near miss at NZAA !

[Matthew]

Hi

Quote from Stuff.co.nz http://www.stuff.co.nz/4079438a10.html

An investigation has been launched by the Transport Accident Investigation Commission (TAIC) after two aircraft reportedly got too close during a take off and landing at Auckland Airport.


TAIC said today it was notified by the Civil Aviation Authority of an incident involving an Air New Zealand Beech 1900 and an Air Nelson Saab SF340A at the airport on Tuesday.

"Information reported to date is that the Air New Zealand Beech was landing at Auckland airport and the Air Nelson Saab was due to take off," TAIC said

"There was a breach of the required separation between the two aircraft when they both ended up on the active runway at the same time.

"No-one was injured and there is no reported damage to either aircraft."

TAIC said it had appointed its investigator-in-charge Peter Williams to inquire into the incident.

This sounds bad, I wonder who was on NZAA_TWR...

Matthew

[PILOT WARRIOR]

Just heard about that on the news, must have been scary for the pilots that were coming in to land..

[travnz]

MEH!!!!! Big Deal

Question is, was the Beech cleared to land?
Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

[ZK-TJL]

What was the weather like at NZAA on tuesday when this happened I wonder? It is my understanding that lowest DH or MDA of any instrument approach at NZAA is 200 AGL, so why didn't the inbound aircraft see the outbound?

[pois0n]

MEH!!!!! Big Deal

Question is, was the Beech cleared to land?
Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

Why is the landing pilot at fault?

[ZK-TJL]

MEH!!!!! Big Deal

Question is, was the Beech cleared to land?
Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

Why is the landing pilot at fault?

Good point. Perhaps the outbound aircraft taxied on to the runway without clearance?

[Timmo]

haha- It kinda cracked me up in the News when the anchor said something to the effect of 'A plane landed on the same runway as a plane taking off"......errrr....yep, that is usually the case haha

[ZK-KAG]

MEH!!!!! Big Deal

Question is, was the Beech cleared to land?
Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

Why is the landing pilot at fault?

The landing pilot should have seen that the runway was not clear and therefore gone around. Its most likely that the aircraft were well away from each other on the runway (say around 1000m) but it still breaches seperation requirements.

I have seen aircraft being cleared to land just seconds away from the flare, so I imagine it was a bit too late when the clearance was given (or it was too late)...

~ZK-KAG~

[ZK-KAG]

Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

Im not sure if ATC would be at fault here... As the landing clearance Im sure would not have been given if the t/o acft was still on the runway, which means that the landing aircraft had no right to land...

Unless of course the landing clearance had been given.

[pois0n]

I have seen aircraft being cleared to land just seconds away from the flare, so I imagine it was a bit too late when the clearance was given (or it was too late)...

Hah yeah, I've been given a landing clearance right as I was touching down before. I would've gone around but the instructor said it'd be fine so I trusted him...

[Timmo]

The media loves reporting anything to do with aviation though....when was the last time you saw a report on 'There was nearly a crash on the Auckland motorway today'? Heck, cars crash all the time.....99% arent reported on the news yet little incidents like this are...nor wonder why some people are so afraid of flying eh haha

[ZK-KAG]

I have seen aircraft being cleared to land just seconds away from the flare, so I imagine it was a bit too late when the clearance was given (or it was too late)...

Hah yeah, I've been given a landing clearance right as I was touching down before. I would've gone around but the instructor said it'd be fine so I trusted him...

Yeah, the law says you should go around crossing over the fence if you havnt received landing clearance... It often gets a bit closer than this

[creator2003]

Funny that i thought the news said Nelson ,man am i just getting old ?
edit :must of been the air nelson saab thing

[Alex]

Interesting - it will be great to read up and find out what the causes of the situation are.

Alex

[Zöltuger]

Yeah, the law says you should go around crossing over the fence if you havnt received landing clearance... It often gets a bit closer than this

I remember going around at Auckland on an Air NZ 732 just as we crossed the fence, apparantly the pilot didn't have clearance to land.

I always thought the rule was the ATC wasn't doing his job right if there weren't a few go-arounds here and there

[travnz]

Either way both ATC and Pilots landing are at fault

Im not sure if ATC would be at fault here... As the landing clearance Im sure would not have been given if the t/o acft was still on the runway, which means that the landing aircraft had no right to land...

Unless of course the landing clearance had been given.

ATC fault for not maintaining the separation.
It is his responsibility to protect IFR aircraft. Even if they are on a visual approach.
If he failed to notice that an aircraft was still on the runway and he lets the arriving aircraft land it is his fault.

But really it comes down to a bit of the ATCs and the Pilots of the Beech

[Alex]

I would say (take this with a pinch of salt - I know next to nothing about the circumstances) that is was a bit of both. The ATC for perhaps allowing the aircraft to land, but also the pilot of the arriving aircraft for landing with another aircraft on the runway (visibility wasn't bad enough to be a factor afaik).

Alex

[ZK-Brock]

Do you not think that it's a bit hasty to put the blame on the ATC, considering all we know is what the media have told us? I await towerguy's take on this..

[Airwolf]

Big deal happens all the time in FS9

[Brennanx]

the saab didn't even get onto the runway .... why did the news have it saying landing while another plane was taking of.