East ops at LAX. AAL521, two missed and low fuel

[Eugene Zaporozhets]

It got somewhat intense at LAX last night. They were landing east, and as the wind changed from 09013G17KT to 23014G18KT at around 1830 PST, they had to switch back to west.

Poor folks AAL521 that were among the last two arrivals for 7R went missed twice, first time due to the tailwind, second time due to getting too close in-trail of an MD10 on final (which was low fuel). The pilot sounded pissed at that point, and advised of low fuel as well. They quickly got around and made it on the 3rd attempt.

The fboweb flight path shows just how crazy it can get for one plane.

[xprtmarksman]

Typical pilot reaction.  Went around on his own the first time, went around due to safety of flight for another aircraft the next time, and was pissed off at the controllers.  What idiots they (pilots) can be.

[dylanh]

Typical pilot reaction.  Went around on his own the first time, went around due to safety of flight for another aircraft the next time, and was pissed off at the controllers.  What idiots they (pilots) can be.

Typical uninformed A-hole reaction. 

You are either:
A: A pilot who is giving off some form of self-dperecating humor
B: A new-hire controller at some class-D airport
c: A complete moron.

I'm Going for "C"

**EDIT**
You are a controller!!! B and C!

He went around the first time because the tailwind was too high for company ops specs, went around the second time because a controller F&^K up. He was low fuel.  Of course he was a little on edge w/ the controller.  You're laughable man....

[RayZor]

Is it permissible for me to sympathize with both parties involved? 

[lostmoon]

It's apparent in this clip that proper phraseology is crucial when giving vectors:

"AAL521 turn left twenty degrees, please"
"Left to twenty, AAL521"
"NOT zero two zero, make a left turn twenty degrees to the left, please"
"Two three zero heading, AAL521" [irked pilot]

Wouldn't this be ATC's boner in this instance?

[KSYR-pjr]

"AAL521 turn left twenty degrees, please"
"Left to twenty, AAL521"
"NOT zero two zero, make a left turn twenty degrees to the left, please"
"Two three zero heading, AAL521" [irked pilot]

Wouldn't this be ATC's boner in this instance?

It is very common and perhaps even proper phraseology (not being a controller I cannot say with top certainty) for ATC to issue heading changes relative to the aircraft's current heading.  Happens all the time.

[RV1]

You're right Peter. Both ways are proper phraseology.
     'Turn right heading 020.'
     'Turn 20 (two zero) degrees right.'
    Say that an aircraft was tracking about due north and you want him to head northwest, about 340 degrees. What you don't know is what the winds aloft are so you say 'Turn left heading 340', however due to the winds, he's already flying a 330 heading. Your instructions would have him turning a 350 degree turn all the way around to the left to reach 340. Therefore, 'Turn 20 degrees left, say new heading' would be much better.
   

[Jason]

Typical uninformed A-hole reaction. 

You are either:
A: A pilot who is giving off some form of self-dperecating humor
B: A new-hire controller at some class-D airport
c: A complete moron.

I'm Going for "C"

**EDIT**
You are a controller!!! B and C!

He went around the first time because the tailwind was too high for company ops specs, went around the second time because a controller F&^K up. He was low fuel.  Of course he was a little on edge w/ the controller.  You're laughable man....

A friendly reminder -- please keep this discussion clean and civilized.

Thank you,

[lostmoon]

"AAL521 turn left twenty degrees, please"
"Left to twenty, AAL521"
"NOT zero two zero, make a left turn twenty degrees to the left, please"
"Two three zero heading, AAL521" [irked pilot]

Wouldn't this be ATC's boner in this instance?

[...]perhaps even proper phraseology[...]

Actually, it isn't proper phraseology. Hence, if you listen to the clip, the confusion in both the pilot and the ATC. If ATC wanted the plane to turn "twenty degrees to the left", proper phraseology is:

"...turn twenty degrees left."

not

"...turn left twenty degrees" as the ATC did. And hence, the confusion of both parties. The clip is much more convinving than reading it on text.

Reference: 7110.65R 5-6-1.2

[lostmoon]

You're right Peter. Both ways are proper phraseology.
     'Turn right heading 020.'
     'Turn 20 (two zero) degrees right.'

Actually, this is incorrect: (see reference below)

5-6-1 7110.65R

2. The number of degrees, in group form, to turn
and the direction of turn, or
PHRASEOLOGY−
TURN (number of degrees) DEGREES LEFT/RIGHT.


It's not "two zero" as you've indicated. You use the number of degrees when instructing a pilot for these kind of vectors. So it's "twenty" degrees.

[RV1]

Perhaps you should read the .65 section that tells you that improvise if necessary to make sure your instructions are understood. As I stated '20 (twenty) followed by a two zero' reduces any confusion. 15 can sound like 50, etc., so restating the single numbers after the group form is a good practise to ensure pilot understanding. It doesn't tie up your freq any more and in fact reduces the possibility of having to tell a pilot twice.

[lostmoon]

Perhaps you should read the .65 section that tells you that improvise if necessary to make sure your instructions are understood. As I stated '20 (twenty) followed by a two zero' reduces any confusion. 15 can sound like 50, etc., so restating the single numbers after the group form is a good practise to ensure pilot understanding. It doesn't tie up your freq any more and in fact reduces the possibility of having to tell a pilot twice.

Your quote was unclear. The parenthetical infers that "(two zero)" is the vocalisation because you wrote "20" and then, the parenthesis with "two zero".

To avoid confusion, your quote should have read:

"Turn twenty, two zero degrees right."

Improvisation is moot on this case, as it was never used, and the original order was never in the correct phraseology to begin with.

References: 5-6-1 711065R


[sic] 'Turn 20 (two zero)

[mk882004]

"AAL521 turn left twenty degrees, please"
"Left to twenty, AAL521"
"NOT zero two zero, make a left turn twenty degrees to the left, please"
"Two three zero heading, AAL521" [irked pilot]

Wouldn't this be ATC's boner in this instance?

It is very common and perhaps even proper phraseology (not being a controller I cannot say with top certainty) for ATC to issue heading changes relative to the aircraft's current heading.  Happens all the time.


The proper phraseology is "Turn 20 degrees left"

[coz]

I think the words AAL521 were looking for were "Minimum Fuel"