3:41 is really SCARY!! According to ADS-B data for both aircraft and the computation automatically calculated by my radar software using their coordinates, they came 0.9 NAUTICAL MILES at 000 feet difference (± 50 feet margin error) at one point. Probably the scariest (consider wake turbulence too since 738PG flew right beneath AAL2587 by just 300 feet) that I have uploaded here.
Good info on this one. Appreciate the extra graphics. Controller decisions and if he was in or out of controlled airspace at the time aside. Any pilot flying down the extended center line of a major anywhere within 10 miles is an idiot. There's an amount of common sense that is required just like driving a car. Is it legal? Debatable. Is it still stupid? Absolutely.
The air traffic controller needs to rethink his decision making process. This was nearly a disaster! He took a lot of chances whipping fast aircraft around that Cessna at the same altitude.
Near head on collision. Tcas works but it is unbelievable that ATC let this happen, especially when the jet don’t have traffic in sight. 1 nautical mile flying head on in same altitude, that give pilot about max 10 to 20 seconds to react. Unbelievable.
I used to fly pipeline and flew through multiple Class B C & D airports weekly. We always called up and they worked us through. I’d never skirt the airspace and not talk. Poor airmanship from this pilot.
- Hello? Honey, be careful out there. The news says there's an idiot driving on the wrong side of the highway. - An idiot? They're ALL driving on the wrong side!
Did a great job calling out early that it was a high wing aircraft as well. Not really seeing it mentioned, but that's very relevant - with all the traffic coming from above, the odds of this guy seeing and avoiding on his own were very low. The wings would block his view. Everybody on frequency having that information was really useful.
This is crazy to me as a UK private pilot, if we had any unknown aircraft enter any controlled airspace traffic would be kept well clear and well above it until it either talks or moves away. If it gets anywhere near the airfield arrivals and departures would stop no question. Bit confused where he was vectoring that vision jet to
@@elbobo3251You are all correct except for the "enter any controlled airspace" part. The Cessna pilot didn't. He or she transitioned underneath the class C airspace of Austin and he or she wasn't required to talk to any controller, and didn't.
@@elbobo3251they were descending the planes to 2000ft which wasn't controlled airspace, which is the first problem. Unfortunately the priority over here is to keep the planes moving.
@@iliketoflystuff9354 Honestly, I feel like US ATC is built on a lot of "reasonable assumptions" that result in all these near misses. If the plane is physically capable of doing that turn, then you should assume that it is going to do so. You have no way to know that it won't. Really those approaches should stay in A/B/C/D controlled airspace. Hundreds of lives shouldn't be risked on a guess about what a pilot is going to do. Even if you're right 99% of the time, you're putting a lot of lives on the line for the 1% of the time you're wrong.
2 points. 1. With all the growth of aviation and Austin in general, how is KAUS not a class B airport? That needs to be fixed. 2. There is a great chance here that the TCAS saved a bunch of peoples lives.
Converting any airport to Class B is a logistical challenge and requires significant planning. Austin has really only seen this level of traffic for the last 2-3 years, and it takes a while to catch up. Plus, you'd want to be sure this increased traffic isn't just a temporary thing where by the time you give it Class B status it returns to previous levels, resulting in doing a whole bunch of adjustments for little gain. Even if they decided today to make it a Class B, I'd expect it to be another year or two before it was made official.
@@jpilot64 except for that pesky part about the G.A. Aircraft NOT MAINTAINING RADIO COMMS, which you ARE REQUIRED TO DO IN CONTROLLED AIRSPACE. This was the G.A.'s fault, just like it's usually the "Roller-Skates" Fault in an accident involving an 18-Wheeler;🤡.
I don’t always go NORDO into the extended-centerline of a big airport, but when I do, I make sure I’m on the approach end maneuvering erratically (and continue to do so after seeing multiple jet airliners whizzing by my window.) 🤦♂️
The F1 race is at Circuit of the Americas this weekend. I wonder if that Cessna was sightseeing the track. They turned left immediately after passing it. They clearly had no idea what they'd wandered into. Truly terrifying piloting.
@@johnhutto71 They didn’t wander into anything. It was the controller that directed the airliners OUTSIDE of controlled airspace, with known traffic in that area. The Cessna had every right to be where he was.
@@davidwebb4904Turning directly into the approach path for a major airport with zero ATC contact is an exceptionally stupid thing to do. It reflects a total lack common sense and disregard for everyone's safety. In no world do I want that pilot controlling an airplane.
@@johnhutto71 He was in uncontrolled airspace where he had every right to be. It was the controller that directed the airlines to go below and out of controlled airspace that caused this mess.
I'm intrigued at everyone saying that N738PG "did nothing wrong". Does he not have a duty to avoid colliding with other aircraft? He clearly saw them if he had eyes, being 400 ft away vertically from a Boeing 737. He continued as if nothing happened and flew right at ASH6304 immediately after. Does he have to actually collide with a commercial aircraft and kill a couple of hundred people before we can say that he did something wrong?
I'm seeing some indication that this was a pipeline patrol aircraft, but that opens up big questions about coordination between the pipeline owner and ATC. If it's a regularly flown route, the pipeline owner should be aware that it is so close to the final and should make sure their aircraft are taking to ATC, *and* they should be making sure that ATC is aware that aircraft regularly fly that specific route.
@@JonBraseYou are mistaken. As long as one stays out of the class C or class B airspace, which the Cessna pilot did, one is not required to talk to any controller and, in fact, doing so would clutter up the radio frequency unnecessarily. What is it that you don't understand about "the Cessna pilot stayed outside of the class B airspace of Austin airport"?
by the letter of the regulations, that cessna was outside the Charlie airspace at all times, and was therefore not required to be in contact with anyone at all. nevertheless, altho within the letter of the regulations, their "see and avoid" skills were obviously horrendous, not to mention the common sense factor of "hey im dancing with these IFR approaches in this Charlie that I'm 100 feet from maybe i better talk to someone". in both "see and avoid" and common sense, the Cessna gets an F. but by the letter, it was perfectly legal.
This gave me chills. In 1968 I was 17 years old flying out of Newnan, GA in a 172. This was before we had TCAs. I was taking a friend for his first airplane ride. We were heading to Carrollton, GA, about twenty miles north. This is maybe thirty miles from Atlanta. It was a hot summer day and my friend was turning green, so I kept climbing. The haze line was really high that day. I was up to about 9500 feet when I leveled off, if I remember right. A lot of altitude at any rate. Of course, I wasn't talking to anybody. I didn't have to back then. I looked to my left and saw a fuselage and four engines heading right at us. It was far away, so I pulled the throttle and descended. I looked to the left again and the fuselage and four engines were still coming right at us, but bigger. I didn't think I had time to get out of its way by turning. The only thing I thought I could do was to keep descending, so I pushed the nose down and pushed in throttle. I stopped when the airspeed redlined and looked left. Fuselage and four engines still coming straight at us. Nose down again and passed the redline. I looked left and saw that the jet was banking. Now I could see it was a DC-8 or Boeing 720, something like that. I think I saw passengers in the window. As it whizzed by, my next thought was wake turbulence. Nothing I could do but wait. I assumed we'd be torn apart. But, nothing. I guess we were so close we flew under it. When I got home, I wanted to talk to my dad, an Eastern Airlines pilot, but he was on a trip. So, I phoned another Eastern pilot and told him what happened. Should I call somebody? I asked. Uhhh, no, he said. Nothing came of it, but I still have some PTSD from it. I'd guess maybe this guy will, too.
I hope so. My fear is that he won't, and will instead loudly denounce, ridicule, mock, and belittle anyone with concerns as weak, a "lib", or the worst possible insult among pipeline pilots: female.
@@DrewBlanton1959 This was in 1968. TCAs didn't exist. If on a cross country, you might call a center to ask for flight following, but nobody regularly talked to ATC on VFR flights. At least, that was true with every pilot I knew and on every VFR flight I was on including with my airline pilot (and 727 instructor) father and all the other airline pilots I flew with. That said, my 17-year-old self certainly learned a lesson about altitude when flying in the Atlanta vicinity.
Guys hear me out. Maybe there can be a protected class of airspace that extends out, say 5nms, from the center of the airport and you have to be talking to a controller in there. It could be shaped like a big vertical cylinder. And then a little further out, for planes on approach, you could have another area of protected airspace for that same airport. Maybe a thinner layer like an upside down wedding cake. And then approaching part 121 aircraft can descend into that protective outer layer before penetrating into the inner cylinder as they finalize their descent to the runway. That way other aircraft, not going to that airport, have a clearly defined airspace that they can stay out of avoiding conflicts with commercial traffic. Maybe we can call this airspace "Class Charlie".
As a former pipeline pilot, I often had to fly between extended centerlines at major airports. I WOULD ALWAYS talk to and coordinate with tower. Luckily nobody was hurt in this event, but such neglect could have had a different outcome.
I have flown for fifty years. Everything, everywhere. And my hats are always off for the guys on Approach. They are amazing. Atlanta, in my humble opinion, has some of the best controllers in the world. But all of them, are incredible. To the guys at Approach, from one of the nameless pilots, Thanks.
40 of those years are probably accurate. They’re throwing whoever has a heartbeat on a terminal now and it’s visible every few days thanks for VAS. The brain dead idiotic things on the controllers end have been blatantly nauseating the past few years.
Not to totally blame the controller here, but continuing aircraft inbound on the approach with a NORCO aircraft directly on the approach path with unknown intentions was incredibly dangerous. It would have made a lot more sense to vector everyone out of the way and bring them back around once they identified this guy and his intentions, whether accidental or malicious, before sending fully loaded commercial airlines head-to-head with him. For all they knew this guy was intentionally trying to take an airliner down and they were almost helping him do it. Here's to hoping the Cessna pilot never sees the skies again.
Agreed. There were numerous airproxes here, all while IFR traffic was under radar control, while the controller knew he had a non-responding intruder into airspace he was controlling (not controlled airspace though). While under his responsibility to maintain separation, two aircraft were involved in a minimum of three proximity violations. Whatever the C182 was doing, someone needs to throw the book at this controller!
@@BillySugger1965 I don't understand what you mean by "not controlled airspace." Even if the Cessna was below the floor of the Charlie, he was still in Class E airspace.
Sounds like a systemic issue with the controllers. When good, qualified people are in short supply, they’re stuck with whoever shows up to punch in for the shift.
Ironically the ATC controller at the center of the fedex/sw near miss was BACK on the airfield in the tower within a few months. We were shocked that they brought back the (still) subpar controller but the FAA did. Ridiculous and equally dangerous IMO
@@johnny88j9 Unfortunately you won't get an expert commentary from me as my experience was a long time ago and in a different country. All I can say is that as in a lot of these videos, what I saw unfolding was a loaded gun. Aviation is supposed to be getting safer through learning by experience, but It appears as though not everybody got the memo.
The controller did a really shitty job. He was aiming everybody at each other at 2000 feet. The vision Jet should have been number 3 and flying southbound, but the really bad controller turned him westbound worming at Airshuttle final approach course. So bad!
The outer ring of the Class C airspace goes from 2,100 to 4,500 ft msl. In the animation, it looks like the indicated altitude of the N738PG varies from 1,700 ft to 2,300 ft msl, but I'm not sure if that is calibrated for sea level pressure. If the N738PG is operating below 2,100 ft msl, then he is operating legally where he is at.
Exactly. None of us get it. It’s like he sees the Cessna, but doesn’t understand the risk of directing passenger jets at it. That controller needs to learn about what the big picture means. If we just needed words read to pilots based on numbers and imaginary lines in the sky, we would be using AI by now. The human element is supposed to be there for just this purpose. To be able to step back and realize something bad will likely happen if this risky behavior continues. If you controllers are trying to be replaced by AI, even sooner than you will be…keep up this nonsense.
@@jpilot64The GA was westbound, so the controller turned the arrival onto the approach. The controller had no idea the GA was going to turn 90 degrees left.
@@karstenkorth1778 He didn't assume. He saw the traffic going westbound and turned the arrival in. If you control traffic on based on every possible eventuality, the system will be frozen. Instead, the controller acted on the data that he had, and when that data changed, reacted differently.
@@retiredatc8720 different countries, different procedures. In GER , no Atco would turn an airliner into unknown traffic. Give yourself one mile more to be sure, that’s no delay! And yes, we do have quite some traffic as well😉… Best regards!
Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks to me that the Charlie begins at 2100, but ATC is sending aircraft below it. Cessna shouldn't have busted the Charlie, of course, but why send the airliners below the Charlie and right toward the Cessna?
I'll preface to say I don't know weather conditions at the time, but off the top of my head, controllers may be vectoring aircraft below a cloud layer for the visual approach. You also always want to intercept the ILS signal from below so as to not catch a false glide slope. IFR traffic in VFR conditions are still expected to see and avoid other traffic, though if you lose or never have visual contact the controller should vector you away.
@@VASAviation- "And how in Earth is the airspace top altitude so high into the finals?" Think in terms of what the likely altitude(s) for departing aircraft would be during reverse operations.
"(W)hy send the airliners below the Charlie and right toward the Cessna?" Transitional descent for the final approach. The airliner needs to be established & stabilized during that phase of flight. Controller couldn't have anticipated the Cessna making that turn since it was non-comms & VFR.
@@VASAviation It's presumably designed for a 3 degree glidepath. They shouldn't need to descend below 2,100 until reaching the inner ring, which is class C from the surface. It doesn't make sense to me why they would be setting up arrivals below protected airspace, but I have seen it happen elsewhere too. Once, while training in the practice area around PHX, we had a 757 descend well below the Bravo right into our class E airspace where we were practicing steep turns. I'm sure he didn't do that without some kind of guidance.
This type of thing happens often. Controller didn't protect himself or the situation enough. Really poor recovery as well. Extend ASH6304 downwind first, then vector AAL2587 to gain a little more room from the final. N296PG would follow ASH6304. No point in running it this tight at Austin. My opinion is the result of being a controller for 18 years and working at Atlanta now.
@VASAviation Makes sense. But then again, you still have to maintain 3NM/1000' on parallels until one aircraft is cleared for the approach. Clearly, the controller wasn't prepared for any "outs" in this situation as he pointed AAL2587 right at N296PG at the same altitude and relied on pilot visual separation or he would have had a separation error. All this to say you have to protect yourself, everywhere.
I think it would be behoove pilots to have a little humility here and not attempt to evaluate how controllers do their work. They train for this and do the work full time every day. Most of us GA pilots may only fly a few hours a week and should be humble in the face of the professions who often have to manage our low-timer mistakes, and sometimes save our sorry butts in the process.
@@djfury05 Especially considering that relying on visual separation by a plane that wasn't in radio contact and was behaving erratically is a big gamble.
i gotta ask why the hack does the IFR traffic get maneuvered *below* the Class C shelf? not by much admittedly, but as far as i can figure the cessna didn't actually break any rules (other than having poor "see and avoid" and SA skills). to me it would make much more sense to maximize the IFRs' time inside the C rather than E/G....
According to other commenters this is a pipeline patrol aircraft flying a defined route, so the controllers should be familiar with this aircraft and it's route even if he wasn't on comms
I mean, IFR aircraft are maneuvered in class E every single day. There’s probably more class E maneuvering done than any other controlled space below 18k. Class c, class e, either way don’t point planes my wife and kid could be riding in towards a GA aircraft not in comms with anyone. Let’s keep it simple.
@@jpilot64 it’s impossible to predict what these GA clowns do. I regularly have ga pilots declare they are going to do a 360 for xyz reason while they have several aircraft behind them.. of course I stop it before it’s an issue but I’m telling you, there are some real morons flying GA…
While clearly the fault of the Cessna pilot, which hopefully has consequences, I do not understand why ATC keeps piling planes at the same altitude as the intruding, unresponsive aircraft. That is a recipe for disaster. I understand that is where they should be, and that especially the sudden south turn seemed unpredictable, but shouldn't the approaching planes have been kept higher and longer in the downwind (or sent around) to avoid a dangerous situation to build up ?
Cessna was exactly where he was legally allowed to be. Controller tried to drop and drag the AA in UNDER the Charlie airspace. Lots of Charlie controllers do this nonsense and it always causes conflicts with GA planes who are following the regs. However, personally if I’m skimming along the bottom of the Charlie I’m not going to fly anywhere near the final and if I do transect it I’d be talking to approach as a safety net.
@@kathrynslye471 exactly, cessna was dumb but didn't *technically* violate any rules here, while im flummoxed that IFR is being vectored to exit the Charlie while on approach... relies on the VFR's common sense, which mostly works but was certainly lacking here
Whilst the inner ring of the Class Bravo airspace is from the surface up to 4500ft, the outer ring is from 2100ft up to 4500ft. N738PG at video time 2:05 was indicating 2300ft, so even allowing for barometric pressure errors from the ADSB blind encoder, they were very close to (if not actually busting) the Class Bravo airspace. Those stating that the Cessna pilot did no wrong should consider this before commenting, and even if the Cessna pilot was using the correct local altimeter setting choosing to fly right up to the 2100ft base of the Class B airspace showed little consideration for other aircraft that close to AUS International. In my own PPL training I was told to allow a minimum of 200ft vertically to remain above or below controlled airspace thresholds, and 1nm laterally for the same reason. I also note that the MEF on that chart grid shows 22, or 2200ft, so that may have influenced their altitude choice, though the higher elevations appear to be located well west and north of their track.
For the record I will just say that my radar software corrects for altimeter. In this case I set the altimeter to 30.33, local at the time. Still some parameters can vary from reality from ADS-B errors. The altitude displayed on radar should be correct ±51 feet.
The controller should have informed all inbounds that he had an aircraft on the scope plodding along the 36L approach heading south and was not talking to him. They would have understood. Go way back to the San Diego tragedy between the PSA 727 and C172 on the right downwind to RWY 27 at SAN. Same type of situation and common horse sense says to vector away from it until it leaves the final approach course. The pilot of the little plane should have known that he was getting real close to danger and should have been conversing with approach in the first place. Common horse sense says so. I always did that when near airline or military airports.
It's a pipeline patrol who not only notifies the tower but is given a squawk as well. Look at the past flights all below 1500 feet and mostly around 500 agl.
a Squawk that he didn't even start until after the first C.A. That Pipleline Aircrafts "Pilot" needs to lose his License for starters; and get his "Summer-Teeth" for his blatant Negligence and DRELICTION.
@@ligmasack9038 🤣 late squawk (which is optional) in class E airspace does not equal summer teeth. It’s not like the controllers didn’t know he was there.
Yeah that's really bad, I don't know if I'd call it extreme near though. Given the close call I once had at an untowered airport in the days before ADSB where another plane joined the pattern underneath my instructor and I and was climbing up into us when I saw it because I was looking around during my turn, I wouldn't call this "extreme." That was extreme, I could see the logo on his ballcap. The worst part was the guy did some touch and goes and left and we never heard him on the radio once. Don't know if he played dumb when we called out on CTAF or just didn't have a radio or the correct frequency. We did a right 360 after I spotted him and slotted in a plane behind and sat on the ramp debriefing and watching him shoot his touch and goes.
I have the feeling the airspace their is not proberbly classified if that cessna was legaly there without coms but it seems to be in direct path of airliner traffic. This is like a accedent waiting to happen.
@@yungrichnbroke5199 it's not clear - slight variations between readings occur and the controller himself said on the frequency that the Cessna is at 2100. Any defense attorney would have a field day with this.
That Cessna was obviously wrong flying there but I would hope a controller would take some extra spacing around planes he's not talking to, especially if they seem blissfully unaware about their surroundings.
A lot of VFR pilots have the misconception that a class C separates them from aircraft on approach. The only separation requirement for the controller is target resolution (targets don’t touch). There is no way they could have anticipated the turn. VFR aircraft are flying right across finals at class C airports all the time at bad altitudes. AUS in particular is one of the busier C’s. The FAA really needs to look at redesigning C airspace around the country because this is not an uncommon scenario.
Were were on approach for 18R the 2 days ago, ATC switched us to 18L, then once set up for the left, they switched us back to 18R. Additionally, while still on final and cleared to land, they cleared 2 other aircraft behind us to land as well. Probably not the safest thing to do. At the very least this could cause a lot more go-arounds. Luckily in that we were in a Falcon 6X and fairly light, we stopped quickly and were able to make the first high-speed taxiway on the left.
My flying instructor was a British Airways Captain flying the Boeing 737. When he was assigned a height to fly at he always flew 100 feet above or below the assignment. His idea was to convert a collision into a near miss. I agree with him. 100 feet is less than the allowed error in height so he is not breaking any rules.
Holy Cow, earlier today I was typing that I hoped Austin didn’t learn they made a mistake closing Mueller. This is so crazy. So glad they avoided each other.
good to have TCAS nowadays that can react quickly in this situation. The ATC realized TCAS would give priority order to these pilots and anticipated with the next plane to redirect it out of this mess. Too bad planes dont have something like camera to see below the plane....
How on earth it is possible for a random VFR Cessna to be flying between big jets on approach with no radio contact with the ATC. To me, something's very wrong with airspace configuration there. No matter how well trained and observant pilots are mistakes like that (ie. the sudden turn) can still happen and to me the key to prevent them is for the ATC to be able to actually separate the traffic, not having them guess what some random cessna will do.
Not to mention how many times the Cessna pilot gleefully flew near potentially deadly wake turbulence. The FAA definitely needs to have a chat with this guy. Even if he stayed in uncontrolled airspace, his actions show a total disregard for safety and rational decision making.
@@VASAviation The airspace system assumes pilots will use a combination of situational awareness and common sense. It's designed to allow as many various aircraft types and pilot skill levels access to as much airspace as possible. This guy probably just ruined it for GA pilots. Controlled airspace around major airports needs to, unfortunately, be expanded. VFR routes can no longer be allowed this close, because it's painfully obvious current GA pilots are reckless.
Granted the dude was high when they first came across each other. But when there was actually a close call.. The Cessna pilot was legal, he was under the ceiling, and outside controlled air space.. . Seems strange to me that a plane can be following the glide slope into the runway, and have to cross un controlled air space under 1500 feet above ground level.. . Seems like an airspace problem... And a possible ATC problem, he should have extended the AA plane further downwind to make sure there wasn't going to be a conflict. . "Hey, why don't you descend to that guys altitude that I have no contact with, and then turn right back into his path"...
I lived close to where PSA#182 (N533PS) overtook and collided with a Cessna 172 (N7711G) in San Diego/1978. I was friends with one of the deadheading captains on #182 who occupied the 4th cockpit seat. A terrible loss as was the Aeroméxico #498 (XA-JED) vs. a Piper Archer, N4891F, in Cerritos near Los Angeles, CA/1986. For San Diego, the TCA helped with midair risks. TCAS has made aviation far safer due to its technology combined with ADS. However, I am really afraid we are going to suffer another tragic midair with major loss of life, and sooner-than-later. It could be a runway incursion. We are seeing too many close calls, I believe because of staffing shortages with FAA. Hopefully I am wrong.
According to the information on FlightAware, that aircraft left Gonzales, TX at 1240hrs and was enroute to Sulphur, LA, where it landed at 1557hrs. I don't think he was sightseeing, but more just doing his own thing, which was dangerous.
The Cessna pilot had every right in the world to fly exactly as he or she flew and the three near-misses (with the second one being the most serious one) were entirely the fault of the controller, perhaps a distracted or tired or overworked one.
someone in another comment said: "I used to fly that cessna aircraft. It's a pipeline patrol and the route ends right there unfortunately. He really should be talking to approach." so it appears the flight might have been work related.
Great video as always. If you have done this before, please let me know the link, it would be good to have a break down of the radar display and what the numbers mean. Also for this video when you went to the chart, I did not see the floor marking for the outer ring. It looks like 38PG might have been below the ring which meant legal and stupid too to turn on the runway centerline.
There is a lot of speculation on whether or not the Cessna was under the Class C shelf or not. The ADS/B (GPS) altitude shown doesn't count. VAS's generated graphics don't count for squat. The only thing that counts is what his barometric altitude was. The controller said 2100... that's the floor, and the controller is seeing pressure altitude transmitted from the airplane corrected for local barometric pressure. AAL2587 also said that he had the traffic in sight. Visual separation is one way of separating aircraft in Class C airspace (read the AIM). Also, for the record the Controller cleared AAL2587 to 2000 feet which would put them OUTSIDE of the Class C so there's that. It amazes me how many people on YT think that they get to be the judge, jury and executioner against a pilot when they have virtually ZERO actual information on the situation. There is fault to go around here. Following the extended centerline, right on the floor of the Class C is not the best move, but AAL should have let Approach know that he lost sight of the Cessna and Approach could have given some more separation. And for those who will soon accuse me of excusing the pilot. I'm not accusing him or defending him. I'm saying we don't have enough information based on this silly YT video so stop accusing people of being reckless and crying for them to lose their Pilot's Certificate when you don't know either.
Eh sorry but I have to disagree. Even if N738PG was “under the shelf” they probably should have been talking to approach.. especially if they’re going to play around on the final approach path
Although my radar program corrects for altimeter (30.33 at the time), ADSB has its own errors that I can't take into account since every ADSB device and transponder is different. According to ATC callouts, he was flying below the Class C legally.
Although my radar program corrects for altimeter (30.33 at the time), ADSB has its own errors that I can't take into account since every ADSB device and transponder is different. According to ATC callouts, he was flying below the Class C legally.
I’m rather puzzled how AUS was letting the Cessna wander through the final approach path/Localizer while also clearing AA for a visual. Things are trending in a direction that is gonna lead to at the very least metal being bent and at the very worst a tragic loss of life due to a various amount of factors both low SA on the Cessna’s part and questionable/decision making controlling on AUS TRACON’s behalf.
So….isn’t there an SOP for ATC when an aircraft is uncontrolled in the pattern better than “I’ll vector commercial traffic towards them and assume they won’t do something stupid”?
Not a pilot (yet) so sorry if this is a dumb question but from the chart it looks like 8PG was pretty clearly inside the Class C. Wouldn't they have to be talking to approach in that case?
ADS-B transmits uncorrected pressure altitude. As Victor pointed out, he configures his "TH-cam radar software" to the current QNH setting (METAR reported pressure at sea level), trying to correct the displayed altitudes. But shown altitudes are still not 100% exact. 8PG was certainly close, but may still have been below Class C.
@@JustaPilot1Look, as the Cessna pilot stays outside of the class B or C airspace all the time, he or she isn't required to talk to the controller and may conduct any maneuver, i.e. a turn, a circle, a descent, an ascent or any combination thereof, and it is the controller's job to route controlled traffic around him. 100% the controller's fault and he has probably already been reprimanded.
I remember when Austin Airport was Bergstrom AFB. I've enjoyed eating in the Officer's Club back in the day. But now, I am not getting on a plane that is going to Austin...period. There has been way too many incidents there lately. I live only four hours away by car.
We deal with this “We own the entire sky” nonsense from the Class C controllers at PBI too. They drop and drag the big jets down to 1800-2000 waaay early on and plow them right through known GA traffic areas below the Charlie airspace, then bitch and complain about the RA’s and go arounds for their jets. Here’s a hint controllers - keep your controlled jets inside your designated airspace. This AA was down to 2000 long before the IF for 36L that required him to be no lower than 2500. If the AA had stayed where it was supposed to be this would not have been a problem.
Ah yes. Another pilot who thinka he knows everything. I love these. Notice 36L and 36R? In order to use both of those effectivly seperation must be maintained until aircraft are established on final. In order to do so one must be low and one high. In order to give the high aircraft a fighting chance to get down, then the lower aircraft naturally has to be low. Thats why we "drop and drag" (dumbest term every btw) jets like that. So what did we learn here? A. Just because you can be skirting the charlie like that, skud running under the finals, doesnt mean you should. B. If you are going to be in such close proximity to a charlie just freaking call us for fucks sake. C. You are not the only plane in the sky. If you want a bravo there instead this is how you get it. Keep up that mentality and keep doing this and a bravo will be the result. Or worse someone dies. Just fucking call us. -A controller that deals with this daily at a different location.
@@jimmybx0072it’s not scud running. It’s legal. If you guys were half as competent as you think you are, or as you all used to be, you’d get more unrequired calls in. Listen to about 25% of the controllers attitudes that we are wasting their time and they’re simply doing us a favor by speaking to us. Fate so long, you’ll just stay away so that nonsense can be avoided. Your own words, “a controller that deals with this”. Like it’s someone else’s fault. If they need more controlled airspace, they need more. Trying to be more efficient by packing them in there to set up for final isn’t a hall pass to expect everyone else to head for the hills or risk being blamed by the almighty screen watcher. Some more advice…. Stop treating it like a bravo and there wont be issues. It’s not rocket science to wrap your head around a shelf altitude. The little circle goes to the ground. The larger one does not.
@@jpilot64 I will agree with you on one aspect. The fact that controllers are here to provide a service is lost on alot of them. I get it, I see that too on a daily basis. A GA aircraft is a user of the system just like any part 121. I dont know where you are based but I highly encourage to call what ever TRACON you fly with often and ask for a tour. Most will be glad to welcome a local pilot in to show them the other side. Both sides of the mic can learn from this. Again I dont work at this airport but I work at one similarly designed, my ask to any and all GA pilot operating in this close proximity to finals is to just call approach and say what your intentions are and verify your altitude. Dont even ask for flight following if you dont want to. But atleast we will know what you are doing and that your mode C is correct. Then go on your merry way. Not a big ask I dont think. Itll keep you and any other users of the system safe. -THE almighty screen watcher ;)
Give me a break. With this attitude you should hang up your wings. The GS intercept for ILS 36L is a whopping 1 nm inside the SFC ring. The crossing altitude at JOVSA is 2100, a mile OUTSIDE the SFC ring. You think pilots are going to dive bomb from 2100 to 1600 in a mile from the SFC to the FAF? No, they are not. It’s perfectly reasonable to vector to final at 2000 exactly where they were, which would be right at a 3 degree GS to 36L TDZ. Pilots with your attitude are a menace.
There’s a difference between what the controller’s radar display shows (un-adjusted pressure altitude from the transponder) and the actual altitude. Very close whether or not the Cessna was legal but according to the controller he was not illegal. Nonetheless pretty inadvisable for the Cessna pilot to fly so close to the floor of controlled airspace right on the final approach course. Especially since most everyone has “ADS-B in” today and can see other traffic. IMO as a pilot the controller was at fault for vectoring airplanes is too close to him and seemingly at unprotected altitudes.
The yelling controller from the other day (and more like him) is probably why the Cessna didn’t make the call to begin with. If the choice is to deal with that nonsense, or just stay outside the Charlie….
What's the controller doing getting everyone to 2000 ft when he has unidentified traffic direct across the approach path at the same altitude. A professional controller should keep in mind and plan for those foolish pilots out there.
He did, he called the traffic, he slowed his traffic so the Cessna would cross final westbound, he didn’t account for the Cessna turning directly up final.
So I am studying for my UAS Part 107 and learning airspaces. N738PG appears they are flying on the edge of class E (700ft and below) into class G airspace ONLY if they are below 2100 feet. The minimum safe altitude for that quadrant is 2200 feet which is probably why they are flying at that altitude. Therefore they should have contacted ATC prior to entering the Class C airspace. Am I right on this?
what the hell was that controller doing he had the data of the traffic yet your gonna clear an airliner 2x and another into a conflict id hose the controller for this the cessna is below the shelf and while not the smartest area to be he is still allowed to be there and the controller has a duty to control planes in his airspace to avoid conflict and he did not do that
This is one of the very few accurate comments. Most people here, I assume they are not pilots, would quite readily lynch the Cessna pilot who did nothing wrong and had a jetliner routed towards him by a tired or overworked controller...
Yes. The controller. However, he has probably already been given a dressing-down and a write-up by his superior. The Cessna pilot did nothing wrong here, the controller fucked up big time.
That controller did bust the floor. I do not know what ATC does about that and do not bother any controller asking about it because they won't tell you, period. Job security. I know a Center controller and he won't comment on anything controller or plane. Not even on VFR map changes. Politics. The FSDO should have a chat with that "pipeline" aircraft about airliners in close proximity to his/her flight path. Controllers make mistakes, too, you know.
@@dashriprock4308there is no requirement to keep aircraft within the class Charlie airspace. Just like busy class delta airspace, you can’t keep everyone inside the delta obviously…
@@VASAviationflying under VFR means the pilot needs to “see and avoid” other traffic. It’s easy to see a 737 on a base leg. The pilot certainly did not avoid the traffic.
Back at my home airport. Road to my house passes right next to the runway. Its a small airport. One day while driving home, I see this 170 model on final. Im just driving fast enough he will be right over me upon landing. As im doing so, this Piper appears out of nowhere and its prop comes a solid foot from the tail of the Cessna. Both apparently see eachother and Cessna continues to land while the Piper pulls off for a go around. High wing on the bottom, low wing on the top. What a bad mix. I ended up calling the local FSDO over it and was asked to send my dash cam footage over. A few months later, a Piper Aerostar crashed next to the church just a block away from my house. I was home at the time and heard it impact the ground, looked over and saw some smoke. My brother came running into the garage saying he just watched a plane crash down the street. Small town, so I rev up and drive over there. Then the whole town responds to it. One man was killed, the other was still alive but blood was everywhere. A state trooper saw it happen in front of him and after a bit of help told us to get lost as EMS came in. Both engines went out. A lot of times people will fly over directly the house, if this guy hadnt landed there, my house was next in line for the smash. Close calls in GA are every where.
WTF was that controller doing, knowing that Cessna was not on his frequency but still vectoring IFR traffic into close proximity with it? It was that controller’s responsibility to maintain separation and he spectacularly failed to do that!
Surprisingly following instructions when the controller told them to fly heading 175 directly in the path of the final with oncoming jets. That made no sense to me;I really don’t understand it.
He is legally transitioning underneath the class C airspace and doesn't have to talk to anyone while doing so. He certainly doesn't expect that a tired or overworked controller routes a passenger jet straight at him...
One aircraft caused three others to be vectored around and one controller an increased work load. If he was at 2,100 and the bottom of the airspace was posted at 2,100 then what am I missing?
Nothing. The Cessna pilot did nothing illegal here, but a tired or overworked or cowboy-type controller routed a passenger jet onto a collision course with him or her.
This would have not been as much of an issue if the IFR traffic was not directed to fly below the controlled airspace they already have allocated. The IFR approaches are designed to remain in Class-C protected airspace when flown as-published.
They can make the class C to the surface extending between the 330-030 radials and 150-210 radials south as far as 10 miles out. Unfortunately this aircraft was supposedly inside the class C, unless approach knew his transponder was just reporting slightly higher…
@@WinginWolf They can make the whole country Class C or A but that takes away a lot of freedom. Simple solution: 1) ATC should not direct aircraft into E airspace when there is a possible conflict with a NORDO or unpredictable aircraft. ATC has plenty of protected airspace around KAUS.
All of the arrivals that had ADS-B reporting of the QNH reported the field altimeter at 30.30 inHg (1026.4 hPa). Mode S altitude reports are rounded to the nearest 100 ft pressure altitude, so you need to correct it for the barometric pressure to get the MSL. At 30.30 inHg, the pressure altitude correction is -348 ft, so the 2100 ft MSL shelf was at 1752 ft PA, and exactly 100 ft below the shelf would be 1652 ft PA. Given the rounding that occurs, if you fly at 2000 ft MSL and bounce a few feet up and down, then the Mode S altitude report will bounce between 1600 ft PA and 1700 ft PA, and that's exactly what the plane's data shows. If the Mode S altitude had reported 1800 ft PA, then the plane would have been at or above 1750 ft PA, which would put the plane at 2098 ft MSL. So, basically as long as the reported altitude never showed 1800 ft PA, then was at least 2 feet below the shelf. And, the data log never shows the plane reporting 1800 ft PA. Rather, it shows the plane descend to 100 ft below the shelf and then turn South to follow the parkway, and then immediately he dives 300 - 400 ft, presumably a response to being about 1NM head-on with a descending jet. About 45 minutes after this encounter, this plane is flying at ~800 ft AGL over Seguin and comes within a 0.5NM, same altitude of a T38 departing KSEQ. 😲
@davidwebb4904 I'm not caught up with American regulations but why the hell is that seemingly really busy approach area uncontrolled??? And how can a controller give orders to these planes if they are outside a controlled zone? Also surely there has to be a law against reckless flying around traffic, especially of that size with the wake turbulence.
@@davidwebb4904 Acording the the charts, no he was not. The floor of the Charlie started at 2100 feet, and the controller reported him at 2300 feet, which would put him in Austin's airspace.
I see some people quibbling about whether AUS should be class B. The point is that it makes no difference. Even for a class C, you need to establish radio comms before you enter the airspace. This guy was clearly in the airspace without talking to anybody. And if I'm misreading the chart and he was below the airspace layer, that still needs to be fixed; airspace layers are designed to keep the approach paths clear for arriving aircraft, with significant margins, so Cessnas going underneath the airspace won't come close to a conflict. As an example, KJFK is a very busy class B airport, but they still accommodate GA aircraft at 400' or 500' going down the shoreline, because the airspace was designed to be safe for all when doing so.
That's not a Bravo, this is KAUS's Charlie and the outer ring is 2100-4500 feet. ADS-B/altimeter errors aside he was showing 2200 which would have been inside it.
No expertise in the area but here's my guess. Controllers have an inbuilt assumption into their moving 3D model and that is that planes go in straight lines until you turn them. When it comes to uncontrolled aircraft, that bias is still in effect even though the controller didn't know it. It's in his subconscious. The idea he might do a Crazy Ivan was not something his brain software had accounted for.
OK - I went away for a bit and I have figured out what bothers me here other than the close call, and it boils down to: I don't understand why people are saying that the Cessna pilot is utterly blameless here. I get that the Cessna was in uncontrolled airspace. I get that the Cessna is allowed to be in uncontrolled airspace without contacting anyone, and while I think that's pretty foolish I do understand that is how it is. But here's the thing: uncontrolled airspace is uncontrolled. That doesn't mean that the airspace is EMPTY. It is up to every pilot to ensure that they are safe to make changes to their altitude, speed, or heading, and this is especially true in uncontrolled areas. In this video there was an airliner, but it could have been any other aircraft (helicopter, two seater jet, another Cessna - anything) that would have just as much right to be in that airspace as the Cessna had. It's the pilot's responsibility to have situational awareness of what else is in the air around them, and in this case, they did not. The airspace design is messed up, and the controller was assuming that the Cessna wouldn't turn, yes - there are other factors at play here - but I do think that the Cessna's pilot behaving as if it was the only plane in the air definitely contributed to the problem and I don't think that they're blameless here.
Yeah, I'm with you, just because you have a right to drive on the highway doesn't mean you have a right to ignore all the other cars and expect them to just get out of your way. And he almost hit not just one plane, it was multiple planes, one after another. Like how many planes do you have to almost hit before you're the problem? Five?
Incredibly dangerous. Even if the pilot was merely intending to follow Highway 183 southbound, which is essentially along the final approach path, doing so that close to a Class C airport is so dangerous as to make me wonder if 14 CFR 91.13 ("Careless or Reckless Operation") should be invoked.
It seems so............but not really. He kept vectoring his traffic INTO the path of an aircraft he was not talking to. Once AA said they lost visual of the " high wing " he should have gotten them the hell out of there. Instead he kept vectoring them for the landing sequence , right into the path of the high wing.
Cessna pilot very bad but as i am an ATCO i am really impressed (negatively) how in the US they keep all the traffic descent at the same altitude (2000ft) and just vectored them around and when you got a situation like that your opportunity to turn gets stuck. Look at the VistaJet was pointing to final at the same altitude of American and the AirShuttle putting a lot of stress and way less room for error and resolution. Very strange for me because during my training I was told never descend everybody to same altitude until same direction in this case the final even if you take planes from left and right base into ils always keep 1000fr separation until or 5 or3 nm or final turn just in case of any problem with the turn that could led to noise opposite. I always see very strong differences between atc in Europe and the US but if it works well done.
3:41 is really SCARY!! According to ADS-B data for both aircraft and the computation automatically calculated by my radar software using their coordinates, they came 0.9 NAUTICAL MILES at 000 feet difference (± 50 feet margin error) at one point. Probably the scariest (consider wake turbulence too since 738PG flew right beneath AAL2587 by just 300 feet) that I have uploaded here.
Good info on this one. Appreciate the extra graphics. Controller decisions and if he was in or out of controlled airspace at the time aside. Any pilot flying down the extended center line of a major anywhere within 10 miles is an idiot. There's an amount of common sense that is required just like driving a car. Is it legal? Debatable. Is it still stupid? Absolutely.
austin is a shitshow
this guy was flying like trying to hit then
The air traffic controller needs to rethink his decision making process. This was nearly a disaster! He took a lot of chances whipping fast aircraft around that Cessna at the same altitude.
Near head on collision. Tcas works but it is unbelievable that ATC let this happen, especially when the jet don’t have traffic in sight. 1 nautical mile flying head on in same altitude, that give pilot about max 10 to 20 seconds to react. Unbelievable.
I used to fly that cessna aircraft. It's a pipeline patrol and the route ends right there unfortunately. He really should be talking to approach.
Did you build time on that thing or what? It looks like there's a 3-4 hr trip every day or two. It looks like a pretty good gig if you did.
@halops117 That was my question. At least if he was monitoring he could have explained that he was on a programmed route and what his intentions were.
As long as he remains outside of class C or B airspace, he doesn't have to.
How is it a regular pipeline patrol and ATC seems to have no idea about it? That makes 0 sense to me.
I used to fly pipeline and flew through multiple Class B C & D airports weekly. We always called up and they worked us through. I’d never skirt the airspace and not talk. Poor airmanship from this pilot.
- Hello? Honey, be careful out there. The news says there's an idiot driving on the wrong side of the highway.
- An idiot? They're ALL driving on the wrong side!
Have you ended up in the UK, Ireland, Japan or Australia?
I consider this the aviation equivalent of that 😂
@@davecrupel2817 Yeah, right?
@@creanero Oh come on )
One of my favorites!
5:28 AAL2587: "No worries". Just want to point out how supernaturally well this pilot kept his cool!
I'd argue to say that's one of the most important parts of the job.
He did sound pretty alarmed.
Did a great job calling out early that it was a high wing aircraft as well. Not really seeing it mentioned, but that's very relevant - with all the traffic coming from above, the odds of this guy seeing and avoiding on his own were very low. The wings would block his view. Everybody on frequency having that information was really useful.
Something every American is lacking, to be able to keep it cool.
Well he can't be mad at ATC this time. The cessnaq doing whatever it wants is the problem
Little confused by the ATC continuing to route planes towards an unpredictable aircraft who he has no radio contact with
This is crazy to me as a UK private pilot, if we had any unknown aircraft enter any controlled airspace traffic would be kept well clear and well above it until it either talks or moves away. If it gets anywhere near the airfield arrivals and departures would stop no question. Bit confused where he was vectoring that vision jet to
@@elbobo3251You are all correct except for the "enter any controlled airspace" part. The Cessna pilot didn't. He or she transitioned underneath the class C airspace of Austin and he or she wasn't required to talk to any controller, and didn't.
@@elbobo3251they were descending the planes to 2000ft which wasn't controlled airspace, which is the first problem. Unfortunately the priority over here is to keep the planes moving.
It’s common to have aircraft not talking to you, it was a reasonable assumption that the aircraft would continue westbound
@@iliketoflystuff9354 Honestly, I feel like US ATC is built on a lot of "reasonable assumptions" that result in all these near misses.
If the plane is physically capable of doing that turn, then you should assume that it is going to do so. You have no way to know that it won't.
Really those approaches should stay in A/B/C/D controlled airspace. Hundreds of lives shouldn't be risked on a guess about what a pilot is going to do. Even if you're right 99% of the time, you're putting a lot of lives on the line for the 1% of the time you're wrong.
2 points.
1. With all the growth of aviation and Austin in general, how is KAUS not a class B airport? That needs to be fixed.
2. There is a great chance here that the TCAS saved a bunch of peoples lives.
Seems like TCAS have been doing lots of jobs recently. I'm worried one day the holes are going to line up through the last layer.
Converting any airport to Class B is a logistical challenge and requires significant planning. Austin has really only seen this level of traffic for the last 2-3 years, and it takes a while to catch up. Plus, you'd want to be sure this increased traffic isn't just a temporary thing where by the time you give it Class B status it returns to previous levels, resulting in doing a whole bunch of adjustments for little gain.
Even if they decided today to make it a Class B, I'd expect it to be another year or two before it was made official.
@@aviation_nut save the effort, teach controllers not to vector arrivals into GA aircraft. It’s an instant fix
@@jpilot64 except for that pesky part about the G.A. Aircraft NOT MAINTAINING RADIO COMMS, which you ARE REQUIRED TO DO IN CONTROLLED AIRSPACE. This was the G.A.'s fault, just like it's usually the "Roller-Skates" Fault in an accident involving an 18-Wheeler;🤡.
@@ligmasack9038wow…you’re so wrong it’s painful
I don’t always go NORDO into the extended-centerline of a big airport, but when I do, I make sure I’m on the approach end maneuvering erratically (and continue to do so after seeing multiple jet airliners whizzing by my window.) 🤦♂️
😂
To be fair, I would probably be flying pretty erratically if I almost hit a jet.
You're assuming they weren't completely oblivious to the traffic around them, which I'd say is more likely
exactly! only pilots do that. aviators don't fly there
probably happens more that you know.
The F1 race is at Circuit of the Americas this weekend. I wonder if that Cessna was sightseeing the track. They turned left immediately after passing it. They clearly had no idea what they'd wandered into. Truly terrifying piloting.
@@johnhutto71 They didn’t wander into anything. It was the controller that directed the airliners OUTSIDE of controlled airspace, with known traffic in that area. The Cessna had every right to be where he was.
@@davidwebb4904 Pipeline patrol
@@davidwebb4904 the sectional says 21/45 and for the most part that plane was at 2100 and definitely got into the 2200's
@@davidwebb4904Turning directly into the approach path for a major airport with zero ATC contact is an exceptionally stupid thing to do. It reflects a total lack common sense and disregard for everyone's safety. In no world do I want that pilot controlling an airplane.
@@johnhutto71 He was in uncontrolled airspace where he had every right to be. It was the controller that directed the airlines to go below and out of controlled airspace that caused this mess.
I'm intrigued at everyone saying that N738PG "did nothing wrong". Does he not have a duty to avoid colliding with other aircraft? He clearly saw them if he had eyes, being 400 ft away vertically from a Boeing 737. He continued as if nothing happened and flew right at ASH6304 immediately after. Does he have to actually collide with a commercial aircraft and kill a couple of hundred people before we can say that he did something wrong?
Air Shuttle is a fractional business jet operation.
I'm seeing some indication that this was a pipeline patrol aircraft, but that opens up big questions about coordination between the pipeline owner and ATC. If it's a regularly flown route, the pipeline owner should be aware that it is so close to the final and should make sure their aircraft are taking to ATC, *and* they should be making sure that ATC is aware that aircraft regularly fly that specific route.
@@JonBraseYou are mistaken. As long as one stays out of the class C or class B airspace, which the Cessna pilot did, one is not required to talk to any controller and, in fact, doing so would clutter up the radio frequency unnecessarily. What is it that you don't understand about "the Cessna pilot stayed outside of the class B airspace of Austin airport"?
Keep in mind the high wing blind spots for the cessna. It's possible to not see a jet at your 9 or 3 o clock.
by the letter of the regulations, that cessna was outside the Charlie airspace at all times, and was therefore not required to be in contact with anyone at all. nevertheless, altho within the letter of the regulations, their "see and avoid" skills were obviously horrendous, not to mention the common sense factor of "hey im dancing with these IFR approaches in this Charlie that I'm 100 feet from maybe i better talk to someone". in both "see and avoid" and common sense, the Cessna gets an F. but by the letter, it was perfectly legal.
This gave me chills. In 1968 I was 17 years old flying out of Newnan, GA in a 172. This was before we had TCAs. I was taking a friend for his first airplane ride. We were heading to Carrollton, GA, about twenty miles north. This is maybe thirty miles from Atlanta. It was a hot summer day and my friend was turning green, so I kept climbing. The haze line was really high that day. I was up to about 9500 feet when I leveled off, if I remember right. A lot of altitude at any rate. Of course, I wasn't talking to anybody. I didn't have to back then. I looked to my left and saw a fuselage and four engines heading right at us. It was far away, so I pulled the throttle and descended. I looked to the left again and the fuselage and four engines were still coming right at us, but bigger. I didn't think I had time to get out of its way by turning. The only thing I thought I could do was to keep descending, so I pushed the nose down and pushed in throttle. I stopped when the airspeed redlined and looked left. Fuselage and four engines still coming straight at us. Nose down again and passed the redline. I looked left and saw that the jet was banking. Now I could see it was a DC-8 or Boeing 720, something like that. I think I saw passengers in the window. As it whizzed by, my next thought was wake turbulence. Nothing I could do but wait. I assumed we'd be torn apart. But, nothing. I guess we were so close we flew under it. When I got home, I wanted to talk to my dad, an Eastern Airlines pilot, but he was on a trip. So, I phoned another Eastern pilot and told him what happened. Should I call somebody? I asked. Uhhh, no, he said. Nothing came of it, but I still have some PTSD from it. I'd guess maybe this guy will, too.
I hope so. My fear is that he won't, and will instead loudly denounce, ridicule, mock, and belittle anyone with concerns as weak, a "lib", or the worst possible insult among pipeline pilots: female.
you should ALWAYS be taking to ATC. Bad on you.
Hey, no one was hurt. It came close but ultimately nothing happened. We live and learn, and it is much safer out there now.
@@DrewBlanton1959I think you missed the part where he said it was 1968… context matters. Get off your high horse
@@DrewBlanton1959 This was in 1968. TCAs didn't exist. If on a cross country, you might call a center to ask for flight following, but nobody regularly talked to ATC on VFR flights. At least, that was true with every pilot I knew and on every VFR flight I was on including with my airline pilot (and 727 instructor) father and all the other airline pilots I flew with. That said, my 17-year-old self certainly learned a lesson about altitude when flying in the Atlanta vicinity.
The holes in the cheese are lining up...😮
I thought the same especially when noticing two aircraft ending in “PG” on frequency as well.
Sadly it’s only a matter of time.
@@RVingToSimplicity The FAA needs to do alot of revamping...
@@RVingToSimplicity Exactly what I wrote too
Sounds like pilot debrief hole in the cheese
Guys hear me out. Maybe there can be a protected class of airspace that extends out, say 5nms, from the center of the airport and you have to be talking to a controller in there. It could be shaped like a big vertical cylinder. And then a little further out, for planes on approach, you could have another area of protected airspace for that same airport. Maybe a thinner layer like an upside down wedding cake. And then approaching part 121 aircraft can descend into that protective outer layer before penetrating into the inner cylinder as they finalize their descent to the runway.
That way other aircraft, not going to that airport, have a clearly defined airspace that they can stay out of avoiding conflicts with commercial traffic.
Maybe we can call this airspace "Class Charlie".
You want to name it Charlie because of Mr. Jacks?
Brilliant. Who says sarcasm doesn't convey on comment boards.
Me sitting here, reading your comment and visions of the AIM dancing in my head.
Austin super busy now even without race day etc, those controllers are the best, know their voices
@@ptrinch decades of practice 😝
As a former pipeline pilot, I often had to fly between extended centerlines at major airports. I WOULD ALWAYS talk to and coordinate with tower.
Luckily nobody was hurt in this event, but such neglect could have had a different outcome.
I have flown for fifty years. Everything, everywhere. And my hats are always off for the guys on Approach. They are amazing. Atlanta, in my humble opinion, has some of the best controllers in the world. But all of them, are incredible.
To the guys at Approach, from one of the nameless pilots,
Thanks.
In general, you are correct, but in this particular case, the controller fucked up quite badly.
40 of those years are probably accurate. They’re throwing whoever has a heartbeat on a terminal now and it’s visible every few days thanks for VAS. The brain dead idiotic things on the controllers end have been blatantly nauseating the past few years.
Thanks for all the great work
Thanks a lot
Not to totally blame the controller here, but continuing aircraft inbound on the approach with a NORCO aircraft directly on the approach path with unknown intentions was incredibly dangerous. It would have made a lot more sense to vector everyone out of the way and bring them back around once they identified this guy and his intentions, whether accidental or malicious, before sending fully loaded commercial airlines head-to-head with him. For all they knew this guy was intentionally trying to take an airliner down and they were almost helping him do it. Here's to hoping the Cessna pilot never sees the skies again.
*NORDO
Agreed. There were numerous airproxes here, all while IFR traffic was under radar control, while the controller knew he had a non-responding intruder into airspace he was controlling (not controlled airspace though). While under his responsibility to maintain separation, two aircraft were involved in a minimum of three proximity violations. Whatever the C182 was doing, someone needs to throw the book at this controller!
@@BillySugger1965 I don't understand what you mean by "not controlled airspace." Even if the Cessna was below the floor of the Charlie, he was still in Class E airspace.
Indeed, exactly.
@@Molon_Labe1776No Radio
Not sure how to process this one, other than it looks like a Dog's Dinner. Thank you, VAS. A follow up would be appreciated!
Of interest: th-cam.com/video/1d2VC258Zfo/w-d-xo.html
Same airport where FedEx and Southwest almost traded paint a while back...
Sounds like a systemic issue with the controllers. When good, qualified people are in short supply, they’re stuck with whoever shows up to punch in for the shift.
Ironically the ATC controller at the center of the fedex/sw near miss was BACK on the airfield in the tower within a few months. We were shocked that they brought back the (still) subpar controller but the FAA did. Ridiculous and equally dangerous IMO
Also the F-18s and the Cessna executive aircraft.
As a former UK pilot and controller, this whole thing just made me twitch.
What the hell did I just see unfolding? Expert commentary from you would be appreciated.
saturated fats clog the brain vessels sometimes
@@frogsandskulls🤣💀
@@johnny88j9 Unfortunately you won't get an expert commentary from me as my experience was a long time ago and in a different country. All I can say is that as in a lot of these videos, what I saw unfolding was a loaded gun. Aviation is supposed to be getting safer through learning by experience, but It appears as though not everybody got the memo.
The controller did a really shitty job. He was aiming everybody at each other at 2000 feet. The vision Jet should have been number 3 and flying southbound, but the really bad controller turned him westbound worming at Airshuttle final approach course.
So bad!
Holy sheet, that was yet another close one…
The outer ring of the Class C airspace goes from 2,100 to 4,500 ft msl. In the animation, it looks like the indicated altitude of the N738PG varies from 1,700 ft to 2,300 ft msl, but I'm not sure if that is calibrated for sea level pressure. If the N738PG is operating below 2,100 ft msl, then he is operating legally where he is at.
Former controller and pilot here, and my stomach was turning over!
Whatever the Cessna's intention, I don't understand why the controller guided airliners directly into its vicinity and apparent path.
Exactly. None of us get it. It’s like he sees the Cessna, but doesn’t understand the risk of directing passenger jets at it. That controller needs to learn about what the big picture means.
If we just needed words read to pilots based on numbers and imaginary lines in the sky, we would be using AI by now. The human element is supposed to be there for just this purpose. To be able to step back and realize something bad will likely happen if this risky behavior continues. If you controllers are trying to be replaced by AI, even sooner than you will be…keep up this nonsense.
@@jpilot64The GA was westbound, so the controller turned the arrival onto the approach. The controller had no idea the GA was going to turn 90 degrees left.
@@retiredatc8720in Germany ATC we use the rule “don’t base control on assumptions….”
@@karstenkorth1778 He didn't assume. He saw the traffic going westbound and turned the arrival in. If you control traffic on based on every possible eventuality, the system will be frozen. Instead, the controller acted on the data that he had, and when that data changed, reacted differently.
@@retiredatc8720 different countries, different procedures. In GER , no Atco would turn an airliner into unknown traffic. Give yourself one mile more to be sure, that’s no delay! And yes, we do have quite some traffic as well😉… Best regards!
The owner of that aircraft is also listed as the airport manager for the private use A J Patrol Airport (LS09) in Louisiana, 350 miles east of Austin.
Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks to me that the Charlie begins at 2100, but ATC is sending aircraft below it. Cessna shouldn't have busted the Charlie, of course, but why send the airliners below the Charlie and right toward the Cessna?
I'd love to know that. And how in Earth is the airspace top altitude so high into the finals?
I'll preface to say I don't know weather conditions at the time, but off the top of my head, controllers may be vectoring aircraft below a cloud layer for the visual approach. You also always want to intercept the ILS signal from below so as to not catch a false glide slope. IFR traffic in VFR conditions are still expected to see and avoid other traffic, though if you lose or never have visual contact the controller should vector you away.
@@VASAviation- "And how in Earth is the airspace top altitude so high into the finals?" Think in terms of what the likely altitude(s) for departing aircraft would be during reverse operations.
"(W)hy send the airliners below the Charlie and right toward the Cessna?" Transitional descent for the final approach. The airliner needs to be established & stabilized during that phase of flight. Controller couldn't have anticipated the Cessna making that turn since it was non-comms & VFR.
@@VASAviation It's presumably designed for a 3 degree glidepath. They shouldn't need to descend below 2,100 until reaching the inner ring, which is class C from the surface. It doesn't make sense to me why they would be setting up arrivals below protected airspace, but I have seen it happen elsewhere too. Once, while training in the practice area around PHX, we had a 757 descend well below the Bravo right into our class E airspace where we were practicing steep turns. I'm sure he didn't do that without some kind of guidance.
The very similar callsigns between the uninvolved 6PG and NORDO 8PG didn't help!
I don’t know why, but the theme to jaws was playing in my head. lol.
This type of thing happens often. Controller didn't protect himself or the situation enough. Really poor recovery as well.
Extend ASH6304 downwind first, then vector AAL2587 to gain a little more room from the final. N296PG would follow ASH6304. No point in running it this tight at Austin.
My opinion is the result of being a controller for 18 years and working at Atlanta now.
296PG was not tight in between the two airliners because he was planned for 36R. Airliners were planned for 36L. Segregated approaches.
@VASAviation Makes sense. But then again, you still have to maintain 3NM/1000' on parallels until one aircraft is cleared for the approach. Clearly, the controller wasn't prepared for any "outs" in this situation as he pointed AAL2587 right at N296PG at the same altitude and relied on pilot visual separation or he would have had a separation error. All this to say you have to protect yourself, everywhere.
I think it would be behoove pilots to have a little humility here and not attempt to evaluate how controllers do their work. They train for this and do the work full time every day. Most of us GA pilots may only fly a few hours a week and should be humble in the face of the professions who often have to manage our low-timer mistakes, and sometimes save our sorry butts in the process.
@@robhoneycutt I could be wrong, but I believe the original comment was from a person who has been a controller for nearly two decades.
@@djfury05 Especially considering that relying on visual separation by a plane that wasn't in radio contact and was behaving erratically is a big gamble.
Ok that was bonkers
Great job by that controller!!! WOW!
i gotta ask why the hack does the IFR traffic get maneuvered *below* the Class C shelf? not by much admittedly, but as far as i can figure the cessna didn't actually break any rules (other than having poor "see and avoid" and SA skills). to me it would make much more sense to maximize the IFRs' time inside the C rather than E/G....
According to other commenters this is a pipeline patrol aircraft flying a defined route, so the controllers should be familiar with this aircraft and it's route even if he wasn't on comms
Flying up final at a busy airport isn’t very intelligent, I would consider it a violation of common sense.
I mean, IFR aircraft are maneuvered in class E every single day. There’s probably more class E maneuvering done than any other controlled space below 18k. Class c, class e, either way don’t point planes my wife and kid could be riding in towards a GA aircraft not in comms with anyone. Let’s keep it simple.
@@iliketoflystuff9354 Oh yea absolutely gigantic F for the cessna on everything *but* the legality
@@jpilot64 it’s impossible to predict what these GA clowns do. I regularly have ga pilots declare they are going to do a 360 for xyz reason while they have several aircraft behind them.. of course I stop it before it’s an issue but I’m telling you, there are some real morons flying GA…
Nice job pushing tin!
OooKay, I'll see myself out now.
Holy cow.
While clearly the fault of the Cessna pilot, which hopefully has consequences, I do not understand why ATC keeps piling planes at the same altitude as the intruding, unresponsive aircraft. That is a recipe for disaster. I understand that is where they should be, and that especially the sudden south turn seemed unpredictable, but shouldn't the approaching planes have been kept higher and longer in the downwind (or sent around) to avoid a dangerous situation to build up ?
Cessna was exactly where he was legally allowed to be. Controller tried to drop and drag the AA in UNDER the Charlie airspace. Lots of Charlie controllers do this nonsense and it always causes conflicts with GA planes who are following the regs.
However, personally if I’m skimming along the bottom of the Charlie I’m not going to fly anywhere near the final and if I do transect it I’d be talking to approach as a safety net.
@@kathrynslye471 exactly. How is the airspace design that way with the finals right there is my real question
sequencing is dynamic
@@kathrynslye471 exactly, cessna was dumb but didn't *technically* violate any rules here, while im flummoxed that IFR is being vectored to exit the Charlie while on approach... relies on the VFR's common sense, which mostly works but was certainly lacking here
If the radar is right though, the Cessna was at 2,200 for a while which is 100’ into the shelf. So he did violate some regs at some point.
Whilst the inner ring of the Class Bravo airspace is from the surface up to 4500ft, the outer ring is from 2100ft up to 4500ft.
N738PG at video time 2:05 was indicating 2300ft, so even allowing for barometric pressure errors from the ADSB blind encoder, they were very close to (if not actually busting) the Class Bravo airspace.
Those stating that the Cessna pilot did no wrong should consider this before commenting, and even if the Cessna pilot was using the correct local altimeter setting choosing to fly right up to the 2100ft base of the Class B airspace showed little consideration for other aircraft that close to
AUS International.
In my own PPL training I was told to allow a minimum of 200ft vertically to remain above or below controlled airspace thresholds, and 1nm laterally for the same reason.
I also note that the MEF on that chart grid shows 22, or 2200ft, so that may have influenced their altitude choice, though the higher elevations appear to be located well west and north of their track.
For the record I will just say that my radar software corrects for altimeter. In this case I set the altimeter to 30.33, local at the time. Still some parameters can vary from reality from ADS-B errors. The altitude displayed on radar should be correct ±51 feet.
Charlie - not Bravo
@maxnawrocki7956 Yes, Solid red circle so Class C. My apologies - UK based pilot, only occasionally flying in the US now. Thanks for the reminder.
He had a squawk and was most likely with another controller (tower?)
The controller should have informed all inbounds that he had an aircraft on the scope plodding along the 36L approach heading south and was not talking to him. They would have understood. Go way back to the San Diego tragedy between the PSA 727 and C172 on the right downwind to RWY 27 at SAN. Same type of situation and common horse sense says to vector away from it until it leaves the final approach course. The pilot of the little plane should have known that he was getting real close to danger and should have been conversing with approach in the first place. Common horse sense says so. I always did that when near airline or military airports.
It's a pipeline patrol who not only notifies the tower but is given a squawk as well. Look at the past flights all below 1500 feet and mostly around 500 agl.
He has every right to be at any safe altitude beneath that shelf. And he was.
@@jpilot64 It's not safe right on a head on with a jet
@@jpilot64are you blind? Shelf starts at 2100. Guy was at 2200+.
a Squawk that he didn't even start until after the first C.A. That Pipleline Aircrafts "Pilot" needs to lose his License for starters; and get his "Summer-Teeth" for his blatant Negligence and DRELICTION.
@@ligmasack9038 🤣 late squawk (which is optional) in class E airspace does not equal summer teeth. It’s not like the controllers didn’t know he was there.
That was exciting!
Yeah that's really bad, I don't know if I'd call it extreme near though. Given the close call I once had at an untowered airport in the days before ADSB where another plane joined the pattern underneath my instructor and I and was climbing up into us when I saw it because I was looking around during my turn, I wouldn't call this "extreme." That was extreme, I could see the logo on his ballcap. The worst part was the guy did some touch and goes and left and we never heard him on the radio once. Don't know if he played dumb when we called out on CTAF or just didn't have a radio or the correct frequency. We did a right 360 after I spotted him and slotted in a plane behind and sat on the ramp debriefing and watching him shoot his touch and goes.
This was less than a mile, same altitude between a little Cessna and a big airliner. Most extreme I've seen.
It definitely was “extreme”
Same altitude, opposite direction and frequency separated.
You can have it worse than that
Very nice job ATC. Former Air Force pilot.
Nice job?
That gave me a mild panic attack. Holy hell.
The clusterfuck! 😮😮😮😮😮
Wrt Charlie bust from Echo: ADSB altitude is pressure altitude, actual altitude depends on QNH.
Exactly. It is highly speculative to claim that the Cessna pilot busted class C. Wouldn't hold up in court.
I have the feeling the airspace their is not proberbly classified if that cessna was legaly there without coms but it seems to be in direct path of airliner traffic. This is like a accedent waiting to happen.
Grate speling
The Cessna busted the airspace. Shelf is 2100+ be was at 2200.
@@yungrichnbroke5199 it's not clear - slight variations between readings occur and the controller himself said on the frequency that the Cessna is at 2100. Any defense attorney would have a field day with this.
That Cessna was obviously wrong flying there but I would hope a controller would take some extra spacing around planes he's not talking to, especially if they seem blissfully unaware about their surroundings.
Cessna, considering possible altitude errors for altimeter or ADSB, was flying legally at that place.
A lot of VFR pilots have the misconception that a class C separates them from aircraft on approach. The only separation requirement for the controller is target resolution (targets don’t touch). There is no way they could have anticipated the turn. VFR aircraft are flying right across finals at class C airports all the time at bad altitudes. AUS in particular is one of the busier C’s. The FAA really needs to look at redesigning C airspace around the country because this is not an uncommon scenario.
Were were on approach for 18R the 2 days ago, ATC switched us to 18L, then once set up for the left, they switched us back to 18R. Additionally, while still on final and cleared to land, they cleared 2 other aircraft behind us to land as well. Probably not the safest thing to do. At the very least this could cause a lot more go-arounds. Luckily in that we were in a Falcon 6X and fairly light, we stopped quickly and were able to make the first high-speed taxiway on the left.
"It's not a near miss.......it's a near hit."
George Carlin
My flying instructor was a British Airways Captain flying the Boeing 737. When he was assigned a height to fly at he always flew 100 feet above or below the assignment. His idea was to convert a collision into a near miss. I agree with him. 100 feet is less than the allowed error in height so he is not breaking any rules.
That’s wrong don’t fucking do that
Holy Cow, earlier today I was typing that I hoped Austin didn’t learn they made a mistake closing Mueller.
This is so crazy.
So glad they avoided each other.
good to have TCAS nowadays that can react quickly in this situation. The ATC realized TCAS would give priority order to these pilots and anticipated with the next plane to redirect it out of this mess. Too bad planes dont have something like camera to see below the plane....
How on earth it is possible for a random VFR Cessna to be flying between big jets on approach with no radio contact with the ATC. To me, something's very wrong with airspace configuration there. No matter how well trained and observant pilots are mistakes like that (ie. the sudden turn) can still happen and to me the key to prevent them is for the ATC to be able to actually separate the traffic, not having them guess what some random cessna will do.
Not to mention how many times the Cessna pilot gleefully flew near potentially deadly wake turbulence. The FAA definitely needs to have a chat with this guy.
Even if he stayed in uncontrolled airspace, his actions show a total disregard for safety and rational decision making.
Top altitude for the airspace there is 2100'. There is the real problem.
@@VASAviation The airspace system assumes pilots will use a combination of situational awareness and common sense. It's designed to allow as many various aircraft types and pilot skill levels access to as much airspace as possible. This guy probably just ruined it for GA pilots. Controlled airspace around major airports needs to, unfortunately, be expanded. VFR routes can no longer be allowed this close, because it's painfully obvious current GA pilots are reckless.
@@slartybarfastb3648 If he was following rules and it was dangerous, then perhaps the FAA's rules are at least part of the problem.
Granted the dude was high when they first came across each other. But when there was actually a close call.. The Cessna pilot was legal, he was under the ceiling, and outside controlled air space..
.
Seems strange to me that a plane can be following the glide slope into the runway, and have to cross un controlled air space under 1500 feet above ground level..
.
Seems like an airspace problem... And a possible ATC problem, he should have extended the AA plane further downwind to make sure there wasn't going to be a conflict.
.
"Hey, why don't you descend to that guys altitude that I have no contact with, and then turn right back into his path"...
I lived close to where PSA#182 (N533PS) overtook and collided with a Cessna 172 (N7711G) in San Diego/1978. I was friends with one of the deadheading captains on #182 who occupied the 4th cockpit seat. A terrible loss as was the Aeroméxico #498 (XA-JED) vs. a Piper Archer, N4891F, in Cerritos near Los Angeles, CA/1986. For San Diego, the TCA helped with midair risks. TCAS has made aviation far safer due to its technology combined with ADS. However, I am really afraid we are going to suffer another tragic midair with major loss of life, and sooner-than-later. It could be a runway incursion. We are seeing too many close calls, I believe because of staffing shortages with FAA. Hopefully I am wrong.
Man, this is the first one that physically stressed me out watching it.
Just an update this same plane had a runway incident recently as of 2 days ago. Struck a hangar no injuries.
According to the information on FlightAware, that aircraft left Gonzales, TX at 1240hrs and was enroute to Sulphur, LA, where it landed at 1557hrs. I don't think he was sightseeing, but more just doing his own thing, which was dangerous.
The Cessna pilot had every right in the world to fly exactly as he or she flew and the three near-misses (with the second one being the most serious one) were entirely the fault of the controller, perhaps a distracted or tired or overworked one.
He might have had more stops on the way then, because Austin Bergstrom is far north northwest of Gonzales, and Louisiana is due east.
someone in another comment said:
"I used to fly that cessna aircraft. It's a pipeline patrol and the route ends right there unfortunately. He really should be talking to approach."
so it appears the flight might have been work related.
It was 100% legal. It is the controller's job to vector fast controlled airplanes around relatively slow, uncontrolled ones.
Great video as always. If you have done this before, please let me know the link, it would be good to have a break down of the radar display and what the numbers mean. Also for this video when you went to the chart, I did not see the floor marking for the outer ring. It looks like 38PG might have been below the ring which meant legal and stupid too to turn on the runway centerline.
There is a lot of speculation on whether or not the Cessna was under the Class C shelf or not. The ADS/B (GPS) altitude shown doesn't count. VAS's generated graphics don't count for squat. The only thing that counts is what his barometric altitude was. The controller said 2100... that's the floor, and the controller is seeing pressure altitude transmitted from the airplane corrected for local barometric pressure. AAL2587 also said that he had the traffic in sight. Visual separation is one way of separating aircraft in Class C airspace (read the AIM). Also, for the record the Controller cleared AAL2587 to 2000 feet which would put them OUTSIDE of the Class C so there's that. It amazes me how many people on YT think that they get to be the judge, jury and executioner against a pilot when they have virtually ZERO actual information on the situation. There is fault to go around here. Following the extended centerline, right on the floor of the Class C is not the best move, but AAL should have let Approach know that he lost sight of the Cessna and Approach could have given some more separation.
And for those who will soon accuse me of excusing the pilot. I'm not accusing him or defending him. I'm saying we don't have enough information based on this silly YT video so stop accusing people of being reckless and crying for them to lose their Pilot's Certificate when you don't know either.
Eh sorry but I have to disagree. Even if N738PG was “under the shelf” they probably should have been talking to approach.. especially if they’re going to play around on the final approach path
At a minimum N738PG should have been monitoring the approach frequency. Had they done that they would have heard ATC’s repeated calls
Although my radar program corrects for altimeter (30.33 at the time), ADSB has its own errors that I can't take into account since every ADSB device and transponder is different. According to ATC callouts, he was flying below the Class C legally.
Although my radar program corrects for altimeter (30.33 at the time), ADSB has its own errors that I can't take into account since every ADSB device and transponder is different. According to ATC callouts, he was flying below the Class C legally.
@@ChangingAperture "should" or "must"? Because if your answer is "should", then the problem is with the guy that designed that airspace so poor.
I’m rather puzzled how AUS was letting the Cessna wander through the final approach path/Localizer while also clearing AA for a visual. Things are trending in a direction that is gonna lead to at the very least metal being bent and at the very worst a tragic loss of life due to a various amount of factors both low SA on the Cessna’s part and questionable/decision making controlling on AUS TRACON’s behalf.
OMG - thank the Good Lord for TCAS.
Holy frickin hell!
Bruh was a menace!
You’re right… The controller is a menace. His decisions were absolutely horrible.
Oh my god, this was like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Unbelievable.
So….isn’t there an SOP for ATC when an aircraft is uncontrolled in the pattern better than “I’ll vector commercial traffic towards them and assume they won’t do something stupid”?
Apparently not, sadly.
Not a pilot (yet) so sorry if this is a dumb question but from the chart it looks like 8PG was pretty clearly inside the Class C. Wouldn't they have to be talking to approach in that case?
ADS-B transmits uncorrected pressure altitude. As Victor pointed out, he configures his "TH-cam radar software" to the current QNH setting (METAR reported pressure at sea level), trying to correct the displayed altitudes. But shown altitudes are still not 100% exact. 8PG was certainly close, but may still have been below Class C.
8PG being an absolute menace here!
That one is totally on ATC!
@@Kyzyl_TuvaNope.
@@JustaPilot1 why not?
@@JustaPilot1Look, as the Cessna pilot stays outside of the class B or C airspace all the time, he or she isn't required to talk to the controller and may conduct any maneuver, i.e. a turn, a circle, a descent, an ascent or any combination thereof, and it is the controller's job to route controlled traffic around him. 100% the controller's fault and he has probably already been reprimanded.
god, flying into austin is scary lately
Hey babe wake up, another near mid air video just dropped
I remember when Austin Airport was Bergstrom AFB. I've enjoyed eating in the Officer's Club back in the day. But now, I am not getting on a plane that is going to Austin...period. There has been way too many incidents there lately. I live only four hours away by car.
We deal with this “We own the entire sky” nonsense from the Class C controllers at PBI too. They drop and drag the big jets down to 1800-2000 waaay early on and plow them right through known GA traffic areas below the Charlie airspace, then bitch and complain about the RA’s and go arounds for their jets. Here’s a hint controllers - keep your controlled jets inside your designated airspace. This AA was down to 2000 long before the IF for 36L that required him to be no lower than 2500. If the AA had stayed where it was supposed to be this would not have been a problem.
Thats correct! Drop and Drag, the Bergstrom Way! Karnac says: The next tragedy will happen at Austin Bergstrom. . .
Ah yes. Another pilot who thinka he knows everything. I love these. Notice 36L and 36R? In order to use both of those effectivly seperation must be maintained until aircraft are established on final. In order to do so one must be low and one high. In order to give the high aircraft a fighting chance to get down, then the lower aircraft naturally has to be low. Thats why we "drop and drag" (dumbest term every btw) jets like that. So what did we learn here? A. Just because you can be skirting the charlie like that, skud running under the finals, doesnt mean you should. B. If you are going to be in such close proximity to a charlie just freaking call us for fucks sake. C. You are not the only plane in the sky.
If you want a bravo there instead this is how you get it. Keep up that mentality and keep doing this and a bravo will be the result. Or worse someone dies.
Just fucking call us.
-A controller that deals with this daily at a different location.
@@jimmybx0072it’s not scud running. It’s legal. If you guys were half as competent as you think you are, or as you all used to be, you’d get more unrequired calls in. Listen to about 25% of the controllers attitudes that we are wasting their time and they’re simply doing us a favor by speaking to us. Fate so long, you’ll just stay away so that nonsense can be avoided. Your own words, “a controller that deals with this”. Like it’s someone else’s fault.
If they need more controlled airspace, they need more. Trying to be more efficient by packing them in there to set up for final isn’t a hall pass to expect everyone else to head for the hills or risk being blamed by the almighty screen watcher.
Some more advice…. Stop treating it like a bravo and there wont be issues. It’s not rocket science to wrap your head around a shelf altitude. The little circle goes to the ground. The larger one does not.
@@jpilot64 I will agree with you on one aspect. The fact that controllers are here to provide a service is lost on alot of them. I get it, I see that too on a daily basis. A GA aircraft is a user of the system just like any part 121.
I dont know where you are based but I highly encourage to call what ever TRACON you fly with often and ask for a tour. Most will be glad to welcome a local pilot in to show them the other side. Both sides of the mic can learn from this.
Again I dont work at this airport but I work at one similarly designed, my ask to any and all GA pilot operating in this close proximity to finals is to just call approach and say what your intentions are and verify your altitude. Dont even ask for flight following if you dont want to. But atleast we will know what you are doing and that your mode C is correct. Then go on your merry way. Not a big ask I dont think. Itll keep you and any other users of the system safe.
-THE almighty screen watcher ;)
Give me a break. With this attitude you should hang up your wings. The GS intercept for ILS 36L is a whopping 1 nm inside the SFC ring. The crossing altitude at JOVSA is 2100, a mile OUTSIDE the SFC ring. You think pilots are going to dive bomb from 2100 to 1600 in a mile from the SFC to the FAF? No, they are not. It’s perfectly reasonable to vector to final at 2000 exactly where they were, which would be right at a 3 degree GS to 36L TDZ. Pilots with your attitude are a menace.
There’s a difference between what the controller’s radar display shows (un-adjusted pressure altitude from the transponder) and the actual altitude. Very close whether or not the Cessna was legal but according to the controller he was not illegal. Nonetheless pretty inadvisable for the Cessna pilot to fly so close to the floor of controlled airspace right on the final approach course. Especially since most everyone has “ADS-B in” today and can see other traffic. IMO as a pilot the controller was at fault for vectoring airplanes is too close to him and seemingly at unprotected altitudes.
controller's radar display IS corrected by pressure
@@VASAviation I thought it showed the exact pressure altitude sensed by the transponder? Which by definition is not adjusted by the pilot, correct?
The first CA should have been the wake-up call. The yelling over-cautious controller from the other day seems more reasonable. This is terrifying.
The yelling controller from the other day (and more like him) is probably why the Cessna didn’t make the call to begin with. If the choice is to deal with that nonsense, or just stay outside the Charlie….
bro was an absolute menace there lmao
What's the controller doing getting everyone to 2000 ft when he has unidentified traffic direct across the approach path at the same altitude. A professional controller should keep in mind and plan for those foolish pilots out there.
He did, he called the traffic, he slowed his traffic so the Cessna would cross final westbound, he didn’t account for the Cessna turning directly up final.
I'd love to see a Pilot Debrief about this one.
Should’ve kept the American at 2500 until he was sure the vfr traffic wasn’t a factor.
I hear they’re hiring controllers. You would qualify much more than the controller who was working this situation. You’re a lot smarter.
So I am studying for my UAS Part 107 and learning airspaces. N738PG appears they are flying on the edge of class E (700ft and below) into class G airspace ONLY if they are below 2100 feet. The minimum safe altitude for that quadrant is 2200 feet which is probably why they are flying at that altitude. Therefore they should have contacted ATC prior to entering the Class C airspace. Am I right on this?
what the hell was that controller doing he had the data of the traffic yet your gonna clear an airliner 2x and another into a conflict id hose the controller for this the cessna is below the shelf and while not the smartest area to be he is still allowed to be there and the controller has a duty to control planes in his airspace to avoid conflict and he did not do that
This is one of the very few accurate comments. Most people here, I assume they are not pilots, would quite readily lynch the Cessna pilot who did nothing wrong and had a jetliner routed towards him by a tired or overworked controller...
do ATC actually get any training in the USA or it's just plug and play?
I have a feeling someone is going to be getting a phone number to call.
He should get a lottery ticket and cash in on his luck if that's all he gets. What he needs is a direct ticket to the FSDO.
Yes. The controller. However, he has probably already been given a dressing-down and a write-up by his superior. The Cessna pilot did nothing wrong here, the controller fucked up big time.
That controller did bust the floor. I do not know what ATC does about that and do not bother any controller asking about it because they won't tell you, period. Job security. I know a Center controller and he won't comment on anything controller or plane. Not even on VFR map changes. Politics. The FSDO should have a chat with that "pipeline" aircraft about airliners in close proximity to his/her flight path. Controllers make mistakes, too, you know.
@@dashriprock4308there is no requirement to keep aircraft within the class Charlie airspace. Just like busy class delta airspace, you can’t keep everyone inside the delta obviously…
@@dashriprock4308yup. It’s the union mentality. Support your brother regardless of their skills and abilities.
Was this airspace designed by Whistling Diesel? Why the big guys get clearances to descend to 2000 while it’s below ATCs jurisdiction?
no worries, FAA will conduct an investigation and say they have done nothing wrong.
Taking possible altimeter and ADSB errors, they most likely did nothing wrong. They flew below class C airspace
@@VASAviation I think OP meant that the FAA will find that the FAA did nothing wrong.
@@VASAviationflying under VFR means the pilot needs to “see and avoid” other traffic. It’s easy to see a 737 on a base leg. The pilot certainly did not avoid the traffic.
@@VASAviation FAA is not flying the plane. We mean the ATC.
Back at my home airport. Road to my house passes right next to the runway. Its a small airport. One day while driving home, I see this 170 model on final. Im just driving fast enough he will be right over me upon landing. As im doing so, this Piper appears out of nowhere and its prop comes a solid foot from the tail of the Cessna. Both apparently see eachother and Cessna continues to land while the Piper pulls off for a go around.
High wing on the bottom, low wing on the top. What a bad mix.
I ended up calling the local FSDO over it and was asked to send my dash cam footage over.
A few months later, a Piper Aerostar crashed next to the church just a block away from my house. I was home at the time and heard it impact the ground, looked over and saw some smoke. My brother came running into the garage saying he just watched a plane crash down the street. Small town, so I rev up and drive over there. Then the whole town responds to it. One man was killed, the other was still alive but blood was everywhere. A state trooper saw it happen in front of him and after a bit of help told us to get lost as EMS came in. Both engines went out.
A lot of times people will fly over directly the house, if this guy hadnt landed there, my house was next in line for the smash.
Close calls in GA are every where.
Wtf that N738PG is doing
WTF was that controller doing, knowing that Cessna was not on his frequency but still vectoring IFR traffic into close proximity with it? It was that controller’s responsibility to maintain separation and he spectacularly failed to do that!
Surprisingly following instructions when the controller told them to fly heading 175 directly in the path of the final with oncoming jets. That made no sense to me;I really don’t understand it.
He is legally transitioning underneath the class C airspace and doesn't have to talk to anyone while doing so. He certainly doesn't expect that a tired or overworked controller routes a passenger jet straight at him...
One aircraft caused three others to be vectored around and one controller an increased work load.
If he was at 2,100 and the bottom of the airspace was posted at 2,100 then what am I missing?
Nothing. The Cessna pilot did nothing illegal here, but a tired or overworked or cowboy-type controller routed a passenger jet onto a collision course with him or her.
Altimeters aren't exact, within 300 feet is generally accepted.
@@chrisschack9716 mode-C altitude encoder tolerance on bi-annual tests is + or - 125ft.
The FAA needs to adjust the airspace in these kind of areas and the likelihood for those events is reduced in the first place.
This would have not been as much of an issue if the IFR traffic was not directed to fly below the controlled airspace they already have allocated. The IFR approaches are designed to remain in Class-C protected airspace when flown as-published.
They can make the class C to the surface extending between the 330-030 radials and 150-210 radials south as far as 10 miles out. Unfortunately this aircraft was supposedly inside the class C, unless approach knew his transponder was just reporting slightly higher…
@@WinginWolf They can make the whole country Class C or A but that takes away a lot of freedom. Simple solution: 1) ATC should not direct aircraft into E airspace when there is a possible conflict with a NORDO or unpredictable aircraft. ATC has plenty of protected airspace around KAUS.
@@dermicknah just extend the C into the part airliners fly into lol.
All of the arrivals that had ADS-B reporting of the QNH reported the field altimeter at 30.30 inHg (1026.4 hPa). Mode S altitude reports are rounded to the nearest 100 ft pressure altitude, so you need to correct it for the barometric pressure to get the MSL. At 30.30 inHg, the pressure altitude correction is -348 ft, so the 2100 ft MSL shelf was at 1752 ft PA, and exactly 100 ft below the shelf would be 1652 ft PA.
Given the rounding that occurs, if you fly at 2000 ft MSL and bounce a few feet up and down, then the Mode S altitude report will bounce between 1600 ft PA and 1700 ft PA, and that's exactly what the plane's data shows. If the Mode S altitude had reported 1800 ft PA, then the plane would have been at or above 1750 ft PA, which would put the plane at 2098 ft MSL. So, basically as long as the reported altitude never showed 1800 ft PA, then was at least 2 feet below the shelf. And, the data log never shows the plane reporting 1800 ft PA.
Rather, it shows the plane descend to 100 ft below the shelf and then turn South to follow the parkway, and then immediately he dives 300 - 400 ft, presumably a response to being about 1NM head-on with a descending jet.
About 45 minutes after this encounter, this plane is flying at ~800 ft AGL over Seguin and comes within a 0.5NM, same altitude of a T38 departing KSEQ. 😲
If I got that close to my ex, I'd be in jail.
If I got that close to my ex I would be desperate. 😂
Where do we submit subtitle corrections for review? There were at least two errors in this episode :)
Here in the comments is OK
WTF... that must be grounds to revoke the Cessna pilot's license!
Why? He was LEGAL AT ALL TIMES. He was UNDER the Class B.
@@davidwebb4904 Nothing like being legal and a hazard to navigation
@@rona4960 Thats utter nonsense. That Cessna had every right to be where he was, OUTSIDE CONTROLLED AIRSPACE.
@davidwebb4904 I'm not caught up with American regulations but why the hell is that seemingly really busy approach area uncontrolled???
And how can a controller give orders to these planes if they are outside a controlled zone?
Also surely there has to be a law against reckless flying around traffic, especially of that size with the wake turbulence.
@@davidwebb4904 Acording the the charts, no he was not. The floor of the Charlie started at 2100 feet, and the controller reported him at 2300 feet, which would put him in Austin's airspace.
OMG!
I see some people quibbling about whether AUS should be class B. The point is that it makes no difference. Even for a class C, you need to establish radio comms before you enter the airspace. This guy was clearly in the airspace without talking to anybody. And if I'm misreading the chart and he was below the airspace layer, that still needs to be fixed; airspace layers are designed to keep the approach paths clear for arriving aircraft, with significant margins, so Cessnas going underneath the airspace won't come close to a conflict. As an example, KJFK is a very busy class B airport, but they still accommodate GA aircraft at 400' or 500' going down the shoreline, because the airspace was designed to be safe for all when doing so.
I saw the thumbnail and interpreted "NM" as Nanometres
The SI prefix for Nano is "n" not "N"
well, it is an "extreme near mid-air" after all 😆
@@SnailFrog888 meters is also m not M. nM would be nano-miles i guess, lol.
N would be newton, Nm would be newton meter.
Imagine what it was like before adsb. We just flew around in class E airspace, on the same routes, avoiding each other with prayer and favor.
That seemed ... malicious. Pilot turned into the patch of 2 aircraft.
Thats ridiculous. The Cessna was UNDER the Controlled airspace, he was LEGAL at all times.
That's not a Bravo, this is KAUS's Charlie and the outer ring is 2100-4500 feet. ADS-B/altimeter errors aside he was showing 2200 which would have been inside it.
@@AmmarAskar The graphic was showing 2200. The graphic is often wrong. The controller said 2000, 2100.
@@davidwebb4904 Ignoring the fact that you're incorrect on multiple points, no need to comment the same thing ten times over lol
@@TopGear413 its probably his grandpa who was flying....the owner has been a ground instructor since 1985
No expertise in the area but here's my guess. Controllers have an inbuilt assumption into their moving 3D model and that is that planes go in straight lines until you turn them.
When it comes to uncontrolled aircraft, that bias is still in effect even though the controller didn't know it. It's in his subconscious. The idea he might do a Crazy Ivan was not something his brain software had accounted for.
OK - I went away for a bit and I have figured out what bothers me here other than the close call, and it boils down to: I don't understand why people are saying that the Cessna pilot is utterly blameless here.
I get that the Cessna was in uncontrolled airspace. I get that the Cessna is allowed to be in uncontrolled airspace without contacting anyone, and while I think that's pretty foolish I do understand that is how it is. But here's the thing: uncontrolled airspace is uncontrolled. That doesn't mean that the airspace is EMPTY. It is up to every pilot to ensure that they are safe to make changes to their altitude, speed, or heading, and this is especially true in uncontrolled areas.
In this video there was an airliner, but it could have been any other aircraft (helicopter, two seater jet, another Cessna - anything) that would have just as much right to be in that airspace as the Cessna had. It's the pilot's responsibility to have situational awareness of what else is in the air around them, and in this case, they did not. The airspace design is messed up, and the controller was assuming that the Cessna wouldn't turn, yes - there are other factors at play here - but I do think that the Cessna's pilot behaving as if it was the only plane in the air definitely contributed to the problem and I don't think that they're blameless here.
Yeah, I'm with you, just because you have a right to drive on the highway doesn't mean you have a right to ignore all the other cars and expect them to just get out of your way. And he almost hit not just one plane, it was multiple planes, one after another. Like how many planes do you have to almost hit before you're the problem? Five?
What is up with AUS and SAT, are these controller training locations?
Incredibly dangerous. Even if the pilot was merely intending to follow Highway 183 southbound, which is essentially along the final approach path, doing so that close to a Class C airport is so dangerous as to make me wonder if 14 CFR 91.13 ("Careless or Reckless Operation") should be invoked.
Why design the airspace that way at first?
Not sure why 3PG was even given the B clearance given the final approach pattern?
What does "given the B clearance" mean?
This is not Bravo
That ATC is a damn rockstar.
It seems so............but not really. He kept vectoring his traffic INTO the path of an aircraft he was not talking to. Once AA said they lost visual of the " high wing " he should have gotten them the hell out of there. Instead he kept vectoring them for the landing sequence , right into the path of the high wing.
Not really
Cessna pilot very bad but as i am an ATCO i am really impressed (negatively) how in the US they keep all the traffic descent at the same altitude (2000ft) and just vectored them around and when you got a situation like that your opportunity to turn gets stuck. Look at the VistaJet was pointing to final at the same altitude of American and the AirShuttle putting a lot of stress and way less room for error and resolution. Very strange for me because during my training I was told never descend everybody to same altitude until same direction in this case the final even if you take planes from left and right base into ils always keep 1000fr separation until or 5 or3 nm or final turn just in case of any problem with the turn that could led to noise opposite. I always see very strong differences between atc in Europe and the US but if it works well done.