Lucky escape for BA 777 flight

[happytraveller]

Picked up this bit of news about a very lucky escape for a BA 777 which took off from the wrong runway intersection. Seems like 2 BA employees onboard at the time realized that the aircraft was about to depart from the wrong intersection, but it was certainly a lucky escape:-

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/...er-taxiing.html

very interesting reading, and a reminder to read back ATC instructions and understand them

smooth landings (and take-offs)

[Ian Warren]

Tho it dose not happen that often , i wonder why someone was not there to spot the error from the ground .

[Adamski]

I thought all pilots had airport layout charts (as well as en-route charts). I can understand a GA Learjet getting it wrong (it wouldn't have mattered anyway, I suppose), but a *commercial airline* ????

[omitchell]

I thought the runways had big numbers painted on the too lol

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Adamski @ Sep 3 2010, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought all pilots had airport layout charts (as well as en-route charts).

I do wonder , maybe a communication error from the tower , recall Tenireffe ? a not so good English speaking controller confused matters .

[Adamski]

QUOTE (omitchell @ Sep 3 2010, 03:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought the runways had big numbers painted on the too lol

There's only the one runway there ... problem is that he started his take-off half way up it!

[IslandBoy77]

I'm gonna flick this one on to my brother to see if he has any comment - he flies a BA 737-400 on the "milk runs" around western Europe and the 'med.

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Sep 3 2010, 06:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm gonna flick this one on to my brother to see if he has any comment - he flies a BA 737-400

Pete , be very interested to here the insider on this , four so years back had a Sinapore 77 put down on 29/11 in CHCH .. he was empty - but to crawl off the runway with no ATC attempt to stop him and warnings from other s warning , id love the hear the cockpit transcript .

[deeknow]

Wow, scarily close to disaster there. They wouldnt have room to reject the takeoff with that sort of distance surely.

One thing of many I dont understand is the conditions were clear so how is it they didn't notice there was another 1000m or so of runway avail and another taxiway to their left heading in that direction. They surely had access to a Jeppersons plate or similar for the ground/aerodrome layout right? But still they both believed they were at intersection-A?

This "confirmation bias" phenomenon mention in the article sounds interesting, anyone got any background on that?

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (deeknow @ Sep 3 2010, 10:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One thing of many I dont understand is the conditions were clear so how is it they didn't notice there was another 1000m or so of runway avail and another taxiway to their left heading in that direction. They surely had access to a Jeppersons plate or similar for the ground/aerodrome layout right? But still they both believed they were at intersection-A?

Dean , Its that , but obviously not a busy airport , but how come tower guy s also did not pick up on the occurring ... well simply , are they not trained ! maybe they should give me a Job the over there , least being a plane spotter would have some control and tell em to put the breaks on .

[IslandBoy77]

I spoke with my brother on the topic - he had heard about the incident but no more than that. He did say that the full report on that incident and all others can be found here http://www.aaib.gov.uk/home/index.cfm

While it's "easy" for us to sit here and pontificate about things, my brother has reminded me (not only for this incident, but the many aircraft accidents and near-misses that he and I discuss regularly) of 2 things:
1) There are always a series of things that lead up to an incident or accident. That sounds obvious at first blush, but I think we all (myself included) do well to be very mindful of the fact that no aircrew is foolish enough or lacking sufficient training (with the exception of some of the known "cowboy" operators) to deliberately make a fatal error. And very often, there are a number of people outside the confines of the flight deck who have contributed to the error. And then there are other factors like birds and weather. I know I'm "preaching to the choir" somewhat with this stuff, but I know for myself that it can be temptingly easy to assess everything well after the fact, with "all" of the "facts" established, with the luxury of time and hindsight to critique an "error".
2) Most airlines train their pilots to a VERY high standard, and check them regularly. I don't know what procedures Quantas and Air New Zealand have in place, but I know a little about BA thank to my brother. And while I'm not at liberty to share the insights (at my brother's request), I can speak to 3 things for BA aircrew and BA itself: A) The selection / training process is VERY rigorous. Only the very determined and disciplined make it through. B) BA is a very professional, "serious" airline who zealously guard their image (in a good way) - they are NOT Kalula airlines. And the people who fly for them fly for BA because of who BA are (largely) - inasmuch as they are attracted to the BA culture and "agree" with it. C) The demands for professionalism, current training, testing and performing to very high BA standards are rigorous, to say the least. While this might also be true for most airlines, BA pilots seem to pretty much eat, sleep and "live" BA philosophy and standards 24/7.

So with all that in mind, I still have a very high degree of confidence, respect and admiration for the men & women who pilot the steel tubes with wings all over the planet - whether they be BA, Quantas, Air NZ, United or whomever. I accept that humans make errors in judgment day in and day out. But I also understand that commercial pilots make a supreme effort (and are "induced" to do so by their employers...) to do their jobs very well. After all, we're not talking about someone trying to loop his helicopter. I'm not saying that errors ought not to be investigated or individuals reprimanded where appropriate, but I for one am going to be more circumspect in any "observations" I make about incidents and accidents: I wasn't there, I didn't feel the pressure of the situation and the lack or deluge of information at the time, and it could have been me missing something "obvious" and trying to take off from half way down the runway...

[deeknow]

Jeeze "Island Boy" there's a "lot" to "think" of there in your "response"

I fully appreciate what your saying, we aren't the official investigating team (thankfully), but there's no harm in considering the event and discussing it, if we didnt then forums like this would be a pretty dull place I wonder whats going on in the prrune forums about this event? There are likely to be blokes like your brother chewing it over there

update 1 - turns out (of course) there is a pprune thread on this...
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/426060-...iing-error.html

update 2 - note this event happened in 2009, the full incident report from the AAIB is available here, so we dont have to upset Island Boy by discussing it here (just kidding mate ) ...
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?f...10%20G-VIIR.pdf

some facts of note from the report that dont appear in the flight-global page in the first post in this thread...

• the ATC operator was a trainee
• neither of the pilots had been to the aerodrome before
• they did have charts which showed the taxiways, but there was no signage on the ground
• ATC did ask them to confirm if they wanted to backtrack further down the RWY
• the pilots confirmed they were happy to depart from their holding position, stating Alpha (which ATC didnt pick up on)

[IslandBoy77]

QUOTE (deeknow @ Sep 4 2010, 09:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jeeze "Island Boy" there's a "lot" to "think" of there in your "response"

Yes, a bad habit using the "quotes" liberally. My brother gives me a hard time about that when it suits him to.

I realise my post was quite defensive (almost used some quotes there... ) of the BA blokes. After chatting with my brother on many occasions about various mishaps or fatal accidents, I realised that while it's fun (after a sort) for the armchair critics to dissect things, I see regularly that there is a very strong tendency to second-guess the flight crew (or whomever), with little thought mentioned as to mitigating factors. Sure, let's discuss things - by all means. All I really want us all to do (and I certainly include myself in the "all") is be mindful of the fact that unless there is obvious incompetence, s***t happens even to the best-trained. I also think it's healthy for us all to be a bit more circumspect in our critiquing, as it's very easy to step over the line, possibly with thoughts of "but I'd never make that mistake".

So, apologies if the last past seemed a bit heavy - having heard how things can be from an actual BA pilot (my brother has a few stories, as you can imagine...), I am now much more inclined to be more generous in not apportioning blame and guilt. Something new for me to not do - I preach to myself also!

[deeknow]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Sep 4 2010, 06:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

s***t happens even to the best-trained. I also think it's healthy for us all to be a bit more circumspect in our critiquing, as it's very easy to step over the line, possibly with thoughts of "but I'd never make that mistake".

Yeah, good call.

QUOTE (IslandBoy77)

having heard how things can be from an actual BA pilot ... I am now much more inclined to be more generous in not apportioning blame and guilt[/quote]
Also a fair position. All airline staff are no doubt drilled to be careful about what they say, especially to media, following incidents of any sort let alone something like the one we've been reading about. But from what I understand BA has a particularly firm policy on this. It's a commercial/PR thing of course, but at BA it sounds almost millitary like. I wonder how much your bro's attitude has been influenced (and you in turn maybe) in this regard? I bet there are tons of details that arent immediately news-accessible/worthy that escape the public's attention because of that defensiveness.

[IslandBoy77]

QUOTE (deeknow @ Sep 4 2010, 07:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But from what I understand BA has a particularly firm policy on this. It's a commercial/PR thing of course, but at BA it sounds almost millitary like. I wonder how much your bro's attitude has been influenced (and you in turn maybe) in this regard? I bet there are tons of details that arent immediately news-accessible/worthy that escape the public's attention because of that defensiveness.

It would be fair to say that BA is one of the stricter of the airlines, if one could put it that way. From what I understand, there appears to be no intent to cover up, and any perceived defensiveness I actually see as mostly positive in terms of not exposing their flight crews to rampant speculation (as we all know, the media is very 'talented' in this regard). I suppose it's possible that I have had my opinion swayed by my brother's involvement with BA. I like to think that my viewpoint is far more balanced now, having had a few glimpses into their culture and the rigours of their training. As with all businesses, BA is just a bunch of human beings making a living, so there is always room for blind spots and believing one's own 'propaganda'. But rather than believing or suggesting that BA or any other airline is perfect or completely altruistic in their motives, I was interested in bringing a oft-missing perspective to discussions like this where many simply make assumptions that are outside of their knowledge and often in the face of circumstance. I'm sure there are many accidents in many industries around the world where the full truth is never known. And at the same time I'm also sure that those not involved - and a comfortable distance away both geographically & chronometrically - are prone to making assessments that exceed all the information: whether that information is available or not.

[happytraveller]

Looking at this from the outside, it seems to read that the captain was aware that the runway length available was extra short, and by 'standing on the brakes' must have know that it was going to be tight. If he was flying into this airport often (line checks as well) then at a fairly simple airport, then he would have known the layout. Also if you are flying the same type of aircraft day in, day out, then you would have a feel for how much runway was needed. Reads like there was also enough doubt at the time as well, including from the tower to have stopped the take off going ahead..

Whilst take-offs from intersections are both common and normal, as an experienced captain then he would have had a good visual idea of the length of runway needed.

The rule that I was taught in aviation was "If in doubt, there is no doubt". There seems to have been a series of errors here by both the captain and the FO, unforgiveable errors as well.

I hope that I do not fly on an aicraft piloted by either this captain or FO,

Smooth landings.

[Chairman]

Thanks happytraveller, more elbow room for the rest of us

I would imagine it is fairly difficult from ground level to visually judge the difference between one and three quarter kilometres (what they thought they had), and one and one quarter kilometres (what they actually had). From a 777 even the longer distance would look awfully short, and far from flying there often the crew had never been there before.

I have a harder time believing that ~400 metres of unused runway and ~1100 metres of unused runway would be confused so easily, and that is what the Captain would have seen when he looked left for traffic before entering the runway. But I wasn't there .......

Either way I would be more than happy to fly with this crew in the future - anyone can make a mistake once but it takes a special sort of talent to make that particular mistake twice, and I don't believe BA crews are quite that special !

Gary