What the actual...

[JonH]

Top comment - This is why we have standard phraseology. Controller couldn’t give him a deviation, because he knew it was his fault.

I do not feel this controller is at fault for anything. I think the pilot needs some more training and that tower handled it well. Am I wrong for feeling that way?

 

[RussR]

In reading some of the other comments, some posted by people that fly out of that airport (granted, it's Youtube, so who really knows), it seems the controller is known for use of non-standard phraseology and has caused communication breakdowns before. "Hold short" would have worked just fine, both times he said "continue holding".

 

[Wrench978]

there is something a little comforting about a controller who speaks casually sometimes. Familiarity, maybe. but he has already had communications problems with this aircraft. could be a student pilot, could be someone who doesnt fly into towered airports and was nervous, who knows, but standard phraseology is standard for a reason. its hard to misunderstand "Hold Short".


That doesnt excuse the pilot though. It sounds to me like a student pilot. Maybe on a long cross country. He was having trouble either hearing or processing what the controller was saying to him. Maybe it was confirmation bias, and he expected a takeoff clearance when he called, i dont know. But it doesnt take a whole lot of thinking to understand that "Continue Holding" Probably doesnt mean "CONTINUE rolling" when you have been sitting still for the last 3 minutes. Unless I have been given a no delay takeoff, I read it back before I cross the hold short line. It gives the controller a chance to catch a bad readback. And if you have any doubt, ASK.

 

[dmspilot]

I can't say the controller was blameless but the pilot on the ground exhibited a severe lack of SA. Not only did he enter a runway with an aircraft on short final but also tried to follow an instruction that didn't make any sense. What would "continue rolling" even mean when I am stopped and I am perpendicular to the runway? Go off the other side into the dirt? Also the pilot properly heard and read back "continue holding" the first time.

 

[deyoung]

I haven't watched the video in the original post, but I have to say that if any controller ever gave me an instruction "continue rolling" I would ask for clarification, because that just doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[bluesky74656]

This is the exact same misunderstanding that burned Harrison Ford.

 

[luvflyin]

In reading some of the other comments, some posted by people that fly out of that airport (granted, it's Youtube, so who really knows), it seems the controller is known for use of non-standard phraseology and has caused communication breakdowns before. "Hold short" would have worked just fine, both times he said "continue holding".

Yup. He said continue holding again after it already had caused confusion. Time for a new word, like STOP. Then get it sorted out.

 

[Larry in TN]

Even if a pilot does think the controller said, "Continue rolling", he should never take that as clearance to enter a runway. The phraseology for entering a runway is very clear; "Cross runway xx", "Line up and wait", and "Cleared for takeoff".

Even so, sticking to the standard "Hold short runway xx" phraseology will also help to prevent misunderstandings. Maybe a controller can comment, but I don't think use the of "Continue holding", followed by an incursion, would qualify as a controller operational error.

A lot of people ignore me, and others, when we advocate for the use of standard phraseology. Standard phraseology reduces the threat of errors such as this.

 

[luvflyin]

Even if a pilot does think the controller said, "Continue rolling", he should never take that as clearance to enter a runway. The phraseology for entering a runway is very clear; "Cross runway xx", "Line up and wait", and "Cleared for takeoff".

Even so, sticking to the standard "Hold short runway xx" phraseology will also help to prevent misunderstandings. Maybe a controller can comment, but I don't think use the of "Continue holding", followed by an incursion, would qualify as a controller operational error.

A lot of people ignore me, and others, when we advocate for the use of standard phraseology. Standard phraseology reduces the threat of errors such as this.

It should not be an OE. If it was ‘called’ which I doubt happened, it would be a Pilot Deviation. The guy on on the Approach sent himself around probably before a loss of ‘separation’ occurred. That being said, both Controller and Pilot could use a little realignment of their thinking.