Air traffic controller: " air Canada 781, go around." Air traffic controller. " air Canada 781, go around." Pilot : " shhhh" Air traffic controller. " air Canada 781, go around." Pilot :" chill bro..I already parked"
A likely explanation is that the Air Canada crew could see the previous aircraft was clearing the runway and thought that if they waited and continued the approach that maybe the controller would reverse his command. Perhaps they were tired and thought the controller was being overly cautious. It can happen that way but very unlikely. Also, there could have been something else making the landing unsafe, debris on the runway reported by the previous aircraft, for example. Or they might not have heard the controller because they had the volume turned down somehow. They didn’t see the lights because they weren’t looking for them. In any case the AC crew has got some explaining to do.
9,000 hour pilot here. There was no DEVIATION offense, here. More like Controller Error. This "It's always the pilot's fault" crap has got to stop. The controller messed up his landing deck, didn't get the runway cleared in time, and needed AC781 to help him fix it. All 6 instructions to "Go around" occurred within 30 seconds. The Pilot, copilot, and flight engineer are all listening on the radio. For all three of them to miss 6 instructions in 30 seconds indicates that they did not hear the instructions. i.e. they did lose radio contact. Light Gun Signal? Who is kidding whom? The red light gun signal is a 6" FLASHLIGHT from inside the tower, which is over a mile from the end of the runway, way to the left of the pilot's vision. Nobody is going to see that. Pilots are not trained to look at the tower for landing instructions. Flying into an airport, at night looks like a Christmas tree of lights. The pilot was cleared to land. His concentration is on the lights at the touchdown zone. Not the tower. Who is investigating the controller?
The FAA concluded after speaking to the flight crew and probing other data that the “crew inadvertently switched from the SFO tower frequency to the SFO ground frequency after receiving their landing clearance.” “The FAA deemed this event to be an isolated occurrence and not reflective of any systematic deficiencies at Air Canada,” according to a FAA spokesman.
Pilot error then. The runway is still tower controlled. Make it a procedure to let the tower know that you are switching to ground. Just saying. Cant just say this is an isolated incident until it becomes a disastrous accident.
Eagle Beast Of course the runway it tower controlled. But ATC has different sections, aircraft can contact Ground, Departures or Arrivals, so after getting clearence to land they switched automatically to Ground frequency cause they were technically about to touch ground.
@@marquisdemoo1792 a mistake happening I can understand, but the multiple consecutive mistakes in this instance is something completely irresponsible. Being at the point of having to fall back on sending visual signals by itself makes them look bad, but to not even be able to rely on that... They shouldn't have to focus to the point of being unable to see signals given by the tower, unless they switched off of their instrument landing system and decided to land manually. Why the hell would they do that though? Do Canadian airlines not use audio boards with multiple inputs that allow you to monitor multiple frequencies simultaneously? They may have to change frequencies depending on the airport but once they are set up on all channels they should not have to change frequencies between talking to ATC or ground crews. Now certainly they could have turned the volume down on the input that they are connected to ATC on, though I dont see how they could accidentally do that.
Ok as a commercial pilot (funny to see wannabes in the comments) I've had avionics failure. It happens. Mic's get stuck. If you're on short final you're not looking for signals from tower. Especially during that critical phase of flight. It happens. Not directly the pilots fault. Equipment failure is uncontrollable. Glad everyone touched down safely.
Larry Tischler He just said, (might be slightly paraphrased, my memory isn’t great) “When you’re on short final you’re not looking for signals on the tower”.
Trust me, the light in the tower is not what you are looking for even if you could see it from a couple miles away when your on short final in a jetliner. It is not like some super powerful laser beam, it is a overgrown flashlight way off the side of your cone of vision when your on approach.
Matthew Elyash in any job you can get tunnel vision as its routine to focus on a task and exceptions do not register, its human. You would have to make a bon fire on the runway for people to break out of their routine.
Apparently these pilots are being accused of disobeying directions from the tower. Surely the possible consequences are dire so what would be their motivation for doing so deliberately?
That lawyer is definitely more lawyer than he is pilot. The light gun signal argument is irrelevant. If the flight crew's story is that they truly never heard any further radio transmissions after they were cleared to land, which is completely normal, then why the hell would they think to look at the tower for light signals??
Lyzander911 they are supposed to look at the runway so that they will actually SEE where they land. And let’s say that the pilot is controlling the yoke, then the copilot usually does the throttle and the minor things which means that it is hard to look at the tower AND land the plane
StandardMeta, meant to look at the tower just in case they are signalling, why? They had been cleared to land, they hadn’t received the “go around” so they believed that they could land, just because the controller transmitted the go around does not mean they received it, and even if they knew they had radio malfunction they are not going to initiate a go around because of that, in fact that would be more dangerous than carrying on with a landing that was cleared. If they had gone around because of radio failures they could have taken a flight path that took them on a collision course with another, maybe larger, aircraft. It is probably procedure that if you loose communication with the tower you obey the last instruction heard, in this case it was cleared to land.
Excellent point that so many don’t or won’t admit is the reality of the incident, if they knew that they had lost comms they would follow the last instruction received, ie “cleared to land” not “cleared to land but if you don’t receive any further communication then look at the tower, in a sea of lights, and look for a flashing red light, but if you don’t see it go around anyway because I might have given you clearance but I might have been to premature in doing that, do you copy flight........”.
It's been a bad week for some pilots. Last week it was the pilots who did an *approved* fly-over for a last flight but then got suspended for doing it. Now these Air Canada pilots will get hauled over the coals and surely suspended.
Denis O'Brien The big deal is that the Air Canada flight staff did not follow the FAA rules. The flight recorder comms should be reviewed. If the flight crew decided that they were in charge of the landing, they should be held accountable and should be banned from flight into or out of the United States period. “Sorry” is no excuse for their actions which endangered hundreds of passengers’ lives. Period.
I think the data of CVR cannot be retrieved without removing it from the aircraft and destroying the casing. That's expensive and the airline wouldn't want to put in a new CVR everytime there's an investigation into crew behavior.
So 2 well trained pilots just ignored 6 warning of go around. I don't believe they heard "Go around". Also I would like to see that red light flashing and how easy it is to see. Previous incident with aircanada has nothing in common to this one.
Roman O the light gun signals were not warmed up as yet, It was clearly stated. A high beam light doesn't warm immediately, it takes a few minutes to warm.
Given how unexpected it is as well as the height of such a signal, it's shocking to see such a signal coming from the tower controllers. This was after dark, the light has to be bright, in order to signal aircraft in the day. The small airport I trained at and fly out of has used this signaling technique when the single runway was occupied by a student having issues longer than expected.
Bobby how dense were the surrounding lights of the city at your airport? It is very difficult to pick out a light source in the middle of a city. So that light gun better be very bright AND aimed at the intended target which is the incoming plane.
I don't know how the radios operate on Airbus. However It may be possible for radio failure and the other 2 radios were not tuned to the tower frequency, thus they wouldn't have heard them. The weather may have been low visibility(I don't know what the weather really was) so they may not have seen the light gun. Another point to make and being a pilot myself, I never look at the tower on an airport when I am on final for landing if i'm not expecting light gun signals. Usually too far out of sight while focusing on landing the plane. Just my thoughts
Happened to me once when I was cleared to land. Atc apparently gave me a heading change to accommodate an American MD-80 on approach to a parallel runway. Didn't hear any of their transmissions and continued on with a right base entry. Fortunately my instructor and I saw the MD-80 and queried the controller as the American was close for no traffic advisory. The transmission went through and we learned they had made several attempts to reach us. From that experience I can say that radios have a tendency to fail during important phases of flight and then start working again. I believe the Air Canada pilots in this case. It was just an unfortunate time for it to happen.
Junior pilots, this is how you have those accidents that end up on TH-cam happen half the time. They stopped listening or tuned down volume last minute before landing.
OR its a terrible airport. As evidenced by the crash that already happened there and repeated close class. Please stick to commenting on what you know about.
Upon hearing this “expert” again, I’m even more troubled with his analysis. Whether there are 2 or 3 radios onboard (I’m sure there are 2 that are being monitored) in normal operations (other than close parallel landing operations that I don’t think SFO does), only one will have the tower frequency tuned unless there is an unusual situation known or suspected. Also there was no panic in the controller’s voice - perhaps annoyance, yes. This lawyer and (supposedly former pilot) should stick to chasing ambulances.
3 radios, yes, only one will have the tower frequency dialed in. The secondary radio will have company or ramp/gate frequency for when they land. The 3rd radio is never used unless one of the other 2 is known to be defective well prior to the incident. When you are on final, you are busy performing the checklist which requires a call and response between the pilots. The light gun signals are rarely used. I never look toward the tower when ready to land. It is usually off to the side by a 1/2 mile at times, opposite of me. I am focused on runway alignment, aircraft performance, and navigation. Such BS that the ambulance chasing lawyer is expecting a zero-defect environment. I get it, the situation could have been terrible, but the Monday morning quarterbacks are laughable.
cellblock131 Captain I agree with u sir as a co pilot of 22 years of age I fly British airways a319 that’s how the radios work for us but the argument between the atc of go around it is really hard to focus on control tower looks tiny from far and I’m busy looking at the runway....not ATC
@@rugratz3440 there is no way those pilots didn’t hear the tower instructions. They heard them loud and clear - they just didn’t want to do a go-around
@@sean2015 they didn't want? How come? Canmot imagine: I am sick of this duty day, better go home, let's ignore the ATC and land no matter what and have my licence suspended, never to be able to fly in my life again. Stress/ tiredness/ workload are to me the leading factors. And maybe the guys inadvertently switched to other frequency
It's two eight right not twenty eight arr 😂 Plus light gun signals are ridiculous. You don't see them unless you are looking at the tower. When you are on final looking at the tower is your last priority. ATC also gave clearance to land but I agree that the pilots should have done a go around if they heard it.
And when was the last time you tried to monitor more than one radio while on short final! This clown didn't know what he was talking about. Probably why he is now a "former" pilot; my license is lifetime, how about yours?
David Powell lol yeah I did see that. I was like "once a pilot always a pilot." Plus air Canada was on an ifr flight plan so I guess they put him on the wrong approach controller and vectored him in to SFO but the pilot should have seen that on his approach plate though. Both pilot and ATC made a mistake there.
Don't know why this happened but why didn't the air controller change his language to something like "do you copy?" I don't know what protocol is on communication between ground and flights in the air but I would have tried to get clarification on the pilots receipt of the communication transmission.
This is a complete farce! Why is it that people think pilots just do as they are told and it is ATC that are in control of everything? The "expert" in this case is misleading and I think was only selected to hype up the story. To respond to some of the points: - "Almost from the first day pilots are trained to do as ATC tells them unless the safety of the aircraft is in danger" If this is what you were trained to do then I am worried, my training revolved around "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate" as a list of priorities, ATC are part of a framework and while permission is needed for many of the things we do (Take-off, Landing etc) they don't get the same pictures as the pilots so the relationship is a two way street. - "The airbus has 3 radios, and it is unlikely all failed" This is true the aircraft has 3 radios. However not all the radios are tuned to the same frequency (station) at the same time. The primary radio will be on tower, the secondary is usually on the emergency frequency and the third radio could be tuned to company frequency or used for datalink. So it would only take the primary radio to fail to not hear tower. (It is possible that the tower also broadcast on the emergency frequency, however it is common practice for this to be turned down, but not off, during critical phases of flight as it can add unwanted distractions, so may not be immediately audible) Now, I haven't checked the airport weather but looking at the reported weather for San Francisco it seemed a clear and fine day and evening, so the last a biggest point here that has been missed entirely, THERE ARE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT OF THE AIRCRAFT! If the runway was still occupied then the pilots can go around themselves, they don't need ATC to tell them. Was it correct to potentially ignore the ATC instruction, no, do I believe that they intentionally ignored the call? no. Do I think that the safety of this flight was at a significantly higher risk because of the missed radio call, no. There are genuine, worrying situations in aviation at the moment. Issues like fatigue, that have caused serious accidents in the past and yet nothing has been done. Organisational pressures that put genuine strain on air traffic controllers, flight crew and cabin crew, all so the consumer can get cheaper and cheaper air fairs. The FAA will investigate every reportable incident and that is correct. Is it worth the 10 minute news piece criticising Air Canada pilots, no. Just my (probably a bit more than...) two cents.
So, ATC had given erroneous instruction to land? Then rescinded that instruction? His first message was mumbled and very hurried and at no point did he say: "Air Canada Flight 781, please acknowledge my go around instruction." Was ATC even transmitting on the correct frequency?
The landing instruction was not erroneous, they had required separation. The instruction was given in the proper phraseology, ther's no need to use 10 words when four will do. Gee, if ATC was transmitting on the wrong frequency, how come everyone else was able to understand and follow instructions.
wait it said 9:00pm united was on the runway then it landed at 9:30 ? then they don't need to go around doesn't take 30 mins for a plane to move off the runway onto taxi way
Pilots only listen to one radio at a time during approach and landing. The number of radios on board is irrelevant. If the radio they were using had a hiccup for a minute there would be no way for them to hear the controller.
You would not see it unless you were looking at the control tower. I would figure the pilots of the AC flight didn't realize they were No Radio and were intent on the runway and their airspeed indicator. ( I went no rad in the pattern on downwind at SBA once and had to look several times before getting my green light from the gun - so I did learn exactly how it looks!)
exactly! thankyou. Cant believe that that so called expert ex pilot was mouthing off like he did. Im not american or canadian so theres no real bias from me for one vs the other, but as you said shite happens, ive had radio mics stick and block out everything for me, then on their own accord unstick and work fine.
TyrannyTerminator Isn’t it Aviate, Navigate, then Communicate? I truly don’t mean to be annoying, Its just that i’m a student pilot and that’s what we learned in Human Factors. :)
The San Francisco airport is very difficult to land on if you are not aware of its differences from all other airports in the world. It is past time to update the S.F. airport to modern safe standards, or so I have heard from one pilot who has landed a commercial planes on this unusual landing situation airport that lacks the more modern aids that line up the incoming airplanes with the runways.
Well hopefully, the *passenger* isn't the one doing the take-off or landing. Anyway, I've been a passenger in and out of SFO many times and I love that airport, although it was a bit confusing back when AirTran was still around because I would see signs all over that airport showing where to go for Airtran. I eventually realized the signs said AirTRAIN which is the train that carries you from the terminal to car rentals and stuff.
I am just repeating what a commercial pilot told me and that was it is not an easy airport to land on without your crew helping with the correct landing approach. It is not an easy airport to land on. This does not mean that Air Canada had any legitimate reason to not abort their approach.
28R is the main runway used for ILS approach. Instrument landings are often needed because of the fog there. Runways 28R and 19 are the instrument landing runways at SFO
Jeez. I’m not sure if this lawyer as well as PILOT guy really flew the commercial. First, the controller DOES NOT sounded like he panicked at all. Second, yes if you’re a NORDO and looking for any clearance then you supposed to glimpse the twr building and acquire the light signal. But this happened after they got the clearance to land and ‘allegedly’ radio gone out. Literally there’s no reason for the pilots to expect the light gun signals and they shouldn’t. FYI, light signal is not laser light. If that was a daytime it is impossible to see without expecting one and in a nighttime as well when hundreds of rwy lights are on.
In the story and the Air Canada press release it was mentioned that AC781 had received its clearance to land. Once that clearance is received there is no expectation of further communication from ATC so if the radio wasn't working properly that would not elicit any adverse reaction from the flight crew. The lawyer mentioned that there are are a total of thre VHF radios aboard so it is doubtful that all three would not be working. What he didn't say was that it was highly doubtful that all three radios would be tuned to the Tower frequency. They would only be utilizing one radio. If they had suspected that there was a problem with the radio they could then switch to a back up. Since they had already received their landing clearance they would not of known they had a problem until the Tower finally reached them on the ground.
Sorry, but a go-around is always a possibility after getting a clearance to land and the tower frequency must be continuously monitored. At a busy airport like SFO there is a LOT of radio traffic on the tower frequency and something is wrong if there is an extended period of silence. A thorough investigation should help clear up the confusion.
Is it conceivable that they would tune away from tower? Would they tune the radio to ground before landing? I bet they are supposed to wait they are on a taxiway with no runways to cross, but it was night and these pilots switched over early to save time.
Mod MINI Never, under any circumstances should a pilot switch out of the tower's frequency if in tower's control area, only until tower gives them another frequency to switch to. You can put ground's frequency on standby so when tower tells the pilot to contact ground, the pilot can switch out of tower's frequency to ground in a quick manner. However, the pilot must stay in tower's frequency when in his control area. In this Air Canada flight's case, he was in tower's control area, and even though tower has given him clearance to land, there may be a chance in the landing phase of the flight that a go around is necessary for the safety of the pilot and/or others, either the pilot himself or the air traffic controller can call the go around.
I didn't go any further with this, but did they find any problems with the radios and did the pilots say that they saw the red light gun when asked if they had?
Part of the problem is that the AC781 flight was given initial clearance to land when in fact they were not clear to land, the runway was going to be obstructed by another plane. As was pointed out in another video, this "CTL on spec" happens in the USA but does not happen in Europe, which has airports that are just as busy. Clear to Land should only be given once a plane is truly clear to land.
Unfortunately this is very common at SFO they routinely have aircrafts crossing runways after already giving landing clearances. There’s a video where a United flight was ordered to go around twice because of just that
Air traffic controller: " air Canada 781, go around." *Pilot to Co-Pilot:* He wants us to land and then _'go around'_ aircraft waiting to depart ! Co-Pilot: Sounds dangerous! Maybe we should just circle and land after? *Pilot:* NO! Rule No. 1. Flight controller tells you to do something, you do it immediaahhhhhhhhhhtely! Phew! Just missed
Many years ago when I was a student pilot on a solo flight from Lynchburg, Va. in to Raleigh Durham, North Carolina I had a similar incident. I couldn’t hear any radio communication from the tower. I saw the green light and landed safely. I soon after landing I discovered I had some time during the flight turned down the volume of the radio.
Even if the radio is off, can't the pilot see in his windshield that he might collide with another plane? I'm sure he can see there is a plane on the runway too close and from that he can decide whether it's safe to land or not. I mean it's common sense
Im not a pilot but when the video mentioned the light gun to warn the plane drom the tower, i was wondering how come the the tower cant activate res flashing lights on the runway somewhere, that makes sense to me. If airports dont have that yet for landing strips maybe this sort of flashing light system should be installed so its easier for pilots to see.
"Air Traffic Controller sounded almost panicked" The controllers voice was very calm he just sounded a bit pissed bcs of ACA not going around. Also how would he know that the pilots just magically switched from ILS to VIS he must've been in the cockpit at the time.
Actually, the A320 and 321 both have problems with their radio connections, the ground pin isn't usually secured correctly and it can sometimes short out. Airbus did release a manual patch to airlines servicing the 320 series, but probably because of budget cuts, AC may have decided not to and leave it to chance.
I am surprised there are not more of these landing issues particularly on the N and S runways! I mean how these pilots line up to land in this direction while adjusting to the earth's spin at 1000 mph takes a lot of skill.
This so called aviation lawyer and former pilot doesn't even realize that there may be 3 radios, but they are never on the same frequency and rarely 2 of them. And the light signals may have gone unnoticed if the pilots weren't expecting them. More misinformation by the press and the eager for notoriety aviation expert and former pilot.
I just flew on American Airlines and I was amazed at the age of some of he pilots that I saw in the airport. Some of them didn't look to be older than 24. Shouldn't there be requirements of experience for commercial pilots?
101southsideboy The CVR has several mics in the cockpit; unless the ATC is on a speaker (as opposed to headphones) only their end would be recorded - the investigators can synchronise the recordings to get the full picture. However it is likely the mics will pick up some of ATC. Part of the problem with the Tenerife Pan-am/KLM crash was static on the radio at the vital monent when the KLM started its takeoff roll - static that masked Pan-am advising it was not clear of the runway and would inform when it was.
This switching of frequencies seems to be problematic , they need an emergency frequency that their radio will pick up should they switch at the wrong time. Possibly a mayday button that lights up and alerts them to go around
Why am I not surprised? Air Canada has for years been, as far as I'm concerned, an airline of last resort. Having said that, however, the recording of the Air Traffic Controller shows that he was breaking the first rule of communication -- gobbling like a turkey, not even getting the airline's name right some of the time. The first rule of communication, especially where bandwith is limited an d transmission and reception conditions variable, is to speak slowly and distinctly and he certainly wasn't doing that. All the more so when some or all of the crew, though no doubt competent in English, may well not have English as their native language, even if it is their working language. I've lived in Canada and the US, my native language is Englishj, I speak French and understand spoken French -- both the Acadian variety and the Parisian variety very well, but gobbled American or for that matter gobbled French, can easily fail to register in my (Scottish) brain. Clearly there are major shortcomings on both sides.
Regardless if the radios were or were not working, if the ATC felt it was necessary to tell AC 781 to go-around 6 times, surely the Captain and FO should also have seen the aircraft on the runway and made the decision to go-around themselves?
"surely the Captain and FO should also have seen the aircraft on the runway and made the decision to go-around themselves?" Or the pilots on ACA781 saw that the planes had cleared the runway threshold, and deemed the landing safe, and landed. The pilot is Pilot in Command of the aircraft, not the controller. The Pilot makes the decision to land or go around, regardless what the controller says.
I'm aware of that. But if ATC are telling you to go-around 6 times I would guess they have a very good reason for doing so. The pilot of the aircraft would then be landing without clearence, so safety cannot be guaranteed. In an emergency I can understand, but this wasn't an emergency.
"But if ATC are telling you to go-around 6 times" The first rule of radio transmission is: Communication only occurs when a message is TRANSMITTED and RECEIVED. The Pilot did not RECEIVE the transmission. Therefore, the controller FAILED to COMMUNICATE. FAILING to communicate, the controller did what he knew would work. He bunched up two airliners on high speed taxiway Tango, the runway was cleared, ACA781 landed. No harm, no fowl. And everyone lived to land another day. There was no DEVIATION. The Pilot was not in error. _____________________ You don't make 6 commands to a heavy on short final. If the controller did not receive a response after 2-3 attempts, he should have sent the first aircraft on Taxiway Tango across 28L instead of bellowing 4 more times to go around. EVERY pilot in the SFO airspace hearing this conversation was shaking his head at the controller's blunder _________________ "The pilot of the aircraft would then be landing without clearence" No, the pilot obeys his last communication: "Cleared to land"
if the clip itself didn't tell me that the air traffic controller was saying "go around" i wouldn't have immediately known that that was what he was saying; he could have tried some change in wording instead of repeating the same two words in the exact same way; 'abort' 'don't land' 'up!'
"Go Around" is the official ATC phraseology for instructing to abort landing. The phrase "Don't land" will not be used because it contains the same word as "Clear To Land". If the radio was stepped on (meaning someone is talking on frequency at the same time), the pilots may hear only "...land".
It's very important that all controllers at all US airports use the same commands the same way. It might sound strange but even fairly good pilots can understand the transmissions.
The ALDIS lamp (light gun) signals are very hard to see unless you are looking directly at the tower. They're not used to get a pilot's attention, they're used when the pilot knows the radios don't work and is looking for the signals. With two pilots focusing on the runway, it's extremely likely they did not see the ALDIS signals.
sensationalism noun (especially in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement. "media sensationalism"
There's something wrong here. The issue is not whether we are trying to blame air traffic control, the pilots or equipment failure. The point is that an investigation is needed to find out what really went wrong and change processes to ensure it can never happen again. Nothing happened this time but it could have easily ended in tragedy.
Yep. Because these Air Canada amateurs turned down the radio to go through their landing checklist. With volume set to zero or inaudible couldn't hear tower ATC instructing a go around. Simple as that. Nothing wrong with the radios. The radios worked as perfect as ever when the crew chose to turn the volume back up after touch down to 5 by 5 at KSFO from the 0 by 5 from ATC's side on the short final when the AC crew turned their volume off.
readios are NEVER turned down on an A320 also if you try to turn the radios off, they stay on at an audible level, the simple fact is there was an issue in the cockpit at which time they are tasked to fix it and NOT respond to ATC
Maybee they turned the volume down on the radio and forgot to increase it again. It happened to me twice. The red light could be difficult to detect at a large airport with all lights around. At some airports t hey use red firework signal instead. Very easy to observe as they move up in the sky. Former CPL
@4:04 "almost taught"? I've been almost taught a million things in my life. I almost learned them, too! An aviation lawyer is not an aviation expert. He is experienced in getting the courts to pass judgement in favor of his clients, and perhaps enhancing sensationalism in journalism. I would be interested in what a true aviation safety expert, such as John Cox or Greg Feith would have to say about this incident. Although, it would not come in a timely manner, as required by journalism, as they would take time to obtain factual information before giving us their opinion.
When 781 first responded to the go around their radio sounded like it had a lot of static, so it is plausible that they had RFI or were in a signal depressed area.
Tower cleared them to land, so the pilot switched to ground frequency before actually landing. Which is a no no, but they were cleared to land..... and then they weren’t.
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 ธันวาคม 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dNTiBBthKgQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"Air traffic control sounded panicked" - To be honest I thought that guy sounded very calm and a tad bit annoyed.
And the Controler was talking very fast. I had a hard time understanding: X 6!
As a former navy atc I would have been furious
@@catherinenelson4162 they sped it up I think. from what I remember a video on it with the atc in real-time he wasn't talking that fast
@@catherinenelson4162 That's how they always talk
If you hear many ATC, you will know their tone is always constant and calm. There was panick in his voice.
Simple: Air traffic controller didn't end his sentences with "...eh."
ZlayaCo6aka Hahahahaha eh
ZlayaCo6aka Thanks! Now I know 'eh' is Canadian for 'over'.
Lol
th-cam.com/video/ZVmgAcaPE8o/w-d-xo.html
Eh is confirmation
Air traffic controller: " air Canada 781, go around."
Air traffic controller. " air Canada 781, go around."
Pilot : " shhhh"
Air traffic controller. " air Canada 781, go around."
Pilot :" chill bro..I already parked"
Michline Al I realize you're kidding, but it was pretty clear, he said "copy that."
Microsoft FSX in a nutshell
This is air Canada 781, we had our speaker blown out from turbulence, so we landed anyway.
he definitely said copy that
Michline Al i think cocaine was on the airplane😂
That was panic in the controller's voice?? If that was panic that was the most chill panic I've ever heard. I'm glad everyone is ok.
The way she says 28R is mildly infuriating
toowenty ayyyyyyyte
Timestamp please?
@@walterbrunswick 0:28
A likely explanation is that the Air Canada crew could see the previous aircraft was clearing the runway and thought that if they waited and continued the approach that maybe the controller would reverse his command. Perhaps they were tired and thought the controller was being overly cautious. It can happen that way but very unlikely. Also, there could have been something else making the landing unsafe, debris on the runway reported by the previous aircraft, for example.
Or they might not have heard the controller because they had the volume turned down somehow. They didn’t see the lights because they weren’t looking for them.
In any case the AC crew has got some explaining to do.
memez_r_dreamz twenty eight R
9,000 hour pilot here. There was no DEVIATION offense, here. More like Controller Error. This "It's always the pilot's fault" crap has got to stop. The controller messed up his landing deck, didn't get the runway cleared in time, and needed AC781 to help him fix it.
All 6 instructions to "Go around" occurred within 30 seconds. The Pilot, copilot, and flight engineer are all listening on the radio. For all three of them to miss 6 instructions in 30 seconds indicates that they did not hear the instructions. i.e. they did lose radio contact.
Light Gun Signal? Who is kidding whom? The red light gun signal is a 6" FLASHLIGHT from inside the tower, which is over a mile from the end of the runway, way to the left of the pilot's vision. Nobody is going to see that. Pilots are not trained to look at the tower for landing instructions.
Flying into an airport, at night looks like a Christmas tree of lights. The pilot was cleared to land. His concentration is on the lights at the touchdown zone. Not the tower.
Who is investigating the controller?
Replies in this thread have banned words and have been censored.
Threewulphmoon Lies
then why, before i replied, when i clicked view replies ; nothing appeared?
replies are kinda wonky lately. I hit it several times before it opened. kinda like SFO huh?
Even this one which should have ended up under Threewulphmoon ended up here.
...ATC didn't say EH at the end of each sentence, nothing more
Grim Reaper 🥴😁
The FAA concluded after speaking to the flight crew and probing other data that the “crew inadvertently switched from the SFO tower frequency to the SFO ground frequency after receiving their landing clearance.”
“The FAA deemed this event to be an isolated occurrence and not reflective of any systematic deficiencies at Air Canada,” according to a FAA spokesman.
Pilot error then. The runway is still tower controlled. Make it a procedure to let the tower know that you are switching to ground. Just saying. Cant just say this is an isolated incident until it becomes a disastrous accident.
Eagle Beast Of course the runway it tower controlled. But ATC has different sections, aircraft can contact Ground, Departures or Arrivals, so after getting clearence to land they switched automatically to Ground frequency cause they were technically about to touch ground.
And the manual signalling to not land?
@@killacam876 A red light from the tower way off the approach path in a field full of red lights. See other comments on that by actual pilots.
@@marquisdemoo1792 a mistake happening I can understand, but the multiple consecutive mistakes in this instance is something completely irresponsible. Being at the point of having to fall back on sending visual signals by itself makes them look bad, but to not even be able to rely on that... They shouldn't have to focus to the point of being unable to see signals given by the tower, unless they switched off of their instrument landing system and decided to land manually. Why the hell would they do that though? Do Canadian airlines not use audio boards with multiple inputs that allow you to monitor multiple frequencies simultaneously? They may have to change frequencies depending on the airport but once they are set up on all channels they should not have to change frequencies between talking to ATC or ground crews. Now certainly they could have turned the volume down on the input that they are connected to ATC on, though I dont see how they could accidentally do that.
Ok as a commercial pilot (funny to see wannabes in the comments) I've had avionics failure. It happens. Mic's get stuck. If you're on short final you're not looking for signals from tower. Especially during that critical phase of flight. It happens. Not directly the pilots fault. Equipment failure is uncontrollable. Glad everyone touched down safely.
John Doe
Your alias tells the whole story. However, You did not even begin to explain how they failed to respond to the red landing lights.
Larry Tischler He just said, (might be slightly paraphrased, my memory isn’t great) “When you’re on short final you’re not looking for signals on the tower”.
Trust me, the light in the tower is not what you are looking for even if you could see it from a couple miles away when your on short final in a jetliner. It is not like some super powerful laser beam, it is a overgrown flashlight way off the side of your cone of vision when your on approach.
Matthew Elyash in any job you can get tunnel vision as its routine to focus on a task and exceptions do not register, its human. You would have to make a bon fire on the runway for people to break out of their routine.
John Doe thanks John! Nice to read from a real pilots point! Blessings
Apparently these pilots are being accused of disobeying directions from the tower. Surely the possible consequences are dire so what would be their motivation for doing so deliberately?
Because the pilot & copilot wanted an on time for their flight. Check the flight recorder.
They wanna pee, now!
It was molson time
The pilots can overrule any instruction they are called captains for a reason.
@@gsmjr8502 no it’s not it’s because they fumbled the radio frequency and switched to ground so they didn’t do it on purpose listen to the atc lol
That lawyer is definitely more lawyer than he is pilot. The light gun signal argument is irrelevant. If the flight crew's story is that they truly never heard any further radio transmissions after they were cleared to land, which is completely normal, then why the hell would they think to look at the tower for light signals??
Because they are supposed to do so
Lyzander911 they are supposed to look at the runway so that they will actually SEE where they land. And let’s say that the pilot is controlling the yoke, then the copilot usually does the throttle and the minor things which means that it is hard to look at the tower AND land the plane
StandardMeta, meant to look at the tower just in case they are signalling, why? They had been cleared to land, they hadn’t received the “go around” so they believed that they could land, just because the controller transmitted the go around does not mean they received it, and even if they knew they had radio malfunction they are not going to initiate a go around because of that, in fact that would be more dangerous than carrying on with a landing that was cleared. If they had gone around because of radio failures they could have taken a flight path that took them on a collision course with another, maybe larger, aircraft. It is probably procedure that if you loose communication with the tower you obey the last instruction heard, in this case it was cleared to land.
Excellent point that so many don’t or won’t admit is the reality of the incident, if they knew that they had lost comms they would follow the last instruction received, ie “cleared to land” not “cleared to land but if you don’t receive any further communication then look at the tower, in a sea of lights, and look for a flashing red light, but if you don’t see it go around anyway because I might have given you clearance but I might have been to premature in doing that, do you copy flight........”.
@@Lyzander911 thank u yes they are supposed to
Should have been in French, screamed into the mic, with wild hand-gestures.
air canada bonne nuit 781 aller autour
They were busy eating escargot 🐌 I guess!
@@EdD-iflyFl500 look at that s car go.
Andrew Emery 😆😆
Omg I lost it reading this comment! 😂
It's been a bad week for some pilots. Last week it was the pilots who did an *approved* fly-over for a last flight but then got suspended for doing it. Now these Air Canada pilots will get hauled over the coals and surely suspended.
Truly Zambian im
temporarily suspended during the investigation, because it might not have been pilot error
Truly Zambian b
This lawyer is just trolling for clients.
Truly Zambian So in your world it's OK to do what you want ignoring the controllers instructions.
The ATC f'ed up. We should have said, "Canada 781 go around eh?"
Denis O'Brien The big deal is that the Air Canada flight staff did not follow the FAA rules. The flight recorder comms should be reviewed.
If the flight crew decided that they were in charge of the landing, they should be held accountable and should be banned from flight into or out of the United States period.
“Sorry” is no excuse for their actions which endangered hundreds of passengers’ lives. Period.
I know the comment is 1 year old, but we don't all say EH! excuse me as I ride away on my Moose!
He smelled back bacon.
What do you expect, its Canada, they dont know anything!!! It happened twice, scary!
@@TheWolfsnack the big deal???? Are you serious???? Remember Tariffe crash!
Either its racism or the Russians.
rapturekevin, Ah Ah Ah Ah Air Canada pilots are clowns!!
muller said it was the russians
The Russians hacked the flight computer.
Lol, good one.
rapturekevin lol
And this is why air traffic controlers work 3 days and get 4 off. The amount of stress must be crazy!! Holy cow!
The cockpit voice recorder will tell the tale, whether or not the radios were working. If they were, both pilots could loose their licenses.
Yeah, gotta keep those licenses tight!
Maybe the Air Traffic Controller's connection was off accidentally?
*Lose
I think the data of CVR cannot be retrieved without removing it from the aircraft and destroying the casing. That's expensive and the airline wouldn't want to put in a new CVR everytime there's an investigation into crew behavior.
They probably had that turned off too. .. Could of hit um with a flashing red LASER -- that would have got their attention.
So 2 well trained pilots just ignored 6 warning of go around. I don't believe they heard "Go around". Also I would like to see that red light flashing and how easy it is to see. Previous incident with aircanada has nothing in common to this one.
Roman O the light gun signals were not warmed up as yet, It was clearly stated. A high beam light doesn't warm immediately, it takes a few minutes to warm.
Given how unexpected it is as well as the height of such a signal, it's shocking to see such a signal coming from the tower controllers. This was after dark, the light has to be bright, in order to signal aircraft in the day. The small airport I trained at and fly out of has used this signaling technique when the single runway was occupied by a student having issues longer than expected.
Bobby how dense were the surrounding lights of the city at your airport? It is very difficult to pick out a light source in the middle of a city. So that light gun better be very bright AND aimed at the intended target which is the incoming plane.
Roman O
Roman do you think the command crew was asleep as they were just meters on top of a well known waterway?
I don't know how the radios operate on Airbus. However It may be possible for radio failure and the other 2 radios were not tuned to the tower frequency, thus they wouldn't have heard them. The weather may have been low visibility(I don't know what the weather really was) so they may not have seen the light gun. Another point to make and being a pilot myself, I never look at the tower on an airport when I am on final for landing if i'm not expecting light gun signals. Usually too far out of sight while focusing on landing the plane.
Just my thoughts
if you have low visibility you don't go on a visual approach..
Happened to me once when I was cleared to land. Atc apparently gave me a heading change to accommodate an American MD-80 on approach to a parallel runway. Didn't hear any of their transmissions and continued on with a right base entry. Fortunately my instructor and I saw the MD-80 and queried the controller as the American was close for no traffic advisory. The transmission went through and we learned they had made several attempts to reach us. From that experience I can say that radios have a tendency to fail during important phases of flight and then start working again. I believe the Air Canada pilots in this case. It was just an unfortunate time for it to happen.
Air canada is taking it hard on San francisco airport. First they try to land on the taxiway then they land the plane despite imstructing not to...
SFO is one of the worse air ports for pilots.
Pilot was high on Maple syrup....... I think..!
They were given clearance. Maybe the tower should be completely sure that the runway is clear before giving clearance to land? Just a thought.
Junior pilots, this is how you have those accidents that end up on TH-cam happen half the time. They stopped listening or tuned down volume last minute before landing.
OR its a terrible airport. As evidenced by the crash that already happened there and repeated close class. Please stick to commenting on what you know about.
They've been given clearance to land. What prompted the ATC to cancel the clearance in the first place? No one explains that part.
Tiago Miranda Obviously it became apparant that a United plane was still on the runway. He explained that at the beginning.
Lol what? That was like the absolute first thing they explained.
@ 3rdID. He (or she?) is probably from Canada. He wasn't listening either.........
haha nice
Just disregard Tiago Miranda, he is from camel country!
Upon hearing this “expert” again, I’m even more troubled with his analysis. Whether there are 2 or 3 radios onboard (I’m sure there are 2 that are being monitored) in normal operations (other than close parallel landing operations that I don’t think SFO does), only one will have the tower frequency tuned unless there is an unusual situation known or suspected.
Also there was no panic in the controller’s voice - perhaps annoyance, yes.
This lawyer and (supposedly former pilot) should stick to chasing ambulances.
3 radios, yes, only one will have the tower frequency dialed in. The secondary radio will have company or ramp/gate frequency for when they land. The 3rd radio is never used unless one of the other 2 is known to be defective well prior to the incident. When you are on final, you are busy performing the checklist which requires a call and response between the pilots.
The light gun signals are rarely used. I never look toward the tower when ready to land. It is usually off to the side by a 1/2 mile at times, opposite of me. I am focused on runway alignment, aircraft performance, and navigation. Such BS that the ambulance chasing lawyer is expecting a zero-defect environment. I get it, the situation could have been terrible, but the Monday morning quarterbacks are laughable.
cellblock131 Captain I agree with u sir as a co pilot of 22 years of age I fly British airways a319 that’s how the radios work for us but the argument between the atc of go around it is really hard to focus on control tower looks tiny from far and I’m busy looking at the runway....not ATC
I disagree with you two...btw i have been a flight simulators pilot for over 20 years🤪
Yes, how would you know the radio is U/S unless you transmitted and didn't get a response. Then you'd have to switch over to another radio.
@@rugratz3440 there is no way those pilots didn’t hear the tower instructions. They heard them loud and clear - they just didn’t want to do a go-around
@@sean2015 they didn't want? How come? Canmot imagine: I am sick of this duty day, better go home, let's ignore the ATC and land no matter what and have my licence suspended, never to be able to fly in my life again. Stress/ tiredness/ workload are to me the leading factors. And maybe the guys inadvertently switched to other frequency
Did the radio work when tested on the ground AFTER the landing? Did anyone bother to check?
It's two eight right not twenty eight arr 😂
Plus light gun signals are ridiculous. You don't see them unless you are looking at the tower. When you are on final looking at the tower is your last priority. ATC also gave clearance to land but I agree that the pilots should have done a go around if they heard it.
PilotCrissy lol the 28R thing bothered me too 😂😂
Was looking for this. When she said “R” it made me cringe.
And when was the last time you tried to monitor more than one radio while on short final! This clown didn't know what he was talking about. Probably why he is now a "former" pilot; my license is lifetime, how about yours?
David Powell
lol yeah I did see that. I was like "once a pilot always a pilot."
Plus air Canada was on an ifr flight plan so I guess they put him on the wrong approach controller and vectored him in to SFO but the pilot should have seen that on his approach plate though. Both pilot and ATC made a mistake there.
AbysS kB lol I cringe every time
Don't know why this happened but why didn't the air controller change his language to something like "do you copy?" I don't know what protocol is on communication between ground and flights in the air but I would have tried to get clarification on the pilots receipt of the communication transmission.
Its midnight large. Do you really think any sane international pilot would be awake at that hour?
because its an "merrrrican' atc, ignorant to the point of suing his own coffee cup because he spilt it on himself.
Because if they were having intermittent radio problems repeating the message over and over is the best way to be heard
My thought too. At that hour you need something more appropriate like HEY AIR CANADA......GO AROUND!
This is a complete farce! Why is it that people think pilots just do as they are told and it is ATC that are in control of everything? The "expert" in this case is misleading and I think was only selected to hype up the story.
To respond to some of the points:
- "Almost from the first day pilots are trained to do as ATC tells them unless the safety of the aircraft is in danger" If this is what you were trained to do then I am worried, my training revolved around "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate" as a list of priorities, ATC are part of a framework and while permission is needed for many of the things we do (Take-off, Landing etc) they don't get the same pictures as the pilots so the relationship is a two way street.
- "The airbus has 3 radios, and it is unlikely all failed" This is true the aircraft has 3 radios. However not all the radios are tuned to the same frequency (station) at the same time. The primary radio will be on tower, the secondary is usually on the emergency frequency and the third radio could be tuned to company frequency or used for datalink. So it would only take the primary radio to fail to not hear tower. (It is possible that the tower also broadcast on the emergency frequency, however it is common practice for this to be turned down, but not off, during critical phases of flight as it can add unwanted distractions, so may not be immediately audible)
Now, I haven't checked the airport weather but looking at the reported weather for San Francisco it seemed a clear and fine day and evening, so the last a biggest point here that has been missed entirely, THERE ARE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT OF THE AIRCRAFT! If the runway was still occupied then the pilots can go around themselves, they don't need ATC to tell them.
Was it correct to potentially ignore the ATC instruction, no, do I believe that they intentionally ignored the call? no. Do I think that the safety of this flight was at a significantly higher risk because of the missed radio call, no.
There are genuine, worrying situations in aviation at the moment. Issues like fatigue, that have caused serious accidents in the past and yet nothing has been done. Organisational pressures that put genuine strain on air traffic controllers, flight crew and cabin crew, all so the consumer can get cheaper and cheaper air fairs.
The FAA will investigate every reportable incident and that is correct. Is it worth the 10 minute news piece criticising Air Canada pilots, no.
Just my (probably a bit more than...) two cents.
So it’s okay to have 2 planes on a single runway at the same time.
So, ATC had given erroneous instruction to land? Then rescinded that instruction? His first message was mumbled and very hurried and at no point did he say: "Air Canada Flight 781, please acknowledge my go around instruction." Was ATC even transmitting on the correct frequency?
There was no error in giving that landing clearance.
The landing instruction was not erroneous, they had required separation. The instruction was given in the proper phraseology, ther's no need to use 10 words when four will do. Gee, if ATC was transmitting on the wrong frequency, how come everyone else was able to understand and follow instructions.
wait it said 9:00pm united was on the runway then it landed at 9:30 ? then they don't need to go around doesn't take 30 mins for a plane to move off the runway onto taxi way
Pilots only listen to one radio at a time during approach and landing. The number of radios on board is irrelevant. If the radio they were using had a hiccup for a minute there would be no way for them to hear the controller.
Glad to read a comment that takes the realities of the situation into consideration!
How about the red light gun??
You would not see it unless you were looking at the control tower. I would figure the pilots of the AC flight didn't realize they were No Radio and were intent on the runway and their airspeed indicator. ( I went no rad in the pattern on downwind at SBA once and had to look several times before getting my green light from the gun - so I did learn exactly how it looks!)
Nobody really looks at the tower for the red light.
exactly! thankyou. Cant believe that that so called expert ex pilot was mouthing off like he did. Im not american or canadian so theres no real bias from me for one vs the other, but as you said shite happens, ive had radio mics stick and block out everything for me, then on their own accord unstick and work fine.
I’m sure this is more a pissing contest that actual traffic separation.
Murdock: We have clearance, Clarence.
Oveur: Roger, Roger. What's our vector, Victor?
Perhaps they were on instruments like guitars and saxophones?
Aviate, communicate, navigate in any emergency...doesn’t seem like they had an emergency.
TyrannyTerminator Isn’t it Aviate, Navigate, then Communicate? I truly don’t mean to be annoying, Its just that i’m a student pilot and that’s what we learned in Human Factors. :)
Air Canada was on a different radio frequency.
Or didn’t communicate on the same language.
Darby
Just travel around the world, and you will see how wrong you are.
The San Francisco airport is very difficult to land on if you are not aware of its differences from all other airports in the world. It is past time to update the S.F. airport to modern safe standards, or so I have heard from one pilot who has landed a commercial planes on this unusual landing situation airport that lacks the more modern aids that line up the incoming airplanes with the runways.
Also, there is no relief taxiway between 28L & 28R so planes can clear the fast turnoffs. That was the reason that caused this incident.
Thank you for your additional explanation. I would hate landing there...either passenger or pilot.
James King what’s wrong w/ a passenger landing or taking off at SFO, I’ve done that several times before and it seems fine.
Well hopefully, the *passenger* isn't the one doing the take-off or landing. Anyway, I've been a passenger in and out of SFO many times and I love that airport, although it was a bit confusing back when AirTran was still around because I would see signs all over that airport showing where to go for Airtran. I eventually realized the signs said AirTRAIN which is the train that carries you from the terminal to car rentals and stuff.
I am just repeating what a commercial pilot told me and that was it is not an easy airport to land on without your crew helping with the correct landing approach. It is not an easy airport to land on. This does not mean that Air Canada had any legitimate reason to not abort their approach.
I thought landing clearance were not issued until runway is clear
CptMikeTango Standard procedure to have planes on apporch while others take-off. Now you know.
+Gustav Ziirsen Jochumsen You might be cleared once the preceding trafic is airborne
USA make their own rules up, everywhere else in the world you're only cleared when it is actually 'clear'.
It's a US airport they do things differently there, unsafely by most of the worlds standards but that's how it is.
Steve Leathem please. Every airport in the world does this. You just don't know.
"half a dozen times" just say 6 times jeez..
why does it matter
@@EDToasty it's vocabulary diarrhea made to make things sound bigger than they actually are. That's why it matters toaster
Might be confused with s*x ☺
28R is the main runway used for ILS approach. Instrument landings are often needed because of the fog there. Runways 28R and 19 are the instrument landing runways at SFO
Jeez. I’m not sure if this lawyer as well as PILOT guy really flew the commercial.
First, the controller DOES NOT sounded like he panicked at all.
Second, yes if you’re a NORDO and looking for any clearance then you supposed to glimpse the twr building and acquire the light signal. But this happened after they got the clearance to land and ‘allegedly’ radio gone out. Literally there’s no reason for the pilots to expect the light gun signals and they shouldn’t.
FYI, light signal is not laser light. If that was a daytime it is impossible to see without expecting one and in a nighttime as well when hundreds of rwy lights are on.
In the story and the Air Canada press release it was mentioned that AC781 had received its clearance to land. Once that clearance is received there is no expectation of further communication from ATC so if the radio wasn't working properly that would not elicit any adverse reaction from the flight crew. The lawyer mentioned that there are are a total of thre VHF radios aboard so it is doubtful that all three would not be working. What he didn't say was that it was highly doubtful that all three radios would be tuned to the Tower frequency. They would only be utilizing one radio. If they had suspected that there was a problem with the radio they could then switch to a back up. Since they had already received their landing clearance they would not of known they had a problem until the Tower finally reached them on the ground.
pdquick1 yeah but how are you supposed to know to go around If your radio is malfunctioning?
Sorry, but a go-around is always a possibility after getting a clearance to land and the tower frequency must be continuously monitored. At a busy airport like SFO there is a LOT of radio traffic on the tower frequency and something is wrong if there is an extended period of silence. A thorough investigation should help clear up the confusion.
Is it conceivable that they would tune away from tower? Would they tune the radio to ground before landing? I bet they are supposed to wait they are on a taxiway with no runways to cross, but it was night and these pilots switched over early to save time.
Mod MINI Never, under any circumstances should a pilot switch out of the tower's frequency if in tower's control area, only until tower gives them another frequency to switch to. You can put ground's frequency on standby so when tower tells the pilot to contact ground, the pilot can switch out of tower's frequency to ground in a quick manner. However, the pilot must stay in tower's frequency when in his control area. In this Air Canada flight's case, he was in tower's control area, and even though tower has given him clearance to land, there may be a chance in the landing phase of the flight that a go around is necessary for the safety of the pilot and/or others, either the pilot himself or the air traffic controller can call the go around.
If the radio that was tuned to the tower was not working the crew would not have heard the go around command so how is this BS.
On the previous incident, how the hell can you land on a "taxiway"? Those lights are blue, not white.
Tired, mixes up lighting.....or just simply just to drunk on maple syrup
Air Canada wasn't the only flight on the previous incident, a Delta flight that landed before the Air Canada flight made the exact same mistake.
Captain Sum Ting Wong was at the controls...
Multiple Radios, yes, but not necessarily on the correct frequency.
I wonder whether pilot or co-pilot switched to the ground control frequency too soon. Red lights are so rare, that part is easier to understand.
Please dont say land on 28 "R". Say right
Please don't say 28
Say 2 8
For Canadian you should repeat with extra 1 word in alphabet"A". Go around aaaaa....
A taxi runway and a TOL runway that is seperate by 100ft apart is waiting for an accident to happen. ..my humble opinion.
I didn't go any further with this, but did they find any problems with the radios and did the pilots say that they saw the red light gun when asked if they had?
Part of the problem is that the AC781 flight was given initial clearance to land when in fact they were not clear to land, the runway was going to be obstructed by another plane. As was pointed out in another video, this "CTL on spec" happens in the USA but does not happen in Europe, which has airports that are just as busy. Clear to Land should only be given once a plane is truly clear to land.
Unfortunately this is very common at SFO they routinely have aircrafts crossing runways after already giving landing clearances. There’s a video where a United flight was ordered to go around twice because of just that
The news know f all about aviation, first “tarmac” and now her saying 28R
Air traffic controller: " air Canada 781, go around."
*Pilot to Co-Pilot:* He wants us to land and then _'go around'_ aircraft waiting to depart !
Co-Pilot: Sounds dangerous! Maybe we should just circle and land after?
*Pilot:* NO! Rule No. 1. Flight controller tells you to do something, you do it immediaahhhhhhhhhhtely! Phew! Just missed
"28 AARRRRR" cringed so hard
Its the pirates landing strip. ARRRR
Many years ago when I was a student pilot on a solo flight from Lynchburg, Va. in to Raleigh Durham, North Carolina I had a similar incident. I couldn’t hear any radio communication from the tower. I saw the green light and landed safely. I soon after landing I discovered I had some time during the flight turned down the volume of the radio.
Even if the radio is off, can't the pilot see in his windshield that he might collide with another plane? I'm sure he can see there is a plane on the runway too close and from that he can decide whether it's safe to land or not. I mean it's common sense
Im not a pilot but when the video mentioned the light gun to warn the plane drom the tower, i was wondering how come the the tower cant activate res flashing lights on the runway somewhere, that makes sense to me. If airports dont have that yet for landing strips maybe this sort of flashing light system should be installed so its easier for pilots to see.
Red flashing lights on. Runway great safety signal
The lights next to their runway are used to tell the pilot where he is on the glideslope
IS AIR CANADA being blocked or Fined ? Do pilots pay Fine$ and lose employment ?
Air Canada is not the same airline as it once was, sad
I agree I think AC needs to return to its roots and earn some money.
"Air Traffic Controller sounded almost panicked" The controllers voice was very calm he just sounded a bit pissed bcs of ACA not going around. Also how would he know that the pilots just magically switched from ILS to VIS he must've been in the cockpit at the time.
Actually, the A320 and 321 both have problems with their radio connections, the ground pin isn't usually secured correctly and it can sometimes short out. Airbus did release a manual patch to airlines servicing the 320 series, but probably because of budget cuts, AC may have decided not to and leave it to chance.
I am surprised there are not more of these landing issues particularly on the N and S runways! I mean how these pilots line up to land in this direction while adjusting to the earth's spin at 1000 mph takes a lot of skill.
Coriolis isn't that big
100k folks in the air around the erf at any given time, pilots and ATC do some pretty good work.
Mr Bleh Ikr, if you did not know, there are 6000-10000 airliners airborne at any given time, insane.
"erf" That was the name of my friends conure b/c it would make that noise.
This so called aviation lawyer and former pilot doesn't even realize that there may be 3 radios, but they are never on the same frequency and rarely 2 of them. And the light signals may have gone unnoticed if the pilots weren't expecting them. More misinformation by the press and the eager for notoriety aviation expert and former pilot.
A D obviously they would try different frequencies to reach the pilots
If you watched the animation and the radio u realize that Air Canada is a sub tier airline company.
I just flew on American Airlines and I was amazed at the age of some of he pilots that I saw in the airport. Some of them didn't look to be older than 24. Shouldn't there be requirements of experience for commercial pilots?
SFO is not the only airport with 2 parallel runways. 3 radios... we used to have 2 on tower and 1 on ground frequency
who in their right mind would ever fly air canada?
Dumby
Canadians?
can you say... TENERIFE ?
Tenerife is hot news now dude
Getting bored with losing luggage and providing poor customer service there, eh Air Canada?
Mick Biggins no. Getti g tired of receiving US peeps crossing our borders??!!👀🤘😉
would what the ATC radio chat be heard on the "black boxes" or just the pilot end of the radio chat ?
101southsideboy
The CVR has several mics in the cockpit; unless the ATC is on a speaker (as opposed to headphones) only their end would be recorded - the investigators can synchronise the recordings to get the full picture. However it is likely the mics will pick up some of ATC.
Part of the problem with the Tenerife Pan-am/KLM crash was static on the radio at the vital monent when the KLM started its takeoff roll - static that masked Pan-am advising it was not clear of the runway and would inform when it was.
This switching of frequencies seems to be problematic , they need an emergency frequency that their radio will pick up should they switch at the wrong time. Possibly a mayday button that lights up and alerts them to go around
Air traffic control should get English speakers.
Why am I not surprised? Air Canada has for years been, as far as I'm concerned, an airline of last resort. Having said that, however, the recording of the Air Traffic Controller shows that he was breaking the first rule of communication -- gobbling like a turkey, not even getting the airline's name right some of the time. The first rule of communication, especially where bandwith is limited an d transmission and reception conditions variable, is to speak slowly and distinctly and he certainly wasn't doing that. All the more so when some or all of the crew, though no doubt competent in English, may well not have English as their native language, even if it is their working language. I've lived in Canada and the US, my native language is Englishj, I speak French and understand spoken French -- both the Acadian variety and the Parisian variety very well, but gobbled American or for that matter gobbled French, can easily fail to register in my (Scottish) brain. Clearly there are major shortcomings on both sides.
Watch out for all the Conspiracy Theorists! This is ripe with bait for them!
Regardless if the radios were or were not working, if the ATC felt it was necessary to tell AC 781 to go-around 6 times, surely the Captain and FO should also have seen the aircraft on the runway and made the decision to go-around themselves?
"surely the Captain and FO should also have seen the aircraft on the runway and made the decision to go-around themselves?"
Or the pilots on ACA781 saw that the planes had cleared the runway threshold, and deemed the landing safe, and landed.
The pilot is Pilot in Command of the aircraft, not the controller. The Pilot makes the decision to land or go around, regardless what the controller says.
I'm aware of that. But if ATC are telling you to go-around 6 times I would guess they have a very good reason for doing so. The pilot of the aircraft would then be landing without clearence, so safety cannot be guaranteed. In an emergency I can understand, but this wasn't an emergency.
"But if ATC are telling you to go-around 6 times"
The first rule of radio transmission is: Communication only occurs when a message is TRANSMITTED and RECEIVED.
The Pilot did not RECEIVE the transmission. Therefore, the controller FAILED to COMMUNICATE.
FAILING to communicate, the controller did what he knew would work. He bunched up two airliners on high speed taxiway Tango, the runway was cleared, ACA781 landed. No harm, no fowl. And everyone lived to land another day.
There was no DEVIATION. The Pilot was not in error.
_____________________
You don't make 6 commands to a heavy on short final. If the controller did not receive a response after 2-3 attempts, he should have sent the first aircraft on Taxiway Tango across 28L instead of bellowing 4 more times to go around. EVERY pilot in the SFO airspace hearing this conversation was shaking his head at the controller's blunder
_________________
"The pilot of the aircraft would then be landing without clearence"
No, the pilot obeys his last communication: "Cleared to land"
The Southwest pilot probably saved hundreds of lives . He turned off the runway when he saw the other plane coming
if the clip itself didn't tell me that the air traffic controller was saying "go around" i wouldn't have immediately known that that was what he was saying; he could have tried some change in wording instead of repeating the same two words in the exact same way; 'abort' 'don't land' 'up!'
"Go Around" is the official ATC phraseology for instructing to abort landing. The phrase "Don't land" will not be used because it contains the same word as "Clear To Land". If the radio was stepped on (meaning someone is talking on frequency at the same time), the pilots may hear only "...land".
It's very important that all controllers at all US airports use the same commands the same way. It might sound strange but even fairly good pilots can understand the transmissions.
Not only all American airports. They use the same terminology all over the world.
all they have to do is to listen to the cockpit voice recording. DhAAAA
Reads title
*ABSOLUTE MAD LAD*
The ALDIS lamp (light gun) signals are very hard to see unless you are looking directly at the tower. They're not used to get a pilot's attention, they're used when the pilot knows the radios don't work and is looking for the signals. With two pilots focusing on the runway, it's extremely likely they did not see the ALDIS signals.
But they did hear the tower’s instructions - you can bet on that.
Canadians are so polite :)
ATC: Air Canada 781, you are NOT cleared to land.
AC781: no that's okay we insist
"twenty eight arr" I almost vomited.
0:32 when you say twenty-eight R instead of two-eight right
sensationalism
noun
(especially in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement.
"media sensationalism"
There's something wrong here. The issue is not whether we are trying to blame air traffic control, the pilots or equipment failure. The point is that an investigation is needed to find out what really went wrong and change processes to ensure it can never happen again. Nothing happened this time but it could have easily ended in tragedy.
This is not sensationalism, this is crazy! Outrageous, inexplicable! I’m dumbfounded as to how this could happen!
So what is the results of the investigation? I know they changed things for the taxiway in SFO.
Going to san fran in july 2018 from Toronto Canada cant wait
Yep. Because these Air Canada amateurs turned down the radio to go through their landing checklist. With volume set to zero or inaudible couldn't hear tower ATC instructing a go around. Simple as that. Nothing wrong with the radios. The radios worked as perfect as ever when the crew chose to turn the volume back up after touch down to 5 by 5 at KSFO from the 0 by 5 from ATC's side on the short final when the AC crew turned their volume off.
readios are NEVER turned down on an A320 also if you try to turn the radios off, they stay on at an audible level, the simple fact is there was an issue in the cockpit at which time they are tasked to fix it and NOT respond to ATC
Must be the Language differences , The FAA might need an American to Canadian translator :)
Beachdudeca do you mean French? Because Americans and Canadians speak the same language
Pony Squad It was a joke.
lol
The pilot / lawyer is a serious comedian. Drama queen all the way who knows nothing about flying.
prat
Maybee they turned the volume down on the radio and forgot to increase it again. It happened to me twice. The red light could be difficult to detect at a large airport with all lights around. At some airports t hey use red firework signal instead. Very easy to observe as they move up in the sky.
Former CPL
@4:04 "almost taught"? I've been almost taught a million things in my life. I almost learned them, too!
An aviation lawyer is not an aviation expert. He is experienced in getting the courts to pass judgement in favor of his clients, and perhaps enhancing sensationalism in journalism.
I would be interested in what a true aviation safety expert, such as John Cox or Greg Feith would have to say about this incident. Although, it would not come in a timely manner, as required by journalism, as they would take time to obtain factual information before giving us their opinion.
2018 and still planes are using old school radios... please upgrade to discord :D
ATC: Air Canada go around
Pilot: Ohh but this time i am not on the taxiway?
air rage
What's wrong with stating the reason for go around? AC781 go around traffic on the runway might be a little more affective.
anyone going to point out that he said “U.S. Aviation Authority” in the beginning?
Chelle the correct name is Federa Aviation Authority
Twisttz_II okay, now what? 🖕
X you go on google and search up the difference between a tarmac and an apron
"sorrry eh I was aboot to go around eh sorry eh"
Blame Airbus lol
Too many close calls with air Canada. I would never fly them. Is that the result of Kamarade socialist commercial aviation?
The Last Neanderthal of course you won't fly with air canada, they don't let neanderthal on board
what on earth are you talking about ? are u honestly mixing up Canada with Russia ?
The Last Neanderthal Ya, bunch of communists eh!
When 781 first responded to the go around their radio sounded like it had a lot of static, so it is plausible that they had RFI or were in a signal depressed area.
Tower cleared them to land, so the pilot switched to ground frequency before actually landing. Which is a no no, but they were cleared to land..... and then they weren’t.