Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

American Airlines lands on taxiway at SEA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • American Airlines lands on taxiway at SEA

    Plane lands safely at Sea-Tac, but not on runway
    03/26/2003

    By GLENN FARLEY / KING 5 News


    SEATAC, Wash. ・How could an airliner with 121 passengers on board land in the wrong place at Sea-Tac Airport? The FAA is investigating the mistake that's just coming to light.

    It's not a case of landing on the wrong runway, but landing on pavement that's not a runway at all.

    The incident involved an American Airlines MD-80 ・flight 1763 from Dallas/Fort Worth to Sea-Tac on Friday afternoon, March 14.

    The public learned about the incident Wednesday.





    KING
    The American Airlines jet landed on the light-colored taxiway.
    According to the FAA, the plane was due to land on runway 16R. But instead, the aircraft landed on taxiway C ・a relatively new strip of pavement built about three years ago.

    It was about 4 p.m. with a 10-mile visibility and light rain.

    典he taxiway was marked with a big X as far as the approach is concerned, indicating this is not an active runway and of course markings on a runway vs. a taxiway are completely different,・said FAA spokesman Mike Fergus.

    "The aircraft landed safely and we are investigating,・said Tara Baten, American Airlines.

    While there were no other planes on the taxiway at the time, the incident raises questions over the subject of increasing concern by the country's air safety agencies ・runway incursions that is the potential for collisions between planes and anything on the ground including other planes.

    The worst airline disaster of all time involved the collision of two jumbo jets in the Canary Islands in 1977s, where both planes tried to land on the same runway at the same time, killing 683 people.

    Now there is a drive to create and install new technologies to prevent disaster.

    鄭nytime we have a system that depends on humans not making mistakes and isn't ready to absorb those mistakes, we have a problem,・said air safety analyst John Nance.

    But Nance says don't be quick to blame the pilots.

    鄭 pilot is looking at so many things that we need to continually upgrade how we are marking runways and taxiways to make sure that we minimize the potential for confusion,・he said.

    Sea-Tac has done a number of things over the years to increase visibility to prevent runway.

    PANC

  • #2
    Congratulations, Sea-Tac, for your third parallel runway! Lucky, these guys, could have been a disaster. Looking at the photo this taxiway indeed looks like it has been built as some sort of emergency runway (@ la Gatwick).

    The worst airline disaster of all time involved the collision of two jumbo jets in the Canary Islands in 1977s, where both planes tried to land on the same runway at the same time, killing 683 people.
    Not quite, the Pan Am was about to leave the runway after landing, while the KLM took off without clearance, and hit the Pan Am well down the runway in poor visibility.

    Regards,
    Peter

    Comment


    • #3
      actually both planes were getting ready to take off KLM was in postition and Pan Am was following it but KLM didnt wait for proper clearance

      Comment


      • #4
        actually, they were on opposite ends of the runway. one would take off above the other one which would take off shortly after. but one of them began rolling for takeoff prematurely while the other was still blazing down the runway. one of the pilots saw the other plane coming head-on so it quickly swerved aside to attempt to avoid a crash but alas, the rear of the plane got hit.

        Comment


        • #5
          Okay, just checked this one out, both 747s were on their way for take-off. The KLM was lined up while Pan Am was backtracking on the runway. KLM eventually took off without clearance while Pan Am was still on the runways. Details can be found here:



          My mistake, I apologize.

          Regards,
          Peter

          Comment


          • #6
            I really can't wait to hear the pilot's explanation for this. Just about every airline requires pilots to set up the NAV radios for a ILS(if there is one!) even during a visual approach. So something tells me the OpsSpecs were'nt being followed during finals into SEATAC. I'm not blasting the pilots (as I have done stupid stuff out there too) but I would really like to know!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by aerpix
              Okay, just checked this one out, both 747s were on their way for take-off. The KLM was lined up while Pan Am was backtracking on the runway. KLM eventually took off without clearance while Pan Am was still on the runways. Details can be found here:
              Quite so..... http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-pa1736.shtml is an interesting report on this incident.

              I heard sometime ago that the Dutch CAA had tried to get hold of Captain van Zanten to head their team assisting the investigation.... before finding out he'd been commanding the KLM ac.

              RJP
              View my photos at JetPhotos.Net!

              Comment


              • #8
                But still, this 'taxiway' at SeaTac, was this built as a proper taxiway only (it was not there upon my last visit in 1997), or is it actually intended to be used as a sort of emergency runway? Anyone any ideas?

                Regards,
                Peter

                Comment


                • #9
                  Luckily there was no plane on the taxiway.

                  How could this happen? The visibility wasn't that bad. ILS a flight controller should have warned the pilot.
                  Andy

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Man! I miss it cuz I didn't watch the news.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Could be it for the pilots if it there fault...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        But still, this 'taxiway' at SeaTac, was this built as a proper taxiway only (it was not there upon my last visit in 1997), or is it actually intended to be used as a sort of emergency runway? Anyone any ideas?


                        This taxiway was built to serve the new third runway, which is still ploughing its way through Seattle's hideous permit process. If the bureaucrats and the NIMBY's are ever finally satisfied, it'll get built to the west of the current runways.

                        It's quite wide, as taxiways go, but it as no markings whatever on it yet. About the only aircraft that use it are on their way to or from the corporate hanger on the westside - probably a good job, in this instance!

                        David

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I could see an international airline landing on the taxiway but not a local! Otherhand the one taxiway does look a little like a skinny runway! Finally, night time is more of an insult to a mistake like that because runway lighting is much clearer. Still pretty bad overall though!
                          Gary R. Tinnes
                          Canada
                          See my photos:
                          http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=391
                          See My Fantasy Airliner images:
                          http://www.geocities.com/fantasyairliners

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I wouldn't agree so much on the international deal. It could have been the first time that pilot has flown into seatac. Still no excuss but I'm sure it was one of the factors.
                            Try to catch me flyin dirty...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Fatigue may be another factor. I well remember the Little Rock, AR, accident a while back, where both pilots had been on duty for over 14 hours, and misjudged the rain storm.

                              Regards,
                              Peter

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X