As a fellow pilot and fairly frequent flyer of major airlines, I understand people make mistakes. However, there's a difference between a mistake and simply not caring about your job. Knowing the behind the scenes work and preparation that goes into flying an aircraft and all of the advanced automation in today's society to help prevent incidents/accidents, I firmly believe that aircraft such as a Boeing 747 and 737 have no excuse for landing at the incorrect airport. The reason these incidences occur is because of poor task management and pre-flight preparation. For example, on August 9, 2012, United Flight 4049, a Saab 340 turboprop landed at an airport 10 miles away from its intended destination in West Virginia. Below is a picture of the flight path the aircraft took.
 |
| United Flight 4049 flight path |
When incidences like this occur, it creates several hazards and complications for everyone involved, from passengers to management. Passengers need to find an alternate way to their destination, which may increase they payout and obviously their intended arrival time. Some of you may think, "why is this such a big deal? Can't they just take-off again and land at the intended airport?" Well, yes they can...sometimes, but for an aircraft as large as a 737, sometimes that's not feasible because there may not be sufficient runway length at the incorrect airport. As stated in the following article, http://www.forbes.com/, this was the case for flight 4013, a Southwest 737 that landed at the wrong airport in Missouri. When the plane landed it was just feet away from the edge of the cliff and this was after the pilot executed an emergency braking procedure. After the hard landing, the aircraft was unable to take-off again because the runway was not long enough for the aircraft with the amount of weight on board. Passengers were forced to find other means of transportation to their destination, which was 9 miles away.
This mistakes happen more often than people realize, but usually it goes unnoticed, because it involves smaller aircraft not carrying passengers. Although wrong airport landings are preventable, there are some situations that are more difficult to place blame than others. In reference to flight 4013, these pilots seemed to have everything correctly prepared for. They knew their destination, they contacted the tower, but unfortunately the controllers didn't catch that their decent rate didn't match up with their distance from the airport. Also, the pilots may have known the general airport environment, but both airports only had one runway, both of very similar magnetic bearing. In these types of situations, I would consider this an isolated incident, but for flight 4049, the Saab 340, I feel there were many issues that could have been corrected that could have help prevent that incident, starting with the pre-flight preparation.
After hearing that Southwest suspended their pilots, I applauded them for making a decision both safe for themselves and the pilots. Yes, the pilots made a mistake, but aside from this incident, maybe they are exceptional and dependable aviators. So, I believe Southwest's decision to only suspend the two pilots shows that their management trusts their employees and is willing to put in the extra effort to fix their mistakes, rather than just "cutting the dead ends." The pilots are very lucky that they were only suspended after making Southwest dish out as much money to fix the problem. I am glad that their management's decision was a carefully thought out one, not an impulse out of angry.
Thank you for reading and please stay tuned for further blogs of aviation current events.
This mistakes happen more often than people realize, but usually it goes unnoticed, because it involves smaller aircraft not carrying passengers. Although wrong airport landings are preventable, there are some situations that are more difficult to place blame than others. In reference to flight 4013, these pilots seemed to have everything correctly prepared for. They knew their destination, they contacted the tower, but unfortunately the controllers didn't catch that their decent rate didn't match up with their distance from the airport. Also, the pilots may have known the general airport environment, but both airports only had one runway, both of very similar magnetic bearing. In these types of situations, I would consider this an isolated incident, but for flight 4049, the Saab 340, I feel there were many issues that could have been corrected that could have help prevent that incident, starting with the pre-flight preparation.
After hearing that Southwest suspended their pilots, I applauded them for making a decision both safe for themselves and the pilots. Yes, the pilots made a mistake, but aside from this incident, maybe they are exceptional and dependable aviators. So, I believe Southwest's decision to only suspend the two pilots shows that their management trusts their employees and is willing to put in the extra effort to fix their mistakes, rather than just "cutting the dead ends." The pilots are very lucky that they were only suspended after making Southwest dish out as much money to fix the problem. I am glad that their management's decision was a carefully thought out one, not an impulse out of angry.
Thank you for reading and please stay tuned for further blogs of aviation current events.
It's not up to ATC to determine whether or not you land at the correct airport. It is the responsibility of the pilot at the controls. He or she is the one with the final authority to make a decision to land. Today's pilots get complacent in the cockpit, technology makes this easier everyday. I would suggest that if they are unsure of the airport that they are supposed to be landing at they should not be up in the cockpit. ATC is only for separation of instrument traffic and military aircraft. This also stems from the first officer imputing the wrong fixes into the FMS and not verifying this with the Captain. All routes programmed in the FMS should be gone over with the Captain to make sure they are flying the correct route.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Trevor, the controller was not piloting the aircraft and is there for separation and information of which he fulfilled his duty. The pilots made a mistake, the airplane did not land at its intended destination. It was their responsibility to get the airplane to its destination safely and they failed. Lucky for them Southwest only suspended and not fired them which I feel speaks volumes for Southwest managements faith in their pilots. Many other airlines have been known to fire their pilots immediately for incidents like this. The NTSB will hopefully figure out what went wrong, maybe some remedial training and back flying the line. As for the passengers, Southwest will bus them and their luggage to the correct airport and they sent another airplane immediately to Branson to continue the flight on to Texas. As with tradition, there will be refunds, vouchers, and apologies handed out to the affected passengers and a press release with updates.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the ATC comment. I don't think they are wholly to blame, but I do think they share a small part in it. Through communications and radar they could have noticed the discrepency, at least in one of the incidences. I'm not saying they should be punished, but a higher awareness on there part may have helped the situation.
ReplyDeleteAs for the suspensions I have to disagree with you. They didn't suspend the pilots to punish them, they did it to help shield themselves and the pilots from litigation. In today's social media filled world where everyone has a voice (even those that have no idea what they are talking about), waiting for a full investigation to occur is the best business decision, and doesn't harm the pilots (it was paid leave). Ultimately it turned out that it was the pilot's fault because they flew a visual approach and ignored the approach programmed into their system.
I did not know it was paid leave and you make a very good point. Thank you
DeleteI have to say that my response has also been "Are you kidding me???" to many of these type of incidents, for the same reasons. Although I found myself confused when you said that the pilots' suspension appalled you, yet also said that there was "no excuse" for the incident. I see, though, that you changed your opinion about that after the last comment.
ReplyDeleteYes, I realized my original thought process got away from me
DeleteI do not feel that by making a mistake like this that the pilots do not care about their job. There are several other factors that could have contributed to an error like this. Due to the speed and high altitudes at which 737s fly, it makes the identification of ground references difficult. Additionally, Branson is a relatively new destination for Southwest, so it is very probable that both pilots had limited experience at that airport. I know personally from flying experience that when I see an airport or landmark that I believe to be my destination, it takes thorough thought and reconsideration in order to properly evaluate position and determine otherwise. Yes, many hazards result from landing at the wrong airport, but there are ways that the aviation community can come together and find solutions for this issue.
ReplyDelete