To Solo or not to solo?

[CYXR 257]

TMZ has the ATC audio of exchange as Harrison Ford crossed the runway at HHR without authorisation. Someone at the FAA should get a bad feeling about this...

 https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/29/harrison-ford-crosses-runway-plane-air-traffic-control-audio/

[W2DR 1,860]

As far as I'm concerned, Jack Ryan can do what ever he wants...........

[overspeed3 410]

This is "Jack Ryan's" third flying mishap; including a crash that he walked away from.  At this point, I think he's a danger to himself and others...

Edited April 30, 2020 by overspeed3

[lownslo 592]

18 minutes ago, W2DR said:

As far as I'm concerned, Jack Ryan can do what ever he wants...........

I'm with you!  But perhaps Jack Ryan's best work now isn't occuring in the cockpit of an airplane...

Greg

[Bob Scott 7,721]

It kinda looks like Harrison should invest in a seeing-eye instructor pilot to accompany him if he wants to keep flying without killing anyone--himself included.

"Man's got to know his limitations..."  -Harry Calahan

[JonP01 104]

Sad though that allegedly he was flying to retain proficiency so as to help with relief efforts though.

[JRBarrett 3,070]

All of us who work at the local airport who have a permit to drive on the ramp or taxiways have to watch an FAA training video every 12 months which is all about safety when operating vehicles on airport property. It covers topics like understanding and complying with hold-short instructions from the tower, never entering or crossing an active runway without positive ATC clearance etc. The introduction to the video is by none other than... Harrison Ford.

Granted, the video was produced quite a few years ago.

I admire Harrison Ford as an actor, and he has been a very active advocate for aviation for many years, but he is not a young man anymore. Unfortunately, he has had several incidents like this in recent years. He might want to consider either retiring from active flying, or at least from flying solo, just as the late Arnold Palmer did when he got older. There is no shame in that.

Edited April 30, 2020 by JRBarrett

[JonP01 104]

I know in my own case that even if I had the money to fly I wouldn't. Not because I have any doubt about being able to master the technical side of flying an actual aricraft itself but because I just don't think I would be able to consistently, reliably, efficiently and most importantly - quickly - handle the added pressure of having to deal with radio communications with ATC at the same time. Even at my age (a couple of decades younger than Harrison) I know that my mind no longer works as fast as it did when I was in my late 30s to early 40s (when I feel it was at its peak) and my hearing certainly is not as good, but not bad enough to need any correction either.

But as someone who has obviously never had to deal with radio comms and fast-talking ATC, from the outside looking in I think pristine hearing and a quick mind are absolute pre-requisites - two things that for me at least are passed their prime even in my late 50s!

[Ron Attwood 3,465]

Is it a requirement of ATC to 'jabber' because that's what it sounded like to me. I would have told him to speak slower and more clearly.

[Chock 17,769]

Personally, I think the controller is to a large extent to blame for this one. He says (well mumbles actually) 'Continue holding short' which is somewhat confusing phraseology. In ATC parlance for taxy instructions, the word 'continue' is essentially the complete opposite of 'hold'. And in any case there should be barrier lights at hold points which are adjacent to a runway, to confirm a hold instruction visually. This has long since been an NTSB recommendation for airport signage and lighting systems, specifically to avoid runway incursions and I'm assuming that these were not in place because no pilot with a brain is going to taxi past those without getting a seriously absolute confirmation that it is okay to do so.

Thus the phrasing choice on the part of the controller is asking to be misinterpreted. It's a bit like saying 'turn left right now' instead of 'expedite left turn' or some such. You aren't supposed to say stuff which can be misconstrued, for obvious reasons. Throw in a bit of static, some garbled reception and the controller not exactly enunciating very well either, and you can easily understand why Harrison Ford interpreted the transmission as 'carry on'.

Ford might have screwed up when he landed on that taxiway some time ago and that one was certainly his fault, but for my money this one is on the controller. I strongly suspect that if it wasn't for the fact Ford is well known, any other pilot would have just had a bit of a minor row with the tower supervisor a few minutes later and then it would have gone no further when they played the tape back and heard exactly what was said by the guy in the tower.

Edited May 1, 2020 by Chock

[Jetman67 517]

This is a very bad blunder for any one period and definently requires investigation and remedial training

 

Wayne

[KevinAu 441]

That could definitely been heard as ‘cross two five’. But then he also mumbled his readback so that the controller had little chance to correct him either. Not that they usually pay attention to the readback. If there is ever a doubt about what the controller said, make them say it again. Both pilot and controller should be faulted.

[W2DR 1,860]

13 hours ago, Chock said:

Thus the phrasing choice on the part of the controller is asking to be misinterpreted.

I can't count the number of times I've had a really hard time understanding a controller. It's not always easy to understand what to do next. In this case I think Jack Ryan should get the benefit of the doubt.

[Chock 17,769]

Yup, the trouble is, people are reticent to say 'say again' or 'repeat last', or question a controller when they are not absolutely certain of an instruction because they think it makes them sound amatuerish. Nothing could be further from the truth of course; real pros are not concerned with what people think of them, they are concerned with doing things properly. It doesn't help when a situation has been fomented over the years whereby some people rattle things off at 100 mph thinking that makes them sound like a pro - it doesn't, it's a stupid thing to do and it can and has led to many accidents. Brevity is good with radio comms, but not at the expense of clarity.

At work I have to talk to a lot of pilots of differing nationalities, and so I am always careful to enunciate slowly and I never use any idioms unless I am certain the person is likely to understand me. In working in commercial aviation, I've learned very quickly that if something is not clear or could be potentially dangerous, then it doesn't matter how many times one says 'say again' or 'just to confirm', or stops doing something until its clear that to continue is safe, that this is infinitely better than the alternative. 

So if anyone should be getting a b*llocking for this current incident, it should be the controller for not being absolutely crystal clear when dealing with a situation where an aircraft is crossing a runway. There have been enough fatal incidents with runway incursions - including the world's worst ever air disaster at Los Rodeos back in 1977 in which 583 people died and many others were horrifically injured - for this to be something everyone should be aware of, and especially a professional air traffic controller.

[CYXR 257]

8 hours ago, KevinAu said:

That could definitely been heard as ‘cross two five’. But then he also mumbled his readback so that the controller had little chance to correct him either. Not that they usually pay attention to the readback. If there is ever a doubt about what the controller said, make them say it again. Both pilot and controller should be faulted.

We don't know if the TMZ audio  is complete; we don't know if it's been edited either... but the source data available will be examined by the FAA. Investigators had  found that he had been given the correct instructions and had read them back when he landed on the taxiway at SNA... Ford is an  experienced pilot. But so was KLM's chief flight instructor, Veldhuyzen van Zanten; on Flight 4805 who had 11,700 flight hours. Experience is no guarantee. I don't know what standards will be used by the FAA to analyse this event. I say Ford should have asked to say again. I dunno what to think about the controller.