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.
Sure, planes can fly through the sky at incredibly fast speeds. But needing to back up even a few feet, when they get too close to one another on the ground? Well, that can pose a real challenge…
In this post:
Planes get trapped on San Diego Airport taxiway
San Diego Airport has complicated logistics. It has a single runway, and taxiways and terminal space on both sides of the runway. So not only does the airport only have a single runway to work with, but you also constantly have planes needing to cross the runway.
February 7, 2025, was an especially challenging day for operations at the airport, as there was heavy fog, along with winds changing directions. Runways obviously go in two directions, so in San Diego, you have runway 9 and runway 27 (depending on whether you’re using it in the easterly or westerly direction).
At the time, planes were landing on runway 9, into the east. However, many planes couldn’t actually depart on that runway, due to the unfavorable wind conditions, which were above operating limits. At the same time, visibility wasn’t initially good enough to use runway 27, into the west. So you had some planes landing on runway 9, while you had other planes lining up for runway 27, waiting for conditions to improve marginally, as it was their only option for departing.
That brings us to this messy situation, which essentially blocked parts of the taxiway for nearly an hour. You can watch the entire eight-minute VASAviation clip for yourself below, as it’s quite entertaining.
Long story short, a Lufthansa Airbus A350 arriving from Munich (MUC) and a JetBlue Airbus A321 scheduled to depart to Boston (BOS) got stuck nose-to-nose on a taxiway, completely blocking off the area. The Lufthansa jet had just landed on runway 9, while the JetBlue jet was hoping for conditions to improve, so it could take off on runway 27.
The assumption was that there would be enough room for the Lufthansa A350 to pass the JetBlue A321 on a taxiway, but there didn’t end up being enough space. As you might expect, all parties were quite frustrated when they realized what was happening, as most modern planes have no way to reverse without tugs. So then a tug had to be called, and that’s never a quick process.
I just generally found this clip to be very entertaining to listen to (non-aviation geeks will probably feel differently):
- Everyone on the frequency is pretty well behaved and patient, all things considered
- You can just hear the frustration in the controller’s voice, and the extent to which he understandably probably wants to crawl under his desk and take a break
- Probably my favorite things is how at the very end, the pilot of American 1049 chimes in and points out “if we keep pushing airplanes, we’re never gonna get out of the spot we’re in here, to get to the other side and get in the line,” to which the controller has a long pause and says “yes, I’m very well aware of that” (like, no $*@#, Sherlock!)
Ultimately the Lufthansa’s A350 arrival at the terminal was delayed considerably. Meanwhile the JetBlue A321 ended up having to return to a gate due to the tarmac delay rule. Rather than landing in Boston at 8:35PM, the plane instead landed at 4:12AM the following morning. That’s rough.
I can totally see how this situation could happen
Some people are suggesting that the air traffic controller should’ve avoided this situation, by checking with the Lufthansa and JetBlue pilots before the Lufthansa plane made the right turn onto the taxiway, causing it to be stuck.
While that would’ve been nice, I can also see exactly how this happened. The priority was probably to get the plane off the active runway as soon as possible, and I imagine that the controller thought there would be enough space for the plane to pass on the taxiway. I’m guessing this wouldn’t have been an issue if the plane coming off the runway were a narrow body, so it was probably a combination of factors here that caused this.
Ultimately all’s well that ends well, though it’s the perfect example of what a tough airport San Diego is.
Bottom line
San Diego Airport had a rough day on February 7, as limited visibility and variable winds greatly limited operations at the airport. What was perhaps trickiest was when a Lufthansa A350 taxied off the runway, near where a JetBlue A321 was waiting for takeoff. There wasn’t enough room for the two planes to clear one another, so a tug had to be called out to assist.
The controller in this situation gave me a good laugh. While everyone is patient (well, at least while on frequency — I’d love to hear the conversation happening in the flight deck between the two JetBlue pilots!), you can just hear the frustration in his voice.
What do you make of this San Diego Airport situation?
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.
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?
@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.
they are not typically numbered like way. They are always numbered that way.
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...
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.
Not Lufthansa fault
I believe it was Lufthansa fault, they were suppose to turn off at C3 but blew past it.
No, it is absolutely not. Lufthansa requested B1, ATC approved B1.
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?
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...
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.
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.
yet another airport that is operating at levels way over capacity and without the margins for safety and operational necessity.
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!
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.