Continental Express (Jetlink) Causes Havock on Approach

[Himerzi]

Jetlink 2054 (Express jet, Continental express) is in the middle of what sounds like a pretty tight final. Jetlink makes a mistake, flies the procedure incorrectly and soon after places the traffic around him in serious conflict. I counted two aircraft on a TCAS RA, thats a first. The controller notices Jetlink's error, and pulls him out of the sequence (and out of serious possible trouble). The controller then proceeds to give a bunch of traffic pointouts on the "guy that doesn't know what he's doing", hehe, only with bi-lingual ATC can you get away with saying that on frequency. The poor guy ends up so confused he checks in with tower for the wrong (and inexistent) runway.

All dead space and irrelevant transmissions removed.

Here is a transcript of the relevant spots where Spanish is spoken:

1:55, Approach (to unknown aircraft) "He's lost and doesn't know what he's doing, descend to 8800 and continue the approach"
Unknown aircraft. "8800, we'll continue"

2:10, App. "Costera (AeroLitoral) 2497 fly heading 120"
Costera 247. "heading 120, 2497"
App. "Correct, there is an airplane, an Embraer at 2 o'clock, maintaining apparently 10500, now he's ascending, he's lost apparently he doesn t know what hes doing."
247. "We have him on TCAS, turning" Not sure if he means he is turning for an RA or because of the instruction.

App. "Aeromar 319, reduce to 160 knots"
319. "160, Aeromar 319"

App. "Costera  2497 continue your turn heading 200 and 9700"
2497. "Maintain 9700, 2497"
 
3:02, App. "Aeromar 319, maintain 11000, theres an Embraer at 2 o'clock 2 miles, that doesnt know what he's doing."
319. "Roger, he sent us a TCAS Resolution 319"

App. "Costera2497, fly heading  140 and 9700"
2497. " 9700, 24.. 140, 2497"

Aeromexico 429. "Changing to tower, amx429"
App. "Correct, good day"

Aeromar 319 " Aeromar 319 with the traffic in sight, we've crossed him. Can we continue the approach ?"
App. "Maintain 11000 feet. Costera 2497, what is your heading now ?"
2497 "(unintelligible)"
App. "Maintain heading 200, maintain heading 200 and 9700"
2497 "9700 and heading 200"

5:00, App. "7323, fly heading 030 to the localizer, 8800 and cleared ILS five right"
Click 7327. "030, 8800, cleared for the approach. It was the Jetlink, correct?
App. "...Repeat. The other guy yes, the one that was taken off the approach, yes. The one ahead is a Costera"
7327 "The one we had a reso.. resolution with"
App. " Yes, Correct"
7327. "Roger, thank you"
 

[PHL Approach]

It sounded like that controller might have been playing with the BTA a bit. Lots of quick altitude changes and real quick turns all over the place... More than I would say was needed. And I would agree, being bilingual really can get you by some crap. Wouldn't that be funny if that BTA PM took Spanish in college.. 

[dan9125]

What does RA stand for....resolution something?

[KSYR-pjr]

What does RA stand for....resolution something?

Resolution Advisory, or the recommendation broadcast by the TCAS unit that will, if acted upon, move the aircraft out of the collision threat.

From what I understand, a pilot is allowed to react to an RA, but from that point until the pilot contacts ATC about the event being over, ATC is NOT responsible for terrain or traffic separation.  In other words, for that moment the pilots are on their own.

[Canadian eh]

about tcas and ra's. if a pilot hears a ra he is to follow what it says. it over rides atc instructions/clearances. the reason for that is because the tcas in his plane "talks" to the tcas in the other plane and they tell the planes to do the opposite things. i.e. one climb and turn north, the other decent and turn south. I'm sure you've all heard the story of the controller saying "turn left right now", didn't work that great. regarding sep. if your a controller, you don't know it's going off til aircraft have taken  action. aka it's to late, your already in a loss or it's so close to happening that no matter what you do your going to lose sep. when a ra happens it's no longer a matter of maintaining sep, it's a matter of taking action to prevent a mid air.
as a side note. if a aircraft is climbing head on to 1000' below another another aircraft that is in level flight going the opposite direction. the tcas may go off depending on climb rate. the tcas doesn't know the aircraft is going to level  1000' below so it's important to pass traffic.

[lololepro]

Look at what happened in Ueberlingen (south of Germany) when Bashkirian and DHL collided... Sad, sad accident... Bashkirian was instructed by ATC to descend immediately. Then TCAS advisory told Bashkirian to climb, DHL to descend. DHL listened to TCAS, Bashkirian listened to ATC... They both started a descent and you know the rest... Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that for russian pilots it was standard procedure to obey ATC instructions over TCAS advisories... An other example where standardization (or lack thereof) contributed to a major disaster...

[KSYR-pjr]

about tcas and ra's. if a pilot hears a ra he is to follow what it says. it over rides atc instructions/clearances. the reason for that is because the tcas in his plane "talks" to the tcas in the other plane and they tell the planes to do the opposite things.

It is worth noting that this assumes the other aircraft is similarly equipped.  In the busier class B terminal airspaces the chances are high that both aircraft will have these units since all part 121 (commercial airlines) are required to have a TCAS unit but at the less busier airspaces the opposite aircraft may not have anything but the pilot's eyes to detect a threat (think GA aircraft).  In this case the detecting TCAS unit will calculate its best guess at an avoidance maneuver.

Also, from what I understand if the other aircraft does not have an operational transponder (this assumes US class D, E, G, and sometimes C airspaces) the TCAS unit will not even detect the aircraft.

[SkanknTodd]

Also, from what I understand if the other aircraft does not have an operational transponder (this assumes US class D, E, G, and sometimes C airspaces) the TCAS unit will not even detect the aircraft.

That's right.  TCAS is transponder-based, not radar based.  So if the traffic doesn't have a transponder (or the pilot forgot to turn it on), the TCAS won't see it.  However, TIS (Traffic Information Service), which is a cheaper and less capable version of TCAS, will show targets without transponders.  Since the information TIS receives is uplinked from ATC's radar, the pilot sees pretty much the same information that the controller sees.  Primary targets (i.e. without a working transponder) come up on TIS but do not show altitude, since that information is reliant on a mode c or mode s transponder.

Todd

[Heading090]

@skip
TCAS II gives only vertical Resolution Advisories. Never turns.

@KSYR-pjr
Following an RA is mandatory.
"In the event of an RA, pilots shall:
1) respond immediately by following the RA as indicated, unless doing so would jeopardize the safety of the aeroplane;" [Source ICAO Doc. 8168 PANS-OPS]

@SkanknTodd
Comparing TCAS and TIS is like comparing apples and oranges.
TCAS (Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System) generates RAs, i.e. tells the pilot in which direction (vertically) to move the airplane as to avoid the collision. RAs are coordinated between suitably equipped aircraft.
TIS is to increase pilot's situational awareness. From SA to collision avoidance is a loooong way.
The collision avoidance functionality is the reason that TCAS not TIS (or similar) is mandated on commercial airplanes.

[KSYR-pjr]

@KSYR-pjr
Following an RA is mandatory.
"In the event of an RA, pilots shall:
1) respond immediately by following the RA as indicated, unless doing so would jeopardize the safety of the aeroplane;" [Source ICAO Doc. 8168 PANS-OPS]

Thanks for the clarification.  My primary point was to discuss ATC's responsibilities during a deviation due to an RA.

One question to you:  You quoted an ICAO document.  Is that regulatory in US airspace?  I would expect that this regulation would have been incorporated into the US Federal Aviation Regulations, perhaps under Part 121?  Anyone know where this regulation is within the FARs?

[KSYR-pjr]

Hmmm.. .I just tried to search for both "TCAS" and "resolution advisory" in the US FARs and nothing stating that responding to an RA is mandatory was returned.

I am curious if instead this particular action is covered in airline operation manuals (which is still regulatory) for scheduled and on-demand carriers here in US airspace?  Not being an ATP I do not know the answer.

[Heading090]

I have no idea what the relation will be between FARs and ICAO provisions. On my side of the Pond, we do as ICAO tells us to do. FARs are applicable only in the US airspace.

To answer your question about ATC responsibilities (from ICAO point of view again, Doc. 4444 PANS-ATM):

15.6.3.2 When a pilot reports an ACAS resolution advisory (RA), the controller shall not attempt to modify the aircraft flight path until the pilot reports “Clear of Conflict”.

15.6.3.3 Once an aircraft departs from its ATC clearance or instruction in compliance with an RA, or a pilot reports an RA, the controller ceases to be responsible for providing separation between that aircraft and any other aircraft affected as a direct consequence of the manoeuvre induced by the RA. The controller shall resume responsibility for providing separation for all the affected aircraft when:

a)the controller acknowledges a report from the flight crew that the aircraft has resumed the current clearance; or

b)the controller acknowledges a report from the flight crew that the aircraft is resuming the current clearance and issues an alternative clearance which is acknowledged by the flight crew.

Have a look on www.eurocontrol.int/acas - lots of good stuff on TCAS.

[SkanknTodd]

Comparing TCAS and TIS is like comparing apples and oranges.
TCAS (Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System) generates RAs, i.e. tells the pilot in which direction (vertically) to move the airplane as to avoid the collision. RAs are coordinated between suitably equipped aircraft.
TIS is to increase pilot's situational awareness. From SA to collision avoidance is a loooong way.
The collision avoidance functionality is the reason that TCAS not TIS (or similar) is mandated on commercial airplanes.

I know that TCAS is much more advanced than TIS.  TCAS systems can cost as much as the entire plane that TIS systems are installed in.  However, I was pointing out that it's interesting that TIS can display traffic that TCAS won't (ie. transponder-less traffic).  An intermediate system, TAS (traffic advisory system) is active like TCAS -- it interrogates other transponder-equipped aircraft.  Unlike TCAS, though, it won't issue RAs.

[coz]

91.123   Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

 (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory....

...

 (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

[KSYR-pjr]

91.123   Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

 (a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory....

...

 (c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.

Are you thinking that these regulations are stating that a pilot MUST respond to an RA?  Based on my interpretation these are not the ones that mandate responding to an RA. 

The first one is mandating that a pilot must adhere to ATC clearances (and the exceptions to this rule) and the second you posted mandates that a pilot must notify ATC when deviating from a clearance.  Neither is mandating that a pilot must respond to an RA.