Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
Another Runway Incursion, UAL B777 @HNL >

Another Runway Incursion, UAL B777 @HNL

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

Another Runway Incursion, UAL B777 @HNL

Old 02-28-2023, 09:41 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,907
Default Another Runway Incursion, UAL B777 @HNL

https://youtu.be/1FLvu7vE7kQ

UAL B777 landed on 4R at HNL. Cleared at taxiway K and was told to hold short of 4L which they correctly read back. But they crossed 4L in front of a Kamaka Air Cessna 208B that had landed. ATC told the Cessna to hold short of 8L. Runways 8L and 4L intersect right around K. I'm uncertain if they completely crossed 4L onto 8L or just went past the hold short line. The 777 crew received the "call this number" while taxiing to the gate.

I've been out of the business for over 5 years now but I still remember a big push to reduce runway incursions. Seems like they need to do that again before luck runs out.
AirBear is offline  
Old 02-28-2023, 10:06 AM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 273
Default

Originally Posted by AirBear View Post
https://youtu.be/1FLvu7vE7kQ

UAL B777 landed on 4R at HNL. Cleared at taxiway K and was told to hold short of 4L which they correctly read back. But they crossed 4L in front of a Kamaka Air Cessna 208B that had landed. ATC told the Cessna to hold short of 8L. Runways 8L and 4L intersect right around K. I'm uncertain if they completely crossed 4L onto 8L or just went past the hold short line. The 777 crew received the "call this number" while taxiing to the gate.

I've been out of the business for over 5 years now but I still remember a big push to reduce runway incursions. Seems like they need to do that again before luck runs out.
The big issue for me is tower asked them to exit on kilo and hold short of 4L, which should have never been given. There's no room for a 777 or any airplane to clear the runway and hold short. They could have asked the caravan earlier if he could LAHSO in my opinion. There's blame both ways
UnbeatenPath is offline  
Old 02-28-2023, 10:35 AM
  #3  
Banned
 
Finessed's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Posts: 459
Default

United is making a habit of risking 100’s of innocent lives due to incompetence from their crews. Funny enough it’s happening right around the time they decided to hire low time, zero to hero “diversity” candidates to meet that quota. Most with zero TPIC, some following that up with no college degree. All for the name of what exactly? You think the public is going to look the other way when one of those candidates puts a 777 in the dirt?

The media will slaughter your entire brand for years and most of you will be out of a job.

Last edited by Finessed; 02-28-2023 at 10:45 AM.
Finessed is offline  
Old 02-28-2023, 04:26 PM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,907
Default Again...BOS Learjet vs. JB E190

And the hits (or near hits) just keep on coming...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...rt-f-rcna72677

LearJet given Position and hold on 9 at BOS, but they took off. JetBlue E190 was landing on 4R, which intersects 9 if you're not familiar.

The Lear was operated by "Hop A Jet".
AirBear is offline  
Old 03-01-2023, 06:01 PM
  #5  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
Default

Originally Posted by Finessed View Post
United is making a habit of risking 100’s of innocent lives due to incompetence from their crews. Funny enough it’s happening right around the time they decided to hire low time, zero to hero “diversity” candidates to meet that quota. Most with zero TPIC, some following that up with no college degree. All for the name of what exactly? You think the public is going to look the other way when one of those candidates puts a 777 in the dirt?

The media will slaughter your entire brand for years and most of you will be out of a job.
What evidence do you intend to present that your political comment has a thing to do with this thread? Do you have any indication at all that lack of turbine pilot in command time led to a runway incursion, or did you simply take a moment to make a wildly inappropriate, non-sequitur, irrelevant soapbox statement about the airline, without any information or contribution to the incident at hand? Would you care to add to that, perhaps with a comment on the soap dispensers at the United training facility, while you're at it, or really plunge in the dagger and discuss paint around handicap parking? Color of sand on mars?

The video posted, which contained truncated audio of ATC communications during the alleged United runway incursion, draws a conclusion not evident by the audio itself. The only inference is that United was given a number to call. ATC told United to "continue to cross." This does not indicate that "they crossed 4L in front of a Kamaka Air Cessna 208B that had landed," as the original poster asserted. In fact, there is no evidence that this took place. Facts, over guesswork.

Winds in Hawaii have been consistently from the northeast lately, tradewinds gusting up to 30 knots; 4R is most aligned. The better runway is 8L, which is closed. Taxiway K is a hotspot, and is identified as such on the 10-9 chart, first by a note wich states "Widebody and four engine turbojets landing rwy 4R roll to end of rwy, no left turn at twy K without tower approval," and then by a note on the 10-9A page which states, "Aircraft landing Rwy 4R and exiting left onto Twy K sometimes fail to hold short of Rwyas 4L/22R and 8L/26R." ATIS at PHNL always includes the statement that LAHSO operations are in effect and if unable, notify ATC on initial contact.

Each operator for whom I have flown into Honolulu, is not authorized LAHSO, so I always make known unable LAHSO, on initial contact. I don't know if either aircraft in this incident had such restrictions or made such notification, and the incomplete audio sample gives on indication, but in any case, both were able to, and did hold short, and took intersection departures. As a matter of course, landing on runway 4R, I roll to the end. The United flight clearly was slowing and able to take K and was queried if they could take K. any of the intersections between 4L and 4R are very short; all but K don't have nearly enough distance between the two runways to contain a large airplane such that it can taxi clear of one, and hold short of the other. If one is holding short of 4L, one s blocking 4R, and if one is holding short of 4R, one is blocking 4L. The runways are close.

Taxiway K has a little more room, but is complicated by being a hotspot intersection for the taway and three runways (six, if one counts the reciprocals, of course). They're not at right angles, and at night, it's easy to end up with an incursion of 4L, especially. Add to that that all taxiway markings are NOTAM'd faded at Honolulu, and surface indications, especially in times of rain (frequent at Honolulu), they can be difficult to see. None of this is obvious from the recording, but having operated there for years, it's still possible to end up with an incursion on 4L or 4R, or 8L, which is the point of having LAHSO as a standard practice there.

Add to this, Honolulu can be a busy place, and sometimes there is a right-hand-doesn't-know-what-the-left-hand-is-doing, feeling. (a few years ago, after cleared for takeoff on 8R, we began our roll, and ATC subsequently told us to hold position. I rejected the takeoff, a low-speed reject. ATC cleared an airplane to land on 4L, in front of us, as we were cleared for takeoff on the intersecting runway. I taxied clear and proceeded with the event as a rejected takeoff, which included a company notification, and a logbook entry, and a wait on brake temperatures. ATC seemed surprised that this was required, and seemed quite casual with the idea of clearing an airplane to land across a departing airplane, and directing a rolling, cleared airplane to hold position. That's Honolulu. It's not JFK.

Whether the United flight actually crossed the hold-short line, or appeared to be about to cross it, isn't clear: only that the landing Caravan, which didn't require a lot of distance to land, and did land and hold short (and may have accepted a LAHSO...this isn't known based on the audio.

As for "the hits keep on coming," does this point to another runway incursion somewhere else in the world (KBOS), or is it somehow relevant to the United landing at Hawaii? Runway incursions happen all the time. There is no growing bur burgeoning problem; there is no correlation between the two. There's no "hit," and they don't "keep coming." An aircraft had a potential or alleged incursion, which sounds very much like a non-event, and a completely unrelated airplane a very long way had an event. One involved an aircraft taking off. One landing. We can do this every day, or twice a day, and it still won't be hits that keep coming: just unrelated coincidences that may have occurred due to similar reasons, but in this case, involve two incidents which bear no similarity.


Does the name of the unrelated, irrelevant charter operator in Boston have any significance or meaning with relation to this, or that event, or is the eye-roll just mudding the waters, inferring that the name has some implication in any of these events?
JohnBurke is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HouseOfPAE
Safety
30
01-21-2023 07:53 PM
ReserveDog
United
46
05-23-2014 07:23 AM
11jetphlyer
Cargo
1
06-11-2008 01:28 PM
miker1369
Major
4
11-24-2006 12:55 AM
LAfrequentflyer
Hangar Talk
2
02-01-2006 05:39 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices