FAA investigates 757 taxiway landing at EWR

MSmith

MSmith

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
903
Location
Hamilton, NJ
Display Name
Display name:
Mark Smith
This is nuts.

CNN Article

Yup - a Continental plane landed on the taxiway by mistake. It was windy at that point, but clear.
 
They should ban airliners from landing at airports. <chuckle>
 
I'm flummoxed by this one...

How - HOW do you mistake a taxiway for a runway? I mean, I've been to some pretty podunk airports where the runway doesn't look like much, but they always have at least a runway number and a centerline (unless its grass). I've never seen a taxiway with runway numbers...
 
Mike Schneider said:
Well, not enough information given. However, if it was the "shortest" runway, the parallel taxiway does not extend the entire length of runway 11 - 29. It looks like taxiway "W" is about 1000' shorter than the 6800' of 11 - 29. Maybe, the pilot is color blind?
Click to expand...
Or just plain blind? How do you miss the big number 11 or 29 that you're supposed to be landing on?
 
Besides, this is NEWARK. A ***BIG*** airport.

At that point on Saturday, skies were probably SCT to BKN at about 4000 feet, STRONG winds from the west or north (which might explain landing on 29 rather than the usual 4 or 22).

Still, that taxiway should have been identifiable.

I guess we should be glad he didn't land on the Turnpike or Route 1/9.
 
MSmith said:
Besides, this is NEWARK. A ***BIG*** airport.

At that point on Saturday, skies were probably SCT to BKN at about 4000 feet, STRONG winds from the west or north (which might explain landing on 29 rather than the usual 4 or 22).

Still, that taxiway should have been identifiable.

I guess we should be glad he didn't land on the Turnpike or Route 1/9.
Click to expand...

How, bout, "Cessna hold short of 29 on Whiskey. Landing traffic."
 
eh just wanted a shorter trip to the ramp
 
They always look for ways to save fuel, maybe the fuel truck was closer to this side?
 
Last edited:
Here at KLNK it is a permanent part of our ATIS. "Do not mistake parallel taxiway Alpha for runway 17." They have pilots landing on the taxiway often enough that I've heard at the end of every ATIS/AWOS broadcast for years.

I'm not sure how it's possible...but it happens.
 
There is always another side to the story.

I too felt that there could be no excuse for this happening.

Go on over to the Red Board and read the same thread. Eamon, a friend of many of us, reports he has landed on that runway at night a hundred times. He reports that the runway lights are incredibly dim on that runway. Why? Guess mode on: That is not the primary runway and they don't want to confuse the big iron during normal ops.

Combine that with the fact that the big iron doesn't generally use that runway unless the wind is howling. You get a hard to find runway and pilots inexperienced with the runway. Not a good scenario.

No excuse though. We should all know what taxiway edge lights look like.

-Skip
 
Thanks Skip :) Here is what I posted on the red board for those of you that are not members....

There is NO approach Procedure into 29 at all

I fly into Newark 4 nights a week.

The tower keeps the runway lights SOOOOOO low that it is almost impossible to see the runways untill you are 1/2 mile out.

The only way I can tell them apart is by looking for the VASIs on 4/22 or the runway end lights on 11/29

The worst is when they are landing 22 & they put me on the ILS 11 circle to land 22. even after 100 landings there, I still sweat that one and my vision is perfect.

The taxiways are lit brighter than the runways. I am supprised that it doesn't happen everyday

It is VERY rare for anyone to land 29. If it weren't for 30-40 kt winds right down 29, they would have been landing on 22, 4 or 11 in that order.

In order to land 29 you can think of doing the Hudson trip from the south & then a quick left turn just before "The Lady" Tight airspace and that is why it is seldom used.

I have seen only one night so far that they even let an RJ or larger land on 11. 99% of the time the heavys use 4R / 22L.
Click to expand...

.................
Also landing 29 & TO on 11 is notamed unavailable frequently whenever there is a ship in the port just off 29.
 
29 is an ugly runway for big planes. Especially with the container port at the approach end. I'm a bit surprised they even still have it, except for small aircraft.

I know everyone knows this, but as PIC you can request that the tower turn the lights up.
 
wsuffa said:
29 is an ugly runway for big planes. Especially with the container port at the approach end. I'm a bit surprised they even still have it, except for small aircraft.

I know everyone knows this, but as PIC you can request that the tower turn the lights up.
Click to expand...
LOL People also know that there is a penalty box for those who make said request :) 45 min in line breathing in jet fumes from the 40 planes in line in front of me is enought EWR face time for me :)
 
I've found at larger airports it's common for the lights to be very low. All of the airplanes are coming in on an approach or an extremely long final with all kinds of fancy equipment to line up with. I don't think the tower controllers realize how difficicult it can be to see a dim runway from an angle.

That said I've made many requests for a tower to turn the lights up. I've never been put in a penalty box.
 
Listening to the Norfolk NAS tower one morning waiting for the gates to open for the airshow one of the arriving airshow pilots got: "You see that jeep in front of you? Follow him, you just landed on a taxiway."
Granted, the viz was svfr, but it can be done in broad daylight.
 
Today's news brings us a report of a plane collision on the ground at EWR.

A Lufthansa 747 flight full of passengers had a wing-to-wing collision with a Continental 757 empty on tow. The Lufthansa plane was damaged and the flight cancelled.
 
I am not sure how much this will play into the incident, but many of the taxiways at EWR are unlit. We have these metal posts with blue reflective tape on them. So even if the pilot was color blind that taxiway is unlit. The runway does have centerline lights as well as REILs. This is probably one of the most challenging approaches one can fly. I find it very hard to defend the result of landing on a taxiway, but that is my persepective. I am based in EWR and have flown this particular approach once, so it is very uncommon. Since this past weekend I have spoken to Captain's who have been based in EWR for 6 or 7 years and have only flown this approach once or twice. Glad no one was hurt and hopefully some people learned from this.
 
And just last night a Luftansa jet taxiing for take off and a Continential Jet being pulled by a tug clipped wings at EWR.
 
Well, that's one way to avoid runway incursions... Just keep all the airplanes off the runways. :rolleyes:
 
Well, that's one way to avoid runway incursions... Just keep all the airplanes off the runways.
Click to expand...

Now we'll know who to thank when some salary justifying FAA office type comes up with this as the new anti-runway incursion plan... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top