Runway incursion. Japan Airlines Boeing 787 enters runway without clearance at San Diego. Real ATC
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ค. 2024
- THIS VIDEO IS A RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FOLLOWING SITUATION IN FLIGHT:
06-FEB-2024. A Japan Airlines Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner (B788), registration JA836J, performing flight JAL65 / JL65 from San Diego International Airport, CA (USA) to Tokyo Narita International Airport (Japan) was taxiing for departure and was instructed to taxi via taxiways B, B8 and hold short of the runway at taxiway B8. But for some reasons the flight crew entered the runway via taxiway B10 without clearance. Meanwhile there was an aircraft on final approach (Delta Air Lines Airbus A220-300 (BCS3), registration N301DU, flight DAL2287 / DL2287) The Tower air traffic controller instructed Delta 2287 to go around. The airplane went around from about 800 feet, distance from touchdown was about 0.54 NM (1 km).
Join me on Patreon: / you_can_see_atc
#realatc #aviation #airtrafficcontrol
Image from thumbnail was provided by a passenger.
_______________
Timestamps:
00:00 Description of situation
00:17 Japan Airlines 65 receives clearance. Delta 2287 is descending towards San Diego
01:28 Runway incursion. Japanair 65 enter the runway without clearance. Delta 2287 goes around
04:50 The flight crew was transferred to Tower frequency. The pilots get a phone number to call. Possible pilot deviation
_______________
THE VALUE OF THIS VIDEO:
THE MAIN VALUE IS EDUCATION. This reconstruction will be useful for actual or future air traffic controllers and pilots, people who plan to connect life with aviation, who like aviation. With help of this video reconstruction you’ll learn how to use radiotelephony rules, Aviation English language and general English language (for people whose native language is not English) in situation in flight, which was shown. THE MAIN REASON I DO THIS IS TO HELP PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND EVERY EMERGENCY SITUATION, EVERY WORD AND EVERY MOVE OF AIRCRAFT.
SOURCES OF MATERIAL, LICENSES AND PERMISSIONS:
Source of communications - www.liveatc.net/ (I have a permission (Letter) for commercial use of radio communications from LiveATC.net).
Map, aerial pictures (License (ODbL) ©OpenStreetMap -www.openstreetmap.org/copyrig...) Permission for commercial use, royalty-free use.
Radar screen (In new versions of videos) - Made by author.
Text version of communication - Made by Author.
Video editing - Made by author.
HOW I DO VIDEOS:
1) I monitor media, airspace, looking for any non-standard, emergency and interesting situation.
2) I find communications of ATC unit for the period of time I need.
3) I take only phrases between air traffic controller and selected flight.
4) I find a flight path of selected aircraft.
5) I make an animation (early couple of videos don’t have animation) of flight path and aircraft, where the aircraft goes on his route.
6) When I edit video I put phrases of communications to specific points in video (in tandem with animation).
7) Together with my comments (voice and text) I edit and make a reconstruction of emergency, non-standard and interesting situation in flight.
Attention all air traffic controllers: when speaking with foreign carriers, slow the f down and stick to standard pilot-controller verbiage. It’s not only more effective, but just a kind gesture. It’s difficult enough operating in multiple foreign countries where controllers have heavy accents, but when you machine-gun clearances (that you’ve issued thousands of times), it creates confusion and radio congestion. Thank you… rant off.
I fully agree!
Truth. A lot of Japanese are not fluent in English. Controllers rattle-off commands so fast, even a native English speaker can have trouble getting all the info the first time.
@@TheCyberMantis No kidding. I just started watching these and I don't know how there are not constant problems, especially when dealing with foreign airlines. I find it very hard to understand some of the instructions.
An arrival controller in my area rattled off incomprehensible instructions. I asked for a slow repeat. The controller did it again. I asked for a slow repeat again, advising the controller that ultra-rapid speaking creates confusion and increases risk. The controller's response was to instruct me to squawk VFR, frequency change approved.
They continued speaking very rapidly after it was clear they weren’t being understood.
JAL, taxi to the runway via Interstate 5, use the left lane to the offramp for exit 32, Yield to oncoming traffic, then multiply 32 by 4 and divide by 16, read back all instructions...
Exit 32 on I-5 is a good 20 miles away... AND NOT EVEN A LEFT EXIT!!! (confusion intensifies)
😂
Read back in Yiddish JAL.
That's about right.
😂😂😂😂😂
Not to take away from the pilot issue, there also seems to be a competition among US ATCs as to who can speak fastest, and who can say "Cleared to land" with the fewest letters - JFK holds the current record with 6 letters "crulan"
Add the use of non-standard phrases and you have an accident waiting to happen
More haste, less speed.
"Add the use of non-standard phrases and you have an accident waiting to happen". Apparently people will have to die before this is addressed. 😡
@@HitechProductions If you know your history of aviation you will know that that is when regulations are changed. Most of them are signed in blood.
@@TheGospelQuartetParadise Yes, and apparently we haven't learned that lesson yet.
@@HitechProductions US Americans haven't learned the lesson. My country at least has learned the lesson very well, especially after causing Überlingen which was a big disaster and scandal in our country. The US is not the world and it seems to me that ATC is degrading in quality over there. I live in Europe and in my country, ATC instructions are clear, concise and short. You have no issue understanding what they say and in the end, it makes a frequency calmer, less hectic and more easily observable. There is always the common excuse that US airports are busier which is total hogwash. It works in Londong Gatwick, London Heathrow, Frankfurt, Amsterdam and so on. So why doesn't it in the US? Controllers in the US are in my estimation too stupid to understand that "say again's" from pilots will use more time, not less. This "crulan" stuff is a basic failure in radio communication and not something to be admired for because it is cool to talk fast. Narcissism is on a steep rise in the US society and I think we can see narcissism having a negative effect on ATC discipline over there. In that sense, I don't see controllers over there doing the best possible job. I see them trying to be cool (narcissism) which will lead to an accident. Just a matter of time.
@@LeTangKichiro I did mean the US when I said we.
I do not understand why slang is so common with US pilots, and to a smaller amount US ATC. It's like they have to be cool... What is wrong with "mayday, mayday, mayday"? I don't think I have ever heard a US pilot say that.
Lack of ICAO standard phraseology once again causes confusion.
Kudos to the JAL guys for being calm and polite, they were only partially responsible here.
proceed onto B, hold short of the runway at B9. This was not a simple mistake where they didn't hold short at the right taxiway, they've taxied into the active runway. Aside from that they've done it via B10 which was not even mentioned. The main issue here doesn't seem to be the lack of ICAO phraseology from American controllers (this time), but the lack of basic understanding of basic instructions by the Japanese crew.
@@GZimmermannyou must be a monolingual American
Looks to me like they were looking at B10 thinking it was B9. So probably also most of the way across B by then. Then obviously mistook the runway for B and here we are.
@@verslaflamme666 I am from Portugal and I speak a few languages. I'll take it as a.. compliment? 😃 judgments about someone's background based on a youtube comment aside, If you taxi into the active runway through a taxiway which was not mentioned during the instructions it's pretty much on you, isn't it? Again, from the entire exchange it seems they couldn't get an ICAO level 4.
@@GZimmermann JAPAN AIR SIX FIVE HEAVY, TAXI VIA BRAVO, HOLD SHORT BRAVO NINER.
the controller is the only one who's not follow ICAO standard phraseology in communication, no offense.
Asking twice an explenation to a seemingly confused JAL crew while they are crossing an active runway is not the wisest and safest move from the ATC. Furthermore the amendments to taxi clearances were faster than the plane movement..
We do not know if audio was cut and the plane movement is not accurate reconstruction.
You are responding to a virtual re-enactment that has NO accuracy.
@@gerardpully762they were definitely still taxiing at the time though. Would have been better to have asked while they were stopped
Audio is not cut. As you can clearly hear them continued to read back the b6 to c6 cross 9 instructions.
Indeed poor time for the controller to ask about a past instructions to a crew trying to follow current instructions@@lauriuusitalo764
Yes
I’m British, with a long flying career, & I struggle to understand the clearances, way to fast, glad I never flew into the states, feel sorry for the JAL crew
I agree "descend and maintain" sounds like one word when some controllers say it! 😂 They speak so fast! I'm sure they set records with their speed of speech 😳
Were you denied entry to the States?
I flew as an expat Pilot for JAL for eight years.
They’re obviously not native English speakers, and they only understand basic ICAO phraseology.
When the Controller went off script to ask about their confusion, they didn’t answer, because that’s not the part of any script and they’ve never heard that before.
When dealing with foreign crews who are not native English speakers, the best thing to do is slow your speak down and only use standard phraseology.
This isn’t an excuse for the Crews runway incursion. They were obviously confused.
Glad ATC captured the threat in time and Delta did a text book go around.
also the japanese culture of saving face
To me the reason why this happens so often in the US is that most Americans have never had to learn and understand a foreign language and this can’t relate to how difficult it is if they’re speaking really fast and not clearly
Americans fail to annunciate their words. Ever notice when watching a film with English actors, that you rarely have to stain to understand what they are saying?
It's not fair to expect Americans to learn a second language when they could barely manage their first.
@@ValNishino lololol
Literally zero slurring here from ATC. Pilots got screwed up.
@@chacehart7286 it’s not so much slurring, it’s the mumbly, fast American accent that we tend to fall back into coupled with expressions that are likely not found in an English textbook that many foreigners, though they’ve studied English diligently, have a hard time understanding clearly. It would be better for them to speak more slowly, clearly, and plainly in this case.
I felt sorry for the crew. English is obviously not their primary langauge and the speed in which the ATC controller was giving out instructions must of made it next to impossible.
If English proficiency is questionable, then the crew doesn´t qualify for foreign flights. If they fly to Boston, JFK, or Chicago OHare they are in for trouble.
@@gerardpully762 Rest assured that English proficiency is checked and makes its way onto every foreign air crew's pilots license. These recurrent tests evaluate "aviation English", the problem being US ATC using colloquial expressions instead of the standard phrases.
@@gerardpully762 Having watched a whole bunch of US ATC videos, I do find that sometimes American controllers can be incomprehensible. And I tested at a C2 level on the Cambridge English tests. Simple enunciation would make a whole lot of difference, to be honest.
I closed my eyes to not read the captions just trying to figure out if I would understand the instructions. I did. Without issue. And english is not my first language.
The confusion was probably coming from the term "backtaxi". I have not heard that one before, but I could guess from where they were, what it meant. But I know the layout at San Diego and really can't fathom how any pilot would think they were cleared onto the opposite end of the runway to taxi all the way to C6 to cross to the other side. One proper briefing and look into the ground chart would have made it clear, that this can't be what ATC meant. And in case of confusion, they should have just asked.
@@gerardpully762They understand English, What they dont understand is American accent
It was frustrating to hear ATC twice asking JAL crew whether there were any confusion with the earlier instruction. When ATC said that it was very fast and it was clear that the JAL crew could not understand what ATC was asking. ATC needs to speak slowly and clearly and understand that not everyone is a native speaker. How frustrating.
Agreed. I'm wondering if it's because SAN receives so few international flights that the ATC just don't think about or realize that they're speaking to a non-native English speaker. But they should. It's common sense. SLOW THE F DOWN.
Agree. The controller was bullying the JAL crew at that point. Very unprofessional to tie up the frequency in that manner. Kudos to the JAL crew for ignoring the controller's idiocy.
@@JustSayN2O Bullying is a good way to put it. Possible the ground controller felt some guilt or responsibility for the situation and responded to the feeling with defensive aggression.
JAL needs to stop and ask for a repeat.
Can’t just keep rolling when you’re not 100% sure. I love JAL and I think the ATC was talking 10x too fast. But JAL needs to stop and ask for a repeat instructions plz
@@PInk77W1yeah they kept rolling. If you don’t know or aren’t familiar it doesn’t appear they had any other flight taxing around them. Could have stop and ask to repeat. Acting like you know and fully understand the instructions after several repeats and then once you’re told you made an error you remain radio silent. Anything could have gone wrong.
Appears that JAL thought they were supposed to taxi on Bravo to enter the runway and back taxi on the runway, holding short of B9 (and then revised to B8) on the runway (based on the read back "hold short of B9" when it should have been "hold short of runway on B9"). The "expect a back taxi" phrase probably confused them. Not great all the way around. At end of day, controller said hold short of runway, readback was taxing on bravo to hold short B9 which does not suggest in that moment that they are planning to enter the runway.
I am amazed at how well English-as-a-second-langague crews handle such fast spoken instructions. I (not a pilot) can barely follow the communications.
@@garrettbernstein5991 I`m also not native english speaker, but usual air traffic talks is crystal clear and accurate, except for crew from India, Japan and sometimes French. Worst accents for my ears.
I’m so confused
I'd never heard the phrase "backtaxi" get used before, I assume the pilots were confused too. I think using this phrase was more confusing than just telling them to go onto the runway.
Except the correct phraseology is hold short runway 9. Yes even if there was only 1 runway that is still the correct phrase. JAL also did not read back the hold short instruction and the ATC should had made him read back the hold short and runway instructions with their call sign.
Was there confusion?
“Thank you, sorry sir” pretty much confirms there was lol
I can only imagine the vacuum-feeling in that pilot's stomach when he realized what he had done.
Worse still he probably was thinking the sorry sorry had him free and clear untill that dreaded pilot deviation call from the tower😂
How many amended taxi instructions do atc need to give? That can’t help the confusion
especially for a single runway airport!
I feel like they were punishing him at that point.
Agree - accuracy, and concision over amending and complexity. They had JAL dance a jig after the misunderstanding.
Having flown internationally in the military, I can tell you that it is exceedingly difficult at times to understand controllers who are speaking English. Imagine being these guys trying to speak and understand English as a second language, maybe at an airport they are unfamiliar with, where a controller is rattling off multiple contradicting clearances, in addition to off script language… not cool.
There is other traffic that needed to be worked around.
The last amendment was to get them out of the way while copying the number, and more importantly, the pilot didn’t read back the previous hold short correctly. Given they just had a runway incursion, keeping them farther from the runway after a missed hold short is a good idea.
I think the ground controller is responsible here. That was the most convoluted taxi clearance I've ever heard. He should have just given a taxi down to 27 via Bravo and if unable waited till it was possible to do so.
Should be noted that weather was absolutely atrocious on Feb 6 in SoCal. Reverse Ops were in effect and it was in the middle of raining for 30+ hours straight.
Exactly…I suspect the reverse ops is what caused the confusion, it seems like SAN was landing from the West over the water, but also having flights take off from the normal westerly direction, obviously that can cause confusion, I’m sure the JAL pilots thought that they would be taking off from the West end of the runway, and having flown out on this very flight, that is an unusual taxi route to the East end of the runway for takeoff.
Can't help but feel sorry for the JAL crew.
Was this after they landed?
@@andrewstorm8240 they were taking off
ATC can definitely speak slower in this case. SAN is not that busy, compared to some other airports.
Isn’t SAN “THE” busiest single runway airport in the world?
Definitely speaking fast, but operations on days like these where they depart west and arrive east are the absolute worst for the ground controller due to the limited taxiway space. The JAL flight usually leaves around 11:40-12 which is a very busy time for the airport.
ATC can say it slowly and distinctly one time or four times at the speed of light and create a shit show. I would say ATC and their training was about 90% responsible for this incident. Embarrassing how poorly Americans do their jobs at times.
@@jasonthomas8770not at all. SAN had 22 milion pax in 2022, London Gatwick had 32 milion, so not even close.
@@altavelmcnamara gotcha, I had heard that at one time., but you can’t trust everything you hear (or read in the comments section on TH-cam 😋)
SAN is a runway incursion prone airport as there can be difficulty discerning the ramp area from the taxiway. This can be a more significant factor if there is unfamiliarity with the airport and a possible language barrier.
Yeah, just looked it up at maps. As it appears, there is a nice confusing "A" painted on the line from spot 2 to taxiway B. Sure, it is upside down when looking at it from spot 2, but it is clearly not helpful.
Yeah I have operated out of there and you have to exercise extreme caution even though I’ve been there many times!@@phoenixqwertz
Most confusing taxi to a runway I’ve ever seen.
It's not nobody is allowed in the runway until given permission. until one hears clear, proceed, taxi on, back taxi. These Japanese pilots comprehensions are really bad.
@@Jopanaguiton The world is not black and white. Yes, the Japan Airlines pilots messed up and weren't supposed to be on the runway. At the same time, a ground controller isn't supposed to amend his instructions so many times. Ideally, you would want to have a maximum of one ammendments, if really necessary, two. But not constant ammendments on an airport which is basically not that big.
Look, the world is a nuanced place and it's not a football match, where one side wins and another looses. It's about increasing safety on ALL sides and here, the Japanese pilots deserve criticism and so does the ground controller.
@LeTangKichiro also tough to judge when you only see 1 plane of the whole picture. Who knows what the other traffic was. Seems from the start the controller thought they were coming out at the other intersection, gave the correction, than seems Southwest popped up in the way, maybe misjudged just how long it would take them to taxi down, so amendment 2, seems last ammendment was to give them a spot to park to copy the number, which is just in bad taste. Let them depart get airborne and call the center and have them give the brasher warning once they are at cruise and have time. No need to do it while they are preparing for departure still.
"You can proceed onto bravo, hold short of the runway at bravo nine, you can expect the back taxi" It very simply could have been "Taxi to runway 27 via Bravo, hold short runway 27 at bravo nine." ATC didn't even say the runway assignment or runway number to hold short of. The crew made an error but clearly the controller is to blame for some of this.
Someone said that weather was atrocious and it’s very difficult to tell what is the ramp and what’s the taxi way. So they could have thought the runway was B.
@@OCinneide "Someone said that weather was atrocious and it’s very difficult to tell what is the ramp and what’s the taxi way. So they could have thought the runway was B."
Good point. But I would counter that most airlines today have Airport Moving Maps which display your GPS location on the airfield map. Entering a runway should be clearly visible to the crew. This is why I think they thought they were allowed to back taxi. The investigation and cockpit voice recorders (if retained) will show if the crew was discussing back taxi as they entered the runway -- of if they were completely unaware that they had done so.
My airline uses Runway Awareness Advisory System (RAAS) which alerts when you approach a runway, either on the ground or in the air. Even so, with moving maps and RAAS, pilots still make mistakes and cross or land on the wrong runways. Thankfully aviation has a series of backups to prevent single modes of failure which can lead to disaster.
I get the impression that ATC was now testing the crew's ability to navigate on the ground by giving them all sorts of taxi amendments. The fact that they adhered to all instructions will probably help them in the phone call they had to make.
Their first instruction included a hold-short. They did not read that back, and entered an active runway without clearance in violation of that hold-short. Whatever mistakes the controller made, that is on the flight crew.
@@sturmovik1274 Yes they made a mistake, and one day it's going to cause a disaster. But on this occasion it's damage limitation
@@sturmovik1274 "Their first instruction included a hold-short. They did not read that back, and entered an active runway without clearance in violation of that hold-short. Whatever mistakes the controller made, that is on the flight crew." The first instruction did not include a hold short with the runway number and the runway they were assigned. So yeah, ATC bunched it up too. Also, maybe I'm quibbling here, but in my experience I usually don't get told to "proceed onto" when it comes to taxiways, that is usually used for runways (example, proceed onto runway 27). Usually it is "taxi via" a taxiway. Maybe I'm splitting hairs. Either way, I think the controller is complicit too. ALSO, to the controller, there is a reason why you have a phone number for them to call ... to hash things out. YOU DO NOT START ASKING QUESTIONS OVER THE RADIO WHILE THEY'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHATS GOING ON AND WHERE YOU WANT THEM TO GO. I am surprised they didn't have another incident. Save the Q&A for the phone call.
@@JohnSmith-zi9or Agreed, ATC wasn't helping one bit. Even his questions about the confusion were being asked at light speed. Slow down.
@@JohnSmith-zi9or What's he supposed to do with that number anyway? Aren't all phones supposed to be in airplane mode prior to takeoff?? Does someone roll up to the plane with an old phone on a really long wire? Or maybe they have a long string with a tin can on the end with the other end going directly to the tower
787's ND can display airport diagrams as far as I know. Sounds like they believed they were cleared to back taxi and entered the runway. Takeaway could be monitor your radio to see whats going on around you even though the transmission is not for you.
Okay, JAL crew screwed up. However, I don’t think it is appropriate for the ground controller to ask if previous instruction was confusing or not after issuing a taxi instruction from B6 to C6. They just had runway incursion, and it is not the right time to ask/talk about the thing while they are crossing the active runway.
Exactly! I made the same comment. That's why you give them a number to call.
I agree. If ATC wants more in depth information, give them a number to call
ATC are using radio to either get crew to admit full blame, or provoke an argument on radio. ATC are snakes. Saw this before a few weeks ago with the middle eastern crew getting the ATC asking them questions "why did you go around?" Tell us now while you are busy and confused, so we can humiliate you somehow. Crews should just issue a phone number or say nothing. ATC are sneaky snakes.
JAL crew was confused but ATC instructions were also ambiguous.
Holy cow. Set them up for failure. Then the controller starts asking them questions as they taxi across an active runway... then. couple more taxi route changes for good measure. And THEN want these guys to call them. What a joke.
Hold short instructions were not standard ICAO phraseology. Should have included the runway number. arguably mutual fault, although I’m not sure where JAL got the idea to proceed onto the runway. Maybe mixed up B9 and runway 9?
Why does the pilot need to get on the phone with ATC when the situation has been resolved, sit there with passengers, burning fuel he may well need at the other end of a long flight? Why doesn't everybody just do what they're going to do anyway, and file a report/ASR? Unless there's a clear safety risk, why the immediate need for a phone call with engines running and flight duty limitations ticking?
It happens to even the most experienced crews. Thanks ATC for catching it early.
is 2100 hours considered "experience" for 787 pilots?
This shouldn’t happen to any crew specially if they have 300 people sitting behind them
Always amazed at how ATC spits out lengthy and complicated instructions. Lots of ATC units need to be retrained in communications and human factors. On the other hand, there is a world wide shortage of quality personnel. I recently flew into Copenhagen and Geneva, I was shocked how ATC was behind the curve. Funny enough, most controllers use non standard phraseology when to speak their native language. Being a level 6 speaker in French and English, I have seen this human behavior in both of these languages. Happy and safe flying to all.
Initial taxi instructions need to include the departing runway. This was not included. Controller also said 'back taxi 09'. It should have been 'back taxi 27, or 'taxi down 09'. Since they are landing 09 and departing on 27 these instructions need to be made very clear.
Nobody would ever guess that you work in a bowling alley.
Crazy.. was taxing out from that same location a month ago and I said to whomever I was flying with that it would be easy to mistake the runway for taxiway Bravo given that it all blends in with the ramp. Shame. And yes, far too many instructions for what should be a fairly straightforward taxi.
Am I the only one questioning the odd taxi route? Why not just instruct hold short at B10 and depart from there? Why backtrack (back taxi)?
I think they were changing runway after Delta’s landing. That explain the taxi instruction via Bravo. Probably that’s why he taxi to runway 9 after the incident
They were changing runways
@@rockqc91 But International flights come out of Terminal 2. Why not have had them taxi straight down Bravo to runway 27 and hold.
@@TheGospelQuartetParadise lots of SW planes coming out of T1 clogging up Bravo.
Nobody can takeoff runway 09 (with any payload) because of the hills of the end of the runway so using 27 for departure. Runway 27 doesn't have a ILS (because of the hills) so 09 is used for landings during low ceilings.
If you just had an incident with an aircraft taxing on to a runway the last thing the controller should have done is add to the complexity and confusion.
Bingo. ATCs attempts to punish the flight crew really means hundreds of passengers are also being punished plus wasted fuel plus added confusion plus now the crew is rattled and more likely to make a careless error here. Very unprofessional the way the incident was handled by ground
They are moving blame while the flight crew is under pressure. Standard tactic by bullies. ATC are bullies.
This wasn’t an ATC issue. San Diego is a very tight airport, and Taxi Bravo has a tonne of lines drawn on it from the Apron on one side and the runway exits entrances on the other. It is a high threat situation, and needs to be carefully briefed.
ATC instructions were clear. Taxi on Bravo hold short of Bravo 8. JAL thought the Runway was Bravo, and entered. End of story. Everything after that was after the fact.
The JAL crew read back the first taxi instruction incorrectly and the controller did not correct it or repeat it. Fortunate outcome.
Re-watch it. They did read back correctly.
They read back the last one incorrectly for sure. Nothing was said about C4
The JAL 65 pilots screwed up and disobeyed instructions. However, the ground controller shouldn't have asked them if they were confused or not because the JAL 65 pilots can explain if they were confused or any reason why they disobeyed instructions when they call the number given to them.
ATC instructions are the audio equivalent to a doctor's handwritten prescriptions.
In terms of understanding the damned things.
It's the radio aspect of flying and my attention deficits that kept me out of the sky!
復唱が大変な早さで次々と指示が出る。英語が母国語でないパイロットは、間違う危険性が高い。もう少しゆっくり話して欲しい。
On the initial communication, the controller did not issue a runway number with the instruction “ hold short of the runway on bravo 9”, and the pilot never read back the hold short instructions, as he never understood that instruction. The controller, in absence of a runway hold short readback from JAL, should have queried the pilot. US controllers are awesome, but in this case, I believe the controller was at fault, specially, dealing with a foreign carrier.
KSAN has a tendency to push.. KPDX is similar. Regardless, it is best to simply slow down. No one gets in trouble for going too slow. ATC doesn’t control your cockpit, they just give instructions..
"No one gets in trouble for going too slow", you say? It happens all the time.
ground control needs to use the standard phraseology that's taught by the book 7110.65aa, "runway ##, taxi via." "hold short of runway ## at (point)" and speak in a slower pace especially for the foreign guys since english is not their first language. obviously you can speak quickly, but make sure it's legible over the frequency.
JAL obviously at fault but this controller needs to slow it down. Every instruction he gives he says it twice like everything is urgent. He’d save more time saying it slower just the one time. My Class D airport in NYC has more traffic than San Diego and no talks that rushed even when they only have one person working the tower.
US atc need to do some training at AMS or FRA on how to talk in a clear, polite, slow manner to foreign crews. It is never a sweat in those places
Because combined...those lovely places handle 2 flight a day.
Not defending the JAL crew, but it looks like they got thrown off-kilter by reverse ops, which does not happen that often in San Diego.
The problem sounds like they must have been planning on JAL to be the first plane out after resuming normal ops, or they would have just had him taxi all the way down Bravo to the departure end of runway 27. What probably threw the JAL pilot is he had probably already been given Runway 27 for departure and for him to back taxi confused him when he could have had a straight shot all the way down Bravo. Seems like the instructions they ended up giving him was the scenic route of the airport.
Two causing factors: (1) language barrier (2) tight ramp and taxiways don't accommodate heavies very well @SAN.
How about this theory... JAL expected that taxiway B would be a segregated strip of pavement-- like it is on the east end of the airport --and didn't recognize that it was actually adjacent to the apron. Looking at Google, I see there are no signs or pavement markings between his gate and taxiway B10.
To add to the foolishness, Delta got inconvenienced but there was never any danger, so it's pointless to go through the whole pilot deviation stupidity with JAL. They've got him sitting out there on taxiway J just so they can read him the phone number, burning fuel he might need on the other side of the Pacific. Do they really expect the pilot to call them on the phone when he gets to Tokyo?
+1 on the theory - I would guess the same (either that or confusion about backtaxi because that means on the runway?)
That's totally plausible. To add to the confusion, from Spot 2, there is an inverted "A" marking which they may have misinterpreted as indicating the route to taxiway A, and therefore the next turn must be taxiway B. Confirmation bias can easily merge these two factors, resulting in an incorrect decision.
@@satoshimanabe2493Nobody should still taxi an aircraft past a double dash lines and a double solid line closed to you without a clearance.
Initially, the ground never said JAL would be departing 27. DL is on final for 9! Back taxi on 9 would be west bound. The whole thing is very confusing. I’m a 737 Captain!
Dude, listening to the speed at which these controllers spit out instructions is anxiety-inducing. I speak a little Spanish so the notion of doing something as sensitive as taxiing a widebody airliner at a weird international airport while someone gives me “d,jandfjbfbkjhfakab” instructions is nightmare. Sometimes you gotta put yourself in someone else’s shoes, man. If you wanna yammer at native speakers, that’s one thing…but doing it with foreigners is just discourteous…especially when it comes to aviation. Kennedy Steve is a good guy to listen to as an example of someone who did it right. He would slow way down and speak very intentionally when communicating with international traffic.
Love and miss Kennedy Steve ❤️
Landing 09 but taking off 27? There is part of the confusion. And the ground controller needs to sloooowwww dooooowwn, I can barely understand him.
Especially when dealing with an obvious language barrier.
@@Decay0 Indeed. Accept the reality that not everyone can speak or understand "machine gun over a crackly radio" English. Even native speakers don't always understand what ATC is saying.
@@dermick I'm a native speaker who doesn't always understand what ATC is saying.
It looks like after Delta landed they were going to resume Runway 27 as the active runway. You sound like you know San Diego airport, so I ask you this. If they knew JAL was going to take off on 27 why did they not have him taxi straight down Bravo instead of the back taxi and scenic route instructions? They said possible pilot deviation. If I were that pilot I would have mentioned ATC deviation when they could have given me a direct route down Bravo.
Bravo taxiway is actually part of the ramp area. If an aircraft is pushing back from a gate there isn’t enough room to get by so taxiing down the runway is sometimes a better option other than waiting. I think this is ultimately what caused the incursion. Taxiways are often separated from the ramp by grassy areas so it’s very clear where the taxiway starts. The crew turned onto the runway thinking it was a taxiway because that is the first paved area separated from the ramp.
According to NYT, such incidents get more and more common, I feel bad flying
Never heard of backtaxi before
I think JAL pilots didn’t understand the controller’s instruction because they spoke very fast, and used difficult words. Japanese pilots are not that fluent in English. Glad everything was fine.
I guess the JAL thought taxiway B10 was B, somehow. Though, you should be able to see the hold short line.
Yes, JAL messed up but what followed was a sad display by the ATC. Theres CLEARLY some language barriers, ATC couldn't just slow down a bit and use clear and easy standard phraseology? Throwing more, complex, rapid fire sentences at an already confused crew will surely help. Jeez...
Something similar may have happened to Alaska 3488 from SLC to SAN on 2/12. We were about to land and were directed to go around. Curious to know what happened.
In this case, it is fortunate that San Diego has a single runway. The chaos is less. As a result, flight crews having problems can receive more attention. Good work ATC!
On top of that, San Diego is the busiest single-runway airport in the world, and the only reason I could think of a back taxi is the fact that so many flights had probably been cancelled.
@@TheGospelQuartetParadiseNo, it’s not. Not even close to Gatwick when it comes to pax numbers.
I wondered if Japanese pilots carry US activated cell phone to call tower for possible pilot deviation. Or if they have to use Skype or something with WiFi.
Oooofff SAN flipping the runway for sure it looks like after Delta landed. The weather was terrible here Feb 6. Unfortunate all around, I've never heard such extreme taxi instructions but depending how backed up they were bravo taxiway isn't the best due to proximity to the ramp
The pilot did his best to ignore the controller’s request for the reason for the incursion
If you think you might be in trouble, it’s smart to wait until you aren’t busy managing an airplane to think about what you’re going to say. It’s also unnecessary to push over the frequency everyone is required to listen to. They’ll call the number and explain themselves then. The frequency is for moving planes, not demanding explanations.
ATC entrapment. Get crew to either admit it eas ALL their fault, or provoke crew to start an argument. We see this same technique withe the middle eastern crew a few weeks ago. Using the radio frequency for blaming or entrapment. ATC knows they F'd up.
Meanwhile, passengers onboard are wondering if the pilots decided to drive to Toyko instead of flying. 😅
I've seen a photo of the position where the JAL started to taxi, and taxiway A and B are parallel and right next to each other. The pilot read back instructions fine knowing he needed to be on B, so he probably thought the path leading to the runway was taxiway B. Where he proceeded to is actually a and told to hold position is a tiled area just prior to the runway and is the same surface as the taxiway (but would still obstruct any approaching planes). This also makes sense as to why he would not immediately recognise it as a runway, doesn't take a native English speaker or even a half competent pilot to spot a runway, but he probably wasn't on the runway immediately. The rapidfire English must be an issue for some foreign pilots (it's actually a bit slower than the JFK machinegun instructions in this vid, but still must be very difficult for L2 speakers). But the problem might lie in a misunderstanding of the layout and not language
The one thing that was clear was JAL was not cleared to enter the runway therfore it was a pilot deviation and long flight back to NRT.
If the ground controller noticed the mistake then how does he relay info to tower to tell the landing aircraft to go around? Does he scream inside the tower like "HEY TELL THAT GUY TO GO AROUND" or something?😅
In KSAN tower there is usually only two or three controllers and it’s reasonably quiet so it would be no big deal for the GC to just tell local about what happened. But since the local controller is scanning the runway environment it’s li’e.y he noticed it himself. Since we have multiple frequencies and aren’t hearing them simultaneously it’s possible the go around was given before it appears on this video.
There are also automated systems to detect incursions like this and issue alarms. Might have been an automated warning.
That’s basically the whole point of the tower ATC, he has to check if the runway is clear. It’s literally the job description
Were the pilots aware and expecting RWY27? Because otherwise it is unclear and makes no sense why would they be back taxying on RWY9 from B8
ATC just had a runway incursion and continue to speak very fast and ask the crew if there were any instructions not understood at the right time they are crossing the runway. They lack situation awareness and they should use standard phraseology. And the fact to ask a crew to call ATC by phone for a possible pilot deviation minutes before take off is a recipe for a crash.
The USA doesn’t use hold points. This is a huge point of confusion. The ATC instructions were clear for a us pilot. Not so for a foreign pilot.
They weren't clear for this USA pilot. The ATC controller did not include a runway number to hold short of.
The runway is clearly marked liked other big airports around the world. No instructions were given to enter the runway. If you’re going to be an international wide body pilot, these are things you need to have a firm grasp on.
@@seoceancrosser "The runway is clearly marked liked other big airports around the world. No instructions were given to enter the runway. If you’re going to be an international wide body pilot, these are things you need to have a firm grasp on."
Which begs the question, why did at least 3 international wide body pilots have a runway incursion?
They were just messing with JAL pilots!
"Taxi B6,, hold short, cross rwy 9, back taxi C4, cross rwy 9, hold short B2, cross rwy 9, but hold short rwy 9, hold short, but clear for takeoff rwy 31L!" 😆🤣🤪🥴🥺
Only a private pilot here, and english is a primary language of mine and I sometimes have trouble understanding ATC instructions.
I do NOT make critical choices until I have confirmed with ATC. If I have any doubts I ask again, as annoying as it may be. Although I do feel selfish to say, a pilot should talk English fluently.
Even when ready to copy the phone number, the pilots were acknowledging instructions they did not understand. Not everything in aviation is taxi, takeoff and land.
what happens after copying the number, who do pilot call after copying the number? What happens
I’m not a pilot, but it is pretty scary to me that ATC communications are done over radio with pilots and controllers who are from myriad different countries with different accents. Add in static, people talking over each other, aircraft noise, etc. and it’s amazing there aren’t catastrophic accidents weekly.
It seems like a system constantly teetering on the edge of disaster.
Who knows if the pilot didn't want to give further explanations or didn't understand what was being asked.
"Roger, thank you, sir" sounded like Japanese for 'I understand that you need something from me, but I have zero clue what you want from me, so I will just say something nice and hope for the best'
@@andij605Bingo! It sounded like the pilot was confused. US airport markings are set up different than in Japan! Plus, his first language is not English. Comprehending English can be a challenge!
Okay, the pilots made a huge mess that could have been worse than what happened in Narita. I don't want to give justifications, BUT, the ground underwent countless changes during the taxi, quickly, for a crew that has a language completely different from ANY OTHER language! I understand that aviation must be fast, but it must also be SAFE. The pilots made a mistake, but ATC has its "piece" of blame...
That was on Haneda, not Narita. It was Japanese controllers communicating with Japanese pilots of the two airplanes involved. They seem to have a communication problem, and when you have a San Diego controller speaking as fast an an auctioneer while using non-standard phraseology...
Delta landing runway 9 and JAL not given an initial runway assignment and a back taxi instruction was confusing.
to be fair they did mess him about changing his taxi instructions at least 5 times.
What's up with all the questions from the controller while these guys (who clearly are not native speakers) are trying to figure out all the instructions they are overloaded with? Especially when they are crossing an active runway there seems to be no need to ask at turbo speed if there was any confusion about the clearance.
This exchange clearly shows that understanding English is not something that is a given by all foreign carrier flight crews. What a cluster-fk!!! And this is with Japan Airlines. They used to perform initial pilot training out of Napa, CA Airport but that ended long ago.
Most likely not an issue of not understanding instructions but just missing taxiway B.
@@lauriuusitalo764 Yes, I agree. It's all concrete and ill-defined in that area of the airfield. Rainwater on the surface would have added to the lack of taxiway definition, too.
They changed their taxi instructions like 5 times, no wonder. Also wtf was that phraseology from the controller?
It was changed once before the runway incursion. Once. The instructions were clear and even read back correctly. This is 100% on the pilots. What are you even talking about?
@@Surfnsnowboard3 Exactly, just people shilling for a JAL crew lacking in English proficiency. If they can't handle SAN, imagine them at LAX or JFK? Also, IMHO Japanese anime culture fandom on the internet makes people sympathetic to Japan anything regardless of context.
Do they usually say "proceed onto X and hold short at X#"?
@@gerardm.5047 yes all the time. They are called taxiways. Proceed onto x taxiway and hold short of x.
controller couldn't be anymore clearer !@@Surfnsnowboard3
what happened on that 20 min phone call? do they get fined? etc?
Thank god that the holes in the Swiss cheese don't always align!
Mmmm...that makes me hungry for a tasty grilled cheese samwich.
If Siri or Google Assistant cant understand your words, chances are foreign pilots wouldnt understand them as well. Also, do pilots receive visual instructions from the tower? Seems like it would be a lot safer if they can receive both voice and visual instructions maybe thru text or a graphic on their screens.
I’m mean. Yes confusion or no confusion. If I’m not sure about the instructions I’ll ask again. It’s ok to miss or misunderstand things. But entering an active runway with second doubt or not 100% is risky. What if delta was 100 feet above ? I’m curious how come they didn’t see the aircraft on a final either!?
it was Lost in the Translation....
Well the backtaxi rwy9 instruction from ATC apparently also was incorrect as he was just taxiing down runway 9 in the right direction.
No it was correct. They (JAL) were departing 27 so the instruction to back-taxi on 09 is correct.
Just wondering what would happen if the pilots never call back? It’s an 11 hour flight back. Are the controllers keeping track of this phone call?
Oh, yes, they are.
They were sent to an area to park until the supervisor in the tower talked with them via phone. They would not be given a Takeoff clearance if they couldn't handle instructions on the ground!
JA836J. The same plane I used to fly to Tokyo Narita from Manila!
They would like you to return all of those purloined blankets and dinnerware. Thanks in advance.
@@RLTtizMEAhahahahaha
No.
He was cleared on to B Hold Short of B8 which was then changed to B7 ,,,He proceeded to enter the runway without ATC authorization at B10,,,,, they had no clue what they were doing.
..after they told him to back taxi
After they told him "you can EXPECT back taxi"... In this case, ATC was OK and JAL was lost.
Sooo delta was able to land on 09, but Japan had to taxi 2 miles to depart on 27? Id understand if it’s a crosswind (which it wasn’t, winds were favoring 09), but why make Japan go all the way across the airport when they could just depart right next to their gate?
Other comments say they had just decided to reverse the runway due to wind changes. Delta would have been the last landing in that direction.
There are also climb performance limitations on runway 9 for many aircraft loaded close to their MTOW, as there is rising terrain towards downtown on the departure end. Not so for RWY 27.
why not just clear JAL65 for takeoff since his already at the start of runway?
Not the pilot’s fault…he knew the chances were high of a celebrity landing on Bravo in California
Watched this one in person. Looked exactly like all the runway incursion videos I have seen over the years. Aviation English is not English and this is proof. The Japanese culture is very respectful, but it does not jive with the required safety culture of aviation.
If only ATC would speak more slowly and clear, and use only key terms to help foreign pilots understand instructions. They're speaking so crazy fast...!
Don't they have geo reference taxi diagrams?
I'm a native English speaker (well, Australian... close enough) and even I felt like my ears were being assaulted with the rate at which that controller was speaking! Holy fuck.
I'm American from birth. I speak English fluently and I can hardly understand the tower's mumbled instructions, so how can they possibly expect foreign pilots to understand their instructions? ATC needs to learn to speak slowly and clearly. This happens with first responders, too. Speak clearly. Lives depend on it.
The pilots voice sounded a little off to me like he was fatigued ?
Although ATC caught the JAL’s plane incursion as it happened, he (The Controller) did not help the cause at all by the constant change in ATC instructions and talking as fast as a horse race caller! He should know better when communicating with obviously foreign crews to slow down and ensure the read back is understood! If anything he’s at fault in this situation 😡
Lot of comments on here criticising ATC for lack of clarity but it's the pilot that got the phone number to call.
Why does ATC have to speak so fast? As a non-native English speaker... for me it's incredibly difficult to understand the instructions, and I am assuming SO is for the Japanese pilots.
"Possible pilot deviation" - there should be some sort of "ATC deviation" phrase too. I hate these arrogant ATCs who act worse than the police. Pilots should write up reports on ATCs to make them behave a bit better.
Also, giving the JAL phone number to call? How long does it take from San Diego to Tokyo, 12 hours? Nobody from the shift would be in the tower at that time most probably. Or did they have to call them before departure?
They would have called before departure.
The main problem native english speaker ATC that they don't follow standard fraseology at all, using slang and They speak the way they want to