SFO this time

That is the second VASAviation clip where a Southwest plane appears to be slow taxiing and/or taking off resulting in go arounds, the Texas incident being the other. Are the pilots "working to the rules" (slowdown) during their negotiations?
 
That was very ugly. How long do they think they can sit on their hands and get away with these close calls?

I don't know the answer, but I'm not paid to figure it out either ...
 
farmrjohn said:
That is the second VASAviation clip where a Southwest plane appears to be slow taxiing and/or taking off resulting in go arounds, the Texas incident being the other. Are the pilots "working to the rules" (slowdown) during their negotiations?
Click to expand...
4500 flights per day, two slow departures in a month doesn’t seem too bad.
 
It would be interesting to hear the cvr (yes, I know it’s not available)
 
farmrjohn said:
That is the second VASAviation clip where a Southwest plane appears to be slow taxiing and/or taking off resulting in go arounds, the Texas incident being the other. Are the pilots "working to the rules" (slowdown) during their negotiations?
Click to expand...
Not sure how accurate the VASAviation taxi movements are.

What I will say is that IF there was a potential for conflict with UAL 277 on 28L, the controller should have at least alerted SWA 1179 of the need to expedite and/or notified them of an aircraft on final for 28L.

But the controller in general was not following FAA procedure during the whole LUAW process.
 
Am I missing something? I didn't hear a takeoff clearance for SW 1179.
 
3393RP said:
Am I missing something? I didn't hear a takeoff clearance for SW 1179.
Click to expand...

Unless it was stepped on I didn't hear it either.

United 277 announced "going around" & a bit later "on the go" before the controller called for them to go around ...
 
3393RP said:
Am I missing something? I didn't hear a takeoff clearance for SW 1179.
Click to expand...
Listen to it again - immediately after UA 277 announces they are going around, she issues takeoff clearance to an aircraft to depart 28R (ie 1179), but because of 277's go around call, the first part of her transmission (identify 1179) is blocked.

Then she tells 277 to go around while someone (1179 most likely) states 'blocked' on the freq.
 
The more I listen to it, it appears to me this controller was at her mental saturation point and UA 277's decision to go around put her into overload - breakers in her head started popping.

Of course, now that the stories are coming to light that it appears this particular controller has had other run-ins in the past, maybe this time they will put her on ice or send her to work some Center airspace.

Bottom line - she should not be working a Class B tower or even a busy TRACON.
 
Fearless Tower said:
The beginning of the clearance (with the callsign) is what was stepped on. The clearance to takeoff from 28R is there on the tape.
Click to expand...

Obviously they didn't hear it either and it's why they did not depart.

I noted in another thread the difficulty that ATC works under in this modern age of great technology by still using these ancient simplex (one person talks at a time) radios ...
 
Fearless Tower said:
Of course, now that the stories are coming to light that it appears this particular controller has had other run-ins in the past, maybe this time they will put her on ice or send her to work some Center airspace.

Bottom line - she should not be working a Class B tower or even a busy TRACON.
Click to expand...

This was implied in the FedEx/SWA near miss in Austin. There were unnamed sources that claimed the controller was unqualified and that his minority status had protected him from removal.
 
I didn't hear a line up and wait clearance either, which Southwest claimed to have received. I don't remember, does one local controller work both 28s or are they split?
 
farmrjohn said:
I didn't hear a line up and wait clearance either, which Southwest claimed to have received. I don't remember, does one local controller work both 28s or are they split?
Click to expand...

That one is clearly on the tape. SWA 1179 told to cross 28L and LUAW 28R.

What she failed to do IAW FAA guidance on LUAW is notify SWA 1179 of the aircraft already cleared to land and on final.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That one is clearly on the tape. SWA 1179 told to cross 28L and LUAW 28R.

What she failed to do IAW FAA guidance on LUAW is notify SWA 1179 of the aircraft already cleared to land and on final.
Click to expand...
Yup-should have listened again prior to posting. My bad.
 
ateamer said:
4500 flights per day, two slow departures in a month doesn’t seem too bad.
Click to expand...

Two that caused major issues. How many others that did not quite get this bad happen?
 
Fearless Tower said:
The beginning of the clearance (with the callsign) is what was stepped on. The clearance to takeoff from 28R is there on the tape.
Click to expand...

So do you take off when you hear a clearance to take off but not CLEARLY hear YOUR callsign??????

And take off clearances need to be read back, which SW did not, because they did not hear their callsign. Hmm, and a tower controller, in VMC can LOOK and see if they are moving.
 
Controller does appear to be in the wrong here. At the same time, SWA didn't need to start "explaining themselves" on the radio, clogging up the frequency.
 
I don’t see obvious & strong fault on either. Yeah, maybe SW could of moved faster, maybe.

The callsign was blocked with the t/o clearance, 28R. Now SW is the only plane it would apply to, besides the callsign, the rest of the transmission came through. Yes tower could of issued it again, right away, it was the highest priority transmission of this whole event.

SW could also of chimed in right away, ensuring that takeoff clearance was for them, which it kinda had to be. They would of already known there’s a plane on an x mile final.

I’m just splitting a few horse hairs, no real pony in the ring.
 
sourdough44 said:
The callsign was blocked with the t/o clearance, 28R. Now SW is the only plane it would apply to, besides the callsign, the rest of the transmission came through. Yes tower could of issued it again, right away, it was the highest priority transmission of this whole event.
Click to expand...
I do not know a single professional pilot (121 or otherwise) who would have taken off based on the clearance that was recorded on the tape.

sourdough44 said:
SW could also of chimed in right away, ensuring that takeoff clearance was for them
Click to expand...
They did.
sourdough44 said:
They would of already known there’s a plane on an x mile final.
Click to expand...
No, because the controller contrary to FAA guidance failed to notify them of any of the aircraft on final or that those aircraft had been cleared to land.
 
It appears we've reached the limits of voice comm. Given targeted [as opposed to virtue signaling, Potemkin village] infrastructure seems to be a non-starter to the NIMBYs and BANANAs who control the narrative on the ground, I'd say it's congestion pricing time.

Or we can go full accelerationist. Worked for pearl harbor (don't torpedo the messenger...to soon?)
 
I’m not suggest SW should of taken off with the callsign blocked. Just saying they could of came back right away for clarification.
 
hindsight2020 said:
It appears we've reached the limits of voice comm. Given targeted [as opposed to virtue signaling, Potemkin village] infrastructure seems to be a non-starter to the NIMBYs and BANANAs who control the narrative on the ground, I'd say it's congestion pricing time.

Or we can go full accelerationist. Worked for pearl harbor (don't torpedo the messenger...to soon?)
Click to expand...
Whoa. That's like some deep thinking......

images
 
Sounds like the controller lost SA. She told SW to line up and wait and she never heard a read-back of the takeoff clearance, so why would she expect that plane to be anywhere but the runway? Yet she chastises them for being where she put them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top