AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

[FICU]

I'm surprised the aircraft on the taxiway weren't madly flashing their landing lights once they confirmed the AC jet was lined up with the taxiway.

[Rooster69]

Does AC still "train to standard"?

Lifer FO?

Yes.

[goingnowherefast]

Train to standard is one thing, but a strong personal drive to better one's abilities usually results in exceeding the standard. Not saying it's the case here, but some don't have the drive to improve, they feel that they're "good enough". Not picking on Air Canada's training either, you see it everywhere, and often with people who just barely meet the standard.

[rookiepilot]

Our 1000hr single engine boy/girl wonder speakith his Johnny Walker wisdom again.....

You're absolutely right. I know nothing about airline operations whatsoever.

I'm only curious if the crew briefed the Notam for the 28L closure.

I do know I was the crew on the ground of the closest aircraft I'd need to taxi back for an extended washroom visit --

[FlyGy]

I'm surprised the aircraft on the taxiway weren't madly flashing their landing lights once they confirmed the AC jet was lined up with the taxiway.

Dude probably would have thought they were pre-threshold runway lights. I guess he would have at least missed the planes if he had landed.

[tps8903]

Our 1000hr single engine boy/girl wonder speakith his Johnny Walker wisdom again.....

You're absolutely right. I know nothing about airline operations whatsoever.

I'm only curious if the crew briefed the Notam for the 28L closure.

I do know I was the crew on the ground of the closest aircraft I'd need to taxi back for an extended washroom visit --

Looks like they did brief the NOTAM. The most telling item in my opinion is that the previous crew that landed also had a problem identifying 28R due to the very bright construction lights on the closed runway. They only found it after cross referencing with LNAV.

Maybe having excessively bright construction lights drowning out runway lights at an airport is a bad idea?

Backing up a VFR approach is probably a good idea as well.

[pelmet]

Our 1000hr single engine boy/girl wonder speakith his Johnny Walker wisdom again.....

You're absolutely right. I know nothing about airline operations whatsoever.

I'm only curious if the crew briefed the Notam for the 28L closure.

I do know I was the crew on the ground of the closest aircraft I'd need to taxi back for an extended washroom visit --

Looks like they did brief the NOTAM. The most telling item in my opinion is that the previous crew that landed also had a problem identifying 28R due to the very bright construction lights on the closed runway. They only found it after cross referencing with LNAV.

Maybe having excessively bright construction lights drowning out runway lights at an airport is a bad idea?

Backing up a VFR approach is probably a good idea as well.

According to Rockie earlier in this thread....it is difficult to do in the Airbus. Hopefully the NTSB will look into this.

[Jet Jockey]

I'm surprised the aircraft on the taxiway weren't madly flashing their landing lights once they confirmed the AC jet was lined up with the taxiway.

They did!

Watch this video... At about 1:03 the second aircraft on the taxiway, a PAL Airbus 340, the one that's about to get hit (or crashed into), turns on all its landing lights... I'm convinced that's the only thing that saved the day! You can also see that the 340 gets completely illuminated by the AC's 320s landing lights.

After the 340's lights come on, the AC crew probably then realized their mistake and decided to initiate a missed approach. By 1:09 Air Canada is in the go around with a nose up attitude but not before it continued its descent over the other aircraft.

I can see where the calculations made by some people are probably fairly accurate when taking the data from the Air Canada's 320 DFDR showing it at it lowest point above ground (RA) and using the tail height of a 340, the clearance between the two aircrafts was less than 20 feet some say closer to 3 feet (tail section).



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF7FR7TjnME

[Diadem]

The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

[Jet Jockey]

The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

Regardless whether it was 20 feet, 13.5 feet or 3 feet, I would call this a very, very close call.

IMHO, there is no excuse for this and I hope the pilots were severely reprimanded (not a slap on the wrist) for this incident and frankly if what I heard from inside sources (Air Canada pilots) the two up front were not, let us say the most professional pilots and one of them will be most likely (hopefully) be a copilot for life... Perhaps he shouldn't be flying an aircraft, any aircraft.

[Bet the farm]

To anyone bad mouthing the FO for failing to upgrade: I bet the farm that you would have struggled mightily to pass in the same circumstances he found himself in, having received grave family news just prior to the start of training. In hindsight he should have removed himself as his head wasn’t in it. But other factors were pushing him to carry on. “During the return to the right seat, the FO performed above average” and “return to line check was above average and the recheck was above average” as stated by an AC trainer. He’s a better man than most of you keyboard warriors. IMHO.

[tps8903]

The NTSB determined that the AC plane missed PAL's tail by 13.5 feet, +/- 5 feet.

Regardless whether it was 20 feet, 13.5 feet or 3 feet, I would call this a very, very close call.

IMHO, there is no excuse for this and I hope the pilots were severely reprimanded (not a slap on the wrist) for this incident and frankly if what I heard from inside sources (Air Canada pilots) the two up front were not, let us say the most professional pilots and one of them will be most likely (hopefully) a copilot for life... Perhaps he shouldn't be flying an aircraft, any aircraft.

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the FO failing to upgrade. He has his role in this incident, no doubt, but the Captain was flying the plane, and it was a visual approach. Any way you slice it the captain is the one responsible for this incident, and was the one controlling the aircraft as he flew into the path of 4 aircraft and came within feet of killing 1000 people. The FO failing to upgrade is a red herring in this investigation.

[C.W.E.]

He’s a better man than most of you keyboard warriors. IMHO.

Interesting comment.

But for your opinion to have any validity we need to know what a keyboard warrior is?

And what a keyboard has to do with flying skills?

[rookiepilot]

He’s a better man than most of you keyboard warriors. IMHO.

That is certainly an interesting comment, like CVE says.

-------

I am sorry perhaps for the directness of some of my earlier comments in the thread, it's not a punitive desire to hang a crew, simply and frankly, this incident scares me, as a frequent commercial pax. What's going on?

If that is hysteria to some -- so be it. It's not a "nothing to see, move along", either.

[Jet Jockey]

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the FO failing to upgrade... The FO failing to upgrade is a red herring in this investigation.

The fact that he failed one perhaps two upgrades is perhaps a red herring in this incident. However if he is the type of pilot that lacks situational awareness, lacks the skills to be ahead of the aircraft he flies, is sloppy when it comes to company/aircraft procedures and SOPs, then the captain if he is not the same type of pilot cannot rely on his FO in critical moments.

There seems to be some on here that are obviously Air Canada pilots that want to deflect the problems towards procedures, towards the aircraft or towards even Canadian visibility rules when something wrong happens with an Air Canada crew. The problem in this incident is that two pilots on a VFR approach screwed the pooch big time and frankly I don't care what rookiepilot says because even if they did ultimately Go Around, they waited way too late to do it and I'll bet a beer that the only reason they initiated a missed approach in the first palace was that the Airbus 340 turned on their landing lights. How else can you explain that the aircraft went down to 60' AGL before starting a climb?

[C.W.E.]

I have thought about this a lot and even if they both were to tired to fly safely how did they get that close to those airplanes with their lights on parked on the taxiway facing them?

It is almost unbelievable.

[Jet Jockey]

And what a keyboard has to do with flying skills?

Perhaps a lot!

The problem today is the kids don't learn to fly anymore (real seat of the pants flying), they are no more than just robots that have been stuffed with all kinds of information and theories of flight but no real life experience flying in the low levels, in the crappy weather in icing conditions with piston powered aircrafts of small turboprops where you not only develop flying skills but also command skills. We are now beyond the "Children of Magenta Line".

[Jet Jockey]

I have thought about this a lot and even if they both were to tired to fly safely how did they get that close to those airplanes with their lights on parked on the taxiway facing them?

It is almost unbelievable.

Me too!

[Jet Jockey]

To anyone bad mouthing the FO for failing to upgrade: I bet the farm that you would have struggled mightily to pass in the same circumstances he found himself in, having received grave family news just prior to the start of training. In hindsight he should have removed himself as his head wasn’t in it. But other factors were pushing him to carry on. “During the return to the right seat, the FO performed above average” and “return to line check was above average and the recheck was above average” as stated by an AC trainer. He’s a better man than most of you keyboard warriors. IMHO.

Here we go... more excuses.

I have friend that is now retired from Air Canada (senior captain on the A320) and he was also on course (upgrade) when something terrible happened in his life. He went to management and asked for a leave of absence which he got. That was the right thing to do and after things went back to normal his life he went back on course.

As for your version of this copilots return to the right seat, I'll take your word for it at face value because it is only hearsay. The fact that an AC Trainer is letting it known that this pilot is/was better than average is also a red herring in my books. How pilots perform while in training and during a test or while in line indoc should not be public knowledge whether it is good or bad. If I ever heard a check pilot was letting it known to others that so and so was weak or better than average, I would have a word with him.

[confusedalot]

This thread just so happened to be at the top of the list, so I read it......again......

A few things here I feel to comment on. Not through merit but by circumstance, did it the old way, and did it the new way.

Yes, there is the children of the magenta line syndrome. Both of these guys are of an age group well before the magenta line, so that is not the answer. They know better and as the cliché goes, it's like riding a bike, even if you have not done so for a while, it comes back real fast.

Yes, there are the keyboard warriors. Funniest part though, the pre keyboard generation actually seems to handle the typewriting better that the PC generation!!! I am thinking fancy lines being drawn up on such as the expressway visual in LGA with not a whole lot of effort, and just to give a prettier picture in order to enhance situational awareness; many of the ''young guys'' could not even be bothered. At the end of the day, pretty sure these two were competent at their typewriting, so that's probably not the smoking gun.

Important family issues can certainly affect anyone, I have had my share. Just like anyone else may I add. Can't speak for others but I can certainly say that they do not render you a complete vegetable that is incapable of doing a job you have done so many times before. I doubt the FO's unfortunate luck had anything to do with it.

Not that I am any better than anyone else, but I have never made THAT kind of error. Nor have I flown with anyone who was about to make that kind of error. So it remains a HUGE mystery in my mind. Two competent pilots, with steam driven and glass cockpit time, and so on.......Big mystery.

I dunno; complacency? For example, brief a parallel runway scenario and then stop thinking? It gets into the confirmation bias psycho babble stuff and the easiest path to take sort of thinking that humans tend to fall for.