Monitoring all possible information released by FAA. Any further updates will be published here... but guess it was just a very tight departure/arrival sequence. AAL590 emergency at Tampa to be published later today as well. 2x1.
Thanks. The controller here made an error, but it was caught by vigilant pilots who started going around. The system worked as designed to maintain 500 feet vertical separation.
PP here, I fly out of SYR. They always have a bunch of trainees in tower and TRACON, since they’re not that busy for a class C. Don’t recognize that guy’s voice, so not sure if he’s certified or a trainee. Since they’re not generally very busy, idk why they needed to run a sequence that tight. And a lot of the controllers seem to get nervous if they have more than 1 airplane in the pattern at a time! More than a few times I’ve been held short for someone on a 10 mile final.
The details here are more accurate and scary. Media said about 700 ft of vertical separation with about 1 mile between them. Radar says 500ft vertical of .1 NM separation.
Excellent job by the Bluestreak 5511 pilot communicating, properly drawing attention to things (conflicting clearances, resolution advisory, forgotten frequency changes, flight paths), and not being whiny about their near-death experience. You can hear in the ATC’s voice that he is devastated. Just announcing the ops report was a very professional way of giving fair notice.
What I don’t understand is issuing a go-around instruction with no immediate turn to de-conflict with the departure. At least that’s what we do. Eg. “Go-around, turn left heading XXX (immediately). 🤷🏼♂️ Two planes climbing on runway heading to the same altitude are still risking trading paint, no?
I'm with you Sir! Avoiding Action turn left/right immediately etc, etc, traffic is an CRJ about to hit you up the a *se. This ATCO was so 'laissez faire' with the whole situation, it beggars belief.
@@breakinghues2751the audio is trimmed there. Other commenters had pointed out that he cleared the blue streak minutes earlier and 2 aircraft landed prior to him clearing the endeavor for takeoff and the go around
An airport “not being that busy” doesn’t mean it never gets busy. There are times you have to make tight calls. Not saying this was not a mistake, but a go around is not all that uncommon and a fairly safe situation.
Not so great on the helicopter imo. if you hear someone with that tone on the radio you wait it out unless you think your message is equally important. you do not block the frequency if there is tension imo.
It's exactly what I said under all these near miss videos on the ground - if you have a landing or TO clearance you should mentally "tune in" to that number so you perk up if it's mentioned in another clearance while you are still "using" yours. It's a bit more difficult in the US, because they allow multiple clearances on the same runway, but this pilot still did well in recognizing that he was way far down the slope for anybody to start their roll on "his" runway. Good situational awareness and good airmanship.
Saw this in the news yesterday, and figured VAS would have the audio up today. As usual, Victor does not disappoint. The video from the cops' dashcam is absolutely harrowing. Had I not read the headline of the news article yesterday, which explicitly mentioned it was a "near miss," I would've assumed I was about to see two aircraft collide.
I was going to ask "Why is the FAA investigating this and not the NTSB?", but, on watching the video, it's quite clear. The controller had no idea what was happening with the runways, he was only thinking about the helicopter.
Well, he cleared the Bluestreak to land and immediately after he cleared the Endeavor to land. I cannot fathom that he forgot he just had cleared another plane to land literally 2 seconds ago.
@@adb012 That is a regular thing in the US. As a european I think it is dumb and dangerous, but it IS their standard pratice to issue so-called "conditional clearances" that sound like "cleared to land 25R, you're number 2" - and they expect you to keep a look out for the other plane and keep your own separation. They even do this with _crossing_ runways where they tell you "cleared to land 25, prior arrival on 17" which is... well, the americans don't like it, if I call it crazy, but it truly is.
@@QemeH ... Oh, I know. Don't get me started on that. Only in the USA (and some other places) you can be cleared to land 5 minutes ahead of landing and have 10 other planes taking off, landing, and crossing your runway inn front of you. And you are wrong: They don't even expect you to keep visual separation. They can legally clear you to land in a CAT-III approach in zero-zero visibility/ceiling and then clear another plane to line up and take off in front of you. My point in the previous comment is that the controller most likely knew what he was doing but didn't realize that the BlueStreak was so close. I don't think that the controller "had no idea what was happening with the runways" as the OP said.
@@adb012 In low visibility settings controllers will not have 2 planes cleared on the same pavement at the same time. This is common practice in VFR and MVFR circumstances for efficiency. In low vis conditions it does cause a ton of delays as the amount of traffic an airport can accept is greatly limited.
It's part of being a flight crew, ATC is not there so they can sleep. Mutual awareness should anyone fail, which is what happened. Pilot saved the day on that day.
@@rosen9425 Nobody suggests that the flight crew were not doing their job. But ATC are expected to be reactive in such a situation. The fact that they briefly stopped doing even routine things like advising frequency switching suggests a number of things. One is a startle response, such as pilots experience when the unexpected happens, which can cause them to freeze, a loss of situational awareness, or possibly interactions in the control room which distracted the ATC. Airprox incidents such as this should always be investigated not to apportion blame but to understand why it happened and how it was handled. A go around whilst another aircraft is departing the same runway is one of those situations in which things can go very wrong, very quickly.
That's how pilots do it all the time at non towered airports. The landing plane doesn't need clearance to initiate a go around if he thinks there will be a separation problem, just as the plane taking off does not have to accept a clearance for takeoff if they don't think they can depart in time.
The rules deliberately permit this screw up. 3-10-6. ANTICIPATING SEPARATION a. Landing clearance to succeeding aircraft in a landing sequence need *not* be withheld if you observe the positions of the aircraft and determine that prescribed runway separation will exist when the aircraft crosses the landing threshold. Issue traffic information to the succeeding aircraft if a preceding arrival has not been previously reported and when traffic will be departing prior to their arrival. EXAMPLES - "American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land, number two following a United Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival." "American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival." NOTE - Landing sequence number is optional at tower facilities where the arrival sequence to the runway is established by the approach control.
@@denverbraughler3948 The rules MOST DEFINATELY DO NOT permit this kind of screw up. The controller violated numerous air separation rules specifically with his calls clearing one aircraft for landing and a second aircraft for takeoff on the same runway. I would strongly suggest you either go get your pilots license (like I have, CFII for the record) or actually read the FAR that covers this before commenting again and proving yourself an uninformed fool.
@GamingWithMaddog64 30+ years of flight experience as a US military pilot and later as a civilian commercial pilot and flight instructor, as well as listening to the radio calls. Yes, they are investigating and I already know what the verdict of that investigation will be.. as does EVERY OTHER ACTUAL PILOT who listens to these radio calls and looks at the position data. Why do you have a problem with me stating my opinion??? Why don't YOU let the pros investigate and then you can berate me to your hearts content if I am proven wrong..
@@9753flyer: You failed to cite the FAR that you allege was violated. You resorted to ad hominem attacks because you lack actual facts. 3-10-6. ANTICIPATING SEPARATION a. Landing clearance to succeeding aircraft in a landing sequence need *not* be withheld if you observe the positions of the aircraft and determine that prescribed runway separation will exist when the aircraft crosses the landing threshold. Issue traffic information to the succeeding aircraft if a preceding arrival has not been previously reported and when traffic will be departing prior to their arrival. EXAMPLES - "American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land, number two following a United Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival." "American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival." NOTE - Landing sequence number is optional at tower facilities where the arrival sequence to the runway is established by the approach control.
Just a mere PPL; on a recent flight into Sywell (UK) I was waiting clearance to land on the downwind, and on base, and even on turning final. The previous aircraft - a light twin - that had landed ahead of me had around a foot (30cm) of their tail over hanging the hold short bars, so technically had not vacated the runway. I did not get a landing clearance, I even asked if I could land at my own discretion (I know, flame suit on) as my landing roll and runway exit would be well before I got anywhere near that twin, but I went around - AS I SHOULD!
I say this all the time. I simply do not understand this USA practice of issuing landing clearance to aircraft so far out. You may as well issue it to them as part of their IFR clearance; makes about the same amount of sense.
"cleared for takeoff RWY 31L shortened" "Uh, sir, we're number 54 in sequence" somehow this is mental but "cleared to land Runway 13L, number 3, 3 departures ahead" is not..... make. it. make. sense. FAA....
It keeps the pilots on their toes while they have nothing better to do on final. Takeoff clearance with immediate departure might have made it safer, but probably still too close.
Thanks, Victor! I was looking for this after the news story yesterday (which butchered the transcript!). I saw someone in the comments say the planes were *only* 500 feet apart. Given the speeds both aircraft were moving at, that's way too close to be comfortable. Put in terms of time that's probably a miss by less than 10 seconds. Imaging someone points a gun a you, shoots, and the bullet misses your head by *only* an inch. That should scare you like those pilots were scared in this incident.
As a european pilot i dont get the system in the states. In europe (or generally EASA) you are only cleared to land or takeoff, if the runway is actually "clear". Thats also how it should be in my opinion, as the meaning of the clearance "cleared to land" is the runway is clear for you and ONLY for you. Even that leads to late landing clearances, its much safer in my opinion as it improves the awareness of the controllers as well the pilots. Can anyone explain why the US have the practice to hand out clearances on the same runway for three or more planes at the same time?
4 หลายเดือนก่อน +55
This. Cleared to land = the runway is clear of traffic and off limits to everyone except the landing aircraft. Even at smaller airports with no radar I've seen tower controllers use a plate/puck with red and green on each side as a manual memory aid they'd flip to remind them the runway is occupied.
Been on final a few times with another aircraft still vacating the runway. "Expect late clearance". Once I did go around as I came over the threshold and the other aircraft was vacating, at the hold short lines... but not quite over them. So no clearance to land was given. Seems like a firm rule here in Europe
When the required separation is met, it's ok to give landing clearance to one and then takeoff clearance to another. The second plane will be airborne before the first lands. In this case, there was insufficient separation. But the pilots were vigilant and started going around. The system worked as designed to recover from the controller's error. The airplanes were never closer than 500 feet vertically, so there was little risk of a collision.
One of the mainstream garbage morning shows butchered the transcript. They thought endeavor was Delta, And they invented new phraseology which I hope catches on … “ready for the sky” said by the tower controller to the endeavor rj just before the takeoff clearance.
Yeah lmfao and i watch that news before this video came out and get confused, "but the news said it's delta airlines??? Wheres the delta callsign, is Endeavor now merging with Delta or what" lol
@@ricklowers8873 right, but their call sign is not “Delta”. The morning show transcribed every “Endeavor” as “ Delta”. The story also said they were 1 mile apart, when they were actually 0.1 NM apart. I think it was CBS morning show. They have since removed every copy of that video because it was so cringe and ridiculous how wrong they got it.
@@Freedom4Ever420Apparently TH-cam doesn't like direct links to IG but if you look you can find the video on there still. It's under the cbsmornings account.
Great channel! You give a lot of evidence as to what is happening in real time and hopefully the FAA and pilots take advantage of this information and make improvements to flying.
0.1 NM = 606.7 feet horizontal separation, 500 feet vertical separation at closest point. The hypotenuse length is 786.2 feet. These distances are the length between the ADSB antennas on either plane, meaning their wing or tail tips passed closer than this.
that is vertical-the horizontal was over a mile separation drama queen and the abs let them know aircraft was in the area and he knew the other plane was in the area and acted according just like it is suppose to be--he was just bothered he had to go around
Yes! I was hoping you'd get to this one. The visuals of the dash cam footage are one thing to see but the ATC audio puts a much better understanding on all of it. The Bluestreak pilot was definitely on his game here.
With these becoming more common, I think the FAA is either not training as good as they used to, or they are pressuring their people to make these windows as close as possible.
Also a lot of these issues are staffing. A lot of people, particularly highly experienced senior employees took early retirement during the pandemic. That’s coupled with the huge uptick in air travel after have put stress on all areas of the system.
The training probably hasn't changed much, but you have a lot of new people and a lot more planes in the air. Due to the lack of staffing, people are probably moved up/promoted before they should be as well. This is not a good situation.
If you're at the point of keying up to say "Wait, who is cleared to take off on 28?", declare a go-around. The extremely tight sequencing we've been seeing is really throwing safety out the window. Barring specific circumstances like Airventure or LAHSO, ONE plane should have clearance for a given runway. Telling inbound flights they're cleared to land while simultaneously giving someone a takeoff clearance with the *expectation* that they'll be out of the way by the time the landing plane arrives works right up to the point that it doesn't. It feels too much like trying to beat a train to the crossing.
'Fail Dangerous' as opposed to 'Fail Safe'. Surely, in the world of ATC safety, the latter is undeniably the objective. As a retired UK ATCO I have never got my head around the numerous 'assumptions' that US ATC relies on.
And IF they were to clear another takeoff they will clear you for landing AND SAY "one departure prior to your arrival". But here it was clearly a screwup.
One of these days the swiss cheese is going to line up. There have been SO MANY of these recently and they don't seem to be abating. SYR is such a tiny little podunk field...why on earth would the controller think they need to cram and jam aircraft like that? Hold the Endeavour short for two minutes, FFS. I think the sheer lack of concern in the controller's voice is the scariest part for me...while he may have shat himself in the chair and was just remaining calm, his voice conveyed more irritation than "holy shit I almost just killed 150 people"
this system is stretched to the breaking point, between overworked understaff controllers, the industry pushing the FAA to keep it tighter than ever with as minimal oversight as the CEO's want, it is a matter of time
The country went from 90% white to less than 50% white in a single lifetime. What did you expect was going to happen to all of the critical infrastructure, society, crime, and everything else? Does a safe, respectable white society just magically sprout from the dirt in your mind?
@@Quatermain98526 You can be overworked at a small airport, too. Just give the guy who does TWR the GND stuff, too. And if it's still not enough, let him do clearance delivery as well. There is nothing in the rules against consolidating positions and it is regularly done world wide. It's just that in a turbo-capitalistic country the short-staffing doesn't stop at SAFE minimums, it stops at ECONOMIC minimums.
@@billstevens3796 The helicopter wasn't in play, but two planes were: the one that was climbing after takeoff and the one who did a go around right into the space of the climbing plane. Landing might have been better, but I don't know where the plane taking off was as the second plane was entering its final landing phase.
Within the safety culture at my place of employment, we've been taught that when you keep having near misses it's inevitable that major injury or worse will occur. Why aren't they learning from these near misses and making appropriate changes to the procedures before a catastrophic event occurs?
Fortunately the PSA Pilot had really good Situational Awareness, otherwise this would have been the Crash waiting to happen. Thank you very much for providing the Radio Communication so quickly again.👍
This was ATC (local controller) obviously but…ALWAYS check the final! The aircraft on final has a better overall view of the runway, but it’s worth a glance out the left window when you pass the hold bars too. 👍
ATC nationwide are overworked and stressed out, which affects them the exact same as pilots. They are short handed and training is a years long process. The NAS is becoming more and more dangerous, and it seems to be a matter of when, not if, we will have a major mid-air.
Thank you for showing some humanity which most people refuse to do. This is an overworking problem, not an incompetence problem. There needs to be more ATC staff hired to reduce fatigue.
I agree with you but not at Syracuse. It's one of the easier airports to work with just 16 scheduled arrivals and 16 scheduled departures per day. This guy just had a brain fart.
I saw this on the news and immediately wondered if it'd be a VASAviation video! Controller at the end with the "roger that" sounds like he just knows he's getting fired.
I had just cleared the runway (SCX8221) when this happened. There was also a Predator drone holding short of the runway on the opposite side. Did not realize they came that close!
A few of questions: - How far was Bluestreak from the threshold when ATC cleared Endeavor to take off? -Was Endeavor already lined up and waiting (or already in the process of doing so) or holding short? Would like to see how much earlier the line up and wait clearance was, and how far Bluestrak was by then (if there was any such line up and wait clearance) - Related to the above: If they were holding short, whatever happened to "clear right, clear left" (especially clear the final) before entering a runway? Of course if they were already lined or lining up, they could not have seen them at this point, but they could have seen them earlier when they were cleared to line-up and wait. - If Endeavour was already lined or lining up, they should have seen them much earlier. If not, they should have initiated the go-around as soon as Endevor started to roll onto the runway. It looks like they did it much later, which greatly reduced separation. Go-around should be started as early as possible, early is always safer. Tower clearly messed up here, but it is possible that pilots made it worse or at minimum didn't help mitigate it.
There needs to be a major improvement of US ATC. There are way too many incidents and this sloppy way of doing things, trying to be smart or whatever needs to stop. I think FAA needs to have a look at how things are done in Europe and try to duplicate that. Because the US ATC obviously does not work at all. And this Cleared to land procedure without having a clear runway probably needs to end. We are coming closer to a serious ATC related disaster in the US every day because things are deteriorating fast now. Something needs to be done, and fast!
The FAA knows exactly how things are done in Europe because that's similar to how the FAA did them in the past. Until they aligned with the demands of major airline CEO's, stating that this system was too "inefficient". The FAA subsequently introduced ATC clearances which allow multiple landing, starting and approaching a/c being cleared for the same runway at the same time. It was a conscious decision that neither FAA nor the airlines seem intent on reviewing, let alone reverting.
The amount of near misses we’ve had so far in 2024 is terrifying. I’m afraid whatever “good luck” we’ve had in these incidents will run out and we’ll have another Tenerife.
According to ADS-B tracks (not totally reliable but pretty solid) these planes got to within roughly 650 feet of each other. That's scary enough in a small GA aircraft, to have two "regional jets" in that proximity is terrifying. Good work by the pilots involved here to avoid catastrophe. Another example of how years of underfunding the FAA is coming back to haunt us now.
Glad the Bluestreak pilots were paying attention. That helicopter really should have held off on his readback after that "WHO is cleared for takeoff on 28??" transmission, though.
I don't get it. Syracuse isn't exactly a hotbed of air traffic. Also normally get some sort of "no delay" call for the takeoff clearance. This feels more like an actual error than tight spacing to me?
My opinion is when the controller realizes that it’s not going to work he gives the arrival a go around. The arrival goes around on runway heading and is given left traffic. The controller then assigns a right turn to 310 to the departure building in separation. Now remember, the separation ATC is using is visual separation and with the turn the courses were diverging the separation is increasing. Obviously not a normal operation but was handled well when the SHTF. Meanwhile, the local PD videos the incident and the forced perspective of the two aircraft in the frame plus the distance make it look like they are crossing when in fact they are diverging. Local PD gives video to local TV station which then goes viral and here we are hand wringing.
But did he pass traffic to the 2 aircraft? The transcript here doesn't indicate that. You can't use VFR separation with 2 IFR aircraft that don't officially know about each other.
@@bsmith1164 I’m pretty sure they knew about each other since the arrival went around because of traffic on the runway and the departure saw the go-around fly past.
Wondering what time it was and I didn't see a time indication on the screen. The shadows in the video inset are very short and and leaning slightly West, so the sun is slightly to the East (aircraft are flying West at 280 deg.), so it might be just before noon. When looking for traffic before proceeding onto the runway one would be looking into the sun. Syracuse can be very busy and this sound bite couldn't possibly capture all that was going on that morning.
That's not enough in situations like this. It took an "every landing is a go-around with active deconflicting" attitude from this pilot to avoid this. Hell, the TCAS even issued an RA.
Although it does appear that the controller made a mistake by clearing Endeavor for takeoff, this is a fairly common scenario for a go-around. I'm not seeing anything close to a collision or mid-air here. The minimum separation here is either visual (no specific minimum distance required, although at least 500 feet is preferred) or radar (divergence with target resolution, which could easily be less than 500 feet).
I live in Syracuse. That video was all over the nightly news the same day it happened. I was reserving judgement on it, as video, and even personal observations can sometimes be deceiving. In this case, it obviously wasn't.
I was hearing rumors about this, so I decided to wait till I could hear about it here. I saw a few poor quality photos that weren't great at all. Glad again that i waitedto come here and hear it and see it for myself. That made my stomach drop. Geeez. 500 ft seperation?!?
@@JoeController right? When a pilot gets an RA, the only way it’s resolved is through vertical deviation. It’s obvious that the RA was not resolved, based on the fact that the planes occupied the same FL. If they had been a little closer laterally, it’s pretty clear to me we would be discussing a tragedy.
It was close luckily the landing piliot was paying attention so he was altleast well aware of the plane taking off. If this was a lower visibility situation this definitely could been bad.
This is in no way the pilots’ fault, but when you go around for departing aircraft, it’s a really good idea to sidestep if at all possible. Obviously doesn’t work at DFW, but at SYR, there’s no reason to let yourself lose visual separation from the other aircraft. TCAS is often inhibited below a certain altitude, and obviously ATC has lost control of the situation. As PIC, you have to maintain separation on your own at a certain point.
When I first saw this and looked up the SYR runway map, I figured one was departing on 28 and the other arriving on 35. The video makes it look like they are on divergent paths to me. I was wrong...
On my first cross country solo I had an ATC try and land me head on into landing traffic. He told me to land 18 when others were landing 36 , I said unable and told him I was landing 36 . He told Me that 3 times wasn’t until I was on the ground he realized what he had said. Not long after I got my ticket a freind and I were flying and ATC told me a heavy would pass behind me and was no factor , the landing light (daytime) ( which they flipped on to alert me ) was so bright out my side window I could feel the heat so I dove to get clear Of the traffic. . . It was a very close call. In North Carolina with an instructor I was in the pattern doing pattern work. ADSB was brand new first time he’d used it . Someone else was calling that they were doing a simulated engine out on the radio. They were right above me on ADSB and dropping fast in my direction I alerted the instructor who was saying something else , he started to say no that’s not what it was , suddenly he realized and dove the plane , they just missed us. Maybe 30 ft ! This type of thing happens wayyyyy more than people think
Up here in Soviet Canuckistan it would be normal to hear the controller say something along the lines of “xxxx one to go before you, expect landing clearance short final. Break. Yyyy cleared for takeoff no delay traffic on x mile final”. Then both have awareness of the other.
Unfortunately, it’s state of the industry. The air traffic control system here in the United States is severely constrained by manpower. Many centers and towers are short on staffing. Almost every day there is a staffing trigger driving delays. Along with this you think about all the experience that disappeared with all the retirements. Of course, there’s never a compromise on safety. As such we must all remain vigilant, committed and always have situational awareness.
EDV5421 had low situational awareness. You *always* check final visually before taking the active. Also tower shouldn't have cleared them to takeoff, but as a pilot, if ATC messes up and you die, ATC still goes home at the end of the day.
I don't know how much GA traffic is at SYR, but there is no way the commericial schedule required the tower to squeeze that departure in before the PSA flight landed.
I think I share everyone's concerns about all these incidents. There will be a serious incident unless something is done. Its just a matter of time with what I have seen lately.
Syracuse is not JFK or SFO. No urgent reason to clear for take-off with the landing jet closing fast. Never assume, nowadays. That was way too close for comfort.
My understanding as a civilian (or whatever I should call it) has always been that landing clearance is a semaphore, whoever has it will always be the ONLY one who has it. But I've since learned that is not the case apparently... What even is the point of the clearance then?
You can see right there the limitations of TCAS. It is inhibited at low altitudes, and you won't even get an alert below like 300 feet. So you can see here how they mentioned it and oh, it's clear now. It almost let them collide because... It's supposed to be up to the controller here. Might be time to revisit this and come up with TCAS III.
Or keep your eyes peeled at all times for these types of incidents. Considering what happened at Austin, pilots should listen intently and do whatever it takes to avoid swapping paint.
When you're that close to the ground and one plane is climbing below another one TCAS doesn't really have a lot of options for a resolution - that's why it is disabled at low altitudes. You can't really tell the lower aircraft to descend.
Just listened to the entire audio as made available on LiveATC. My personal assessment is 85% fault on ATC and 15% on Endeavor Pilots. The audio here is shortened and makes the events seem closer than they actually happened. Bluestreak pilot requested landing clearance further from the airport than this particular video shows. In fact, a Sun Country 737, and a general aviation aircraft had time to land prior to Bluestreak's Go-Around. Anyhow, on Bluestreak's short final, the Endeavor was cleared for takeoff and I heard no audio evidence to suggest they were ever cleared to line up and wait -- this means the Endeavor was cleared to pass the hold bars and onto the active runway for takeoff with an aircraft on short final. Human error and big mistake to ATC. I'm sure he knows it, but it could have been catastrophic. Big learning point for Endeavor pilots for failing to really check for traffic and spacing before accepting a takeoff clearance and taxiing onto an active runway. The Bluestreak flight crew acted swiftly and saved lives this week!
"the events seem closer than they actually happened" All we need do is see the result. The two aircraft were a lot closer, and it did happen. No amount of explaining can fix it. Fortunately, no death, again.
Folks, there are NOT enough controllers. And it takes a while to train new controllers; The only solution to the problem is to limit the slots at major airports until staffing reaches proper levels. While that may not be the issue here, it was still pretty stupid to clear someone for takeoff when there is another aircraft on three mile final. Syracuse is not a particularly busy airport, so there was no reason for this incident to take place.
A problem with staffing levels is the high dropout rate at OKC. When 30 percent don't make it through and then another 30 percent wash out on their first posting you start with a lot of candidates and end up with few actual functioning controllers. The FAA needs to tighten the hiring criteria and only accept candidates that are likely to make it through. The changes due to the Barrier Analysis in 2013 did not improve the safety of the NAS.
Was the Endeavour given a line up and wait prior to the beginning of this audio, or were they cleared for takeoff from the hold short bar? It's understandable why Tower would want to try to get the Endeavour off the runway before the arrival if they were already lined up, but I have a hard time understanding why they'd be cleared to take the runway if they weren't already on it.
Very confusing. If there is no time delay here, then I feel like AA is requesting landing clearance too near to the airport. They couldn't have been more than 2NM out. In addition, the pilot doesn't call out short final, distance or anything. Endeavor is already lining up and waiting (right?) No other way to tell unless we get more audio. So AA should have never received landing clearance unless ATC didn't look out the window or just made a horrendous assumption that landing traffic was farther out. ATC is additionally clueless as AA is plotting their own Go Around and approach procedure.
There is so much wrong with this post. This is a controlled airport. Aircraft don't request clearance. Aircraft don't call out pattern turns at a controlled airport. The go around procedure is published for each airport so the pilot already knows what to do. The pilot reviews that procedure before landing. You don't do a line up and wait when an aircraft is cleared for landing.
![ไลฟ์สุ่ม iPhone 295 บาท... โกงมั้ย?[ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.97 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gdstHEE4UUE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 86 | คู่เอก "คมเพชร vs ชาติพยัคฆ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m3q_dRYDuU8/mqdefault.jpg)
Monitoring all possible information released by FAA. Any further updates will be published here... but guess it was just a very tight departure/arrival sequence.
AAL590 emergency at Tampa to be published later today as well. 2x1.
Thanks. The controller here made an error, but it was caught by vigilant pilots who started going around. The system worked as designed to maintain 500 feet vertical separation.
Been to Syracuse. It does not warrant planes being on top of each other like that.
Tight as in TIGHT.
PP here, I fly out of SYR. They always have a bunch of trainees in tower and TRACON, since they’re not that busy for a class C. Don’t recognize that guy’s voice, so not sure if he’s certified or a trainee. Since they’re not generally very busy, idk why they needed to run a sequence that tight. And a lot of the controllers seem to get nervous if they have more than 1 airplane in the pattern at a time! More than a few times I’ve been held short for someone on a 10 mile final.
Thanks for providing your videos. They are an excellent resource. Keep it up.
Sees social media report of near miss. Jumps to Vas Aviation for details. Thanks Victor for promptly posting content.
Always ;)
I thought the same thing!
The details here are more accurate and scary. Media said about 700 ft of vertical separation with about 1 mile between them. Radar says 500ft vertical of .1 NM separation.
@JimAllen-Persona Same here!
My first place to check for details as well.
"Wait he is cleared for take-off" is the pilot's equivalent to "the fuck is this sh*t"
You censored shit, but not fuck? Lol
It sounds like "who's" rather than "he's" to me but the pilot's definitely incredulous!
I was waiting for this somehow news got it first. I’m a controller somewhere. Crazy we hear these first.
To me it sounded more like a "what did you dooooo-WHAAA!?"
Full F bomb, but * the shit?
Excellent job by the Bluestreak 5511 pilot communicating, properly drawing attention to things (conflicting clearances, resolution advisory, forgotten frequency changes, flight paths), and not being whiny about their near-death experience. You can hear in the ATC’s voice that he is devastated. Just announcing the ops report was a very professional way of giving fair notice.
What I don’t understand is issuing a go-around instruction with no immediate turn to de-conflict with the departure. At least that’s what we do. Eg. “Go-around, turn left heading XXX (immediately). 🤷🏼♂️ Two planes climbing on runway heading to the same altitude are still risking trading paint, no?
That's the move, yes
I'm with you Sir! Avoiding Action turn left/right immediately etc, etc, traffic is an CRJ about to hit you up the a *se. This ATCO was so 'laissez faire' with the whole situation, it beggars belief.
Where's the de-conflict offset? Pilot did it on his own. That is the reason why we're not ready about the devastating mid air.
The piggy back is a bad situation. As you say needed to start the diverging earlier.
@@kevinscoggin3286 "ready"? Did you mean "reading"?
Worst part about this is Syracuse isn't even that busy. No need to send Endeavor on its way before PSA is safely on the ground.
He clearly forgot about the plane on final and I bet SYR doesn’t have ground radar with runway incursion warnings
@@JoeControllerforgot??? It was like 3 seconds after
@@breakinghues2751the audio is trimmed there. Other commenters had pointed out that he cleared the blue streak minutes earlier and 2 aircraft landed prior to him clearing the endeavor for takeoff and the go around
An airport “not being that busy” doesn’t mean it never gets busy. There are times you have to make tight calls. Not saying this was not a mistake, but a go around is not all that uncommon and a fairly safe situation.
@@georgiaboy8686ablea minimum horizontal separation of 1nm and minimum vertical separation of 100ft is not "not uncommon and fairly safe".
Great coms on Bluestreak5511, he heard the takeoff clearence for 28 and he was like - ha, funny same runway I'm landing o.....wait. what! WTF!!!
Thats why you listen to callouts even if it isnt for you. Great work by Bluestreak/American
Surely he didn't clear that other plane to take off!
Not so great on the helicopter imo. if you hear someone with that tone on the radio you wait it out unless you think your message is equally important. you do not block the frequency if there is tension imo.
It's exactly what I said under all these near miss videos on the ground - if you have a landing or TO clearance you should mentally "tune in" to that number so you perk up if it's mentioned in another clearance while you are still "using" yours.
It's a bit more difficult in the US, because they allow multiple clearances on the same runway, but this pilot still did well in recognizing that he was way far down the slope for anybody to start their roll on "his" runway. Good situational awareness and good airmanship.
Yes, probably something like that.
Saw this in the news yesterday, and figured VAS would have the audio up today. As usual, Victor does not disappoint.
The video from the cops' dashcam is absolutely harrowing. Had I not read the headline of the news article yesterday, which explicitly mentioned it was a "near miss," I would've assumed I was about to see two aircraft collide.
Now that Victor's awesome work is here, we all wait patiently for Juan to make his video.
The circle of Life 🎶🎶
It's such a perfect duo of Aviation TH-cam.
I was going to ask "Why is the FAA investigating this and not the NTSB?", but, on watching the video, it's quite clear. The controller had no idea what was happening with the runways, he was only thinking about the helicopter.
Well, he cleared the Bluestreak to land and immediately after he cleared the Endeavor to land. I cannot fathom that he forgot he just had cleared another plane to land literally 2 seconds ago.
@@adb012 That is a regular thing in the US. As a european I think it is dumb and dangerous, but it IS their standard pratice to issue so-called "conditional clearances" that sound like "cleared to land 25R, you're number 2" - and they expect you to keep a look out for the other plane and keep your own separation.
They even do this with _crossing_ runways where they tell you "cleared to land 25, prior arrival on 17" which is... well, the americans don't like it, if I call it crazy, but it truly is.
@@QemeH ... Oh, I know. Don't get me started on that. Only in the USA (and some other places) you can be cleared to land 5 minutes ahead of landing and have 10 other planes taking off, landing, and crossing your runway inn front of you. And you are wrong: They don't even expect you to keep visual separation. They can legally clear you to land in a CAT-III approach in zero-zero visibility/ceiling and then clear another plane to line up and take off in front of you. My point in the previous comment is that the controller most likely knew what he was doing but didn't realize that the BlueStreak was so close. I don't think that the controller "had no idea what was happening with the runways" as the OP said.
@@adb012one land one take off. I guess my point being that mistakes happen.
@@adb012 In low visibility settings controllers will not have 2 planes cleared on the same pavement at the same time. This is common practice in VFR and MVFR circumstances for efficiency. In low vis conditions it does cause a ton of delays as the amount of traffic an airport can accept is greatly limited.
Great SA by the Bluestreak crew. Well done. 2 trained professionals upfront saved the day.
The pilots are doing ATC themselves, and confirming with the tower smh
The shocked silence from ATC speaks volumes.
It's part of being a flight crew, ATC is not there so they can sleep. Mutual awareness should anyone fail, which is what happened. Pilot saved the day on that day.
@@rosen9425 Nobody suggests that the flight crew were not doing their job. But ATC are expected to be reactive in such a situation. The fact that they briefly stopped doing even routine things like advising frequency switching suggests a number of things. One is a startle response, such as pilots experience when the unexpected happens, which can cause them to freeze, a loss of situational awareness, or possibly interactions in the control room which distracted the ATC. Airprox incidents such as this should always be investigated not to apportion blame but to understand why it happened and how it was handled. A go around whilst another aircraft is departing the same runway is one of those situations in which things can go very wrong, very quickly.
That's how pilots do it all the time at non towered airports. The landing plane doesn't need clearance to initiate a go around if he thinks there will be a separation problem, just as the plane taking off does not have to accept a clearance for takeoff if they don't think they can depart in time.
@@warden330he gave them the frequency change in the initial instructions after takeoff
"Just gotta do an ops report" Yeah, it's going into the record.
Good thing Bluestreak was checking ATC's homework.
Controller screwed up, plain and simple
The rules deliberately permit this screw up.
3-10-6. ANTICIPATING SEPARATION
a. Landing clearance to succeeding aircraft in a landing sequence need *not* be withheld if you observe the positions of the aircraft and determine that prescribed runway separation will exist when the aircraft crosses the landing threshold.
Issue traffic information to the succeeding aircraft if a preceding arrival has not been previously reported and when traffic will be departing prior to their arrival.
EXAMPLES -
"American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land, number two following a United Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival."
"American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival."
NOTE -
Landing sequence number is optional at tower facilities where the arrival sequence to the runway is established by the approach control.
people screw up. better have good systems
@@denverbraughler3948 The rules MOST DEFINATELY DO NOT permit this kind of screw up. The controller violated numerous air separation rules specifically with his calls clearing one aircraft for landing and a second aircraft for takeoff on the same runway.
I would strongly suggest you either go get your pilots license (like I have, CFII for the record) or actually read the FAR that covers this before commenting again and proving yourself an uninformed fool.
@GamingWithMaddog64 30+ years of flight experience as a US military pilot and later as a civilian commercial pilot and flight instructor, as well as listening to the radio calls.
Yes, they are investigating and I already know what the verdict of that investigation will be.. as does EVERY OTHER ACTUAL PILOT who listens to these radio calls and looks at the position data.
Why do you have a problem with me stating my opinion??? Why don't YOU let the pros investigate and then you can berate me to your hearts content if I am proven wrong..
@@9753flyer:
You failed to cite the FAR that you allege was violated. You resorted to ad hominem attacks because you lack actual facts.
3-10-6. ANTICIPATING SEPARATION
a. Landing clearance to succeeding aircraft in a landing sequence need *not* be withheld if you observe the positions of the aircraft and determine that prescribed runway separation will exist when the aircraft crosses the landing threshold.
Issue traffic information to the succeeding aircraft if a preceding arrival has not been previously reported and when traffic will be departing prior to their arrival.
EXAMPLES -
"American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land, number two following a United Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival."
"American Two Forty-Five, Runway One-Eight, cleared to land. Traffic will depart prior to your arrival."
NOTE -
Landing sequence number is optional at tower facilities where the arrival sequence to the runway is established by the approach control.
Great awareness from the Bluesyeak pilot 👌🏾 Swiss cheese model was lining up 😮
Just a mere PPL; on a recent flight into
Sywell (UK) I was waiting clearance to land on the downwind, and on base, and even on turning final. The previous aircraft - a light twin - that had landed ahead of me had around a foot (30cm) of their tail over hanging the hold short bars, so technically had not vacated the runway. I did not get a landing clearance, I even asked if I could land at my own discretion (I know, flame suit on) as my landing roll and runway exit would be well before I got anywhere near that twin, but I went around - AS I SHOULD!
I say this all the time. I simply do not understand this USA practice of issuing landing clearance to aircraft so far out. You may as well issue it to them as part of their IFR clearance; makes about the same amount of sense.
Yep, if you say "cleared to land" to everyone, does that mean anything at all?
You're cleared to land but you're also always cleared to go around lol
"cleared for takeoff RWY 31L shortened"
"Uh, sir, we're number 54 in sequence"
somehow this is mental but
"cleared to land Runway 13L, number 3, 3 departures ahead"
is not.....
make. it. make. sense. FAA....
You say it all the time yet will always get the same answer all the time.
It keeps the pilots on their toes while they have nothing better to do on final.
Takeoff clearance with immediate departure might have made it safer, but probably still too close.
Thanks, Victor! I was looking for this after the news story yesterday (which butchered the transcript!). I saw someone in the comments say the planes were *only* 500 feet apart. Given the speeds both aircraft were moving at, that's way too close to be comfortable. Put in terms of time that's probably a miss by less than 10 seconds. Imaging someone points a gun a you, shoots, and the bullet misses your head by *only* an inch. That should scare you like those pilots were scared in this incident.
As a european pilot i dont get the system in the states. In europe (or generally EASA) you are only cleared to land or takeoff, if the runway is actually "clear". Thats also how it should be in my opinion, as the meaning of the clearance "cleared to land" is the runway is clear for you and ONLY for you. Even that leads to late landing clearances, its much safer in my opinion as it improves the awareness of the controllers as well the pilots. Can anyone explain why the US have the practice to hand out clearances on the same runway for three or more planes at the same time?
This. Cleared to land = the runway is clear of traffic and off limits to everyone except the landing aircraft. Even at smaller airports with no radar I've seen tower controllers use a plate/puck with red and green on each side as a manual memory aid they'd flip to remind them the runway is occupied.
Been on final a few times with another aircraft still vacating the runway. "Expect late clearance". Once I did go around as I came over the threshold and the other aircraft was vacating, at the hold short lines... but not quite over them. So no clearance to land was given. Seems like a firm rule here in Europe
When the required separation is met, it's ok to give landing clearance to one and then takeoff clearance to another. The second plane will be airborne before the first lands. In this case, there was insufficient separation. But the pilots were vigilant and started going around. The system worked as designed to recover from the controller's error. The airplanes were never closer than 500 feet vertically, so there was little risk of a collision.
@@bbgun061 Relying on a human to pick up and correct another humans mistake is not a great system to begin with.
The phraseology is CLEARED
One of the mainstream garbage morning shows butchered the transcript. They thought endeavor was Delta, And they invented new phraseology which I hope catches on … “ready for the sky” said by the tower controller to the endeavor rj just before the takeoff clearance.
Yeah lmfao and i watch that news before this video came out and get confused, "but the news said it's delta airlines??? Wheres the delta callsign, is Endeavor now merging with Delta or what" lol
I really wanna see that, but I really don't because it get's me irritated so much
Endeavor DOES fly under the Delta flag.
@@ricklowers8873 right, but their call sign is not “Delta”. The morning show transcribed every “Endeavor” as “ Delta”. The story also said they were 1 mile apart, when they were actually 0.1 NM apart.
I think it was CBS morning show. They have since removed every copy of that video because it was so cringe and ridiculous how wrong they got it.
@@Freedom4Ever420Apparently TH-cam doesn't like direct links to IG but if you look you can find the video on there still.
It's under the cbsmornings account.
Great channel! You give a lot of evidence as to what is happening in real time and hopefully the FAA and pilots take advantage of this information and make improvements to flying.
Improvements? Too late. Get some shovels and granite stones.
Finally had time to watch this, that video, mother of god that was close. Great job by the pilot.
Cleared to land, except that it's NOT clear
0.1 NM = 606.7 feet horizontal separation, 500 feet vertical separation at closest point.
The hypotenuse length is 786.2 feet.
These distances are the length between the ADSB antennas on either plane, meaning their wing or tail tips passed closer than this.
500 foot vertical separation is allowed when visual contact is made.
I think the system worked as designed to recover from the controller's error.
that is vertical-the horizontal was over a mile separation drama queen and the abs let them know aircraft was in the area and he knew the other plane was in the area and acted according just like it is suppose to be--he was just bothered he had to go around
@@mtsky-tc6uw No, that was way closer than you might think. And I'd be bothered by such an egregious error by ATC that could have cost 100+ lives.
Yeah, both planes are CRJ900, wingspan is about 82 feet.
@@mtsky-tc6uw 0.1 nm is WAAAAY less than a mile, read the video again. It says ,1NM, not 1NM
Thank you for this channel.
Yes! I was hoping you'd get to this one. The visuals of the dash cam footage are one thing to see but the ATC audio puts a much better understanding on all of it. The Bluestreak pilot was definitely on his game here.
I've had the popcorn ready since I saw the video yesterday
With these becoming more common, I think the FAA is either not training as good as they used to, or they are pressuring their people to make these windows as close as possible.
D.E.I. Inclusivness of people not capable of this vocation because BLM says it's racist. TRUMP 2024
Also a lot of these issues are staffing. A lot of people, particularly highly experienced senior employees took early retirement during the pandemic.
That’s coupled with the huge uptick in air travel after have put stress on all areas of the system.
The training probably hasn't changed much, but you have a lot of new people and a lot more planes in the air. Due to the lack of staffing, people are probably moved up/promoted before they should be as well. This is not a good situation.
And with pushes for "small government" what the hell do you expect. This is great!!!
Pushing tin until it rains...
If you're at the point of keying up to say "Wait, who is cleared to take off on 28?", declare a go-around. The extremely tight sequencing we've been seeing is really throwing safety out the window. Barring specific circumstances like Airventure or LAHSO, ONE plane should have clearance for a given runway. Telling inbound flights they're cleared to land while simultaneously giving someone a takeoff clearance with the *expectation* that they'll be out of the way by the time the landing plane arrives works right up to the point that it doesn't. It feels too much like trying to beat a train to the crossing.
'Fail Dangerous' as opposed to 'Fail Safe'. Surely, in the world of ATC safety, the latter is undeniably the objective. As a retired UK ATCO I have never got my head around the numerous 'assumptions' that US ATC relies on.
And IF they were to clear another takeoff they will clear you for landing AND SAY "one departure prior to your arrival". But here it was clearly a screwup.
One of these days the swiss cheese is going to line up. There have been SO MANY of these recently and they don't seem to be abating. SYR is such a tiny little podunk field...why on earth would the controller think they need to cram and jam aircraft like that? Hold the Endeavour short for two minutes, FFS. I think the sheer lack of concern in the controller's voice is the scariest part for me...while he may have shat himself in the chair and was just remaining calm, his voice conveyed more irritation than "holy shit I almost just killed 150 people"
A great example of the importance of a full and complete read back!
Oh boy, that was scary...
this system is stretched to the breaking point, between overworked understaff controllers, the industry pushing the FAA to keep it tighter than ever with as minimal oversight as the CEO's want, it is a matter of time
What CEO's are you suggesting want less separation between aircraft?
The country went from 90% white to less than 50% white in a single lifetime. What did you expect was going to happen to all of the critical infrastructure, society, crime, and everything else? Does a safe, respectable white society just magically sprout from the dirt in your mind?
@@A.J.1656 Airlines and airports. Higher throughput means bigger numbers.
It's SYR, they aren't busy. I'm going to call b.s. on this controller being overworked, just incompetent.
@@Quatermain98526 You can be overworked at a small airport, too. Just give the guy who does TWR the GND stuff, too. And if it's still not enough, let him do clearance delivery as well. There is nothing in the rules against consolidating positions and it is regularly done world wide. It's just that in a turbo-capitalistic country the short-staffing doesn't stop at SAFE minimums, it stops at ECONOMIC minimums.
Saw this news and came to this channel first.
Appreciate it
The go around almost made things worse, not better. 😢
@robertmog4336
Right? Colliding with the helicopter would probably have killed *way* fewer people!
@@billstevens3796 The helicopter wasn't in play, but two planes were: the one that was climbing after takeoff and the one who did a go around right into the space of the climbing plane. Landing might have been better, but I don't know where the plane taking off was as the second plane was entering its final landing phase.
@robertmog4336
Per your comment the helicopter could have been in play if they had not gone around. How was that not clear to you?
Within the safety culture at my place of employment, we've been taught that when you keep having near misses it's inevitable that major injury or worse will occur. Why aren't they learning from these near misses and making appropriate changes to the procedures before a catastrophic event occurs?
Not a near miss. A near hit.
@@k1mgy "Near miss" implies that the two objects were near to each other when they missed, not that it "nearly missed." It's correct.
The procedures that are in place already prevent this from happening. But you have to follow the procedures.
I was really surprised NOT hearing the controller yelling "CANCEL TAKEOFF CLEARANCE"
The controller seemed to be in another world.
Fortunately the PSA Pilot had really good Situational Awareness, otherwise this would have been the Crash waiting to happen.
Thank you very much for providing the Radio Communication so quickly again.👍
This was ATC (local controller) obviously but…ALWAYS check the final! The aircraft on final has a better overall view of the runway, but it’s worth a glance out the left window when you pass the hold bars too. 👍
ATC nationwide are overworked and stressed out, which affects them the exact same as pilots. They are short handed and training is a years long process. The NAS is becoming more and more dangerous, and it seems to be a matter of when, not if, we will have a major mid-air.
Thank you for showing some humanity which most people refuse to do. This is an overworking problem, not an incompetence problem. There needs to be more ATC staff hired to reduce fatigue.
@@Jump-2-the-moon To get more ATC they would have to pay more, the amount of money they get for such a job is a joke.
@@d0m1nu27it’s not a pay issue. We just can’t get enough controllers and we’re working more traffic than ever
If they remove the age requirement and reevaluated the medical requirements I think that would help a lot
I agree with you but not at Syracuse. It's one of the easier airports to work with just 16 scheduled arrivals and 16 scheduled departures per day. This guy just had a brain fart.
I saw this on the news and immediately wondered if it'd be a VASAviation video!
Controller at the end with the "roger that" sounds like he just knows he's getting fired.
I had just cleared the runway (SCX8221) when this happened. There was also a Predator drone holding short of the runway on the opposite side. Did not realize they came that close!
Heads up people controllers are people too! Nice job JIA
A few of questions:
- How far was Bluestreak from the threshold when ATC cleared Endeavor to take off?
-Was Endeavor already lined up and waiting (or already in the process of doing so) or holding short? Would like to see how much earlier the line up and wait clearance was, and how far Bluestrak was by then (if there was any such line up and wait clearance)
- Related to the above: If they were holding short, whatever happened to "clear right, clear left" (especially clear the final) before entering a runway? Of course if they were already lined or lining up, they could not have seen them at this point, but they could have seen them earlier when they were cleared to line-up and wait.
- If Endeavour was already lined or lining up, they should have seen them much earlier. If not, they should have initiated the go-around as soon as Endevor started to roll onto the runway. It looks like they did it much later, which greatly reduced separation. Go-around should be started as early as possible, early is always safer.
Tower clearly messed up here, but it is possible that pilots made it worse or at minimum didn't help mitigate it.
There needs to be a major improvement of US ATC. There are way too many incidents and this sloppy way of doing things, trying to be smart or whatever needs to stop. I think FAA needs to have a look at how things are done in Europe and try to duplicate that. Because the US ATC obviously does not work at all. And this Cleared to land procedure without having a clear runway probably needs to end. We are coming closer to a serious ATC related disaster in the US every day because things are deteriorating fast now. Something needs to be done, and fast!
The FAA knows exactly how things are done in Europe because that's similar to how the FAA did them in the past. Until they aligned with the demands of major airline CEO's, stating that this system was too "inefficient". The FAA subsequently introduced ATC clearances which allow multiple landing, starting and approaching a/c being cleared for the same runway at the same time. It was a conscious decision that neither FAA nor the airlines seem intent on reviewing, let alone reverting.
Thanks forthis
Someone in the tower needs to call a phone number...
That "okay" after the pilot stated he was filling an Ops Report
Pilot (on landing aircraft) was on the ball, but only so much he could do when he didn't know exactly where the other plane was. Wow.
It almost happened...
The amount of near misses we’ve had so far in 2024 is terrifying. I’m afraid whatever “good luck” we’ve had in these incidents will run out and we’ll have another Tenerife.
@@AV4LifeAnd as far as I can recall all of them were in the United States. A clear sign of systemic issues with U.S. ATC
According to ADS-B tracks (not totally reliable but pretty solid) these planes got to within roughly 650 feet of each other. That's scary enough in a small GA aircraft, to have two "regional jets" in that proximity is terrifying. Good work by the pilots involved here to avoid catastrophe. Another example of how years of underfunding the FAA is coming back to haunt us now.
ATC knew he screwed up. You can hear the lump in his throat.
Glad the Bluestreak pilots were paying attention. That helicopter really should have held off on his readback after that "WHO is cleared for takeoff on 28??" transmission, though.
I don't get it. Syracuse isn't exactly a hotbed of air traffic. Also normally get some sort of "no delay" call for the takeoff clearance. This feels more like an actual error than tight spacing to me?
Bluestreak 5511: "Tower, are you ready to take a number down for possible controller deviation?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
This is like "hey tower, I have a number for you to call."
Whats with all the ATC mistakes and mear misses lately. It seems its monthly at this point
Keep up the excellent work victor.
This was so close and nobody had any control over the situation. This 100% should be treated as an accident in the investigation
Another day another near miss in the US.
My opinion is when the controller realizes that it’s not going to work he gives the arrival a go around. The arrival goes around on runway heading and is given left traffic. The controller then assigns a right turn to 310 to the departure building in separation. Now remember, the separation ATC is using is visual separation and with the turn the courses were diverging the separation is increasing. Obviously not a normal operation but was handled well when the SHTF. Meanwhile, the local PD videos the incident and the forced perspective of the two aircraft in the frame plus the distance make it look like they are crossing when in fact they are diverging. Local PD gives video to local TV station which then goes viral and here we are hand wringing.
But did he pass traffic to the 2 aircraft? The transcript here doesn't indicate that. You can't use VFR separation with 2 IFR aircraft that don't officially know about each other.
@@bsmith1164 I’m pretty sure they knew about each other since the arrival went around because of traffic on the runway and the departure saw the go-around fly past.
They got a TCAS RA - they were not diverging.
It's getting closer
Dude you instantly forgot about traffic 2MF that you just cleared to land.
Wondering what time it was and I didn't see a time indication on the screen.
The shadows in the video inset are very short and and leaning slightly West, so the sun is slightly to the East (aircraft are flying West at 280 deg.), so it might be just before noon. When looking for traffic before proceeding onto the runway one would be looking into the sun.
Syracuse can be very busy and this sound bite couldn't possibly capture all that was going on that morning.
It’s only a matter of time…
The law of averages will come into play.
Every landing is a "go around" with an option to land!
That's not enough in situations like this. It took an "every landing is a go-around with active deconflicting" attitude from this pilot to avoid this. Hell, the TCAS even issued an RA.
At least the pilots were on the ball. Is it me or were the Tower not over-forthcoming when it came to offering numbers etc.
Possible tower deviation. Sheesh.
Although it does appear that the controller made a mistake by clearing Endeavor for takeoff, this is a fairly common scenario for a go-around. I'm not seeing anything close to a collision or mid-air here. The minimum separation here is either visual (no specific minimum distance required, although at least 500 feet is preferred) or radar (divergence with target resolution, which could easily be less than 500 feet).
5511 the second time was "I'M HAVING A COFFEE, ANYONE ELSE HAVING A COFFEE!?"
I live in Syracuse. That video was all over the nightly news the same day it happened. I was reserving judgement on it, as video, and even personal observations can sometimes be deceiving. In this case, it obviously wasn't.
I was hearing rumors about this, so I decided to wait till I could hear about it here. I saw a few poor quality photos that weren't great at all. Glad again that i waitedto come here and hear it and see it for myself. That made my stomach drop. Geeez. 500 ft seperation?!?
I think this was way closer than people realize
If you find the full dash cam video the cop was freaking out. Things look bad from the ground but the radar looks really bad too.
@@JoeController right? When a pilot gets an RA, the only way it’s resolved is through vertical deviation. It’s obvious that the RA was not resolved, based on the fact that the planes occupied the same FL. If they had been a little closer laterally, it’s pretty clear to me we would be discussing a tragedy.
It was close luckily the landing piliot was paying attention so he was altleast well aware of the plane taking off. If this was a lower visibility situation this definitely could been bad.
This is in no way the pilots’ fault, but when you go around for departing aircraft, it’s a really good idea to sidestep if at all possible. Obviously doesn’t work at DFW, but at SYR, there’s no reason to let yourself lose visual separation from the other aircraft. TCAS is often inhibited below a certain altitude, and obviously ATC has lost control of the situation. As PIC, you have to maintain separation on your own at a certain point.
When I first saw this and looked up the SYR runway map, I figured one was departing on 28 and the other arriving on 35. The video makes it look like they are on divergent paths to me. I was wrong...
SYR doesn't have a 35.
@@JasonPhipps 33/35 whatever. I said I was wrong, nerd.
5511s radio odds apparently the only one that can function.
Wouldn't you hear TCAS alarm in the background of the audio?
On my first cross country solo I had an ATC try and land me head on into landing traffic. He told me to land 18 when others were landing 36 , I said unable and told him I was landing 36 . He told
Me that 3 times wasn’t until I was on the ground he realized what he had said.
Not long after I got my ticket a freind and I were flying and ATC told me a heavy would pass behind me and was no factor , the landing light (daytime) ( which they flipped on to alert me ) was so bright out my side window I could feel the heat so I dove to get clear
Of the traffic. . . It was a very close call.
In North Carolina with an instructor I was in the pattern doing pattern work. ADSB was brand new first time he’d used it . Someone else was calling that they were doing a simulated engine out on the radio. They were right above me on ADSB and dropping fast in my direction I alerted the instructor who was saying something else , he started to say no that’s not what it was , suddenly he realized and dove the plane , they just missed us. Maybe 30 ft !
This type of thing happens wayyyyy more than people think
As we used to say at ORD, " An inch is as good as a mile"
Up here in Soviet Canuckistan it would be normal to hear the controller say something along the lines of “xxxx one to go before you, expect landing clearance short final. Break. Yyyy cleared for takeoff no delay traffic on x mile final”. Then both have awareness of the other.
Unfortunately, it’s state of the industry. The air traffic control system here in the United States is severely constrained by manpower. Many centers and towers are short on staffing. Almost every day there is a staffing trigger driving delays. Along with this you think about all the experience that disappeared with all the retirements. Of course, there’s never a compromise on safety. As such we must all remain vigilant, committed and always have situational awareness.
That is inexcusable.. ATC is asking for it, and it’s gonna happen..
EDV5421 had low situational awareness. You *always* check final visually before taking the active. Also tower shouldn't have cleared them to takeoff, but as a pilot, if ATC messes up and you die, ATC still goes home at the end of the day.
Definite Tower Deviation
2 Bombardier CRJ900s had a near-miss over SYR. Seems like this is Tower error.
I don't know how much GA traffic is at SYR, but there is no way the commericial schedule required the tower to squeeze that departure in before the PSA flight landed.
I think I share everyone's concerns about all these incidents. There will be a serious incident unless something is done. Its just a matter of time with what I have seen lately.
Syracuse is not JFK or SFO. No urgent reason to clear for take-off with the landing jet closing fast. Never assume, nowadays. That was way too close for comfort.
@@dashriprock4308Even if the airport isn't busy the controller could be overworked. For example by having a shift that's too long
My understanding as a civilian (or whatever I should call it) has always been that landing clearance is a semaphore, whoever has it will always be the ONLY one who has it. But I've since learned that is not the case apparently... What even is the point of the clearance then?
You can see right there the limitations of TCAS. It is inhibited at low altitudes, and you won't even get an alert below like 300 feet. So you can see here how they mentioned it and oh, it's clear now. It almost let them collide because... It's supposed to be up to the controller here. Might be time to revisit this and come up with TCAS III.
Or keep your eyes peeled at all times for these types of incidents. Considering what happened at Austin, pilots should listen intently and do whatever it takes to avoid swapping paint.
When you're that close to the ground and one plane is climbing below another one TCAS doesn't really have a lot of options for a resolution - that's why it is disabled at low altitudes. You can't really tell the lower aircraft to descend.
wow that is horrifying.
"I gotta do an ops report... and clean out my underwear."
Dang 0.7 nanometers!?!? That’s crazy
No
Wdym no?
Just listened to the entire audio as made available on LiveATC. My personal assessment is 85% fault on ATC and 15% on Endeavor Pilots. The audio here is shortened and makes the events seem closer than they actually happened. Bluestreak pilot requested landing clearance further from the airport than this particular video shows. In fact, a Sun Country 737, and a general aviation aircraft had time to land prior to Bluestreak's Go-Around. Anyhow, on Bluestreak's short final, the Endeavor was cleared for takeoff and I heard no audio evidence to suggest they were ever cleared to line up and wait -- this means the Endeavor was cleared to pass the hold bars and onto the active runway for takeoff with an aircraft on short final. Human error and big mistake to ATC. I'm sure he knows it, but it could have been catastrophic. Big learning point for Endeavor pilots for failing to really check for traffic and spacing before accepting a takeoff clearance and taxiing onto an active runway. The Bluestreak flight crew acted swiftly and saved lives this week!
"the events seem closer than they actually happened"
All we need do is see the result. The two aircraft were a lot closer, and it did happen. No amount of explaining can fix it. Fortunately, no death, again.
Nice to see an incident like this being handled effectively and practically on freq. Too often there's anger, yelling, and lots of distraction.
Jeeesssuussssss.. What is going on with ATC's these days? I've never seen/heard so many instances of unforced errors/bad calls the past 12mo.
There's just no excuse for that!
Folks, there are NOT enough controllers. And it takes a while to train new controllers; The only solution to the problem is to limit the slots at major airports until staffing reaches proper levels. While that may not be the issue here, it was still pretty stupid to clear someone for takeoff when there is another aircraft on three mile final. Syracuse is not a particularly busy airport, so there was no reason for this incident to take place.
This wasn't a Major airport... It was KSYR a regional airport.
@@FlyingRob22that’s what he said. No reason for conga line
@@FlyingRob22 Did you read what I posted-?
Donnie, did you hear the Dude's story?
A problem with staffing levels is the high dropout rate at OKC. When 30 percent don't make it through and then another 30 percent wash out on their first posting you start with a lot of candidates and end up with few actual functioning controllers. The FAA needs to tighten the hiring criteria and only accept candidates that are likely to make it through. The changes due to the Barrier Analysis in 2013 did not improve the safety of the NAS.
was the tower trying to mimic the landing and takeoff sequence at airport in India not long ago, where one lands right behind another taking off?
Was the Endeavour given a line up and wait prior to the beginning of this audio, or were they cleared for takeoff from the hold short bar? It's understandable why Tower would want to try to get the Endeavour off the runway before the arrival if they were already lined up, but I have a hard time understanding why they'd be cleared to take the runway if they weren't already on it.
They had NOT been cleared to line up
Very confusing. If there is no time delay here, then I feel like AA is requesting landing clearance too near to the airport. They couldn't have been more than 2NM out. In addition, the pilot doesn't call out short final, distance or anything. Endeavor is already lining up and waiting (right?) No other way to tell unless we get more audio. So AA should have never received landing clearance unless ATC didn't look out the window or just made a horrendous assumption that landing traffic was farther out. ATC is additionally clueless as AA is plotting their own Go Around and approach procedure.
There's no more audio than what you hear here
@@VASAviation The content is great as is. Thanks for piecing it together!
There is so much wrong with this post. This is a controlled airport. Aircraft don't request clearance. Aircraft don't call out pattern turns at a controlled airport. The go around procedure is published for each airport so the pilot already knows what to do. The pilot reviews that procedure before landing. You don't do a line up and wait when an aircraft is cleared for landing.