airtraffic

Author Topic: ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK  (Read 5975 times)

Offline chefnoel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK
« on: July 11, 2008, 08:45:25 PM »



Offline athaker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
Re: ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2008, 09:39:17 PM »
For you controllers here, what do you think of perpendicular runway use?  I understand the greater issues of congested airspace, safety minimums for separation, and overworked controllers, but when the FAA tells you a certain routine procedure must now be changed, does it add more stress?

Let me know if I'm missing something, but you still have the same number of planes coming in and going out.  now, though, you are no longer allowed to pack em in using perpendicular runways.  This means more delays and more stress, no?  Where do you put em?

djmodifyd

  • Guest
Re: ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2008, 09:52:02 AM »
For you controllers here, what do you think of perpendicular runway use?  I understand the greater issues of congested airspace, safety minimums for separation, and overworked controllers, but when the FAA tells you a certain routine procedure must now be changed, does it add more stress?

Let me know if I'm missing something, but you still have the same number of planes coming in and going out.  now, though, you are no longer allowed to pack em in using perpendicular runways.  This means more delays and more stress, no?  Where do you put em?

hmmm....yes...the FAA likes to change rules on us.

LAHSO and PandH are the two major ones that they have changed.....basic runway separation is still the same.

but I can hardly ever put someone in position and hold now...and sometimes they have to sit and wait 5 minutes because I cannot hit the gap...but if i had PandH they would have gotten out.

BUT....the FAA is geared more toward safety now and not moving lots of traffic....so thats what i'll do

one thing i dont understand is how this one played out.

from the artical it SOUNDS like the controller had a deal...because if you have crossing runways the other aircraft has to be through the intersection of the landing aircrafts' runway or vis a versa.

hmm...im sure i'll be getting a briefing on this
« Last Edit: July 12, 2008, 09:55:12 AM by djmodifyd »

Offline athaker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
Re: ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2008, 01:09:55 PM »
The clip is posted in the other forum.  It doesn't sound like anyone - meaning the controller or pilots of either aircraft - peed their pants over this one, and no phone numbers or anything like that, plus 600 feet vertical separation and half a mile horizontal is over half a mile in straight line distance between two planes going in different directions. 

Thanks for the response.  It seems like the burden here will fall on passengers who get to sit EVEN longer before departing.

Offline CFD208

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: ANOTHER Averted Collision at JFK
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2008, 04:04:00 PM »
Here is an article about changing the policy at JFK about intersection runways.
http://www.wnbc.com/news/16858119/detail.html