Near-Miss For UK Charter Airline | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-04.22.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.16.24

Airborne-FlightTraining-04.17.24 Airborne-AffordableFlyers-04.18.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.19.24

Join Us At 0900ET, Friday, 4/10, for the LIVE Morning Brief.
Watch It LIVE at
www.airborne-live.net

Sat, Dec 09, 2006

Near-Miss For UK Charter Airline

Aircraft Passes 56 Feet From Vehicle On Runway

A 737 operated by the UK's Excel Airways missed a vehicle on the runway it was using by only 56 feet according to an official report released Friday from the country's Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB).

The flight was departing Manchester bound for the Greek island of Kos with 190 passengers aboard in July 2003. The pilots were unaware the runway they were using was operating at a reduced length to allow for a team removing rubber deposits at the departure end.

The reports says the pilots couldn't see the opposite end of the runway because of a slight rise in the middle. It wasn't until the aircraft cleared the rise that the pilot saw the vehicles at the far end. By that time it was too late to abort the takeoff. The pilots believed they cleared the vehicles with a good margin.

The report found the crew were unaware of the reduced runway length available and irregularities with the way the airport and ATC handled disseminating information.

In fact, a day earlier, ATC directed three separate airliners to go around after clearing them to land on the same runway. When asked, none of the three crews were aware of the rubber-removal operation, or the reduced runway available. After telling the tower they couldn't accept a landing under the conditions, they were told to go around and assigned another runway.

AAIB says while the aircrew was clearly at fault, procedures for planning and managing future runway maintenance activities were altered to address concerns the agency expressed to both the operators of Manchester Airport and the National Air Traffic Service.

The primary cause of the near-disaster according to the AAIB was the flight crew did not realize the runway was operating at reduced length despite being in possession of a NOTAM concerning the work-in-progress, an ATIS broadcast relating to the work-in-progress and ATC passing information on the takeoff distance available.

FMI: www.aaib.dft.gov.uk

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.20.24): Light Gun

Light Gun A handheld directional light signaling device which emits a brilliant narrow beam of white, green, or red light as selected by the tower controller. The color and type of>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (04.20.24)

"The journey to this achievement started nearly a decade ago when a freshly commissioned Gentry, driven by a fascination with new technologies and a desire to contribute significan>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (04.21.24)

Aero Linx: JAARS, Inc. For decades now, we’ve landed planes on narrow rivers and towering mountains. We’ve outfitted boats and vehicles to reach villages that rarely se>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (04.21.24)

"Our driven and innovative team of military and civilian Airmen delivers combat power daily, ensuring our nation is ready today and tomorrow." Source: General Duke Richardson, AFMC>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.21.24): Aircraft Conflict

Aircraft Conflict Predicted conflict, within EDST of two aircraft, or between aircraft and airspace. A Red alert is used for conflicts when the predicted minimum separation is 5 na>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC