Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Second near collision at JFK prompts changes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:08 AM
Original message
Second near collision at JFK prompts changes
Source: Yahoo


WASHINGTON - Two airborne planes — one landing and the other taking off — came within a half-mile of colliding at John F. Kennedy International Airport on Friday in the second such incident at the airport in a week, the Federal Aviation Administration said.

The FAA moved quickly to change takeoff and landing procedures at JFK on perpendicular runways — the kind of runways involved in both incidents.

FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said a Delta Flight 123 was arriving at the airport Friday when the pilot decided to abort his landing and execute a "go-around" — a routine procedure often used during heavy congestion. That caused the Delta flight to intersect with the flight path of Comair Flight 1520, a regional jet that was taking off on another runway.

The FAA ordered new procedures Friday afternoon to change the way takeoffs and landings on perpendicular runways are sequenced, Brown said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Yahoo


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/jfk_near_collision;_ylt=Ait.F7jc89MPsPzeW16fxK.s0NUE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. .... because flying just isn't an unpleasant enough experience these days.....
..... let's toss in a little game of runway chicken!!!

:scared:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Our aviation Du'ers may be able to explain what seems like 'new' interest in "go-arounds". nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. See below....
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. changes..?? Bu$hitCo will only have'm hire an illegal alien to wave them off with a red flag,
while standing on the runway
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
4. Is this happening because the airport has more traffic than it was built to handle?
It seems like you'd have to figure out how to direct traffic before you even built the airport - is this because Kennedy is an old airport?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yes....
...but it's not only JFK it's the entirety of New York airspace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. It is that
and the fact that rayguns gutted the Air Traffic Controllers in the 80's. They never fully recovered from that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NV Whino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
5. Since when
does the pilot get to decide a "go around"? How can he do that without the tower's permission or even knowledge?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. The pilot always has the authority to initiate....
...a missed approach (go-around) procedure. ATC can also initiate the procedure if they see that there will be a loss of separation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. Aviaton Pro
already brought up the "loss of separation" (read collision) scenario. Another can be weather related. If the runway is not seen within a prescribed altitude (like 200 ft above ground level- varies for different conditions and avionics packages) a go around will be initiated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
6. This is being improperly reported....
...the operation at JFK is called Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO) and is common at airports like JFK, ORD and LAX. Separation was never lost and the pilots were ultimately responsible for accepting or declining the clearance. In addition, there are specific weather criteria for conducting these operations and looking at the METARS there was no reason not to conduct LAHSO. Finally, go-arounds or as they are more correctly known missed approach procedures (MAP) are standard procedures in order to prevent loss of separation.

This is a bunch of bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Thanks for the info.
This article drew my attention after reading a similar AP story earlier this month (this link is not to the AP story but contains some of the content):

FAA Looks At Go-Around Procedures At Busy Airports

Controllers Say There Have Been Many Close Calls


With additional focus on airport congestion and the potential for runway incursions, one of the first maneuvers any student pilot learns is facing additional scrutiny by federal authorities: the go-around.

The Associated Press reports the FAA recently reviewed go-around procedures at three of the nation's airports, including Newark Liberty -- where the arrival ends for runways 22L, 22R and 29 intersect at the northeast corner of the field.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pilotguy Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. Not Exactly...
LAHSO, Land and Hold Short Operations are used when intersecting runways are simultaneously in use. Both incidents here involved departing traffic on runway 13R and a "go around" off of runway 22L. Although runways 13R and 22L are perpendicular they do not intersect and so LAHSO does not apply here.

http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/JFK/APD/AIRPORT+DIAGRAM/pdf

Missed approaches and "go arounds" are at the pilot's discretion and are not uncommon occurrences. The FAA has changed the arrival/departure procedures at JFK within the last day or two as a result of these recent near midair collisions. Most troubling here is the conflicting "facts" offered by the tower controllers and NATCA and by the FAA. The NTSB will pull the JFK tower radar and communication tapes and will investigate.

Both of these were very serious near collisions, in my opinion.

You can hear the actual radio communications between the tower and the planes involved in the first incident in this report.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFVqTQ6Hf1E
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. My bad, I thought it was 22R which is an intersecting runway....
Edited on Sat Jul-12-08 11:43 AM by Aviation Pro
...and the longer of the two southwest runways. Why were they operating 22L and were they operating parallel PRM approaches?

Airport diagram here:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0807/00610AD.PDF
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarthDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. A Slight Underserved Detail in the Reporting . . . .

ATC tells the Cayman flight executing a go-around to make a right turn first, THEN corrects it to a left turn. Was this because the controller just became aware of the LAN flight taking off and therefore changed the direction at the last second? The KCBS report made no mention of it. Weird. And unsettling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. There was a LAN flight departing?
First I heard of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarthDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-13-08 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. LAN Chile

In the first JFK incident, on July 5. This second incident involved Delta and (ironically?) its subsidiary Comair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-13-08 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. Ah, Ok.....
...I knew about the LAN Chile one from the 5th, I thought there was an additional conflict aircraft in the second.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
11. Flying in the US these days SUCKS!!
Edited on Sat Jul-12-08 10:20 AM by 48percenter
I got bumped off a flight on 7/3, making me lose the first day of my vacation and then on the way home, Delta up and cancelled my flight from the islands back to mainland, leaving about 50 passengers in the lurch, luckily USScare was nice enough to let me fly with my family on their flight from Provo to Charlotte. What a disaster, we were late getting out of Charlotte, etc.

There is NO organization or real care on the part of the airlines, the staff is just shell-shocked and most don't give a shit anymore. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
12. IN A RELATED STORY----- JETBLUE.....
jetblue


threw the faa guy off their next flight....
made his wife sit in the toilet throughout the entire flight....
charged his fat secretary double as a weight penalty....
sent the faa a bill for $50 for their extra bag....

on the bright side they did hand out blue potato chips and a free diet coke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. If that is true
they won't last long. I work at an aviation training center, and interface with the FAA a couple times a week. Really nice guys, as long as you are straight with them. But fuck with one of them, and you would rather have the IRS on your ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libnnc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
18. oh so NOW the FAA will change the approach procedure?
Interesting since the FAA management told controllers who had been complaining about unsafe procedures in Philly that if they didn't like the SOP they could just find another job.

Nice to know that the FAA is finally listening to controllers on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC