AC Lining Up with a Taxiway SFO...?

[Rockie]

If ATC doesn't like it(in reality, they don't mind at all), then too bad.

Why don't you try out your theory then. Fly on down to SFO and when you sign on to tower ask them if the lights for the active and adjacent runways are turned on. Of course the guy behind you is in the same boat so he has to ask...and the guy behind him....and the guy behind him...

See how long it takes for the controller to start minding.

[CpnCrunch]

The NOTAM said 28L was closed and the approach lighting for 28L was out of service, so I'm not sure why you'd need to ask ATC unless you didn't read the NOTAMs.

[Cat Driver]

In over half a century flying in U.S. airspace I never ever had their air traffic controllers not respond to any question I asked to clarify something for me.

In fact American air traffic controllers go out of their way to make things safer and more understandable.

So if it had been me on that approach and I had any doubt about what I was seeing I would have asked the controller to verify anything that I was not sure of.

That is what is called good airmanship and shows that decisions are not being made without confirming you have all the available information.

Of course that is only my personal opinion on this subject.

[Rockie]

In over half a century flying in U.S. airspace I never ever had their air traffic controllers not respond to any question I asked to clarify something for me.

This crew did ask for clarification on something and received it. Have you ever asked at a major US airport (or any major airport) if they had the runway lights turned on? I haven't, but then I've only been flying for 100 years, half as long as you.

[Illya Kuryakin]

In over half a century flying in U.S. airspace I never ever had their air traffic controllers not respond to any question I asked to clarify something for me.

In fact American air traffic controllers go out of their way to make things safer and more understandable.

So if it had been me on that approach and I had any doubt about what I was seeing I would have asked the controller to verify anything that I was not sure of.

That is what is called good airmanship and shows that decisions are not being made without confirming you have all the available information.

Of course that is only my personal opinion on this subject.

What he said.
Illya

[Cat Driver]

Illya, if I said the sky looks blue Rockie would find something wrong with my comment.

I sort of feel some empathy for him though because he has had a few rather difficult Air Canada public relations issues to defend lately.

[Rockie]

Illya, if I said the sky looks blue Rockie would find something wrong with my comment.

I sort of feel some empathy for him though because he has had a few rather difficult Air Canada public relations issues to defend lately.

Show me where I said clarifying something that could be amiss or is unusual shouldn't be done. Asking for clarification if the lights are turned on at a place like SFO as was suggested would be stupid and as I said not well received by the tower there especially if everybody was asking. What do you think the 300 airplanes that landed in front of you used? If something's out of place there's about a 100% chance it's something else that I should be asking about. As was the case here. Given your 200 years flying in US airspace you could probably agree with that if you gave it a few seconds thought.

I'm also not defending anything (again, show me), I'm waiting for the report that hopefully will shed some light on why this happened, but in the meantime addressing some the more ridiculous assumptions out there.

[Illya Kuryakin]

In over half a century flying in U.S. airspace I never ever had their air traffic controllers not respond to any question I asked to clarify something for me.

This crew did ask for clarification on something and received it. Have you ever asked at a major US airport (or any major airport) if they had the runway lights turned on? I haven't, but then I've only been flying for 100 years, half as long as you.

Well Rockie, I've never asked either, but that's not to say I never would. I'd first assume at a major, if I couldn't see the lights, I was looking in the wrong direction.....but if there really was a doubt, I'd SAS ask.
Illya

And....the "300 airplanes that landed in front of you...." might have done so before the breaker popped?

[Rockie]

And....the "300 airplanes that landed in front of you...." might have done so before the breaker popped?

Because an asteroid might have hit the control shack and severed the wires right?

Of the "what ifs" in this situation that's pretty far down the list of things I'd want to query at a place like SFO. YMM maybe...but not SFO. But yeah, it's there somewhere...

But then again, maybe the lights were off which is why they thought the taxiway was the runway. If that turns out to be the case when the report comes out I'll move that query up to the top of the list when things don't look right out the front window.

[Cat Driver]

The posters on Pprune sure have not lost interest in this issue.

[confusedalot]

And....the "300 airplanes that landed in front of you...." might have done so before the breaker popped?

Because an asteroid might have hit the control shack and severed the wires right?

Of the "what ifs" in this situation that's pretty far down the list of things I'd want to query at a place like SFO. YMM maybe...but not SFO. But yeah, it's there somewhere...

But then again, maybe the lights were off which is why they thought the taxiway was the runway. If that turns out to be the case when the report comes out I'll move that query up to the top of the list when things don't look right out the front window.

There has got to be some reason why his happened. Most on this forum are attempting to find a reason why it would.

Personally, I have trouble wrapping my head around why two experienced crew would end up in a situation like this.

[Cat Driver]

Yes, most of us are puzzled as to why two pilots could get that close to landing on other airplanes lined up on a taxi way in perfectly good VFR weather.

The only reason I can come up with is fatigue.

[pelmet]

In over half a century flying in U.S. airspace I never ever had their air traffic controllers not respond to any question I asked to clarify something for me.

Have you ever asked at a major US airport (or any major airport) if they had the runway lights turned on? I haven't, but then I've only been flying for 100 years, half as long as you.

If you re-read my post, you will see that I said approach lights, not runway lights. Of course, most airliners have the ILS tuned or GPS aided RNAV guiding them straight to the runway, but it appears that a few don't. If there is any doubt, like these guys obviously had, my suggested simple question would have saved the day, especially at an airport like SFO where the runways are very close to each other.

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines. You will find that the resources that should be used in CRM include ATC. Your refusal to even consider using ATC as a resource for a night visual approach because you don't want to bother them shows questionable judgement and airmanship. Especially when it is obvious that this simple question would have prevented what happened. The days of the "Lone Cowboy" should have left airliner cockpits many years ago. Be willing to use your resources as required in varying scenarios.

[complexintentions]

Good lord pelmet, you DO have the "Self-Righteous" set to "High" most of the time, don't you? If only you'd been there to "save the day", as you say.

Rockie didn't say he'd refuse to ask ATC if the lights were on, he said it was a dumb idea. I agree. Nothing to do with CRM or blah blah blah. Asking ATC if the lights are on when you know they are isn't going to sort out your situational awareness, it only confirms your confusion. The fact is when you don't understand the SA picture, you have to either figure it out in the correct amount of time - which depends on the situation - or Get Out. Which on an approach means, go around. That's it, that's all. As far as I'm concerned, that's the graver error here - leaving the solution late, not their getting disoriented about lighting. If they'd gone around from a few hundred feet there might have been a couple red faces, but not headlines.

I remember when I went back to flying the VOR 13L approach in JFK without the benefit of RNP-AR. Sorting out the lights for that one at night can be a pain in the ass, especially if you only do the approach once every few years. I recall getting low and identifying the lights late, and while I could of course land, I recognized couldn't do so and maintain the stabilization criteria. So, "Go around, flaps 20" and we did it again. A non-event. We were pretty low when we did the overshoot, maybe 3-400 feet, but not enough to scare anyone on the ground.

[pelmet]

Rockie didn't say he'd refuse to ask ATC if the lights were on, he said it was a dumb idea.

In fact, he said...

and one does not "confirm with SFO tower" which approach lights are illuminated. They would rapidly run out of patience if every aircraft coming on frequency did that.

The overall intent of the above post is the same. Tower ain't gonna be asked for any help for situational awareness. One could imagine the harsh reaction if his poor F/O actually did something like that.

But, thanks for your input. I have made a suggestion or two on what could save the day or maybe it wouldn't. Feel free to use your own methods and call mine dumb(but your not being self-righteous of course).

My idea is an idea to possibly prevent losing situational awareness in the first place. Two parallel runways close together and no accurate navigation aid to line you up...of course read the notams and consider asking, especially if you are at one of the busier airports in the US and have decided to land on a surface that does not have approach lights illuminated when there is no reason known reason for them not to be illuminated.

Asking ATC if the lights are on when you know they are isn't going to sort out your situational awareness, it only confirms your confusion.

If they knew the 28R approach lights were on, I doubt they would have almost landed on the taxiway. So yes, it very well might sort out your situational awareness. But, why bother a controller at 1 AM in the morning, or anytime with a question. He might get pissed off.

As for VOR 13 at JFK, a classic place where knowing the lighting is critical at night for different reasons. Someone in our company once lined up with 13R instead of 13L.

[complexintentions]

Nope, once again you're taking an objection to a specific idea that isn't practical for general use and extrapolated it to mean anyone who disagrees with you isn't the CRM god that you obviously consider yourself. You get offended that Rockie or I point out that your idea, while not terrible, just isn't going to happen. So then feel the need to preach a sermon like this:

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines. You will find that the resources that should be used in CRM include ATC. Your refusal to even consider using ATC as a resource for a night visual approach because you don't want to bother them shows questionable judgement and airmanship. The days of the "Lone Cowboy" should have left airliner cockpits many years ago. Be willing to use your resources as required in varying scenarios.

Dad? Is that you?

I might even have gotten offended if I could actually take such self-importance seriously. You don't know me or the crew on the incident flight or Rockie or well, anyone.

Especially when it is obvious that this simple question would have prevented what happened.

Is it though? Would it have? I hope you have contacted the NTSB tout suite and let them know how OBVIOUSLY silly and preventable this whole unfortunate situation was. *sigh* So many easily preventable near-disasters, so little time.

I will continue to use my own methods, thanks. Worked well so far and I'm a practical though suspicious type. As mentioned I had a not dissimilar experience and simply tossed the approach away and did another. So did this crew, except late enough to get everyone frothing about OMG HOW CLOSE IT WAS TO BEING THE WORLD'S GREATEST AVIATION DISASTER, LIKE, EVER! Except, well, it wasn't.

(but your not being self-righteous of course).

Nah. Blunt, perhaps. Incidentally I think you meant "you're" not "your". If it helps you keep it straight, just remember the phrase "Grammar is the difference between knowing your shit and knowing you’re shit."

[Rockie]

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines.

Really? I did not know that....

[Old fella]

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines.

Really? I did not know that....

[pelmet]

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines.

Really? I did not know that....

We have known this fact for a long time.

[Cliff Jumper]

When it comes to discussing aircraft accidents or incidents, there are two distinct types of people.

- One would like to find out who f'ed up so they can blame that person.

- The other wants to know why that person did what they did, hoping not to make the same mistake himself.

Neither of these two people will ever be able to convince the other that their opinion is correct, and both get terrifically frustrated when the other side won't see their point.

[Rockie]

CRM, is a technique used by many airlines.

Really? I did not know that....

We have known this fact for a long time.

Gosh, how could I be in this industry for so long and not know what CRM is or that we use it? How embarrassing.

[pelmet]

Really? I did not know that....

We have known this fact for a long time.

Gosh, how could I be in this industry for so long and not know what CRM is or that we use it? How embarrassing.

Perhaps mostly because of your repeated displays of not having it...

However, you might want to read this which has some CRM to the point basics.

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Cre ... _(OGHFA_BN)

Highlights that you might want to emphasize as related to this thread are.....
(a) The concept of CRM originated in the 1970s and was initially known as “cockpit resource management.” In essence, CRM is the practical application of the various aspects of human factors, including situational awareness, decision making, threat and error management (TEM), team cooperation and communication among the various people who are involved in the operation of flights. These include flight and cabin crews, maintenance personnel, air traffic controllers and dispatchers. The principles of CRM integrate both technical and nontechnical skills. As the name implies, CRM seeks to manage the available human resources effectively to reduce risk and maximize efficiency.
(B) Causes of Poor Management of Resources ....Individual personality and attitude. Some people, by nature, do not want to listen to others and shun anyone who speaks up with an opinion contrary to theirs.
(C) Preventing Unsafe Conditions Caused by Poor Resource Management Skills.......Do not be afraid to ask for help. Use all available resources, and do not make the problem worse by keeping it to yourself.

[Rockie]

Thanks Pelmet...you're the bestest.

[pelmet]

Thanks Pelmet...you're the bestest.

I think that smartass responses and sarcastic replies (especially if it continues over to being part of your personality at work) would be included as poor CRM. You are actually a very good example here and in earlier threads.

Thank you as well, for your real-world examples.

[Rockie]

You're welcome. May I ask where you work?