http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 2064667958

landed on a less then 7000' runway instead of an airforce runway......oops

And it took off without incident this afternoon, headed for its original destination of McConnell AFB:



Looks like it got off pretty easily! I just wonder what the two pilots said to each other last night when they finally figured out they landed at Colonel James Jabara Airport (KAAO)...

"Oh boy... not looking forward to THIS post flight briefing!"

Stol 747 @ McMinville OR.

I bet this was an elaborate pr stunt. Resently 30 787-10 Dream liners along with other models were part of a record order by Etihad Airlines at an aerospace tradeshow in Dubai. What better way to clinche the deal and perhaps secure more orders tnha showing it getting out of a tight spot. Nothing better than free publicity.

ViperPilot wrote:I just wonder what the two pilots said to each other last night when they finally figured out they landed at Colonel James Jabara Airport (KAAO)...

"Oh boy... not looking forward to THIS post flight briefing!"

I'm betting it was more like.... "I wonder if Yute Air is gonna be hiring Sled drivers in Bethel any time soon."

They are not going to have fun standing there in front of their Chief Pilot. Not to mention what the FAA is gonna do to them.

Gump

I doubt that the FAA will be concerned. Jabra is a non-towered airport, so landing there is probably not a regulatory issue.

This airplane hauls 787 parts (BIG parts)--it's basically a 747 with a tall roof line, sort of like the difference between a regular van and a hi-cube van. It's ability to get in and out of a "short" field wouldn't influence anyone in purchasing 787s, which are completely different airliners.

On the other hand, it's hard in today's world with WAAS GPSs which allow us to land as if we had a real ground-based ILS to understand how a mistake of this nature could have occurred. In olden times, yeah, especially in VFR weather--there are 4 airports all in a line there, all facing the same basic direction (Jabara, Beech, Cessna, and McConnell). But here, with umpty-ump airports in the Wichita area including those 4, you'd think both pilots would be glued to their GPSs to make sure that they picked the right one--and in the dark with that monster, I would think using either the 19R ILS or the 19R or L GPS approach at McConnell would be wise.

So yeah, they're into the "flying boxcar with dog sh-t" situation (per Top Gun), I would think--their boss is undoubtedly less than thrilled.

Cary

http://youtu.be/6XiOywNT4rQ

Here is the second one coming into MMV. "Practicing for Johnson Creek"

I'm betting they revoke a couple ATP's for this stunt just because they can... This could have been a disaster had the mistake airport been smaller and surrounded by houses.

As for regs violated... The list will be long, but distinguished. Look at the load bearing capability of KAAO's runway. It's 60,000 pounds. Think a 747 is legal to land on it?

Gump

Actually, what I just read about the airport said 62,000 lbs per pair of wheels. I B-747-400 has 18 wheels (16 with brakes) and max gross landing weight of 652K, since they were only carrying a fuselage section for a smaller aircraft and getting close to landing (light on fuel and payload), prob landed well under 600K.

Was it a screw up.....yes... are any of us perfect..... i highly doubt it....

Matt

These days the FAA wields a big stick. And understanding "being human" doesn't appear to typically be their long suite....
The pilots that flew it in, you will notice, somehow were not qualified at noon the next day to fly it out,,,,,
Atlas Air flew in a new crew from NY for the very short hop to the proper destination airport.
I'm guessing both captain and co-pilot's tails are in a big tight wringer- both with the FAA, and Atlas Air. I would think Boeing wouldn't be ecstatic about the negative publicity (their name is all over this screw up) either....
Of course all this surmising is from a distance-thankfully.

b75matt wrote:Was it a screw up.....yes... are any of us perfect..... i highly doubt it....
Matt

Wait a minute.....
Sometimes the spread between 'a screw up' and 'perfect' is pretty small....

example;

say ya just landed the family J3 in the pasture out back and dragged the wing tip through the mesquite you usually swerve around... That's a screw up. Not perfect, but pretty small gap...

Then let's say you plop down 600,000 lbs of fuel, metal, and extremely hot pissed off turbo fan engines. Not on your intended 'target', not kinda close, but a measly miles away... not only is this a less than stellar 'spot landing' it is a freakin catastrophe.... The fact that these boys weren't piloting this aircraft at a heavier weight is not a positive in this case, it is a miracle. Because they didn't know if they had the landing made, and they still set it down. At this point they could have just as easily had 400 souls on board and landed with noo where nearly enough runway.... Ya... the spread between a boo-boo, and perfect is pretty much unimaginable there...

Actually, what I just read about the airport said 62,000 lbs per pair of wheels. I B-747-400 has 18 wheels (16 with brakes) and max gross landing weight of 652K, since they were only carrying a fuselage section for a smaller aircraft and getting close to landing (light on fuel and payload), prob landed well under 600K.

That's not weight per tire. It's gross weight of the aircraft. These dipshits exceeded that by a factor of 10. Atlas is going to be paying some $$$ to KAAO to re-surface a runway to get the ruts out of it. Especially where they did their 20 point turn to allow it to take off.

Gump

The other interesting factor is that these Dreamlifters have only a few Boing manufacturing airports that they frequent, their destination airport being one of the few. So, neither pilot had ever been at that destination airport before?
IF that happens to be true, that, to me, would seem like a big dispatcher screw up, which makes Atlas Air in total look bad.
My guess is it boils down to pilot complacency. Been there, done that, lotsa times, here we go again. Ho-hum.
Then, during rollout comes that big time "OH-SHIT" moment when nothing looks right.....

News/media coverage:

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2013/11/2 ... latestnews

This happens, or almost happens more often than you think. CAE was a hotspot at a past carrier I worked for. GTR was another. The crew is definitely in some trouble, but they will most likely have to do the carpet dance in front their chief pilot and, if they are program participants, will file an ASAP report (similar to a NASA form) and will get some remedial training in the sim.

Yes, it could have been a worse outcome. Despite the RNAV approach leading them to the front door, the plane breaks out and both pilots see what they think is the field and go visual. With multiple airports in the area, especially at night, it's a threat you have to be aware of and mitigate. I'm always leery of calling the field or going visual unless I know the area well and have been there a lot...and recently. Otherwise, you stay on, or at least continually reference the approach to make sure everything is adding up. In fact, for us to do a visual at night, we are required to have an instrument approach to back it up. It's not uncommon for crews, in general, to go to airports that neither have been to before, and in those cases it's even more important to do all the above...and probably not even consider accepting a visual or calling the field in sight.

I have lots of time on B777, B747-400 and B747-8. This is just unacceptable. It is pretty easy to see if you are approaching the right or wrong airport, even flying an visually approach at night and no approach programmed in the FMC or hard tuned on the NAV/RAD page. Just look on the ND (Navigational Display) which shows a nice little round circle with your destination airport identifier for the route you have programmed or uploaded into your FMC. For you who are not familiar with Boeing glass cockpits, each Pilot has a PFD (Primary Flight Display, which shows, attitude, airspeed, altitude, VSI, heading, track and more) and a ND (Navigational Display, like a moving map with your active routing , tuned nav aids, airports, heading, track and more) PFD and ND are your primary flight instruments. Even worse, if you would have selected all airports in the vicinity to be shown on the ND, airports which are not suitable to land will not be displayed on the ND. If you select the 5NM or 10 NM scale on the ND and you don't see an airport identifier or not your destination airport identifier on the ND straight ahead when on final you already lost situational awareness a while ago. Which is a big NO NO in the airline world and one of the leading causes of airline accidents. CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) is just one that comes to mind.

Grass strip:
Question. Is the 747-Dreamlifters a separate sign off/rating/qualification/whatever...?
Or are all the crews for the 40+ Atlas Air 747s in an equal pool that crew assignments are made from for all the various 747 heavy iron?
My obvious assumption was that there would be a small pool of Dreamlifter pilots that kept the planes moving, but, I have grazed out in left field before , although the grass there is not at all sweet.
.

Edit: A search indicates pilots on a commercial airline forum say that the Type Rating is the same as the 747-400, so a pool of 747-400 pilots is likely how it is done at Atlas Air.
The airplane had (apparently) been at the destination airport many times- but that didn't help the crew this time.

Second edit:
There is some good humor in here.....
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/cargo ... rport.html

Another media view/thoughts:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/11/dr ... g-airport/



Separate:

Karlene Petitt, a pilot based in Seattle, tweeted out a picture of herself standing in front of a Dreamlifter, and wrote: "Women pilots don't land at the wrong airport. We ask for directions!"

Wonder if filling the NASA form will help the pilots in this case

I'm not familiar enough with the 747 to say, but I would have guessed, like you found out, that it is just difference training that is required.

Bart, if they are participants in an ASAP program, that substitutes for a NASA form. In short, an ASAP program is an internal reporting program. When you screw up, you submit the details and a board usually consisting of a company, FAA, and pilot rep reviews it. If submitted in the time frame required and not anything illegal or negligent, it affords similar protections...actually probably better protections, than a NASA form. Like NASA forms, the program is to collect data to improve safety.