Author Topic: Collision course over the Pacific  (Read 24770 times)

Offline ORD Don

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Collision course over the Pacific
« on: May 17, 2014, 11:02:25 AM »



         Apparently, UA 1205 had to dive 600 ft. to avoid on oncoming US Airways flight on April 25, 2014. I was just
         
         wondering why this was just coming out now and/or if we would have any audio....


                         http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1205/history/20140425/2235Z/PHKO/KLAX/tracklog



Offline RonR

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 980
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2014, 03:11:30 PM »
Checked the archives for PHKO.  You can hear UAL1205 departing Kona and getting handed off to Honolulu Center climbing out of 2200 for FL330.  There are a few other transmissions between ZHN and UAL1205 but then the flight gets handed off to another ZHN sector (126.6 it sounded like) which is not yet covered by Liveatc so, unfortunately, the incident was not captured by a feed.

Offline ORD Don

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2014, 11:27:38 PM »





               Thank you for checking that out.  It probably would've been interesting....

Offline RonR

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 980
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2014, 11:44:18 AM »
Some more info on that incident...

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/05/15/feds-probe-claim-of-near-miss-between-passenger-jets-may-have-been-worst-ever-air-disaster/

I like the picture of the "757" they have at the top of their story...  :-D

Ron

Offline N/A

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 91
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2014, 12:59:29 PM »
-
« Last Edit: June 16, 2021, 03:15:48 PM by None. »

Offline Fadamor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2014, 09:10:36 AM »
The guy was obviously guessing about the capacity of the other aircraft because he didn't know which one it was.  The other flight was AWE432.  It was flying west at FL330 for some reason and at time 1:16 the two planes were staring each other in the face. The following picture reconstructs the planes' positions based on Flightaware data. UAL1205 is yellow/green and AWE432 is red.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59191044/Near%20Collision.PNG

« Last Edit: May 21, 2014, 09:20:02 AM by Fadamor »

Offline svoynick

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2014, 02:27:44 AM »
The guy was obviously guessing about the capacity of the other aircraft because he didn't know which one it was.  
He was even guessing about the capacity of his own aircraft, because the "289" number he uses, as others have pointed out here, isn't any configuration of seats that United flies in the 757-300.   I bet the 289 number comes from the "757" Wikipedia article, which states, about the -300 variant:

"Eight standard cabin doors, plus a pair of over-the-wing emergency exits on each side, enable the 757-300 to have a maximum certified capacity of 289 passengers."

It seems that's where the 289 number comes from.  Yet he uses it, and then multiplies it by 2, and asserts on the basis of this total that this incident would have been the biggest air disaster ever - by something like 8 or 10 souls over Tenerife.   Without inflating both aircraft capacities to this unsupported high number, he wouldn't have been able to make that statement, which is the emotional lynchpin of his argument - indeed, the headline of his article (and therefore, I assume, his clickbait.)  This was a misrepresentation, whether unintentional (and sloppy), or intentional (and therefore deceptive.)

As I commented down in that cbslocal.com article linked by RonR, this doesn't change the seriousness of a possible midair, no matter where it happens ("out over the ocean" just adds a scary emotional element.)  But since the author's statements of opinion (like the system is "broken") are based upon his presentation and interpretation of apparently objective technical facts, it leaves me feeling like if he can't get his facts right, and possibly even inflates and distorts them to make his case, then it severely undermines his opinions, which I now assume are not anchored to reality.

Edited to add:  Just found a great posting deconstructing the incident and Mr. Townsend's essay about it.  This aligns with my opinions, for what they're worth...

http://www.nycaviation.com/2014/05/near-miss-near-hawaii-didnt-happen/#.U4A00Haz58E



« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 02:30:04 AM by svoynick »

Offline ORD Don

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: Collision course over the Pacific
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2014, 10:18:50 AM »



             Good article (referring to the link in the previous post). Thank you for that.  The fact of the matter is, when I started

             this thread, I wasn't even aware of Mr. Townsend's "over-the-top article".   I was just curious as to why this incendent,

             which seemed relatively serious, had gone unreported for a few weeks.  Maybe that's not unusual.

             As far as the press goes, hey, never ruin a good story with the facts.  As far as the ATC community goes, 99.99 percent

             of the time, they do an AMAZING job....