Incident at GPT

daveozzie999

Senior Member
Aug 15, 2009
249
0
16
MRY
Yikes. We are all bound to make mistakes in this career but trying to lie and deceive your way out of something just won't work. Besides multiple people involved in every incident EVERYTHING we do is recorded. Let this be a lesson in support of ATSAP reporting.
 

ajmezz

Epic Member
Apr 8, 2010
1,811
28
48
When asked about what was going through his mind, his only response was, "shit'll buff out".
 

STL2CVG

Senior Analyst
Feb 2, 2009
893
2
18
Cincinnati
Yikes. We are all bound to make mistakes in this career but trying to lie and deceive your way out of something just won't work. Besides multiple people involved in every incident EVERYTHING we do is recorded. Let this be a lesson in support of ATSAP reporting.
If I read it correctly, and understand it correctly, I believe the ATSAP team rejected his report.
 

StuSEL

Moderator
Aug 23, 2009
1,014
10
38
You know where.
Yeah, he couldn't file ATSAP. I believe one of the conditions for ATSAP is that you actually have to witness the mess you created...heh.
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
868
6
18
Yikes. We are all bound to make mistakes in this career but trying to lie and deceive your way out of something just won't work. Besides multiple people involved in every incident EVERYTHING we do is recorded. Let this be a lesson in support of ATSAP reporting.
Why the hell should this be a "lesson in support of ATSAP reporting?" This guy shouldn't be certified on local control until he earns his certification back. ATSAP is complete garbage.
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
868
6
18
I'm not trying to say the controller wasn't to blame, but why wasn't the E145 aware that someone had just been issued a takeoff clearance on the crossing runway mere seconds before? Even if the E145 was ground control frequency, they would've heard the controller issue the takeoff clearance over all the frequencies the controller was working.
 

UNDgrad06

Epic Member
Dec 8, 2010
1,309
14
38
Peachtree City, GA
#1 The runways didn't cross, only the flightpaths crossed after they were airborne.

#2 The ERJ probably assumed the controller was doing his job, and not being a total dumbass.

Do you think pilots should be listening to every transmission made and trying to comprehend what the controller is doing/thinking when it does't involve their aircraft? If every pilot questioned your clearance because they though they heard you just clear another aircraft then, it would be nearly impossible to get anything done. I can picture it now....

"Umm didn't you just clear an aircraft off this runway, are you sure we are going to have the required separation with this clearance?"
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
868
6
18
#1 The runways didn't cross, only the flightpaths crossed after they were airborne.

#2 The ERJ probably assumed the controller was doing his job, and not being a total dumbass.

Do you think pilots should be listening to every transmission made and trying to comprehend what the controller is doing/thinking when it does't involve their aircraft? If every pilot questioned your clearance because they though they heard you just clear another aircraft then, it would be nearly impossible to get anything done. I can picture it now....

"Umm didn't you just clear an aircraft off this runway, are you sure we are going to have the required separation with this clearance?"
Yes, the flight paths cross which is really no different on multiple departures than if they actually intersected with one another in this situation. The likelihood of the controller telling the guy departing runway 18 to start a turn before the "crossing runway" is slim to none, but that would've prevented this from happening.

It was 10 seconds between takeoff clearances. I am not trying to put any blame on the pilot, but come on now. If I am flying an airplane and I hear someone get cleared for takeoff a mere 10 seconds before me on crossing routes, that is something to pay attention to. Basic calculations from my own experiences in a tower are the E145 will be 6,000 feet down the runway in roughly 45-60 seconds and the single engine will roughly 6,000 feet down the runway in 60-75 seconds. They were wired for one another from the start, but I am surprised the pilot didn't question the takeoff clearance much like the pilot did in that incident at PVD...
 

daveozzie999

Senior Member
Aug 15, 2009
249
0
16
MRY
I'm not trying to say the controller wasn't to blame, but why wasn't the E145 aware that someone had just been issued a takeoff clearance on the crossing runway mere seconds before? Even if the E145 was ground control frequency, they would've heard the controller issue the takeoff clearance over all the frequencies the controller was working.
Why do we have a job then? You're an idiot.
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
868
6
18
Why do we have a job then? You're an idiot.
Slow your roll homes... Controllers make mistakes, but only an imbecile like you would use this as a reason to support ATSAP reporting. I am just wondering why the E145 didn't hear the takeoff clearance of the C172 departing on a crossing course. The clearance to the C172 was issued TEN SECONDS before the E145 called ready for departure. By the time the controller finished issuing the clearance and the C172 read back the clearance, there was literally a SECOND before the E145 called ready and another SIX SECONDS before the E145 was issued a takeoff clearance. So basically there was LESS THAN TEN SECONDS between the C172 reading their takeoff clearance back to when the E145 was issued a takeoff clearance. You don't think that should get the hairs on the back of neck raised if you were a pilot and put you on alert?

No one should have to do our job and separate themselves, but don't you think the E145 should've had somewhat more of situational awareness to recognize an imminent situation developing? Without a doubt, the controller is in the wrong, but I am just wondering why the E145 didn't question the takeoff clearance when there was one issued literally a second before they called ready for departure and their departure clearance was issued SIX SECONDS later... If you want to act like an ass from Monterey, go ahead, you're making a fool of yourself with your childish name calling. Questions should be asked so everyone can learn from the mistakes of others on both sides of the mic and get a better grasp on what occurred.
 

WatchThis

Trusted Contributor
Apr 29, 2010
561
0
16
Arizona
There's something I think people here are overlooking. It seems apparent to me that the NTSB wasn't impressed with the combining of positions, especially since it violated the facility's own regs. From the report, it sounded like there were others available to work.

I'll bet this thing doesn't happen with a properly staffed tower. I think it's a bad idea to combine multiple operating positions on a routine basis unless the traffic is truly down to singles.

Avoid the single point of failure, especially if that single point is a weak link.
 

FM_Weasel

Senior Analyst
Dec 9, 2008
991
7
18
Also sounds like the facility management and controllers didn't think highly of this particular controller either. A fact they were happy to divulge to the NTSB.
 

daveozzie999

Senior Member
Aug 15, 2009
249
0
16
MRY
The reason this made me think he should have done an ATSAP is because if he had done it within in the timeline as to not get it denied by the ERC he could have simply admitted he made a mistake and no punitive action would have taken place. Instead now he has to lie saying he didn't know he had a deal and that he thought there must have been a go-around. Sure doesn't sound like a likely story to me.

Sorry to get offensive. You know how it can be when you're writing on a forum as a faceless person.
 

StuSEL

Moderator
Aug 23, 2009
1,014
10
38
You know where.
Something else I wonder is whether or not the ATIS said both runways were in use for departures. It sounds trivial, but if the E145 was running a checklist or something, they may have thought the Cessna was cleared for takeoff on the same runway as they were on.