Two United Airlines jets had a very close call several days ago, as a plane that had just landed accidentally entered a runway that was occupied by a plane that was taking off. Fortunately disaster was avoided, but this still ended up being quite the inconvenience.
Continue reading: United Jet Enters Occupied LAX Runway, Right After Pilot Confirmed He Wouldn’t
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
What was a cause ?
Speeding most likely .
Same as on the roads , when auto drivers assume others will get out of their way .
Another cause includes too many aircraft coming and going . Solution might be fewer and smaller aircraft , with less passengers , and less stressed ATCs and pilots .
as soon as is cleared to a different runway than they are expecting or had previously been cleared to, they should open the airport chart. There are high speed exits but they aren't long.
Also, it is possible that the pilot making the radio calls was not the pilot who landed the plane or taxied it.
It shouldn't happen but it does.
and doing 100 knots in any jet before a rejected takeoff usually requires checks before it flies again and the pilots may have chosen not to continue the trip which could explain the delay in getting the flight out.
yes, the difference in attitude between LAX and JFK controllers is notable.
The new High Speed Exit Taxiways off of 24R have had A LOT of runway incursions since they opened last year. There are multiple NOTAMS, company ops alerts, and it’s even noted in the ATIS. Basically everyone is running into this problem
Bless the atc. Stuff happens, mistakes are made, but at the end of day. We rely on you.
interesting, are these new exits shorter than the old exits or is it uncommon to have a high speed exit that directly leads to a parallel runway?
For $100 ...Syncopated Waltz....... Who is the useless fool that comments this way .. Alert
high speed taxiways often do connect to a taxiway but that is not the case for the north runway complex at LAX.
again, it is ALL on the airport diagram for pilots and the high speed exit taxiways (V, W, and Y) are all designated in orange while the entire rest of the chart is in black with hold short indicators.
Someone not only did not read the airport diagram before landing or follow ATC directions.
I get that this was on the pilot and the charts showed that the exit lead directly to the parallel, not excusing that mistake but given the post said there's been a lot of these issues was just trying to understand if the design was also a contributing factor (ie the exit is too short to stop in time). Seems to me that if this was not a one-off mistake by the UA pilot but rather has happened "A LOT" there might be a more systemic issue beyond just someone not properly reading a chart.
IIRC, LAX wanted to move the northernmost runway further north but the communities around the airport refused.
LAWA, operator of the airport, agreed not to move it. High speed taxiways are necessary at busy airports because they increase runway capacity.
There are plenty of airports that have sub-optimal configurations which is why it is all documented.
It's not LAX is some backwater airport or UA is an airline that has minimal operations on the west coast.
and, if everything was operating normally, DL and WN and airlines that predominantly have operations on the north side of the terminal complex use the north runways
But because UA had a 787 evacuating on one of the south runways, they had to use the north runways.
You don't get a pass as a pilot because you have to use runways or an airport that you are less familiar with.
Ya think March 2 wasn’t ‘good’ for United? Ask Emirates and Qatar how they felt about March 2…
I'm sure you have had a few by this point in the evening but I think the word you are looking for is "brakes"
cheers!
One thing to consider is that the pilot working the radio likely was not the pilot steering the aircraft on the ground. So while the pilot on the radio may have correctly read back the instruction, there may be a number of reasons why the pilot operating the controls failed to follow it properly. I’ve seen it happen before where an instruction is clearly understood and read back, and confirmed to the pilot at the controls, but still there ends up being a misunderstanding. As the old saying goes, if there’s any doubt, there’s no doubt (that you need to confirm). It will be interesting to see what comes out of the investigation into this.
V/F
The “Jerks” who accuse TD of self abuse on these pages are the real “Jerks” of this website, yes?
Well how about having the FAA require something really innovative: automatic traffic lights you have all over preventing collisions in every towns and cities all over the world
And to compensate for pilots who may ignore them add electronics to stop traffic cold.
A lot of people can't. There have been incursions by all different airlines. Simply pointing out it is a known hotspot and issue.
Yes I agree, I wish they could've moved the northern runway slightly north. No excsuses, just shedding light on how this has been an issue since the redesign.
I don't know if its published somewhere, but any pilot like myself who frequents LAX knows about it. It's in the ATIS, companies send out Ops Alerts highlighting it, There are also NOTAMS about it
there are ground movement monitoring systems and lights at a number of particularly busy airports but, again, not every technology is available or works at every airport.
Pilots are highly compensated professionals. The vast majority follow directions and know the details of the airports they fly into.
This situation is unique because a UA flight failed to hold short of an active runway on which another UA flight was departing, causing a high speed rejected takeoff at the same time that another UA aircraft was disabled and evacuating on another runway.
The chances of all of that happening at one time are exceedingly low but the root issue here is that the FAA has done everything it can to communicate the unique hold short requirements on the north runway complex and yet some pilots don't get it right.
Late to this party. Typically don’t like to pile on, but will this time. While he’s a know-it-all, TD does not know it all. He happens to know a lot, but not all.
Love how he gets in a spat with Mike, who clearly has a handle on the complexity of LAX.
TD, why the need to make so many comments on so many topics and articles. Keep it to DL, please.
@Tim last count shows UA has more wide bodies than DL and AA combined and zero mainline RJs. Windcheck…
the UA rainbow and unicorns machine strikes again.
it is abundantly clear that a UA pilot failed to comply with ATC directions which are clearly marked
As much as you want desperately to create arguments, Mike agreed w/ me that LAX wanted to move the northernmost runway more north but neighbors objected. He also says that there are abundant NOTAMS and every pilot that frequents LAX knows about. I don't fly into LAX frequently but I can read airport diagrams and NOTAMS in ForeFlight and other aviation tools.
As much as you want to just bury the story, it is clearly a UA pilot error and we all can see it.
Unlike other incidents, it cost another UA flight even as the south runway complex was messed up because of yet another UA incident.
Suck it up. It was a bad day for UA and esp. at LAX. I said that the chances of all of it happening all at one time are very low - but it happened nonetheless.
I'll comment on whatever I want whenever I want.