NEAR COLLISION with Control Tower! | Plane Deviates from Landing Path
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 03. 2024
- VIDEO ANALYSIS reviewing the incident • [ANALYSIS] Near Collis...
23/MAR/2024
Southwest Boeing 737-8H4 (N8554X) performing flight SWA147 from Nashville to LaGuardia was on the second attempt to land when the aircraft suddenly deviated to the right of the approach path coming dangerously close to the control Tower at around 150-200 feet height.
Air traffic controller yelled the pilots to go around and climb immediately.
______________
Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASAviation
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Flying Eyes 10% OFF: flyingeyesoptics.com/?ref=Vas...
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
Please, give a big LIKE to support and for more videos like this!! :)
VIDEO ANALYSIS reviewing the incident: czcams.com/video/DPCTrHJn4H4/video.htmlsi=OubHRs7H8V6uUIiP
It's evident according to radar track thay they deviated off the localizer and overflew the Tower, located east of the runway.
Now the question is and with radar showing their lowest altitude at 200' feet, didn't they see that they were not lined up with runway 4?
*EDIT 3 FROM A FAA GUY: In 2009 a hotel was built on 83rd street just off of and abeam the threshold of runway 4. It's now called the "Avion Inn." In 2013 while doing ILS tests, the FAA realized that this building intrudes into glideslope. For a time, the GS was not available for runway 4 while they figured out what to do about it. Ultimately they settled on the restriction of no AP coupling and a lot more commentary on the approach plate.* This guy also sent a copy of the ILS 4 approach plate from 2008, in which no commentary about the autopilot coupling appeared.
*EDIT 2: Some people are commenting on the possibility that the ILS signal (although not autopilot coupled) showed the pilots that they were flying correctly on localizer/glideslope, but phisically were not. Any LGA familiar pilots here (or even engineers) can tell if this sounds anywhere close to what could happen do to signal blackout or reflections? Have you ever hand flown an ILS (which is hand mandatory) visually and noticed that the signals were directing you off the lineup for the runway?*
*UPDATE: The ILS 4 at LaGuardia is mandatory to be hand flown, as stated on the approach plate. Autopilot MUST BE OFF.*
could someone maybe translate the metar at 0:34, please?
Guessing combo of wind and talking to company about diversion. Either way they weren't totally focused on landing.
@jochen_schueller
Heavy Rain, Mist
Visibility is very low at only 1 mile
Temperature is 46°F
Dew point is 43°F
There is a headwind of 16kts (coming from 040° towards 220°)
chatgpt4: This METAR for LaGuardia Airport (KLGA) indicates it's from the 23rd of the month, at 16:51 UTC. It shows winds from 40 degrees at 16 knots, visibility of 1 mile, heavy rain and mist, overcast clouds at 600 feet, temperature 8°C, dew point 6°C, and an atmospheric pressure of 29.79 inches of mercury. Surface visibility is 2 miles, with significant rain (0.21 inches in the last hour) and temperature and dew point detailed further. @@jochen_schueller
@@gregf7817 ty!
"Let's get out of here before we receive a phone number to call"
It is an incident the FAA already been alerted about.... it's little more than just phone number now
😂
Ya know what? That very thought entered my mind as well. INtersting to note, the crew was given clearance to Pittsburgh. The flight diverted to KBWI....I guess because KBWI is one of SWA's hubs,
LOL I was thinking the same thing "Uhhh we'd like to leave now"
It hasn't happened to me personally, but I have heard telephone call requests handed over from previous controllers, so it can happen
"Say reason that you were like...not on the approach" lmao that's one way to put it 💀
People’s inability to communicate without using “like” every other word is so annoying
@@reed785M it's almost as bad as using "so" or "really" for meaningless emphasis.
@@imoverclocked haha, but you just said it right there, it adds emphasis. You can say it’s meaningless but that’s your opinion, it still serves a purpose. Using “like” insistently genuinely has no meaning. It’s more of a lack of processing that formed into a bad habit that should be broken.
Just curious why you were trying to fly into the tower
@@reed785M filler words are filler words. So, really, um, like… yeah?
Approach: Southwest, contact tower.
Southwest: okay, turning right.
Lmao bruh
Lmao....good one!
Lol
Damn it 😂
😂
Oh that's what they mean by contact the tower! I've been doing it all wrong.
😂
"Sir, you can't park there."
"He's comin right at us!!!"
"Sure picked a bad week to give up sniffing glue!"
LOL!!!!!!!
@@clqudy4750 proceeds to jump out the window.....
There's a sale at Penny's!!!
Even in Russia it rings a bell! Aeroplane - the real classic!
Wow! Rough weather day! Good call on the divert. SWA147 crew got shook up!
Thanks Victor!
Someone mentioned possible reflections on the ILS. Real possibility? Or extremely rare? FYI, love your channel.
If time allows, please do a short video on this and share your opinions 🙏
I hope to see a blancoliriio video on this one!
I think this will make the news tonight. Can’t wait for your follow up!
may be they could have tried the LPV approach which does not have the autopilot restrictions, if hand flying was an issue?
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.
"So help me, you'll have to talk him right down to the ground!"
I just wanted to say, good luck, we're all counting on you.
Don't call me Shirley
What do you make of this?
Well… I can make a hat! I can make a broach! I can make a pterodactyl!
I just wanted to say, good luck, we're all counting on you.
AirForceProud moment
"Aaaaand you can go ahead and Alt-F4. Welcome to FSX Steam Edition."
Flightsim 2001 proud
Ground Pound 69. unironically.
It's missing a hot air balloon buzzing the tower doing 400kts
No snacks for the passengers probably.
Philly, Pittsburgh, Baltimore -- anything to stay out of LGA.
No more question just let us get out of here
La Garbage. Hate going there.
I forgot about this aspect. As a seasoned NYC/Queens avoider I can sort of understand the hustle. TBF, they should have diverted to Pittsburgh without attempting to land.
Baltimore's not that bad
@@TrueSight_333Voted America's Best Airport for 2023. Rebuilt from the ground up!
When I read the title, I thought this would be a recording from a smaller airport with some student pilot in a Cesna.... but nope it's a 737 at one of the busiest US airports.
I thought the same thing…..and almost didn’t watch the video.
Me too, luckily the algorithm knew better
@@marcellkovacs5452algorithm: nah, really! You’re going to wanna watch this. Trust me, bro.
Wow, rough day at LGA.
Oh wait, it’s ALWAYS a rough day at LGA!
I diverted up to Syracuse because of that wind, we refueled and tried again after the wind died down. Surely a tough day!
2:45 was such a polite way of saying "What the f*ck was that all about?"
@@Raiders33sounded dumb but did the job well. It only becomes a big issue when you sound dumb and you mess up. That’s why it’s always easier on yourself to just talk like a professional.
Yea, that was the politest NYC WTF You Doin? I've everheard. Props to ATC. 😂
@@Stephengirty Yah, she was super nice. LaGuardia ATC is notoriously nasty. I can't imagine how colorful it would have been had it been that nasty guy that was in a few viral videos about a decade ago
@@Raiders33 well when you see an aircraft flying directly toward you, there is a certain pucker factor that can become part of the equation.
I’m sure she was just freaked out and lost her phraseology for a half a second. Seems like there was general chaos in the tower. People are giving a professional, credentialed ATC such crap for a single word. Unbelievable.
Surface winds are 040 at 16 kts and SWA147 was complaining about a tail wind. I checked the historical winds, and at 3000 ft the GFA was showing 179º at 48 kt. Just a guess, but there was a substantial crab and once through the shear layer they were late taking it out and drifted right. Gale warnings and low level wind shear in low visibilitly...this does not sound like a fun day to fly.
Update:
DATA BASED ON 231200Z JFK @ 3000: 1759, @6000: 1936+05
Definitely shifting so quick up there. A good reason for the first go around, but for the second :O
can confirm on the ground all around the NYC area that day was absolutely miserable - driving rain & wind followed by substantial gusting wind after the low pushed through.
I've had days we would try to set up for a CAT III, calm winds at the surface but 50kt tailwind ripping down final. Can't get slowed down and configured, have to go around.
Thanks for bringing this up, that certainly could have contributed. Then, there’s the fact that ILS approaches to 4 must be hand flown. I’ll look forward to the results of the investigation.
@@jacobshaw808 Just pulled up the plate to see that for myself... interesting! Any idea why? If that's the case, I can definitely see a scenario they're fighting to maintain their speed bracket/meet stable gates in the conditions and accidentally stay just right of the flight director for long enough that it accumulates a full deflection on the loc to the point this situation occurred. Total speculation of course.
"I'm sorry Goose, but it's time to buzz the tower"
"I don't think that's a good idea Mav"
@@nix4644 "You've lost that loving feeling!" 😆🎶
"Mav, do you have the number of that truck driving school we saw on TV? Truckmaster I think it is. I might need that..."
U guys crack me up😂😂😂
Came here looking for this comment 😀
Pilot: Give reason for go-around?
Tower: You were about to land in the Dunkin Donuts in Concourse C. We'd like you to not do that
Not only were they significantly off the localizer, but they seemed to be completely oblivious to it. I wonder if they were task saturated and fatigued, and if that led them to just wanting to get the aircraft on the ground. Visibility poor at 1SM, heavy rain... they had no idea that they buzzed the tower and overflew the terminal. "What was the reason for that go around?" Uh... you were about to cause one of the largest aviation accidents in history. A loaded commercial airline plowing through a packed terminal
That's a crazy thought. All those people in the terminal being involved in an aircraft accident! I guess the pilots mistook the tower lights for runway lights maybe? I can't recall there ever being an accident involving an aircraft crashing into an airport terminal.
pretty sure it happened in the documentary movie "airplane" @@joshilini2
@@jaredstoll2169"Airplane!"
FTFY so others can watch that documentary.
Greg has it all figured out. No need to get the FAA involved
@@slates010saving taxpayer money, what a gentleman
The ATC shouted out the go around, but I didn't hear a call-sign. Was that just missing communications in the video, or did she omitted it because she could look the pilot in the face and took a dive under her desk? 😂
Was probably eye to eye with the landing lights lol
I think maybe it was a different voice - so maybe didn't have the call sign. But honestly, just everyone go around if it's that bad.
I took it as: "everyone, go around!"
Let’s not be fatuous boys
LGA's Control Tower height is 240 feet. @VASAviation's ADS-B data showed SWA147's altitude at 002 feet at 2:36
4:25 You can hear the pilot's voice trembling, he must have realized that had been a very close call.
And that's the pilot monitoring, who became the pilot flying a few moments later. The pilot who had been flying took over the radios.
it wasn't close at all, they started their go around at 350 ft before reaching the airport and crossed the airport at 1000ft.
They were 108 feet above street level over East Elmhurst at one point. They almost clipped a church. By the time they passed the control tower they were already in a climb. The control tower is not the concern. They almost took out a neighborhood.
@@cageordie yup so the female pilot was flying when it happened..
@@fhowland on average, women simply should not be pilots.
The guy in right in front of them went around for windshear. That METAR does not indicate the actual winds the aircraft were experiencing on the approach. Actual winds were likely much worse than what METAR/Tower were reading. And by the way, while executing a Go Around, telling tower the reason is not the first priority. It's Aviate, Navigate, then Communicate. IMHO
Tower did preface every request for info with "When Able...", which pilots provided _when able._ Relatively quickly in these cases.
The weather was truly awful on Saturday. I’m actually surprised some of these approaches even happened. You can hear the Republic say that they were not allowed per their company.
I actually was in x-plane trying to land at LGA saturday and it was ROUGH. I had 3 go arounds but finally stuck one.
Yeah that was because of RVR which then went above 4k once they discontinued
@@heddingitelol xplane u fly real planes at all?
Yeah we always give it a shot even when the rjs are going around lmao
@@seanshipley8624 Not yet. Why laugh? X-Plane is a respected simulator
"Southwest 147 contact tower . . . . . ON THE RADIO, NOT IN PERSON!"
As a New Yorker, the weather that day was horrible. Rain coming down so hard windshield wipers did almost nothing. Diverting was the best decision
seemed like a really windy day, with other pilots having issues as well.
And low visibility.
Definitely. The JetBlue pilot coming in right after them also said they were going to have to go around. When asked for a reason by ATC he cited windshear.
Had to pull this one up on FR24 and yeah they were significantly off the approach, like not just a little bit. Wild stuff
ATC saved lives
AdsbExchange shows it a lot better.
1/2 dot deviation from localizer requires immediate missed approach. This approach (ILS 4)must be hand flown due to building reflecting glideslope signal. Windshear, high workload, airspeed fluctuations, and tunnel vision in low IFR contributed to this near disaster. Tower called the go-around and is the hero today!
Maybe the girl should have stayed off the controls?
I saw the Autopilot coupled NA on the plate but can't find the source for the reflecting glideslope signals. Can you share please.
@obamabigears734 no one cares about your sexism.
When autopilot coupled not authorized is in the notes of the approach plate the reason isn’t spelled out, MIA ILS 09 is the same, you just have to know that if you fly it coupled to the autopilot and suddenly the signal changes due to reflection of building or something the autopilot could make the airplane fly unstable path. So hand flying the approach is logical because you’re not going to be aggressive with the controls on final even if the glideslope signal fails or deviates, just note the signal is out of compliance and go-around on current heading. Everything is trimmed out hand flown and on approach speed, stable by 1,000 feet all the way to touchdown with minor changes cross checking the localizer and glide slope deviation. It’s the bread and butter of IFR pilot training.
600 ovc and 1sm vis isn’t really “low ifr”.
I don't think southwest asked for the reasons - SWA voice (male and female) were both super shaky.
Yikes, I live in the area and can say the weather was BAD that day. Driving was a challenge at times can’t imagine trying to fly in that.
As someone who has landed at LGA, oh maybe 500 times, as a passenger since the late 1960s, I rather have the pilot go alternative then try to land at LGA in really bad weather. Been there done that, it is not fun for either the crew or the passengers. Folks today don't know how much safer it is today then in 1970. I landed in a horrible snow/sheet storm where the Lockheed L-1011 pilot did a great job but landed real hard, came on the PA while going to the terminal and said " sorry about that folks, was trying to stick the landing in the snow, but not 2 feet into the tarmac."
When I was a kid we hit the ground so hard at LaGuardia the oxygen masks in the row in front of us came down.
My Dad used to captain L-1011s out of Kai Tak for Cathay Pacific in the late 80s and early 90s before the A330 replaced them. Got to jumpseat a few times as a kid. It was his first command and still his favorite plane.
Landed there once in a thunderstorm, on the approach over the water. Just dark clouds and rain and the water getting closer and closer as the plane drops during turbulence. By far the most I've ever questioned if I was going to survive a flight!
@@--KP- Any landing at LaGuardia which you can swim away from is a good landing.
PERMISSION TO BUZZ TOWER?!
the pattern is full
denied. This is steam edition.
Only if you buy the DLC.
That just about covers the fly-bys....
I WANT SOME *BUTTS!!!*
That’s basically going right over where I work (Elmhurst Hospital) to be that far off the approach path. That’s a HUGE oops, especially with the low clouds.
The weather the day this happened was heavy rain and winds of 40 plus miles per hour
Plus, so not a good day in this region. Many cancelled and delayed flights for all three airports.
Interesting. Sounds like a stressful situation up there
Another great and quick upload! Thanks for posting.
Thank you for watching
@@VASAviation , love your videos. v
ATC, “she’s aiming the plane right at us. Climb, climb, climb!”
Weather in eastern PA was crap all day that day. Not surprised that they had issues in that area.
Oh… that’s why I heard the thrust really loud from the college (Vaughn). I really wondered why it felt so close (but visibility was virtually Zero, so there was nothing to see).
That's exactly what I was thinking. To miss runway 4 and be headed for the tower they must have been flying over all of the car rentals. The weather was awful that day. How far was that localizer needle off that they didn't call the go around themselves and it was called for them? The important thing is that they live to be able to review what went wrong.
They executed the go around procedure above your college
If this was from this weekend we had some wild weather here in the tri-state area. Nor-easter blew through with dead calm to 50mph winds.
Thanks, Victor!
Thank you very much for picking this Incident up!👍 It was indeed tough weather that day at LaGuardia - maybe a contributing factor to the incident. There were a lot of Go-Arounds caused by the Weather Conditions - and for that Southwest Flight it was the second landing attempt, too.
Looks like everyone was having a problem
And they went around as they should. This one was disastrous and inexcusable.
@@Theb_rand_1Only someone who doesn't understand the situation would say such a thing.
No coupled approaches permitted to KLGA ILS RWY 4. It's been noted on the approach plate for over a decade. Not sure if that contributed to the issue but who knows. For those who may not know, a 'coupled approach' is one where the auto-pilot is used to minimums as opposed to hand-flying the approach. (I'm not referring to Autoland because there is no CAT III Auto-Land approaches available in LGA.)
SWA doesn’t have autoland in their aircraft, so all ILS approaches in low vis must be hand flown using the HUD, which is only on the captain’s side. This would seem like a situation where the captain should have been flying to me, but who knows without more details of what was happening in the cockpit.
I hope they remembered to pull the circuit breakers on the CVR so we can all learn from the event...
I was listening to this on LiveATC. I wasn't sure what was happening st first but I was also watching FlightRadar24 at the same time and saw just how close he came. It sounded like the weather was playing havoc but still, you've gotta account for that and "stay on target" , you know?
Sometimes approaches that are not allowed to be coupled (Auto Pilot must be off) are that way due to erroneous glide slope indications. Although in this case they were off the horizontal path by quite a bit... So could be an issue with the ILS/LOC instrumentation on the ground, some interference/something between the signal and the aircraft, or because the pilot flying (PF) was hand flying they might have had trouble maintaining the horizontal course. >1 dot deviation should have been a go around, but if the pilot monitoring (PM) was looking outside for the runway and the PF was saturated with the hand flying the deviation may have snuck though the "Swiss Cheese".
Good call by the Crew to divert, sounds like some low visibility out there.
👍
Looks like the weather played a major roll.
Ahh.. ya
What kinda of roll are we talking here? Maybe a honey roll or just some butter?
Was this on Sat 23Mar around 3pm? I was DH’g to LGA, held for an hour then diverted to BWI. Fun day at LGA 🤪
wow that was almost a heartbreaking disaster
Lol ATC controllers finally experienced first hand what it is like to be in an possible accident situation. The screams for go around had a bit of another accent on them than usual 😂
Meaning?
@@653j521 It's not every day you see an airplane that is about to crash in to the tower you're in, so you're liable to be a bit less composed than usual.
Question??!! If everyone is going around and with tailwind, windshear on the rnwy 4 approach ,how come they don't send them around to do the rnwy 22 approach??? Seems like it was a very windy day
Surface winds were 040/16 according to the metar
The wind on the surface is reported 040 at 16, you can definitely not change to runway 22 with that. Having a tailwind during the initial - and even final approach phase - is quite normal in thunderstorm conditions. Then as you descend it rolls back and faces you, as reported on the surface wind sensors.
Most aircraft have limits on how much tailwind they are able to land with (for example all of our fleets is 10 knots), however on approach, it doesn’t matter the wind conditions but that does make you more susceptible to windshear like JetBlue experienced. Just the way it is sometimes
@@JD_SoarZall of the airplanes I know have a 10kt tailwind limit. From a C172 to a A380. I think that's the safe limit they all get during the designing process.
@@giorgiomarino5958 are you a ZNY or NY app controller? Curious because I thought LGA’s configuration determined the configuration for the whole NYC terminal area? Maybe I was misinformed
This incident reminded me of the Eastern Airlines 66 disaster of 1975 @ JFK International due to terminology mentioned: bad weather and subsequent aircraft go arounds. The only difference is that although wind shear reportedly brought down that EAL B727, that specific weather phenomenon terminology was unknown and unrecognized at the time. The heroes of that fateful day were Captain Nickerson (possibly attributed with "creating" the wind shear evasion maneuver while in command of EAL 902, but was reprimanded) and the Flying Tigers DC-8 captain. A very interesting read at "Admiral Cloudberg" and "NYC Aviation" online.
Tower, this is Ghostrider requesting a fly-by.
Negative Ghostrider, the pattern is full.
“*Expletive*” - Tower.
This is a result of an immense amount of inexperience in the cockpit currently.
You know, not being lined up on a runway didn't stop Harrison Ford, so why should it stop Southwest?
The pavement vs building ratio...
@@jonathanbott87 Bah! Just tiny details.
🤣😂
I’m in Delaware and 3/23 was a hellacious weather day. Big Nor’easter coming through, big wind and rain on front end and powerful wind on the back end. I don’t know what the limits are for wind/visibility when flying a jet but I can say conditions on the ground were horrendous.
i worked construction for a couple years at LGA building the new terminals, and i can tell you its windy as hell there most days, especially during the winter. being that the old layout of the runways was so tight, im surprised this doesnt happen more often
Twr - Southwest 147, Say your intentions. SW147 - Can we pretend we were in the simulator?
LOL good summary!
- Southwest 147 when ready I have number you can copy
- negative, diverting to Pittsburgh, see ya
🤣🤣@@pluto8404
"It's OK...we can buy new tower"
lmao classic
Smart move to call it after the bad go around....
Dang it Maverick, you're not allowed to buzz the tower! The ATC manager spilled coffee on his shirt again!
That one crew sounded shook
"And what was the reason for the two go-arounds?" -- clueless about where he was. This is crazy stuff. Controller may have saved a bunch of lives.
I believe SWA 147 was incorrectly tagged on that transmission. It sounded like another voice. Maybe another aircraft was asking why everyone was going around, which isn't uncommon.
I don't think it was SWA asking the question. Her reply was "he was (...), so someone else had asked (probably another controller or maybe the Brickyard pilot as they were supposed to land on 4 and heard both JetBlue and SWA going around - he was trying to asses if they should go with another approach of if they should divert to another airport)
@@BlueSkyUp_EUI think Tower also thought it was someone else but was indeed SWA
@@jimrossi4787sounds like the same voice to me
I think the "may have" should be excluded from that last sentence.
Can confirm weather Saturday was terrible. Pilot sounded shaken up after second go around
appears that the Pilot Monitoring had to take control on the SWA147, hence the change of voice on the Comms. That must've been eye opening in the flight deck, and the tower!
His voice sounded real shock up.
What gets me is when he asked for a reason. Surely he would already know.
@@caroltlw not necessarily ...fight, flight or fawn response.
The Female was the Pilot Flying for both approaches and the male was the pilot monitoring.
@@caroltlwhe didn’t ask. it was misattributed. those are 2 different voices.
I would’ve hate to be a passenger onboard Southwest 147. 2 missed landings and then a divert… not a good sign
Sounds like a lot of mistakes going on in that cockpit… worrying. Yes, wind sheer and poor weather, but the indecision, the clear confusion we heard in comms, switching who was in control. It was clear that the flight deck wasn’t in the right frame of mind, although the eventual diversion was a good decision (better late than never).
Passengers looking out the left side wondering why the runway was all the way over there.
@@aps-pictures9335More like sounds like a shit day to be flying
@@aps-pictures9335 Cabin actually... Cockpit, or Flight deck you might mean?
Sounds like you don't actually have a clue of this, and still commenting. Worrying.
@@SgfGustafsson heavy rain in NYC on the 23rd. I’m guessing they didn’t even have a visual on the runway.
We were on this flight. It was a wild ride! I’m glad I didn’t know all this at the time. Wow, how scary!
4:08 why was conversation and subtitles reading like the tower was talking to a third person rather than sw147 who had asked them a question? But didnt 147 actually call themselves off the first time? Im confused...
Pittsburgh seams like a long way from LaGuardia for an alternate airport glad to se they went to Baltimore instead, but then again they might have wanted to get as far away from LaGuardia tower as possible.
I think they wanted to get far away from Saturday's storm track. That storm dropped 2 feet of snow in my yard in the White Mountains of New Hampshire.
Looks like they got to about 300ft agl. Wowzers.
Lower than that
@@VASAviation FR24 ADB-D shows they were at 300 at their lowest point right about Astoria Blvd and were climbing by the time they were over 24th Ave. Wouldn't surprise me if the Budget Car Rental lot had a rude awakening with TOGA thrust directly over their heads. I'm not even sure they would've made it to the tower if they hadn't called go around - they were more likely to run into the Grand Central Parkway first.
@@gregarious119FR24 shows altitude based on 29.92 altimeter. The altitude you see right there on my radar screen (2:38) is altitude corrected to local 29.79, which was like 180 feet AMSL.
@@VASAviationdaaaayumn 😬😬😬🥴🥴🥴
@@VASAviation LGA's Control Tower height is 240 feet on LGA approach plates.
"LaGuardia, possible tower deviation, I have a number for you..."
😂
N750FA had a total engine failure into KFRG yesterday (3/24/2024) with a landing around 1450/1500 if u wanna look into it
RWY 4 approach can be tricky and my guess is they were fixating on something unrelated. Perhaps they didn't visualize the runway lights after breaking through the ceiling because the neighborhood is has a lot of lights, but most of the buildings around the runway are mandated to have rooftop lights.
*_Is it just me or was the 1st Officer the pilot flying in the two failed attempts, then they switched roles when they had to divert, with the Captain taking over controls?_*
I don’t want to assume who was captain and FO, but they definitely switched PF and PM roles at the divert decision based on the new pilot taking over commas.
That's what I heard.
It is not just you. Two missed with a male voice on the radio. Then the diversion requested by a female voice. Clearly the female was flying the first two attempts.
Exactly what I thought
LaGuardia was having themselves a day… 😬
A good friend of mine a retired Boeing 767 captain always told me he hated flying into LGA reminded him of his aircraft carrier landing experiences in his navy days…
Challenging weather day and I don't know if anyone else picked up on it but I'd wager there was training at the local controller's position as well. I've had a few rough ones like that myself. Always rattles you. Good call on the divert.
Tower... "Hey Southwest, what was your reason for flying at the tower?"
Southwest... "We uh... stand by while we sort this out...."
Long pause...............
Southwest... "Uh, we'd like to divert without answering your question please" 🤣
First time I heard a Southwest say "We're too fast..."
Firsts for everything ^.^
man, bad day when you end up in Pittsburgh when trying to fly to NY. But hey, its better than ending up in Flushing Bay, or the control tower.
They didn' t end up at Pittsburgh
@@VASAviation that’s where she asked to divert to, so ai assumed that’s where they went!
Can't you read on screen text in the video?
I know you focus on Airlines but are you able to get the ATC equivalent of the ship that crashed into the bridge in Baltimore?
That's one way to let tower know you broke out
Well.... at 2:14 LGA TWR asks, "Southwest 147 let me know where you break out at." 😛
Q. SWA, what's your intention?
A. To scare the crap out of tower personnel.
Landing a B737 in +RA is like driving your car through the car wash at 180mph. The wipers can't keep up with plus rain.
Throw in mechanical turbulence from city buildings and a notoriously fluctuating glide slope that has to be hand flown, buckle up you're in for a ride. I believe this is same approach SW had a hard landing on with gear collapse years ago too.
As for lateral deviation, sounds like trying to transition visually too early.
This is a significant incident, I wonder if there is an investigation and what the root and contributing causes were. It needs to be dug up and addressed.
Would have been nice to have a weather overlay on this one.
All over the place, nothing special to show on screen
Also how did they cross minimums and continued without the runway in sight? If the visibility was that bad you really gotta be careful no?
Is it possible that the plane was angled in a way that they couldnt really look over the dashboard and see the runway maybe because of a too flat approach?
So weird...
Do you know they crossed the minimums?
@@lauriuusitalo764They got down to 135' MSL. Definitely below minimums.
Must have been something in the air that night. JetBlue698, right in front of Southwest 147 on their second attempt, got too low ant had to go around!
This is might be the craziest event so far this year. Either their ILS equipment was not operating correctly or they were really tired. Crazy to see mistakes like this especially for pilots at majors. Maybe they were fatigued.
lga is one of the most challenging airports. period ! good or bad weather doesn't matter
I read “diverted to Baltimore, sadly”
Yeah, what happened to Pittsburgh as their alternate?
@@m.choudry4898 I’d be happy as a clam diverting to Pittsburgh, saves me a connection. Two things with Baltimore though, first, it’s an ops center for Southwest. They really don’t have hubs per se, but if they did, Baltimore would be one of them. Second, if everything goes to pot, you can take the train to New York in no time flat.
@@m.choudry4898KPIT was the filed alternate on the IFR flight plan, but that doesn't mean that's the only airport they can divert to. That's just for planning purposes. In actual flight conditions, the crew can divert to another airport if needed. In this case, dispatch told them to divert to BWI.
Never landed at LaGuardia before I assume its a short final and there was some weather… They were done with trying again apparently.
Sounds like SWA is still using the Burbank Two Fast Speed arrival.
It seems the weather was so bad they never even saw the tower or runway?
Tower requesting flyby
It is likely that the instruments showed they were on localizer and GS.
doubtful.....
Saturday's weather was crazy.
1:02 He says 3000, your subtitles say 2000
I also noticed, SWA147 is told to "fly runway heading" or "fly 040" multiple times and continues to fly and readback "060" even after he nearly crashes into the airport terminal
Drunk!
Also noticed that myself and found it curious. Runway course is 044º, as is the missed approach course to GREKO. Why saying 060º? Were they deviating on that heading for weather ahead? Had they the wrong course or missed approach inserted?
@@pesto12601 Fatigue and tiredness is just as dangerous as flying/driving drunk
The only 040 instruction I've found is for Brickyard at 03:21
SWA announced 060 twice and no controller asked them to change course.
What am I missing? I don't find where they're instructed to fly 040, nor where they're asked to correct the 060....
I think the missed is 060 .. I don't have the chart in front of me. Will be interesting to see the after action report if there is one. I'm on the 73 myself. I'm not familiar with SWA ops and is they are the HUD or dual channel.
Oh my gosh. I hope the pilots and controllers can calm some nerves today and understand how that happened. How scary.
LGA's Control Tower height is 240 feet. At 2:35 in @VASAviation's video, SWA147's ADS-B data displayed 002 feet (200 feet).
Yep, that's the ADSb recorded altitude corrected for local altimeter. I guess they passed very close to Tower at the same level, but not directly into it
@@VASAviation I measured the separation to be about 300 ft laterally and about 610 to 635 feet vertically from the tower. When SWA147 was abeam the tower, I graphically matched a SWA147 Flightradar24 point at 850 ft. with a Google satellite map, and also matched it to about the same ADS-B Exchange point at 875 feet. At those points, SWA147 was only about 300 ft. laterally (west) from the tower, and at those altitudes of 850 to 875 feet --- about 610 to 635 feet above the tower.
@@Raiders33thanks God Tower called and they could start the climb