Guess someone was in a hurry
05-26-2023, 09:02 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2019
Posts: 174
Guess someone was in a hurry
05-26-2023, 09:18 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2021
Posts: 1,330
fact check
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4cewwhcL5c
They were cleared Line up and Wait and had clearance to occupy the runway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4cewwhcL5c
They were cleared Line up and Wait and had clearance to occupy the runway
05-26-2023, 09:34 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 989
it’s not a runway incursion when you’re cleared to line up and wait on the outboard runway.
If they’d taken off on the blocked takeoff clearance and anything had nearly happened, you’d be here talking about southwest cowboys just taking off whenever they like.
05-26-2023, 09:38 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,778
fact check
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4cewwhcL5c
They were cleared Line up and Wait and had clearance to occupy the runway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4cewwhcL5c
They were cleared Line up and Wait and had clearance to occupy the runway
I found it funny that they then cleared that plane to cross with someone on short final again lol.
05-26-2023, 09:51 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 291
05-26-2023, 10:33 AM
#6
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,274
SWA1179 was told "plan 28R for departure, hold short 28L," and SWA1179 replied "Ah, alright, we'll plan 28R for departure now, Southwest 1179"
SWA1179 was subsequently told to cross 28L, line up and wait 28R, which SWA1179 read back.
United 277, on the ILS 28L, announced a go-around and the radio traffic stepped on a takeoff clearance for SWA1179. "United 277 on the go" followed quickly by "blocked." Tower issued missed vectors for United, and a clarification when United got the altitude wrong. Tower asked SWA1179, "are you departing?," to which SWA1179 replied "We never got that clearance, somebody blocked it."
Tower responded "Okay, then you shouldn't be on the runway, Southwest 1179, exit at Charlie 2, turn right on Charlie, traffic short final for that runway."
"Charlie 2, Charlie for Southwest 1179, and the last plans we got were to line up and wait for Southwest 1179."
ATC responded, "I don't need an argument on frequency."
The tapes in the linked article at the outset of the thread were truncated and doctored: they were cut to not show the whole story, which makes the narrative completely different.
Listen for yourself on live ATC.net. Why the first aircraft went around isn't clear, but presumably SWA 1179 wasn't clear of 28L enroute to their clearance to line up and wait on 28R. It's worth noting that when UAL277 was cleared for the approach, they were advised that traffic was crossing (SWA) and additional traffic would depart before arrival, so it may have been the other traffic departing that caused UAL277 to go around, not the Southwest flight. SWA was holding short 28L, with a United flight on 28L. The United flight was cleared for takeoff, then SWA1179 cleared to cross, and line up and wait 28R. If the United flight departing 28L had any delay, it's reasonable that SWA1179 would have waited for them to at least begin the rolll, rather than taxi behind them at takeoff thrust, thus delaying SWA1179's crossing of 28L. It's also worth noting that when the initial clearance to 28R was given, it appears to be a runway switch, implying that SWA1179 was anticipating 28L. At a minimum that might mean re-bugging and a quick rebrief and re-entry of takeoff data in the FMC. United 277 announced at 700' on the ILS.
The second go around, Alaska 553, went when SWA didn't depart 28R immediately, and was clearing the runway as directed.
If anything, this is the exact opposite of SWA 1179 being in too big a hurry; they were too slow. The were given a runway change, then directed to line up and wait which they did. Their takeoff clearance was stepped on, and then they were told to taxi clear. They did not attempt a takeoff without a clearance, just as they should have done; they did as they were supposed to do.
If anything, ATC was funneling aircraft too quickly onto the approaches; and this appears to be another case of a rush to get max runway utilization. It does not appear to be a case of the Southwest flight doing anything wrong, and certainly not doing something "in a hurry."
SWA1179 was subsequently told to cross 28L, line up and wait 28R, which SWA1179 read back.
United 277, on the ILS 28L, announced a go-around and the radio traffic stepped on a takeoff clearance for SWA1179. "United 277 on the go" followed quickly by "blocked." Tower issued missed vectors for United, and a clarification when United got the altitude wrong. Tower asked SWA1179, "are you departing?," to which SWA1179 replied "We never got that clearance, somebody blocked it."
Tower responded "Okay, then you shouldn't be on the runway, Southwest 1179, exit at Charlie 2, turn right on Charlie, traffic short final for that runway."
"Charlie 2, Charlie for Southwest 1179, and the last plans we got were to line up and wait for Southwest 1179."
ATC responded, "I don't need an argument on frequency."
The tapes in the linked article at the outset of the thread were truncated and doctored: they were cut to not show the whole story, which makes the narrative completely different.
Listen for yourself on live ATC.net. Why the first aircraft went around isn't clear, but presumably SWA 1179 wasn't clear of 28L enroute to their clearance to line up and wait on 28R. It's worth noting that when UAL277 was cleared for the approach, they were advised that traffic was crossing (SWA) and additional traffic would depart before arrival, so it may have been the other traffic departing that caused UAL277 to go around, not the Southwest flight. SWA was holding short 28L, with a United flight on 28L. The United flight was cleared for takeoff, then SWA1179 cleared to cross, and line up and wait 28R. If the United flight departing 28L had any delay, it's reasonable that SWA1179 would have waited for them to at least begin the rolll, rather than taxi behind them at takeoff thrust, thus delaying SWA1179's crossing of 28L. It's also worth noting that when the initial clearance to 28R was given, it appears to be a runway switch, implying that SWA1179 was anticipating 28L. At a minimum that might mean re-bugging and a quick rebrief and re-entry of takeoff data in the FMC. United 277 announced at 700' on the ILS.
The second go around, Alaska 553, went when SWA didn't depart 28R immediately, and was clearing the runway as directed.
If anything, this is the exact opposite of SWA 1179 being in too big a hurry; they were too slow. The were given a runway change, then directed to line up and wait which they did. Their takeoff clearance was stepped on, and then they were told to taxi clear. They did not attempt a takeoff without a clearance, just as they should have done; they did as they were supposed to do.
If anything, ATC was funneling aircraft too quickly onto the approaches; and this appears to be another case of a rush to get max runway utilization. It does not appear to be a case of the Southwest flight doing anything wrong, and certainly not doing something "in a hurry."
05-26-2023, 10:53 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Position: Pipers!
Posts: 387
I’d say the SFO Tower controller was in a hurry, but even that’s not exactly her fault as much as NORCAL is pushing her. This goes a lot higher than meets the eye. Swapping runways last minute to takeoff is not helpful either.
05-26-2023, 12:56 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,897
05-26-2023, 05:36 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2021
Posts: 115
SFO controllers believe their little note in the atis affords them the ability to drop last minute runway changes on you and be immediately ready. It’s clear nobody in that tower understands the current procedures in most airline cockpits when it comes to a runway change, not that I’m surprised by this at all.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
