JetBlue & Lufthansa...
 

JetBlue & Lufthansa Planes Stuck Nose-To-Nose, Mess Ensues

19 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
246 Views
Posts: 39951
Admin
Topic starter
(@lucky)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
[#17521]
wpf-cross-image

As an aviation geek, I love listening to air traffic control audio, and the VASAviation YouTube channel does an incredible job picking up on some of the more interesting interactions that happen. Along those lines, a recent event at San Diego International Airport (SAN) gave me a good chuckle.

Continue reading: Lol: JetBlue & Lufthansa Planes Stuck Nose-To-Nose, Mess Ensues

Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.


18 Replies
18 Replies
(@George Romey)
Joined: 6 years ago

Posts: 1390

Listened to the tape. I have no idea of how a controller would have told the LH plane to make that turn where a JetBlue plane was sitting for the runway. I think though they had it resolved in about 30 minutes at least.


Reply
(@Maryland)
Joined: 4 years ago

Posts: 473

I enjoy listening to LiveATC. Just want to thank the controllers everywhere. The amount of attention and patience exhibited is outstanding. They probably are excellent parents!


Reply
Diamond
(@tim-dunn)
Joined: 5 years ago

Member
Posts: 7466

yet another airport that is operating at levels way over capacity and without the margins for safety and operational necessity.


Reply
Diamond
(@creditcrunch)
Joined: 5 years ago

Member
Posts: 648

We keep hearing “possible pilot deviation when ready copy for a telephone number” do pilots have the ability to do the same too ATC I wonder.


Reply
 E39
Diamond
(@e39)
Joined: 3 years ago

Member
Posts: 308

Not Lufthansa fault


Reply
(@BuBu4)
Joined: 9 years ago

Posts: 26

I believe it was Lufthansa fault, they were suppose to turn off at C3 but blew past it.


Reply
Gold
(@f15x28)
Joined: 2 years ago

Member
Posts: 0

I thought JetBlue holding short of taxiway B means any airplane is guaranteed to being able to do runway 9, then B1, then B. stuck. I know there are marked thresholds from taxiway to runway, but is there no such threshold from taxiway to taxiway? If noy, how does this being stuck situation not happen all the time?


Reply
Gold
(@f15x28)
Joined: 2 years ago

Member
Posts: 0

No, it is absolutely not. Lufthansa requested B1, ATC approved B1.


Reply
(@Chicago Chris)
Joined: 6 years ago

Posts: 11

I don't think anyone is singularly at fault. When using RWY 9 you typically turn onto Bravo. If it's going to be Charlie then ATC may say to expect a left to Charlie to give a heads up. I didn't hear either.

Most aircraft don't use the full runway when landing so it's unusual to see them turn on to B1.

Then it seems JetBlue stopped a bit further than they should have because B1 is supposed to be available. It may have been for the typical narrow bodies that fly to SAN, but not a 350, ATC said it was a matter of feet.


Reply
(@Colin)
Joined: 14 years ago

Posts: 57

Given they have one runway, and that is used in both directions, does anyone know how it came to be runway 9 and runway 27? Runway 1 and 2 seem to make more sense, right?

Or do they count the arterials connecting to the main runway form the terminal buildings as runways too?


Reply
(@jallan)
Joined: 5 years ago

Member
Posts: 277

@Colin Runways are typically numbered based on their direction, dropping the last digit of the 360 degree compass. Thus, San Diego runway 9/27 runs east/west, 90 degrees and 270 degrees.


Reply
(@Jaymes)
Joined: 5 years ago

Posts: 20

they are not typically numbered like way. They are always numbered that way.


Reply
(@Dylan)
Joined: 3 years ago

Posts: 23

Additional commentary on this. The reason they are numbered the way they are is for direction (i.e. easier to know if you're on course for the runway if you're going at heading say 340 and the runway is 34 vs a general runway #1 which could be any direction for any given airport) and also to assist with quick analysis and recognition with orientation to the wind as winds are always read out in the direction they're going and you predominantly want to land with the lowest tailwind and crosswind components you can.


Reply
Diamond
(@bradstpete)
Joined: 5 years ago

Member
Posts: 598

I spent a lot of growing up time in San Diego and the location of the airport has been controversial for years. There was a thought many years ago of moving it to MCNAS Miramar to give more runways and room for growth. Taking off to the east is challenging with 30 story high rise buildings a mile away. I travel to SAN often and it amazes me what they manage with one runway.


Reply
(@Maurice)
Joined: 8 years ago

Posts: 14

As a SAN based flyer, tarmac delays and gate holds increase exponentially when we have any weather, in particular fog and wind. Normal operations from runway 27 allow for alternating patterns of one landing followed by one takeoff. When landings switch to runway 9 especially due to fog, the go around occurrence increases substantially due to the terrain of Point Loma prior to landing. As you mentioned with only one main taxiway crossing Terminals 1 & 2 on the south side of the runway, this causes significant delays with aircraft unable to push out of the various piers while waiting for the aircraft holding at the end of runway 9 to takeoff. With the even small growth of wide body aircraft at SAN, the new terminal 1 cannot come soon enough to better accommodate aircraft movement, even though this will not solve the weather related irregular operations.


Reply
(@John Jay)
Joined: 2 years ago

Posts: 1

I heard that every time planes collide in the US, the price of eggs drops by 15 cents


Reply
Diamond
(@timtamtrak)
Joined: 5 years ago

Member
Posts: 729

They just wanted to boop snoots.


Reply
(@Mason)
Joined: 3 years ago

Posts: 452

"It’s amazing what you can do when you’re not in skyteam"


Reply