Jump to content

Near miss at Bergstrom

cattail

By cattail
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15539

Posted
Posted

The audio makes pretty obvious this was the fault of ATC.  And it’s not the first one of these at AUS.  There was another near-miss just a few weeks ago involving American and Delta.  There’s a real problem at Austin ATC, and it needs fixing now.

Even without a collision, it’s remarkable that Southwest didn’t get caught up in the turbulence from FedEx.  The 767 is a big plane, and a 737 trying to take off really shouldn’t be that close to one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43537

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

The audio makes pretty obvious this was the fault of ATC.  And it’s not the first one of these at AUS.  There was another near-miss just a few weeks ago involving American and Delta.  There’s a real problem at Austin ATC, and it needs fixing now.

Even without a collision, it’s remarkable that Southwest didn’t get caught up in the turbulence from FedEx.  The 767 is a big plane, and a 737 trying to take off really shouldn’t be that close to one.

I mean, for starters, there's too many fucking planes for the airport. ABIA needs to be twice as big.

Edited by ztejas
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles

Homercles 10206

Posted
Posted

Austin is pretty busy for a non-Bravo airport, but clearing a 737 to takeoff when there’s a 767 on short final in CATIII visual conditions seems like a very poor choice…this isn’t Heathrow or JFK where runway utilization has to be absolutely maximized.  Hats off to the FedEx pilot for staying cool and focused.  That felt ‘Air Canada landing on the taxiway’ levels of danger close.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43537

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Homercles said:

Austin is pretty busy for a non-Bravo airport, but clearing a 737 to takeoff when there’s a 767 on short final in CATIII visual conditions seems like a very poor choice…this isn’t Heathrow or JFK where runway utilization has to be absolutely maximized.  Hats off to the FedEx pilot for staying cool and focused.  That felt ‘Air Canada landing on the taxiway’ levels of danger close.  

I'm not defending ATC but I feel like you're underselling how busy ABIA is during peak traffic. Given it's size it has to be one of the most chaotic airports in the country. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11823

Posted
Posted

The FedEx pilot knew something was up.   he clearly heard the landing clearance for himself, and the takeoff clearance for SWA.   he even fucking clarified with the tower and they told him no issue plane would be gone.

 

sounds like Fedex never trusted that, and once he heard SWA  giving their take off notice,  Fedex aborted, but had to get enough power to pull away, getting them within 75 actual feet of each other, plus take the SWA plane tail height and the FedEx wheels down  it was probably less than 30 feet maybe 25 feet of fucking clearance at one point.

  • Like 4
  • Rage+1 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105335

Posted
Posted
Just now, Surly Bevo said:

One nice thing about DFW.  It's so fucking big that I am pretty sure they rarely, if ever, use runways dual purpose takeoff/landing.  

I mean, here in Austin, we HAVE the runway capacity.  It's just that we're using most of it for bike lanes at the moment.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HiggyBaby

HiggyBaby 2545

Posted
Posted
I thought they landed on one runway (west) and departed on the other (east); do they takeoff and land on both runways all the time?

Surprisingly, no. Both runways are used for takeoff and landing simultaneously. Depends on the direction of departures and arrivals. However, last month they were doing a trial of landing one and taking off the other.39c916811cf356c8a38f62d7235642dd.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles

Homercles 10206

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, ztejas said:

I'm not defending ATC but I feel like you're underselling how busy ABIA is during peak traffic. Given it's size it has to be one of the most chaotic airports in the country. 

Maybe and I hear you but given the massive amount of ramp space, two runways, and no airspace to share with nearby major airports I don’t think it’s insane enough to call a quick takeoff in those conditions without at least an ‘expedite’ call.  
 

I feel like San Diego with the unique approach / single runway / volume and Nashville with their narrow alleys would be more challenging for overall operations.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mchookem

mchookem 16385

Posted
Posted (edited)

in the audio, it sounds like when ATC realizes a collision might be imminent the first thing they say is 'Southwest abort' and the SWA flight replies 'negative' - were they already going too fast and were thus committed to takeoff? 

did the FedEx pilots actually see the SWA plane and pull up on their own??

Edited by mchookem
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rip76

Rip76 4947

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, mchookem said:

in the audio, it sounds like when ATC realizes a collision might be imminent the first thing they say is 'Southwest abort' and the SWA flight replies 'negative' - were they already going too fast and were thus committed to takeoff? 

 

This is what I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Your Mom

Your Mom 4852

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Rip76 said:

This is what I thought.

 

11 hours ago, 4th and 5 said:

That’s the FEDEX pilot telling SWA to abort

which is highly unusual 

I think it was FedEx saying “swa abort”. ATC would’ve used a full call sign and different terminology. SWA said negative, likely because they were beyond the speed at which you are committed to going. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidis

sidis 9832

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Homercles said:

Dude made a visualization (in severe-clear) based off available data.  Damn close. 

 

how am i supposed to trust this when he has some bullshit united tail marking on a supposed swa flight?

jesus christ that was close. someone seriously fucked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15539

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

 

I think it was FedEx saying “swa abort”. ATC would’ve used a full call sign and different terminology. SWA said negative, likely because they were beyond the speed at which you are committed to going. 

It was definitely FedEx calling "Southwest abort," because it's the same voice that then announces that FedEx is a "go" around.

That you've got FedEx telling Southwest to abort is a real problem.  ATC has completely lost control of the airspace.  And FedEx can't tell Southwest to abort because he has no idea what speed Southwest is going (presumably Southwest had already passed V1, so it couldn't safely abort).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...