C-17 Lands at Wrong Airport

[Blackjack]

I understand that flying a military aircraft is different from a civilian aircraft, but airmanship is the common thread & there have to be some operational improvements we can develop and share (at least in non-tactical envirinments for mil). Here are a few other "wrong airport" scenarios from around the world in recent years.

No, my wrong airport landing in the mighty C-182 isn't on this list. Neither is NWA landing @ Ellsworth, having intended to land in Rapid City in 2004

Dude care to cite anything better than 2006? For ###### sake look out the window. The runway markings alone should have told these guys it was the wrong airport.

[Toro]

I understand that flying a military aircraft is different from a civilian aircraft, but airmanship is the common thread & there have to be some operational improvements we can develop and share (at least in non-tactical envirinments for mil). Here are a few other "wrong airport" scenarios from around the world in recent years.

No, my wrong airport landing in the mighty C-182 isn't on this list. Neither is NWA landing @ Ellsworth, having intended to land in Rapid City in 2004

<<big long list that nobody cares about>>

What? This isn't the first time somebody landed at the wrong airport? No shit?

It has happened, and will continue to happen. The only reason this is being discussed is because it was an impressive mistake that was caught it on video and it made the news.

[brabus]

It's too much airplane, too much inertia, too much risk to squeeze in maneuvers or events you didn't plan and pre-think ahead of time

Sooo, if something changes and requires you to update your gameplan, "maneuvers," etc. in the air, you just don't do it since it wasn't "pre-thought"? Are you sure you're not part of an Asian Air Force?

[amcflyboy]

The continental connection aircraft that landed at Cabaniss field is still a funny tale at NAS Corpus Christi. Cabaniss, in fact, is not abandoned, but used for transition work to declutter NGP.

Back in January, a Delta Connection CRJ almost landed at my airfield, mistaking us for Albany Int'l Airport. I had just finished my airdrop check ride, and we were taxiing off of the runway when my F.E. noticed an aircraft on short final that looked rather odd, plus we were still turning onto the taxiway. All of a sudden we hear, "FLAGSHIP ON FINAL, THIS IS SCHENECTADY TOWER ON GUARD!! GO AROUND!!!". Aircraft raises his nose, sucks the gear up and makes a sharp 90 degree turn towards ALB Airport. My Evaluator and I, both airline pilots, just shook our head in laughter. There's a reason why you back up all approaches with an instrument approach!

[dream big]

The continental connection aircraft that landed at Cabaniss field is still a funny tale at NAS Corpus Christi. Cabaniss, in fact, is not abandoned, but used for transition work to declutter NGP.

Back in January, a Delta Connection CRJ almost landed at my airfield, mistaking us for Albany Int'l Airport. I had just finished my airdrop check ride, and we were taxiing off of the runway when my F.E. noticed an aircraft on short final that looked rather odd, plus we were still turning onto the taxiway. All of a sudden we hear, "FLAGSHIP ON FINAL, THIS IS SCHENECTADY TOWER ON GUARD!! GO AROUND!!!". Aircraft raises his nose, sucks the gear up and makes a sharp 90 degree turn towards ALB Airport. My Evaluator and I, both airline pilots, just shook our head in laughter. There's a reason why you back up all approaches with an instrument approach!

I am from Schenectady and I must say , buzzing around there in a 172 , if you mistake the two airports for each other, you have no business flying an airplane.

[Guest]

Sooo, if something changes and requires you to update your gameplan, "maneuvers," etc. in the air, you just don't do it since it wasn't "pre-thought"? Are you sure you're not part of an Asian Air Force?

Always break left. Keeps it simple.

[Kaman]

"Crazy Ivan"...Ramius always turns to the starboard at the top of the hour, sir!

[xaarman]

So back on topic, is this the reason for ACCs new CRM SII?

[amcflyboy]

I am from Schenectady and I must say , buzzing around there in a 172 , if you mistake the two airports for each other, you have no business flying an airplane.

Agreed...but then again, they were regional dudes probably working on the sixth leg of their day, plus the "S.A. Low" light was probably on.

Edited September 14, 2012 by amcflyboy

[stract]

So back on topic, is this the reason for ACCs new CRM SII?

what new CRM SII? Haven't seen it yet...

[xaarman]

My bad, it's a 12th AF SII.

[bowe96]

It's too much airplane, too much inertia, too much risk to squeeze in maneuvers or events you didn't plan and pre-think ahead of time.

Please let me know how this attitude works for you next time your airplane decides to hand you an emergency you didn't plan for ahead of time, or the next time you venture through a few fields with less than awesome controllers (UAFM or OKAS come to mind) .

You do realize this is pretty much the only reason pilots haven't all been replaced by remote control yet right? We get paid for that one time shit hits the fan and there needs to be a warm body in the seat to safely recover the airplane and/or pax. You can train a monkey to pull back on the stick. The growing trend I see is "pilots" with the attitude the above statement exudes who never challenge themselves and never stray from the script.

When shit actually does hit the fan they will be found severely wanting.

[capt4fans]

Ya know, in the Herk we joke about -17 guys being gucci airheads...things like this don't help!

On a more serious note, it sounds like there's quite a few fighter guys just saying "Man up and fly a visual right", and that's just not the way to approach flying a heavy. It's too much airplane, too much inertia, too much risk to squeeze in maneuvers or events you didn't plan and pre-think ahead of time. Yeah, these guys were wrong in every way possible, sure- airfield ID, DME, hell look at the fucking ground (you didn't fly over water, you're not there yet).

We're fortunate enough to have 4 guys up front, all crosschecking each other (and would you believe it, it works?). As a nav I look at this kind of incident and sigh. But on an even smaller crew like the -17...the PNF has got to EXPECT the other guy to be 6-9 seconds away from fucking something up, every day. We've got 4 people in the Herk, plus two LM's (who DO catch shit), and we still lose things through the cracks. On a 2-man crew with a whole lot of airplane, you've got to be on your game, every time. There's no excuse for flying to a major airfield and NOT having an approach ready, or a waypoint built, or the fucking DME tuned, and using them to the max extent possible. Our planes are too big to be fucking around in, and we've got too many lives riding in back.

And having said THAT, yeah, some buddies of mine put a Herk into Khost instead of Salerno a few years back (technically only touch-n-go'd). They all got Q-3'd, and admitted that "SCNS was correct, but we didn't follow it because we thought we saw it." Use your fucking systems, guys. In my experience, SCNS (or equivalent) is usually right, and your eyeball is usually wrong.

Hey Nav.....I need a water...after that, you can go sit back down and be quiet unless there's a required checklist.

[C17Driver]

Ya know, in the Herk we joke about -17 guys being gucci airheads...things like this don't help!

On a more serious note, it sounds like there's quite a few fighter guys just saying &quot;Man up and fly a visual right&quot;, and that's just not the way to approach flying a heavy. It's too much airplane, too much inertia, too much risk to squeeze in maneuvers or events you didn't plan and pre-think ahead of time. Yeah, these guys were wrong in every way possible, sure- airfield ID, DME, hell look at the fucking ground (you didn't fly over water, you're not there yet).

We're fortunate enough to have 4 guys up front, all crosschecking each other (and would you believe it, it works?). As a nav I look at this kind of incident and sigh. But on an even smaller crew like the -17...the PNF has got to EXPECT the other guy to be 6-9 seconds away from fucking something up, every day. We've got 4 people in the Herk, plus two LM's (who DO catch shit), and we still lose things through the cracks. On a 2-man crew with a whole lot of airplane, you've got to be on your game, every time. There's no excuse for flying to a major airfield and NOT having an approach ready, or a waypoint built, or the fucking DME tuned, and using them to the max extent possible. Our planes are too big to be fucking around in, and we've got too many lives riding in back.

And having said THAT, yeah, some buddies of mine put a Herk into Khost instead of Salerno a few years back (technically only touch-n-go'd). They all got Q-3'd, and admitted that &quot;SCNS was correct, but we didn't follow it because we thought we saw it.&quot; Use your fucking systems, guys. In my experience, SCNS (or equivalent) is usually right, and your eyeball is usually wrong.

YGBSM!

[Apollo]

You can't plan a visual approach ahead of time?

Flying a visual approach is "######ing around?"

...yeah, looks rough:

.....######in' Navs.

The weight we save without navs or FEs allows us to maneuver like that. Toasty was right on track for the legacy dudes, too much inertia.

[Prozac]

The weight we save without navs or FEs allows us to maneuver like that. Toasty was right on track for the legacy dudes, too much inertia.

Yeah, but how much does the hula girl on the glareshield of Fat Albert weigh? AMC fuel savings initiatives would never allow for something like that. That said, I'll bet she'd look good perched atop the altitude alerter on the tanker.

[Danger41]

Those videos were fucking sweet!

[Goblin]

Yeah, but how much does the hula girl on the glareshield of Fat Albert weigh? AMC fuel savings initiatives would never allow for something like that. That said, I'll bet she'd look good perched atop the altitude alerter on the tanker.

[Right Seat Driver]

Yeah, but how much does the hula girl on the glareshield of Fat Albert weigh? AMC fuel savings initiatives would never allow for something like that. That said, I'll bet she'd look good perched atop the altitude alerter on the tanker.

Just add it as a remark in the MAF Fuel Tracker and you'll be good.

[sky_king]

...yeah, looks rough:

Try that in a 60 year old 707-300. I bet the wing spar doesn't make it past 23 seconds.

[matmacwc]

I only heard "Stall" once on takeoff.

Edited September 15, 2012 by matmacwc

[Swizzle]

-1 Excerpt

-- WARNING -- Stall warning speed increases or decreases dramatically with elevator inputs, power changes, flaps selections, or changes in G. Anticipation of these effects is required for safe maneuvering near the stall warning speed.

---------------

The stall warning system provides alerts 5-15% above the stick pusher speed in all flight conditions and configurations. These alerts supplement natural buffet to provide adequate situational awareness of stall speed margin. Changes in flight conditions have a large effect on stall and stall warnings speeds. For example, raising the flaps from 100% to UP will increase stall and stall warning speeds by approximately 20 KIAS. Reducing power from takeoff to flight idle can also increase the stall speeds by approximately 20 KIAS. Increasing G by 0.1, which is barely perceptible to the pilot, increases stall speeds approximately 3 knots. As a result of these real-time calculations, stall warning speed is continuously changing unless the aircraft is in steady flight.

STALL WARNING AIRSPEED. An airspeed readout and caret are used as an indication for alerting the pilot that the airplane is within 40 knots of the stall warning airspeed (approximately 1.08 times the power-on stall speed). The suffix label is the letter S (<S). If the counter-pointer is being displayed, both the stall warning caret and the stall warning readout are displayed. If the counter-pointer is not displayed, only the stall warning readout is displayed. The stall warning indications have priority over VH. The stall special alert is displayed when the indicated airspeed is less than the stall warning speed.

The charted stall airspeeds are defined as the calibrated airspeeds at which the stick pusher activates and are derived from flight test data. [...]. The indicated airspeed at which the stick pusher activates should not be higher than the charted calibrated stall speed....

Edited September 16, 2012 by Swizzle

[matmacwc]

SIB is out.

[stract]

interesting read. A couple queep points [nerdy safety hat]...the SIO went to the trouble of having his final message be in Tab T format, but he still screwed it up. Three things listed in the factors section were concluded to not be factors, so they should have been down in the NFWODs section (since they were worthy of him discussing in multiple paragraphs). And I know Findings and Recommendations are not required for Class E mishaps, but seriously, if you go to that much effort to write your analysis and then not have any recommendations, that's a bit absurd. I can think of at least two recommendations I would make for this event (and having to scroll back up to the narrative to figure out where the causal findings were was annoying). [/nerdy safety hat]

I still want to know how the conversation went with the O-10 once they told him they had not, in fact, landed at MacDill.

[Royal]

I still want to know how the conversation went with the O-10 once they told him they had not, in fact, landed at MacDill.

I'm guessing it was something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTXzcILPPp8