Southwest DANGEROUSLY LOW Approaching to Land at Manchester-Boston
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASA...
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Flying Eyes 10% OFF: flyingeyesopti...
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
Please, give a big LIKE to support and for more videos like this!! :)
Southwest descended to about 1700 feet, 400 feet below MRVA (2100ft). BLUUM to be crossed at 2500 feet.
He was cleared to 2100 feet, looks like he descended to 1700, then climbed back up. The first turn looked too close to the final approach course. Ceiling was reported 3,000 so most likely visual.
All former A-10 pilots..they get scared above 500 ft AGL
*Brrrrt* muscle memory 😂
I was watching this on FR24 _ live about 7 miles from KMHT and many fly right over my home. Started looking at terrain heights where they overshot the first turn which is what caught my attention - gets up to over 800 ft South Bow/Hooksett looking at the track log on FA.
@@sailingeric i thought they were all navy pilots the way they tend to slam the planes down when landing.
Wow, regardless of what Southwest was doing, that controller did an absolutely fantastic job. Every single transmission that came out of his mouth was flawless. Well done.
He realized they were unstable and made the suggestion to try again. Pilot also did well to take up the option and not rush trying to land at any cost.
@@2DogsVlogsI know, I watched the video.
He did however give them a late vector onto final....
In Europe controllers always act like this....
The ATC guy was super thorough and clear with instructions.
It's refreshing to hear kindness from them instead of the crabbiness or irritation that we come to expect. Although the sample is biased because it's more likely those are the ones getting videos made about them.
Controller caught it right away and pilot didn’t try to make the unstable approach work with “get-there-itis”. System worked well to prevent anything more serious. Great job!
Yes poor vector through the loc...approach was never going to work.
Excellent controller!
I see the "First one to land with a clothes line stuck to the main gear" contest is still accepting submissions.
Isn’t this the third or fourth time now? I’d say it’s time someone looks into their operating procedures, something is not working as intended there.
I was going to say the same thing! I tried getting tail numbers to see if the ones having the problem were from the same lot of consecutive serial numbers...
It does seem to appear it might be an institutional issue at Southwest
You’re right but the company already had a company wide training day for pilots about this exact issue
The others were visual approaches, this one looks to be an ILS approach?
@@pjotrtje0NL This one was an ILS. Oklahoma City, Tampa, it was either Newark or JFK and Either San Fran or LA were all ILS. So now we look at the model. I know they were 737s. Has to be something in common besides being a Boeing aircraft.....
Hey Southwest, you can only tie for the low altitude record.
They want gold trophy for sucked up gay people
Depends on if we count how deep they ram it in to the ground.
Thanks Victor! Great Capture.
Classic case of an overshoot preceded by a last minute runway/approach change= unstable approach- Go Around and try again....It happens. Jb.
Plan the flight and fly the plan! Last minute runway change can become a huge trap! Most of the time, ATC offers thinking it would help. On a short leg to PIT, setup n briefed for 10L, App offered 10R, as we were descending thru 10’. Politely declined!
A major responsibility of a pilot is situational awareness. And these days they have moving maps showing them. No mental gymnastics like days gone by and paper charts.
Yeah, that's the problem. They're relying on the "set it and forget it" mentality using computers. More automation, less paying attention.
Seems like the late change in approach broke their flow, maybe didn't have time to fully brief it, or possibly didn't get it programmed into the FMS right. Sure looked like he was hand flying!
I agree. Task saturation along with less than proficient hand flying skills.
We can rag on the pilot, rag on the controller, rag on SWA, even rag on the airport... ...but the bottom line is, that when the altitude bounced high, both ATC and the pilot recognized the unstabilized approach, and the pilot decided to go around.
This is a good thing.
More pilots should decide this way.
this is pretty poor to begin with, yes the remedy was correct - but for professional pilots this is equal to getting lost on the way to school - not a good thing at all - blew through ALT as well as the LNAV
@@ghostrider-be9ek I agree. I have watched far too many "how did it happen" videos where the pilot had doubled down on an already bad approach.
He didn’t go around
@@kylepinto5795 He went around the pattern again.
The phrase "go around" is short for "Go around the landing pattern again".
(It is not short for "pushed the TOGA button".)
@@KennethAGrimm the phrase is NOT short for go around the landing pattern again.
Southwest pilot training emphasizes flying below air defense radar.
the controller was on top of the game, well done!
Seems like the pilots misread the approach plate, they should descend to 1600 ft after BLUUM, may have been a brainfart since the controller mentioned BLUUM. Obviously still not acceptable though.
They were tracking the glideslope though.
@@kewkabe This wouldn't have happened if they were on GS.
It doesn't make sense. You're intercepting from below the GS, there is no reason to intentionally descend to 1600ft. They should have stayed at 2100 until intercepting the GS and then riding it down. No need to dive and drive
What's the date of the incident?
Sep 7th, 2024
@@VASAviation can you please include dates in description. Been a few cases of wanting to know dates and having to ask comments
@@D3V1L0M3N And now we just might know the handle of the chief pilot for SWA.
could it have hurt for him to say "thanks for the help"?
I was on this flight!
I was standing on the ground, and now my hair is messed up. 😂
I just wanted the pilot to say thank you at the end of it all.
What is with this airline and precision approaches
They did this in Oklahoma a few months back.
And TPA
And misaligned at LGA almost hitting the tower.
I’m going to speculate. He was given 2100 until established. Looks like he thought he was established and started the descent to intercept the glide slope at the FAF at 1,600 ft. If the overlay is to scale, he was past BLUUM so that would have been perfectly fine. But he overshot the final approach course and therefore never “established” and couldn’t begin the descent in the protected area. Not as egregious as the other incidents but still not good. This happens more than you think in the NAS.
It's 2100' UNTIL ESTABLISHED for a reason. Once you're established, you're protected. If not established, you've lost obstacle protection.
@@VASAviation I agree
The turn to final was late resulting in an overshoot of the localizer. Approach mode armed and I would bet the GS and LOC both captured on autopilot and the jet started down the GS. Excellent job by all in recognizing the unstable approach since the climb back up to 2100’ put them well above the glide slope at that point.
Nobody is perfect but with two drivers they should have an above average of being perfect.
This is actually very different than OK which was a long visual approach late at night with the resulting night visual illusions. This a a routine full ILS approach where the crew was flying way behind the aircraft. This generally occurs when you are set up for one approach and you change to a different approach to close to the airport. They may have made a mistake in the FMS or didn't do a full approach brief for the new approach or may have forgotten to select the right altitude or armed the altitude level off or not completed the check list. Symptoms include poor radio communication, missed altitudes (high or low) and overshooting / unstabilzed approaches. Trying to program the FMS and fly the approach is diffcult in weather. They may also have been hand flying which introduces more complexity while distracted with the FMS. They ended up overshooting the the turn to final, lost altitude and started to realize they were going to have to declare a missed approach... but then the controller would ask why they missed the approach. Not a good look on the radio for everyone to hear the pilot's explaination off the cuff - when you know the FAA has the tapes. The controller was nice and asked if they wanted to shoot the approach again. My rule is to know your mendoza line of when you are stabilized and don't want to make any changes to the approach or ask for delay vectors until you get set up properly and are flying ahead of the aircraft. Asking for delay vectors is good practice and is considered a good saftey protocol - it's routine and nothing happens. In contrast, missing a sloppy approach will require several unpleasant meetings, remedial training and "you performance" posted on VASA forever.
I don’t think this had anything to do with behind behind the airplane or programming. I bet it was being hand flown with the flight director off and the pilot flying struggled.
@@SgfGustafsson This meets my definition of flying way behind the aircraft on an actual ILS instrument approach. Looking at FlightAware data - the flight started the approach at ~265 Kts (high), had wildly fluxuating airspeeds and rates of decent (way out of +/- 10%). They overshot the FAC with a full deflection on the lateral guidance and busted an alititude by more than 200 feet. This situation requires an immediate missed aproach - even worse - the pilot didn't initiate the missed approach. ATC had to ask them if they wanted to shoot another approach. The controller knew he was about to have to instruct the aircraft to cancel the approach and go around. The controller was very nice and professional with this crew. The pilot was almost certainly hand flying based on the flight aware data and also got a little slow in airspeed during the initial climb to shoot the next approach. The next approach was stabilized. It's a standard industry practice and an airline policy to require the flight director to be on at all times for safety reasons.
@@waltermengden8927 I work for an airline in the U.S., a flight director is only required to be used during takeoff until after you've reached the initial climb pitch. If you have the flight director on and can follow it you wouldn't be able to tell that the autopilot is off from flight aware. The issue becomes that so many pilots either don't hand fly, or when they do they use the flight director. Then they get rusty on basic skills, most important of which being the scan. I bet this guy was without flight director and was fixated on something like slowing enough to add flaps and then got fixated on altitude when that was caught etc. so everything got missed. We can agree this is getting behind the airplane, but we are disagreeing on what caused them to get behind the airplane. It takes 30seconds to reload an approach, the longest thing is re-briefing it, which usually the PM does at that point, and they still had plenty of time for that. I have seen events similar to this unfold in the situation I described above several times as PM.
This recording doesn't necessarily point to them hand flying. Say they were still catching up to set everything up so they couldn't use APP yet, and were still flying it around in heading and level change or VS. Explains both blowing through the localizer and descending through the GS.
@@SgfGustafsson I defer to your experience. I don't understand why some pilots don't use the FD at all times - primarily to reduce the workload before task saturation becomes an issue. The FD is very useful on a hand flown approach. I only turn it off when it's giving misleading information and once I fix the problem, I turn it back on. It would be interesting to know if the FD was on or off. From the available information and as you stated in your hypothesis, it's much more probable this was a hand flown approach and that the FD was not used. As a result, a missed approach was required.
The instructor did a great job. But even more important the crew were humble in accepting instructions and help.
Southwest have a thing for flying low
Wait…. this has to be a joke. I can’t think of ANYTHING that one company training does differently than others which would cause these incidents, yet this has to be the 4th or so similar incident recently. All the equipment is the same as everyone else.
There’s NO WAY the culture is that fundamentally worse at Southwest - plus you’d be having a ton of other issues if it was.
Is there some bizarre SOP / training for approaches at SWA?
Seriously. WTF.
Incorrect use of the autopilot
Hence one of the reasons why 50 or so FO’s have to go back on IOE for 2 months with a check airman.
OUCH!
Looking forward to @blancolirio doing another episode in his Southwest Low Altitude Alert series.
Is that related to the Delta Wingtip/Tail Proximity Warning series?
@@PetesGuide Yeah, those pilots must have a fun chat with the Chief pilot. Bet he had a jackscrew handy for reinforcement.
@@JimAllen-Persona The _whole_ jackscrew, or just the tip? ACME FTW; BEEP BEEP!
My mom was on this flight! She said she could tell something weird was happening and my dad (a pilot) was tracking the flight as she landed and noticed the low altitude warning!
WTF is going on at SWA‽
A direct quote from their website: Southwest Airlines is an Equal Opportunity Employer (EOE). We are committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion,
@@jamescollier3 I don't think that's it because most of the other airlines have similar policies.
@@jamescollier3 Clown Planet.
@@jamescollier3So? That's normal these days. Lufthansa does that too and doesen't has similiar problems.
@@jamescollier3this ain’t the comment you think it is, bud.
What is going on with Southwest and these low altitude events?
I wonder if they made a mistake programming in the change to the planned runway.
I don't get how. I'd think the autopilot would be set to 2100 so it shouldn't descend below that until the glideslope intercepts. Even if the fms had the wrong waypoints or altitudes the autopilot would not descend below the mcp setting.
Maybe I'm missing something, or they were hand flying, or they have loose procedures.
There is an inherent cultural issue at SWA. Most 121 pilots are paid brake off to brake on. Southwest pays specially for the trip. Pilots may feel that they "win" and beat the system if they cut corners and arrive early as they get paid the same either way. I hear them constantly on frequency looking for shortcuts or complaining about anything that may delay them (part 91 ops in the area that they may be vectored around, etc.). This possibly contributes to poor CRM and ADM, and raises the possibility of normalization of deviance.
15, even 10 years ago that might be a factor but shortcuts, mitigating delays, etc saves time and fuel, saving gas and increasing profits (or losing less). This is a captain not doing their job.
PA: So ladies and gentlemen, as we get closer to the airport, it's time for us to now take a look at the scenic tour which was definitely not promised during takeoff by us your pilots today, for which you guys must pay the extra 500 dollar charge that was definitely not written in your tickets either..SO ENJOY!
Regards Southwest
The "Cruise Missile Approach".
_"All right, I'm going to level with you all. The most important thing now is that you remain calm. There's no reason to panic. Now it IS true that one of the crew members is ill..... slightly ill. But the other two pilots are just fine. They're at the controls flying the plane, free to pursue a life of religious fulfillment."_ 😛🤣
Mt Uncanoonuc is a few miles west of MHT and rises to 1,324 feet. Depending on where they were on the approach they weren’t that far away (I’ve flown into MHT for 30+ years as a passenger).
They were descending from 5,000 west of Uncanoonuc and Joe English over New Boston according to the track log. Low altitude alert was South Bow/Hooksett.
Sounds like the vector onto final was too late and they flew through the localizer. When trying to get back established, they got low and had to go around.
ASAP report time.....
They had an issue out in Oklahoma (either at OKC or TUL), into TPA and here now…all getting low…the first two were fortunately not CFIT. This appeared 300’ low.
Can’t forget the takeoff from a closed runway in Portland, MA early one morning recently.
That had to be a mix of getting going early or on time to keep the schedule (go fast SWA) and that damn NOTAM system. It’s easy to miss some NOTAMs if not reading them slowly.
Fortunately no one on that runway was injured.
But what the heck is going on at SWA? Seriously, what are crews focused on these days?
Rare KMHT appearance, awesome! My second home airport after EDDN
Isn’t southwest on double secret probation with the FAA right now?
Extra Updoots to you for the Animal House reference 👍🙂
The other recent Southwest incidents with low approaches were visual approaches, and the pilots likely mistook a different surface feature for the intended landing runway. In Oklahoma it was a runway at a different airport. In Tampa it was a bridge that they likely mistook for the runway. This incident is different because it's an instrument approach. There's no reason for them to be looking out the window to determine when to descend on the ILS. Either the circumstances of this incident are completely different, or they're a lot harder to explain than the previous ones.
Southwest or Southworst?
Good thing that wasn't a crowded airspace, they weren't even close to keeping the altitudes they were assigned.
Everyone involved did a good job HOWEVER very surprised that two professional pilots would allow the altitude to deviate that much before established on the ILS.....
I can't call being that far below the ILS approach plate (and ATC instructed altitude) minimum altitude "a good job."
@@fhuber7507 were you inside that cockpit at all?
Yeah this is like the 4th or 5th time this has happened in recent history. i think the FAA / NTSB needs to look into this before they end up hitting something
The faa is. Southwest is undergoing a Certificate Holder Evaluation Program administered by the friends against aviation
If you notice, every single one of these songs like a seasoned captain on the radios. So you know what that means….
Landed there a few weeks ago, approach just east of State Capitol building
Pilot exhaustion strikes again.
wtf is southwest doing
Sucking people through engines 😂😂😂
Clearly, the special recurrent training the southwest pilots were supposed to attend didn’t do any good for these guys. You don’t hear about this happening with other airlines.
Training hasn’t been conducted yet. How quickly you forget about united 1722…
You've got to get pretty low in order to land -- Ted Stryker
Southwest why bros why
Again?!
@@marsgal42 🤷🏼 It's a trend.
"Southwest pilot fails his Instrument Rating checkride"
ATC good job ❤
Is it part of the Southwest SOPs to fly approaches with full scale deflection below glideslope???
Southwest "We Fly Low"
Low but NOTHING like the other events that SWA had. The controller caught it right away.
Not a pilot , don't they still have it on auto pilot for ILS approach ? If not , they don't know its 2100 ?
If they tell the AP to fly below 2100 the AP will do that.
Maybe, maybe not. You're not required to engage the auto pilot. It looks like it was not engaged or the automation wasn't being set up properly.
Not again Southwest geez
What's up with southwest airlines
Too late for a change of approach? Causing a quick briefing and missing altitudes maybe
Oh my. Recently SWA has almost run into the control tower at KLGA requiring the tower to scream at them. SWA flew down to 150 feet over a causeway in TPA miles from the runway. Plunged down to 400 feet above the Pacific Ocean by Hawaii. I think in Oklahoma they wandered down to 500 feet over homes not near the runway. And here the standard ILS approach is a challenge to adhere to the procedure to track and hold correct altitude for them. They used to only be a hazard on the ground speeding around the taxiways,
Lack of situational awareness involved each time.
Just here appreciating modern technology showing low altitude alerts in red. Guess that wasn't available 20 years ago?
I think this is #6 for almost CFIT events for SWA this year… just waiting on #7… maybe they will crash next time
Ok right green light 🫡😘😘🥰
“You just want vectors to come back around?” Is ATC-speak for “well, you really screwed that up”.
PNF: Does this seem low to you?
PFL: Nah. I'm identifying as a treehouse.
SWA needs an intervention before they manage to succeed at crashing an airplane.
ATC wanted to offer the most convenient approach and runway. Sometimes it is better to stick with the plan that was briefed and prepared for rather than changing at the last minute.
Why did it take for the Controller to have to say “do a go around” and not the Captain or FO??
Any word on what caused this? Will there be an official report of any kind?
How often do Low Altitude alerts happen during approach like this?
that was strange . saludos
Looks like SWA pilots are doing some serious manual flying. Even after the low altitude alert, they ascended to over 2500 when they were asked to maintain 2100.
For a long time Southwest disabled autothrottle and VNAV on their whole fleet.
It makes me wonder if they do not trust part of their equipment for some reason.
Not serious enough! I agree, it looks like the PF was hand flying (poorly) and the Capt. didn't realize, acknowledge or correct the situation until the approach was too far gone resulting in the (correct) missed approach.
@@az................. That was a long time ago. Not a factor here. Poor flying skills-either hand flying or automation management.
@@Storriesmith I guess difference in idioms. Serious manual flying was just emphasising the manual flying, not implying any danger. 😂🤗
I guess I missed the dangerously low part
I think you did. Watch again.
The part about being 400' less than the ASSIGNED altitude while not established on course? That part? Or the part about MHT being in very hilly terrain?
@@Storriesmith 300 ft low does not mean dangerously low. it means they were below the assigned altitude. still 1600 ft above airport elevation. its not an excuse just the term dangerously low might be click bait.
@@lenator100 dude, they descended 400 FEET below the MRVA. Any altitude below the MRVA (they never said visual contact with the ground) is dangerous.
I've never been afraid to fly because I trusted the professionalism of the pilots, but these peeps are getting out of control. It's just a matter of time before we witness a major disaster due to pilot errors. Wake these guys up.
What space cadets, honestly.
What the heck was going on there?
Love to listen to the pros !!!
Go Arounds are FREE!!! Do them if you aren’t stable… smh
What do you mean FREE?
Fly every approach to the go-arounnd, with the option to land.
I think the real star in this one is how smoothly ATC caught and untangled the situation.
They do cost money. At PDX in the 1970s I heard tower order a United flight to go around. The pilot protested that it would cost $500 in fuel. The controller's reply was succinct: Cleared for one $500 go-around.
In the terms of safety (which trumps all things in aviation) they are free… would you rather impact the ground, or go around and live to fly another day?
@@davidrichter57Sure you did. That joke is almost as old as aviation itself.
Wut again lol wtf y’all
What day was this
Did these guys not adjust their altimeter settings after descending below 18,000’? And what’s up with not following the vectors all the way to localizer intercept?
How do you know they didn't do both of those?
Around 2:00 is my focus.
When ATC told SW to turn 140, it was already too late to make BLUUM and SW was high. Tower should’ve made the call a little sooner than he did.
That's no excuse to bust the altitude. Late vectors are a daily thing. You overshoot the loc and rejoin or request vectors back around but you NEVER descend without being established.
SW 1306 pilots need to answer for being asleep at the wheel. Would be interesting to hear the reason/excuse......
Late turn to final. That’s why he went through. Use to call those Carluccis.
No excuse to descend below the minimum aafe altitude
Yeeee haawww
Do they not cross check MSA or FAF altitude anymore? Poor CRM to let this happen.
Again!?
AGAIN?
Is this where I post that it is only a matter of time before Southwest has an accident, and pretend like that is an insightful and intelligent comment?
ATC Turning him on final a bit late didn’t help matters
Yeah. He was basically through the glideslope when ATC cleared him for the approach.
@@jeffmasek9541Localizer.
Came here to say this as well.
Autopilot the second time around?
maybe someone was hand flying and doing a bad job
and the other one?
@@VASAviation looks like he picked the wrong day for that...
What the hell is going on at SWA?
I live in Manchester, just about halfway between BLUUM and the end of 17, a hair to the east of the flight path, on the NW corner of the building.
There are days I wish I didn't follow aviation TH-cam. Ignorance was bliss. (As though all of the other videos didn't put these irrational thoughts in my head regardless.)
Never great to know the situation got through one hole in the swiss cheese, but grateful for the sizable block of cheese the system presents, and that it usually works.
Many thanks to the professionalism of ATC and the pilots, and of course to Victor/VASAviation for the high quality information as always.
Thanks for watching and for your support.
Even on the second approach they couldn't maintain 2100...
Probably capturing the GS already
@@VASAviationLooks like they stayed at 2500 on the 2nd approach until on the localizer, despite ATC clearing them to 2100.
@@andrewdstokes probably because the glideslope was captured already.
@VASAviation possibly, but didn't look like that from your vid. Glad they got down with no further trouble. Keep up the good work, VAS
Did SWA hire Capt Wi tu lo from Asiana Airlines?
😆 Sum Ting Wong was the first officer.
Comment of the day
You should all be ashamed of yourselves 🤣🤣
Ok now this is starting to be click bait. I heard the entire thing and he was not dangerously low lol. Wow Vas….
How is this not dangerously low?