravo my complaint is well switching from ground to Tower after you have just rolled past the whole short is a bit of a misnomer
When there's no news... Go find news and sensationalize it.
Why did southwest have to cross the runway? The taxiway and terminal are on the same side
Because there's a taxiway on the other side of the runway and they wanted them to taxi on that side
Expert must be a Dodgers fan
This is the ground controller's fault. You have two controllers on two different frequencies. They are called Ground and Tower. Tower controls the runways. Ground controls the taxiways. This is a breakdown between the ground and tower controller. The Ground cleared a plane to cross a runway without clearing it with the tower frequency controller.
Also, the instructor they interviewed has a chicken little complex to make himself look more important than he is. The controllers aborted actions as trained. The controller sensationalized so that it could possibly get San Diego International expanded.
FAA has a difficult relationship with the truth.
Women have a hard time being air traffic contollers!. I was on USAir Flight 1493 coming into LAX when a woman cleared us to land on top of a Metroliner! She killed everybody on the Metroliner and a fourth of everyone on my plane!
That's why you never take opinion from someone not on scene. It's soooo easy for anyone (and i'm not doubting his experience or expertise) to over exaggerate the severity of the situation. I will believe him when I see the runway path of the planes instead of his statement. That shitty animation cbs did didnt help at all.
The comments by the flight instructor are wrong. The hold-short lines are an added distance from the runway that controllers and pilots use to provide an increased level of safety. There are controller rules that say they are not allowed to use the runway to land or takeoff when another aircraft has passed the hold-short line. Since the crossing aircraft had not entered the runway when told to stop and the departing aircraft was also told to stop his takeoff, this was “not” a near miss. When controllers make a mistake they can correct the mistake by having the crossing aircraft hold short of the runway and the aircraft on the runway stop the takeoff. If it had been a landing aircraft the controller would have had the landing aircraft go around. These are rare but not uncommon occurrences.
You are being obtuse. The flight instructor is accurate.
If you cross the Hold Short line at any runway you're in violation of the runway operating space.
so at a traffic intersection when you cross the stop bar you are not actually in the intersection? Well you are technically. I would suspect it is the same way at an airport runway/taxiway.
Crossing the hold-short line is entering the runway area.
@@jimmiller5600 correct you are, however, if the controller tells you to cross you are not and the controller has different rules that have nothing to do with your rule. Controller cannot allow another aircraft to takeoff or land on the runway while you are across the line. Nobody took off or landed while the aircraft was across the hold line and short of the runway.
Did DEI have anything to do with this near miss? We'll never know, will we.
Ah, the "Fox News Approach" to promoting bias when you don't have any facts to back it up: Phrase it as a question.
Does prejudice have anything to do with you asking your question, even as you profess certain ignorance? I guess we'll never know, will we(?)
Nah probably bunched panties or a bra strap adjustment while rolling past hold short
I rarely comment on videos, But the fact that you spun an everyday Air traffic controller conversation into some sort of narrative about public safety concerns is disgraceful. There are plenty of other things you could’ve spent your time discussing that would actually make people feel good and safer living in San Diego.
Lol a CFI of 43 years is an expert and has an opinion that matters 😂
The controllers really should have a status board.
A green runway would indicate aircraft landing, a blinking green runway would be aircraft taking off.
A yellow runway would be idle, and red runway would be aircraft crossing or stopped on the runway.
"The second Southwest aircraft never entered the runway."
In other words "nothing happened."
And....that.....reporter.....needs.....to....brush....up.....on....his....speaking....skills.....
George Carlin: Near miss is a collision! *Explosion* Look they nearly missed. Not quite!
"What exactly is Pre-boarding? You get on before you get on"? - George Carlin
As an amateur aviation enthusiast, it is still useful to read about these incidents. Why were there two air traffic controllers manning the same single run way? Maybe it is to provide an extra pair of eyes to a stressful job. I was at Vancouver International Airport and saw a lot of planes taxiing across the runway in between takeoffs.
So.. two controllers weren't manning the same position or runway.
One is local/tower that deals with takeoff/landing and aircraft in the immediate airspace. The other is ground that coordinates taxiing before takeoff and after landing, along with any movement around the airport. What happened here is ground was likely given verbal clearance from tower for one aircraft to cross the runway at x position. From there ground issued the clearance. Another aircraft called up tower for takeoff.. tower likely slipped their mind they just gave clearance to cross. (the amount of time between these events is not clear based on the reporting, it makes it seem instantaneous but it likely isn't) Someone in the tower notices both have been given clearances and tells ground and tower to cancel clearances. At most this is a runway incursion. Not great but not some near disaster that is being described in the story.
Your instructor is over dramatic. A single runway operation is only complex when having to cross as was the case here. In my opinion the crossing should be handled by local and not through coordination with ground but that’s a local San tower discussion. With departure gaps provided by SCT (Southern California TRACON) the towers job is quite simple. The most dangerous and complex airports are those with crossing runway configs like Houston hobby, Chicago midway, and San Francisco. Bottom line here- there was a communication breakdown regarding the crossing of the runway by the controllers. They recognized their mistake and corrected it.
Absolutely spot on.
This incident reveals that these airports are running over capacity at times. Only a matter of time until disaster strikes.
Hey I’ve got an idea. How about two people cannot clear the same runway. Just a thought.
id love to see you try to manage ground and clearance at the same time. Not a chance, especially at this airport.
@@jonnie2bad I could handle it.
An aircraft between the holding position and the runway is considered to be on the runway as far as ATC operations are concerned. However, we don’t know if SW785 was physically on the runway after crossing the threshold and then stopping.
If you listen to ATC from around the U.S., this happens ALOT lately
There’s also a common denominator that nobody wants to discuss either. One only has to listen to the near disaster at Reagan International last spring to understand who.
Was the fottage captured by a fellow avgeek planespotter?
I have a couple of questions? Number 1 why was the tower giving taxi instructions that is grounds job and number 2 why were there 2 people on the same frequency in the tower talking to planes on the ground? Tower should have never been talking to the southwest aircraft taxing once it cleared the active and crossed the hold short lines.
ATC here. Yeah, this one's on us - ugh.
That would be called a Runway incursion this actually happens a whole lot more frequently and this is usually due to failures with air traffic control
It is not an incursion when given clearance to cross, and I agree that it happens more frequently than most know, but totally disagree with the statement that "it is usually due to failures with air traffic control", spoken like a pilot.
Not surprising this would happen at SAN. The one runway is at absolute capacity and no room for error. Its a miracle the FAA and ATC keeps the level of operations at SAN as is.
Robert Katz is obviously a very very unintelligent individual, I would never ask them for flight instruction
They have shortened the air traffic controllers courses and the precept length. Great decision by
Pete Buttigieg. What does a former Mayor of a small town know about transportation , oh , DEI ,again !!!degrees in philosophy and politics should take care of that .
Near miss? More like a near hit!
ATC competency has been lacking lately. What could be the reasons for this🤔?
Near miss. They collided. Near hit. They missed. I'll never understand.
When an airplane crosses the hold short line it has entered the runway environment!!!
The FAA went woke.
Well at least they weren't sleeping on the job
OMG is ATC drinking on the job or using Fentanyl??????
What does a near miss have to do with public safety? Who writes this stuff?
Absolutely nothing
Near hit.
Not much to see here. The controllers caught their mistake and held the planes.
I am sure DEI had nothing to do with this? Well, kind of sure? …… OK, I am not sure?
Which ATC has priority when it comes to aircraft movement on the ground? One ATC instructed a flight to cross the runway while another ATC cleared a flight to take off.
And I'm wondering if both of these planes were on different frequencies, or could they hear what was being told to other air craft?
Runway incursions happen way too frequently. Way too frequently.
This reporter is THE WORST. That voice.
The ATC need to give more urgency in their voice on these rejected takeoffs.
This is also happening at other airports around the country. Usually it seems to be a discrepancy between ground and the tower. I'm not even close to an expert, but I love watching the Reat ATC and VASaviation channels. ruclips.net/video/u-Hh2j-8MxY/видео.html
blancolirio covered the incident ruclips.net/video/k-QoYJ3qQy8/видео.html
In The words of the late great GEORGE CARLIN, “DON’T YOU MEAN NEAR HIT?” 🤷🏾♂️
LOL. Right! That is what it should be called.
It seems that since the airport only has one runway, it should be simpler to control, not more complicated.
They say that National Airport is the most dangerous in the country, but my vote goes to San Diego's airstrip-in-an-alley...
DEI hires. The "reporter" and the female controller.
HOW does a PILOT REFUSE a cancel take off request??????????? Do not let him fly again!
Must have been a DEI
These reporters be like “ a near miss for southwest as the plane was exiting the taxi path off ramp while a Boeing 757-700 was about to takeoff on San Diego’s main runway runway 8L, we haven’t gotten any statements from the ceo of southwest who handles incidents like this. If you’re an avid air traveler we recommend you stay off southwest as this will lower their safety rating. Maybe more training for southwest pilots will improve and avoid accidents, or maybe it’s just another classic Boeing mistake. In other news a new dive bar will open in San Diego and we will spread more mis information up next at 6”
DEI, congrats
My daughter flies into and out of this airport and this scares me!
Could that controller speak any faster?