Back to Squawk list
  • 58

Near Mid-Air Collision Over Miami

An Argentina Airlines A340 landing at KMIA overshoots the final for runway 9 and ends up almost directly on top of an American 737 on final for runway 8L. ( さらに...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

You caught that comment too, did ya Philip? I snickered as well. The Argintinian pilot also was so "busy" after his "miss" that he forgot his flight number for a sec.
olseric 0
They called that a near miss??? Looked like 1000' vertical separation to me...just another pilot who should be working in the terminal only...
My favorite oftrn-used quote is, ends up "almost directly" on top. Well, is it almost, or directly?
SI SENOR.............
Love to know how many of those increased incidents involved foreign airlines with minimally trained pilots and lax proficiency standards.
chalet 0
If you listen on the approach and tower frequencies of JFK between 3 and 6 PM every afternoon you will probably faint if not suffer a heart attack when all flights from Europe and some from the Far East start flowing into the stream. I admire the operators for having mastered their auditive virtues and are able to understand them pilots, some of which should not be allowed into U.S. air space. You can use your computer for listening in, if you are interested, this is the link:
You should listen to how many US pilots lax proficiency standards as you put it, they can't even give a standard position report in the correct format!!!
What proficiency standards?
Then maybe we all should go for an annual or biannual check ride, otherwise your license reverts to "In Active" status until accomplished. I will even go along with more frequently similar to our airlines.
usmcflyr 0
The misleading animation by CBS makes it look like 150ft separation between the two... I guess when the graphics developer first pitched his more accurate model they didn't think it was dramatic enough.
Ikaika Mokulele
A classic PRM scenario.
No mention of TCAS, controller back patting is ok, but the TCAS should've been mentioned even if it didn't affect the outcome.
I wondered about that too.
but what would the TCAS have told the America 737 crew to do? DIVE?!?
No not dive..."descend, descend now." While at same time in other cockpit command "climb, climb now." I wonder how many billions was spent on TCAS to not even get a mention here? Wow....
RA mode on TCAS is inhibited on approach. I'm not sure it's the same on all systems, but I believe ours is 1200 feet radar altitude. It goes to TA (advisory) only. American may not have received any TCAS instructions. Also nearby aircraft targets can almost become ignored at busy airports with parallel approaches.
Is the TCAS even operational when the Weight on Wheels switch is activated?
What is the required vertical separation in the terminal environment?
indy2001 0
I have 2 impressions from the video replay.
1. To join the final, the Argentina aircraft (an ungainly A340 that probably has full flaps out and possibly even the gear down) must execute a 90° right turn onto its final approach course. This seems to be a very dangerous procedure, particularly with parallel approaches in use. Why not have them intercept the final at a 30°-40° angle, as the AA aircraft does? Even if they need to fly a few miles further out, the safety gains would be worthwhile.
2. The Argentina aircraft has already passed through the final approach path when the controller first communicates with him. Why didn't the controller say anything then? Even after the incident has been recognized, he is assigned a 90° heading. This means he will fly in close formation with the AA aircraft, even though he is 600' below his assigned altitude. Why not just let him continue northward or turn him northeast to get him out of the AA aircraft's airspace?

I am basing these questions on the video. I don't know how closely that matches what the controller saw, or how closely the audio is synced with the video. Also, there is a significant time period during which the information blocks for both aircraft are superimposed on top of each other. Even ATC simulation games can automatically reposition these blocks so that they can each be read.
The ARG was on tower frequency, not approach, so we don't know what heading the aircraft was issued for the intercept. The rule is 20 degrees or less when using simultaneous approaches. However, the tower controller, who is working the aircraft, may have little or no radar experience. Also, if simuls were in use, there would be a final monitor position open just for these cases, where the radar controller would cut out the tower freq when needed to give instructions. To aircraft not established on final approach course.
Chris...where its turned off varies with company, but normally its just the sensitivity that's adjusted. When you do this you still get traffic advisories, but may no longer receive resolution advisories.
One of the things I dislike about Airbus is they developed their plane to allow third world countries and others to put minimally trained crews on the flight decks. This an other situations like them are mistakes made by the pilots not the aircraft. The Airbus plane is designed to keep the pilots from making certain type of mistakes that could cause loss of control. Piloting skills as to how to fly an approach course is not something the plane can correct for. Neither can the plane correct for poor language skills.
This news coverage is SO overblown, full of rhetoric and exaggeration as to make it sickening. I only watched 30 seconds of it and I was totally turned off. This is not to take away from the potential disaster which occurred that day, but this kind of coverage simply should be toned down without taking away the seriousness of what occurred.
I'm glad the European controllers held my hand on my trip to Europe. I'll admit I said say again more times on one trip to Europe than my whole career in the states.
This pilot appears have been looking at the wrong end of the runway. Helps to and at the right end :)
It is a bigger help to speak and understand the language of the controllers and to follow instructions.
Say whaaaaat. . . . .
Too many of these incidents. Whats to be done?
Just because they are licensed to fly in their country, does not mean it should be automatic in US airspace ... It would seem a lesson in English may be what that crew needs. There should be some type of International version of the FAA to track the crews certfications ..
TO: Argentina Aviation Administration
FROM: United States Federal Aviation Administration

As of Jan 01, 2012 your flight crews will meet or exceed U.S. FAA regulations and requirements as well as medical certifications. The english language will be clear and concise in both speaking and understanding including understanding english under stress and through a headset.

If these requirements are not met by any and all Argentina flight crewmember(s) then it will result in serious repercussions.

How's that?
The above post is of course is not official in any manner but it shows how difficult it is to try to bring the rest of the world up to our standards in langusge and other characteristics that differ in every country. It would seem that reading an instruction would be far safer than depending on the spoken word over a radio. The TCAS is the best safety feature to come along in a long time. It still isn't perfect as is proven with this incident. Any instructions given by ATC should have a text backup that is easily read in the event the crew made not have clearly understood what was just transmitted to them.

Just my $.02 worth as well
I had to chuckle when AAL431 wishes the controller "Good Luck" following his hand-off.
I chuckled when AAL431 wished the controller "Good Luck" after being passed off to departure.
Sorry for the duplicate entry. Didn't think the first one posted.
"Near disaster almost occurred "
Does that mean a "far" disaster did occur? Or what exactly? Gotta love reporters!
Close to a disaster! As in nearly collided. At least it is not a "Near Miss" which in this case would indicate they nearly missed each other.... and actually collided.
The FAA said that NMAC's have tripled in the last few years because increased reporting?!?!? BullShite!! Are they saying that controllers were not reporting all NMAC's in the past? No it's due to a shortage in controllers and that senior controllers are being force to push everyone thru the training process no matter how incompantant they are. A friend of mine was removed as a trainer in Denver because he refused to push a student thru.
With that said, it was obvious that this was pilot error here.
Just my $.02
That's about what it's worth. (Maybe not even $.02) This was pilot error (possible due to second language issues) and nothing to do with a controller. To use this as an opportunity to editorialize about how fast controllers are green flagged is not appropriate. I haven't seen an increase in errors, and I can't even recall ONE in the last few years.


アカウントをお持ちではありませんか? 今すぐ登録(無料)!機能やフライトアラート、その他様々な設定をカスタマイズできます!