Pilot: Has thousands of hours of training in flying in general, and to know the capabilities of the exact vehicle that he's responsible for controlling, as well as a halfway decent knowledge of the airport he's landing at. ATC: Knows the runways like the back of his hand, but otherwise just has a wheelie chair and some screens. Yeah, uh, I dunno about you, but I know who I'm trusting here.
@@Dee_Just_Dee what does "halfway decent knowledge" mean? are you telling us that pilots in general do not have "decent" knowledge of airports theyre landing at? you speaking like an actual civilian that has never been in a pilot's world. pilots are on average more decent at understanding an airport than most ATC that work there. and if you dont think thats true, then you simply would be wrong.
@@housemana calling something halfway decent is commonly considered to be saying that it is above average. Fairly common use of those words when they're kept together. On their own "halfway" and "decent" mean "average" unless we're using halfway to measure distance of course
The land or go around judgement is the pilot’s alone, not the controller’s. No matter how long the controller’s been doing the job. If the controller can’t make enough space for the pilot to be comfortable landing, he has no basis to complain when he goes around. The pilot’s job is flight safety alone, not traffic management.
@@Flies2FLL No, it wasn't that. He was upset that his plan to make things go extremely efficiently just fell apart and will cause him even more work and inefficiency.
@@Flies2FLL I agree. Do controllers not get 'graded' by how much tin they move per hour, per shift? The more they move, the more they get paid? There must be some incentive. Same with pilots, no? Isn't there $ incentive to deliver more pax on-time, every day? Otherwise everybody relaxes, spreads out, fewer flights landed, fewer folks moved, plane travel gets worse (again).
Controller ought to be reprimanded for baiting a pilot into an emotional reaction when the pilot is dealing with all kinds of last minute changes, a few hundred feet off the ground. Either it's the pilot's call or it isn't, and if it is, controller should stfu and stick to his job.
The certainty of "I do this every day" has been proven disastrous many times, in many professions - not just aviation. Excellent call by the captain - and a simple announcement of "Ladies and gentlemen, we decided to go around because of heavy traffic in the ground ahead of us, we are landing shortly." would have just sorted everything out.
I worked in ATC almost half a century ago. The minimum separation was then six minutes; later it was reduced to three, and today (if I am informed right) it is a minute and a half. Modern technology makes that possible, and today's traffic volume makes it a necessity. I learned I could only grant a clearance to start or land when absolutely nothing was on the runway. In this clip the controller says "There will be a heavy Boeing 777 between you and that traffic ... [you are] cleared to land." That is absolutely shocking to me. I also learned that ATC is a service and the captain is the Pilot in Command; his/her decisions count. The behavior of this controller is not OK.
@@ErnestoM2002 always cool to hear from the old timers. In this case that’s literal as well as figurative. :-) I got in an 85 and we always use some type of radar or visual, but occasionally had clearance void times. Things certainly changed in my 26 years, but it’s really hard for me to see all these people thinking that this Delta pilot prevented a collision and deaths, or that a loss of separation meant a collision. I tried to explain it to a few people, but I was just confusing them with facts and experience. But if the initial descriptions were correct, it was pretty obvious, this one was not going to work.
@@lukeball4937 I agree. I think the fact this situation has even become a talking point is because of the hurt ego talk back from ATC, which is at a minimum highly unprofessional, but is being interpreted as his committing unsafe traffic sequencing. At a major UK airport it is quite normal to be cleared to "land after" an aircraft currently accelerating on it's take-off roll in good visibility. The landing aircraft is accepting the role of judging that it is clear to land, that the other aircraft has taken off, before actually landing. I have been landing a 737 and whilst in the flare to touchdown checking that the wheels of the aircraft taking off have actually left the runway (several thousand feet away at the other end!) and it is in the climb out before my wheels touch down. In the event that they aborted we would have rejected the landing and climbed away whilst making a 90° turn away on the missed approach, just as we would if we had seen a vehicle enter the runway in error. Also, I have often heard ATC give tailor made go around instructions to landing aircraft in the event that it may "get tight", such as "BigJet456 in the event of a go around, maintain runway heading, climb altitude 3000 feet", so as to ensure that if his plan doesn't work out he knows exactly where the aircraft will be going. As a side note, at my airport without a displaced threshold, I'd be alert for a potential go around if I hear a departing aircraft getting line up clearance when I am at 3 miles, as long as they don't delay it will be fine, so hearing it at 2.5 miles with a displaced threshold I would be thinking "Oh, come on?!" I just wouldn't want ATC taking the chance that we will have to go around and do it again, adding 15 minutes to an already long day and delaying the arrival of our aircraft on stand. (Belaboured detail for the lay person's benefit, not yours!). The only thing that I feel is unsafe in this video is the snarky come back from ATC, which could emotionally distract the pilots from the high workload go around they are currently trying to fly and monitor whilst raising flaps and ensuring they are tracking correctly and climbing to the correct level off altitude, etc. This, I feel, is the one factor that really stands to degrade safety.
@@CatalinaAVX i’m not hearing anything I disagree with. Cherry on top we’re talking about a couple of heavies. Similar to trying to get a 900 series Boeing 737 to slow down, it’s just not gonna happen. I absolutely agree with you, I tried mentioning what you’ve listed in various other posts but the people with their movie level knowledge of air traffic control, frustrated me into terminating and deleting the threads. As you know, “squeeze plays” go on all the time every day at airports that share pavement between arrivals and departures. Something like this, every pilot involved should have their instructions before they enter the critical stage of flight. Any experienced controller knows If a crew has to go around, they’re too busy flying the plane to comply with a bunch of controller instructions to avoid the plane they just went around for. Good controller,knows, you always leave yourself an out just in case the departure aborts or the GA citation dawdles down the runway, or misses their turn, or pulls a head fake where it looks like they’re turning off the runway, but then they decide that they want to go to a subsequent intersection. The unspoken part that a lot of people miss is that they seem to think that, why not just wait? As if there isn’t another plane a couple of minutes behind these guys. I 100% agree, I am embarrassed for the profession by what the controller said. It wasn’t the place or the time, and it didn’t matter anyway. The situation was resolved. The controller could’ve been right. It might’ve been a squeeze play that did work and was a legal operation by the book, a good controller would’ve moved on. I could see asking if the go round was for a mechanicalor wake issue, but you don’t have judgment discussions on the frequency, that’s what the telephone is for.
@@lukeball4937 totally agree with all you said, and also a pleasure to listen to a professional speak. I had not heard the term "squeeze play", but now I'll think of it every time my finger is hovering over the TO/GA button! As the Queen used to say, "Never complain, never explain.", our controller in this video could have taken some high ground and benefit of the doubt by replying "Roger(.)". Hope you have a great day.
Try not to be too hysterical. When a controller says something like that, they are not talking about a collision, they’re talking about a “loss of separation“, which actually just means we did not give them the spacing that our rules require. If that departing air India Was only 5900 feet down the runway instead of 6000 feet down the runway, then by the controllers rules it would not have “worked“. But you would’ve never known the difference as a passenger and 5900 feet instead of 6000 is not dangerous, except to one’s career! :-) at least that’s the way it used to be. Nowadays FAA management laughs about operational errors. One of the reasons I retired earlier than I had to.
@@ectem... could you and the Pippit whippet above try to be just a little less hysterical? Who said anything about exceeding defined performance or operational characteristics? At busier airports, the described situation happens at least dozens of times a day everywhere across the country, where airports are arriving and departing the same piece of pavement. I acknowledge that this particular situation is a bad plan and a bad decision from the moment the controller was talking to them. You used to be able to expedite heavies, but it’s against the rules now. Not familiar with the airport layout, but if the GA ramp was down at the far end, you have to tell the citation while he’s still out on final that you need him off the runway ASAP, otherwise they will dawdle down the runway to exit closer to their ramp. The arrival should’ve been slowed on initial contact with emphasis that spacing could be minimal. But it’s a bad plan from the start because if you have a heavy departing while another heavy is going around, you have actual wake turbulence issues going on all over the place in a terminal environment, also known as planes really close to the ground in their most difficult flying configurations. But the controller Really had no business comparing his judgment to the pilots, the controller just needed to know if it was for a mechanical issue or something else. As described by our debriefer, the pilot thought it was safer to put it on the ground, then to fly up the back of the departure, another judgment call that could’ve backfired if the departure had to abort. All those judgments are being made in real time in fractions of a second. most times they’re right!
Over the last 30 years I have been a passenger during 4 go-arounds. It always made me feel better knowing the pilot was alert, was being careful and might be saving our lives. My dad taught me that.
I regularly get a flight to the point that I know the approach and landing cause im a plane enthusiast.. On one of our flights we were very far right of where we usually are.. and i was thinking "this isnt right..we're off here".. I was seeing buildings on my left that are usually to the right of us when we're landing.. so was getting a bit tense.. but sure enough a few seconds later the engines flared and we were going back up. Soo GG to pilot was clearly off decided to not go for it and went around. :)
As a passenger the Pilot can go around as many times as he likes, not keen on getting into unsafe situation at all. The old saying better safe than sorry. Actual playing with lives not a card game.
"Controller is not the one going to take the heat for that" As I put it to my kid when I was teaching him to drive, "If you're waiting at an intersection for a break in traffic so you can make a turn and the car behind you honks, that's not an offer by them to pay your insurance deductible if they are wrong."
Exactly. Most ATC are not pilots, and have no experience actually flying an aircraft. Not saying they don't know their jobs or they are bad at thier jobs, it's just different being in an aircraft VS sitting at a radar display. The Delta pilots made a judgement call based on THIER experience as pilots, and i'd rather they do their jobs rather than let the ATC "backseat quarterbacking" the call. ATC might have been correct, but maybe they weren't. We'll never know, because the pilots made a call that precluded a potential accident. And in my opinion, preventing an accident from happening in the first place, is much better that trying to mitigate an accident in progress.
As a pilot, it's essential to remember that the final decision always lies with us, not with ATC. This fundamental principle is one of the first things we learn. While some ATC folks might get their egos bruised, that's not our concern. I've encountered this attitude at places like LAX and Long Beach, where some ATC officers seem more focused on their authority. However, safety is paramount, and sometimes that means deciding to go around when it doesn't feel safe. This decision is never made lightly, nor is it about undermining ATC. It's about ensuring we all fly safely. ATC is there to guide us, but the ultimate call is ours.
You’re 100% correct. Unfortunately, there are other cultures (other than Americans) who have a stronger tendency to defer to Authority, and will follow what they perceive are orders from Authority, such as ATC. And, there are those who may also become complacent when certain practices become routine, even those that might not be ideal. We see this in all areas of life, when what was once deemed unacceptable just a few years ago, becomes more acceptable later. Some old school pilots with decades of experience would better recognize these types of changes, than perhaps newer, less experienced pilots. And as each year passes, that newer group will eventually make up the vast majority that have no experience with what used to be the accepted way of doing things.
@@GuyNAustin There is a case when Soviet Union lost a whole bunch of admirals due to a pilot's inability to say no. In that case it caused a failed take-off due to an overloaded aircraft with insufficiently secured cargo.
@deerock7 Exactly! Not a go-around case, but last week, several of my adult children had a flight delayed because the pilot felt uneasy about the aircraft originally scheduled, so he requested to change aircraft. The original plane had been repaired, but the sensor still showed the fault (fuel feed, I think). Maintenance said it was just a faulty sensor, pilot still decided against taking that aircraft. I thank this unknown pilot for bringing my family safely to me.
Class act on the part of the Delta pilots. I wish the controller had not made the unnecessary comment in the end. The fact that the controller said, “It would’ve been tight” is a red flag. I completely agree with Kelsey…when you’re operating in a tight environment, the slightest unexpected event could be catastrophic. Delta decided it wasn’t worth the risk. Good decision.
Great video as always. Really appreciate the Delta pilot not clapping back at ATC. The subtext of just responding “we needed to go around” says it all.
Yep, though a “So do we.” would have worked as well. ATC could have reasonably be reminded that they are not the only professionals doing their job here.
My two cents, airline pilot here: As you said, controllers get very good at spacing out landings and departures. It's a source of pride. But sometimes, they cut it just a tad too close for comfort for the pilot, and when that happens, and the pilot goes around, it embarrasses them in front of the tower crew. I could hear the embarrassment in his voice.
@@GMLGMD let’s not take it too far. Unless the departure aborted, the pilot chose to do the least safe thing left. If he had chosen to land, and the departure did not abort, the worst case scenario is that he rolls out with a loss of separation. In that scenario, only the controller would get into trouble, although the pilot would have to answer some questions, but since he chose the safest thing to do, it would just be some questions. By going around, he is now in a takeoff envelope flying right into the wake turbulence of the departing heavy. You really don’t want to be trying a lot of evasive actions in takeoff configuration while flying into turbulence. That’s why we have rules about wake turbulence. Yes, any good controller considers a go around because of a possible loss of separation as a failure. But good controllers also know, when you’re running minimum separation, sometimes it’s not going to work.
@@lukeball4937 And then there's the punishment factor where ATC sends you to a holding pattern, until they can fit you back in with the flow. Happened to me going in to LAS. Coming in from the east, they turned us on final at less than 5 miles...in front of all the SWA planes coming in from LAX. We were still doing 250 knots and trying to get a 777 slowed while trying to loose some altitude is challenging. I called for gear and final flaps, knowing our airspeed was still above landing flaps speed. But, most airplanes have a safety feature that prevents over-speeding the flaps but as you slow down, the flaps will extend. It was actually one of my better landings...
@lukeball4937 Minimum separation is the essential safety buffer - without that it's all in the lap of the gods. And by trying to coordinate such a tight dep / landing scenario, there's really not much latitude for error or failure in the expected normal ops. You said that in the case of an aborted take-off the worst would be that the ATC would suffer the consequences of a separation breakdown. But what if the dep Air India was slow to roll, had performance issues &/or assorted the landing AND say the landing Delta touched down late &/or had braking issues so rolled longer. Perhaps the Delta was heavy & knew they'd need a long roll-out. You only need 2 Swiss cheese holes lining up to make an accident. And I might be wrong, but I don't remember an Expedite instruction from the ATC to the Air India aircraft - only advice that the Delta was on a 2.5 mille final. The Delta PF or PIC couldn't be blamed for making the GA call in that situation.
As a passenger, I remind myself that the pilots want to land safely just as much as I do. Props to the Delta pilot for using his experience to keep all on board alive to fly another day. ATC needs to check his ego at the door.
Why is air traffic control using one runway for take-offs AND landings at the same time?? When I used to fly, I seem to remember airports having dedicated runways for either take-offs or landings; not both at the same time. It's exactly to prevent this kind of disaster. What is air traffic control thinking?
This is my motto too. When passengers are getting mad or freaking out about flights not going for weather or mechanical issues I just say "hey, if the pilot doesn't want to fly do you REALLY want to??" 🤔
@@tatlowtimes, I was a flight attendant. People complained about weather and mechanicals all the time and my response was always, "Safety first. The alternative (dying) sucks." Not in those words, exactly.😂
@@williamyoung9401 thats the silliest thing ive ever heard... you must be GA only? you know thers airports with only one runway too right... there might be several aircraft on an approach while someone else is taking off. its called anticipated separation. the other guys gonna be gone before they show up.... theres also same runway separation. the requirement is 6000ft and airborne for any jet aircraft. that means the aircraft departing needs to be 1nm and off of the ground before the follwoing landing aircraft crosses the landing threshold.... you clearly dont have a clue on the workings of air space management and the national airspace system, maybe dont speak on it.
I love your wrap on this. We pilots, by nature, are very sure of ourselves, so making us happy makes the world just right. I got squeezed into that box in STL one day, back in the days when TWA was still there and STL was a major speed bump in the system. The arrival had us fast with a last-second slow down programmed. Tower put a 777 onto the runway in front of us. It took its jolly time spinning up to roll. The parallel (12L) wasn't available. In the crunch, I kept it as slow as possible, began the go around as late as practical, and sneaked a bit to the right to keep the 777 in sight. Tower and approach weren't happy with me. The trip around to pattern to get back on short final was about 45 minutes. So many airports can get like this at times, making it quite tempting to press things ("It would've been tight, but...") to the limits, but pressing to the limits is for flight test and combat ops - not for flying your friends and neighbors safely across the country. Nice video. Thanks.
I was on a plane that did a go-around for a different reason: wind sheer on the ground that made the pilot decide he wasn't on a good approach; he essentially told the tower their judgment of the wind wasn't correct as pertained to his plane. But his explanation to us passengers was that he wanted to give us a more comfortable landing so he was going around to get a better angle. That made people relax, and most of us actually enjoyed the go-around because it gave a view of the snowy countryside and the light snow falling.
One of the first things I was taught; a go around is NEVER a bad decision, and whoever makes the decision is never going to be countermanded or criticised. One of my early landings I got into PIOs, my instructor was just about to take the controls when I decided I was going around, he just came off the controls and left me to do it. Afterwards I was told “good call”.
Just be careful with that "Never" phrase. Say you just diverted because of weather, then did a go-around at your alternate, now you don't have enough fuel to go-around and make another approach. Better make that last one count.
@@flightcamps9041 then one would hope there was no need for a go around. Quite frankly if you get to that stage on fuel there needed to some much better decision making well prior to that point.
ATC added a new hole to the Swiss cheese model by adding the triple into the mix while the Delta was on a configured and stable final approach. I appreciate ATC there are overwhelmed, but adding risk to flight doesn’t always end well. Crazy. Kudos to the Delta.
Yeah, I thought, it was tight, but could be managed just fine with the Delta about 2 minutes behind the Citation. But trying to have a 777 heavy take off in between? I dont know, how ATC thought, that was ever going to work.
The moment ATC said 'It would have been tight' rings the warning bell. That is a roll of the dice. The Pilot was very professional.........The ATC was not.
even less professional when he whines about the pilots decission... he is NOT on the plane and he is NOT risking his life when he does stupid decission like this... Pilot did brilliantly and kept his cool in his replies.
As an American controller in a very busy airport, as of the last few years he doesn't have any credibility in the "IT would have fit bro trust me" department. So many VASAviation videos are just ATC screwing up and packing planes too close and trying to get themselves out of a corner. What happens when you get the planes on the verge of losing separation, because you got them so tight, and then the landing aircraft gets a windshear alert and starts a windshear escape maneuver and a go around? Whoopsy, the landing, light on fuel plane is going to be going to TOGA power and closing quick on the aircraft climbing out, Now ATC would have two planes in regimes of flight where they really shouldn't be turning (
Thanks for this video. I now have another insight into why take off and landing are such critical times on the flight. As the passenger, keeping the blue side up is my mission, too so I'll be buckled up tight and praying harder that all you pilots get exactly what you want while flying us in and out and all around the world and that towers everywhere remember that the same situations can present differently on the screen and in the sky. Safety First.
China as to u.s.a ...... China not profit operations for reason of existence.......u.s.a. profit for existing...as to subject of video only ...hey just maybe ?!!!!!!!! Ha ha ...get it !!!!
I used to know an air traffic controller at Newark Airport. He was also a great video game player, but he once told me, "The times that you LOSE a game always involve greed..., like when you go after a power-up you don't need." He applied his gaming philosophy to his ATC decisions.
Reminds me a little bit of Captain Sully. "Make it human". They operated the whole case based on numbers and NOT the reality of the situation. Same thing here, ATC is seeing numbers and lines assuming the system is gonna keep working, not taking into account the HUMAN factor of what's actually happening in real life.
I think the pilot's decision is fine, however the controller has likely seen those numbers before and in the past it was tight but it worked. Both pilot and controller can be correct in this case. It could have worked, but the pilot did nothing wrong by going around. If the timing is so tight that controllers shouldn't be asking pilots to do it, that should be codified somehow.
This is the first of your videos UA-cam has brought to my attention in quite some time. As usual your analysis is SPOT ON. I also noticed you have a new pair of shoulder boards, Congratulations Captain!
Thanks for your videos Kelsey. As an A&P mechanic who never went into the industry and as a casual observer I find all of your videos interesting. Additionally, my son is currently studying to be a commercial pilot at UND. I share your videos with him and have conversations on the topics from time to time. Appreciated!!!!
As a military helicopter mechanic 40 years ago, I learned the phrase "General Flight Safety always has the command." Nobody can break, speed up, or change this command. That was a very good decision by the Delta pilots. The ATC needed a kick in the butt to remind us to always maintain our safety margin, because we never know when we will need the margin.
If the air traffic controller had to ask the pilot "Why" he didn't land, he needs a vacation and some re-training. His 'Obvious-Detector' was malfunctioning that day.
In the case mentioned here I am sure it would have been "safe" to land anyway but what if a tire to the landing gear, or worse a landing gear itself where to give out on that other plane before in the queue? An incident like that and getting the plane out of the way in time may be a problem. Clearly the pilot made the right call.
I love these videos. I will probably never fly again, did too much in the 1980s and 1990s. but I also spent 1981-1992 working for a flight simulator company, worked on radar simulators for US military aircraft. And so I have this enduring love for aviation. I also worked with US Navy trainees and instructors, and acquired a great deal of respect for pilots. Mind you, that was nearly back in the Pleistocene...but still, pilot quick thinking saves lives.
What you described on your approach and why you chose to land just happened last week. A pilot decided to go around (justifiably IMO) and the vertical separation between the plane going around and the plane taking off was like 700’. It was all over the news. My first thought when I saw the story, with video footage of the planes, was “I can’t wait for Kelsey to do a video about this.” I hope someone has sent you the video. It was remarkable.
There are other reputable aviation channels but somehow Kelsey is able to bridge the gap between professional and cool. It feels like just one of the guys telling you how it is. Never get any morally superior vibes from Captain Kelsey. Very refreshing to listen to a human.
@@DenseGrowthOfTrees Those are the 2 I follow as well. My FIL was Marine Corps pilot during WWII and Korea. Then a Flight Safety Inspector with the FAA for the rest of his career. He’s been gone for a while now but I find watching Kelsey and Mentor bring back warm memories.
My dad was a Controller in the 70s in the DFW Regional airport and had to go to a school to learn the new equipment for the new DFW Int'l Airport being built. It was a stressful job even then.
Delta pilot was absolutely cool. Didn’t sound shook or ticked off in any way. When asked why the go around, perfectly appropriate answer in a non accusatory tone in any way. Absolute pro pilot, no doubt. 👍🏻😎👍🏻
Did a trip as passenger from Copenhagen to London Heathrow a few years ago in a BA 767. It was a bumpy trip and I knew with Heathrows East-West runways there would be a big crosswind. Sure enough on finals there was a lot of turbulence and the plane did a go-around. Several passengers expressed alarm and the captain made a brief announcement to apologise for the extra air time and the turbulence. Personally, I felt this guy knew what he was doing and relaxed, knowing he wasn't going to risk the lives of his passengers and crew. The second attempt was perfect. I wish I had been in the jump seat to see how he did it.
@@colinpotter7764 nah, but sometimes you realize halfway how sh.t they are. i survived eg. a flight where the pilots did full flaps!! mid-flight. on cruise height. on an a320. it was insane. pure insanity. they also did not use the autopilot the entire 3-hr flight. i said so many thanks to engineers after that flight, there must be so many backup safety systems on an a320 that ensured we didn't die from the stupidy of the pilots that day. (it was in SEA on a smaller airline.)
As a now retired former Delta flight attendant, I had 100% trust in the flying skills of all our pilots. The captains of the planes always have the last word on decisions made onboard the aircraft. ATC, not as much.
Last night, I flew into Hannover with BA978, I sat in 15f above the wing, 20 mins into the flight, the motors for the flaps started screaming, soon after the captain called the cabin staff to the cockpit, before we landed, he informed us that the plane had malfunctioned and we shall see if we can get to the gate. The plane landed, no reverse thrust, heavy braking on and off, we used most of the runway, emergency services awaiting to spray foam. Once the services said all was ok, a tug then pulled us to the gate. Apparently, hydraulics had failed, the air braking flaps remained at an obtuse angle, remaining flaps extended and the baggage doors could not be opened. The captain and crew were great, calm, reassured the pax until we finally disembarked. I collected my bags this morning and was told the plane had been grounded.
In the UK when landing at a airport with an information service like EGCB (Manchester Barton) the FISO will say "land at your discretion" as even without traffic, as a pilot if I'm not happy then it is 100% my call if I land or not. This pilot did 100% the right thing and acted in the most professional of manner. Well done :)
Loved your commentary and explanation. Thank you for sharing this. I was ATC for 33 years and for people who don't have your experience (or Delta's) you provided a valuable service to the flying public.
@@TurboLoveTrainthat is not how this works. No matter who the FAA hires (if you’re trying to hint at diversity hiring) there is still competency-based certification and hundreds of hours of training. The pilots and controllers will always have to certify based on strict standards. For pilots it’s the ACS. No matter what they LOOK like if they don’t meet the standard they don’t work. Cut and dry. I would like to know your experience with aviation to make you think that diversity hiring causes most of these problems?
@@eugenemccary4748 in my experience what you are saying is partly true. There are many fine pilots regardless of genetics. The reality is that DEI quotas have led to lower selection and competency standards. This is true for ATC the Airlines and the Air force. All of which I have worked in 40 years in aviation.
@@eugenemccary4748 If you don't meet the standards those standards will be lowered until you can. This isn't new. I worked in cabin systems, signal deconfliction, then moved on to material stress testing and component design for fracture critical systems like landing gear and jet engine fan blade attachments. Cost cutting and hiring policies have lead to lower standards across the board and the results are observable--more equipment failures and "near misses" like this. I left the aerospace industry because this was happening and I don't fly anymore.
10:13 (JFK Tower) "I do this every day sir. It would have worked" (Delta 45) "Oh, I'm sorry. Surely you have MUCH more experience flying this aircraft than I do. My bad." Hopefully this controller was given a sit-down with his supervisor and they discussed how his ego means zip-point-squat when it comes to the safe operation of an aircraft.
It might've worked if the India flight didn't need to abort takeoff. ATC must understand that they can't have multiple planes on the same runway at the same time -- basic common sense. Too many flights in too little time is going to result in a bad crash eventually. ATC is playing games with people's lives.
It's not even that. It's not about the pilot being more of an expert (even though they are), it's the terrible reasoning by the controller. "It's worked before, therefore it'll work now" is one of the oldest logical failures we know about. It's more well-known as a post-hoc fallacy. Just because he's done it so many time doesn't mean it's going to work _this_ time. The point shouldn't be experience, but position. The pilot is flying the plane. The controller is giving directions. The pilot has the final say, _always._ That's the expected respect that a controller should give. Even without the logical failing in the reasoning, it's still overstepping their bounds to suggest their say should have been the final one, as the controller did here. The quick response should have been, "confirmed, [instructions for the go-around/landing]". Then again, unless they did it for data collection purposes or whatever, the controller probably shouldn't be asking anyway. Again, pilot has final say. If they ask for a go-around, then that's their call.
@@Latter-Day-Aintzip is a colloquial word for zero. Squat is also a colloquial word for zero. "Zip-point-squat" is "zero point zero" (0.0), or nothing, which means he's saying "Your ego means nothing."
I just LOVE the way you are "nuanced" about the various positions and judment from different perspectives. The world needs more people like you (not only in the aerospace world... EVERYWHERE...) understanding the others view! BRAVO... Please continue! Problems and issues get solved by understanding the different points of view and finding the best tradeoffs.
Ya if he said “you had plenty of space” then the atc guy is just wrong. Acknowledging it was going to be tight shows the ATC guy has reckless habits. Tight leaves no margin for error
Really a great video from somebody in the biz……also I noticed 4bars on your shirt……congrats for them, but when did you get it. Didn’t notice it before. Keep up the great work you provide so often. I myself am up in age, but one time in the early seventies I worked at JFK, and that when my favorite, jumbo 747, started flying. Saw what was the frirst Queen landing around Kennedy, it was an Eastern one. This affirmed my love for anything to do with aviation. You confirmed my love for this great industry, thanks again. 17:03
If pilots accept this "squeeze" by ATC , only more will come... someone has to be an advocate for safety, the pilot whose life, and that of his passangers, is ideally positioned to push back against this ridiculous situation....
2 things. I agree with you, whether flying a plane or driving a vehicle, it's best to avoid a possible danger and find out you didn't need to than not avoiding it and wishing you did. Then in you pilots' defense, as Captain Picard told his Admiral, "This might be your fleet, but this is my ship."
As a 1.5 million mile NWA passenger and a former private pilot, I always appreciate a pilot with the fortitude to do the right thing in his or her mind. Good outcome, safe passengers, and safe crew. No dents on the big bird. Good job!
(1-1/n)^n chance of success goes to about ⅔ chance of failure. Controller does what, 200 shifts a year? 20 years, 4000 shifts, ask pilots to take 1-in-4000 risks once per shift about ⅔ of controllers will cause an accident during their career, that is *wildly* unacceptable. Google tells me one in about 3000 takeoffs are aborted.
@@tjthill You missed the comment, try to read it again or get a third party to assess your understanding of the comment. I understand, you are neurodivergent.
Seeing how this is being covered by channels like this, this was made into an incident report. This controller getting retrained / changing career may very well save lives.
Good to hear the communication between the two. Good explanation of why the go-around. *** Pilot chose safety first ! That's always the right decision !
I've been on a plane into Heathrow that had to do a go round for this reason and then after 24 hrs travelling because we missed our spot had to go round in circles for an hr until a spot opened up for us to land. We got there safe. Safe is better than dead. The delta pilot was great.
I can't believe that controller was snappy about it. He's responsible for the airspace, but the pilot is responsible for the souls onboard. I'd rather have a pilot exercise careful judgement and be safe than risk it for some ATC to get a biscuit. Thoughts?
It's important that there be agreement. The controller minimums should be what pilots are practicing and training for. Seeing disagreements like this means there's a breakdown in communication somewhere.
Absolutely, in the moment, if you're uncomfortable with the situation, don't do it. ALSO, if the pilot isn't comfortable with Kennedy-level traffic, then he either needs to get more comfortable somehow or stop going there. But that's a "think about later" problem. The best thing the pilot did there was decline to pick up the argument bait on air.
Had something a little like this landing (as a passenger) at Heathrow once. An aircraft in front landed and was supposed to vacate the runway, failed to make the requested exit and stopped on the runway (I guess to ask instructions). Our Virgin Atlantic pilot went around (LHR ATC trying to get planes landing as closely as possible), and when settled explained that our sluggish departure from Narita had been caused by this same plane being hesitant taxiing out. We'd then followed it all the way over China / Russia. And then we got held up again due to hesitancy on the ground. The pilot did an excellent job of conveying being totally and utterly narked off without explicitly saying so, remaining professional. You had to be properly British to understand it.
@@CDB8939 That doesn't mean you're not deep down in the approach to the runway. This was an approach into 09L I recall (definitely from the west), and I think we'd cleared the M25 (which is about 1 mile from the aim point) when the power went back on and we headed back up into the murky weather.
@@abarratt8869 In the USA they clear aircraft to land that are number 3 in the line, at least here the pilots know they are not cleared until the runway is clear
Fantastic explanation as always Captain Kelsey. LOVE the shots from the flight deck at night. Breathtaking. To add to other comments, the ATC isn’t physically responsible for the passengers or the airplane. The Captain is… another brilliant lesson learned from Captain Kelsey. ❤😊❤❤❤
Thank you for continuing your videos even though you don't have the time like you did during covid. They put a smile on people faces. "Ask me how I know".
Eliminate ALL Variables!!! That's my motto, and what i teach my apprentices in the electrical field on how to get our work done efficiently! they will learn over time, and some are smarter than others, but that is my number one rule in how we approach our process of work in general! from bending conduit, planning the size of wire we run, to how we approach the order of work that we send our guys in to do, in order to get the job done on schedule. This rule, albeit i am sure it was done unconsciously, was the exact process that the pilot used, and i am proud of him, and without knowing the Sir, can definitively say, that he, Definitely eliminated ALL of the Variables!
The controller was depending on the situation being the best case scenario. In case of any number of problems, the scenario could have gone bad on them. Kudos to the pilot.
That was my biggest concern as well, as a (not professional) pilot. If everything works, everything works. If anything goes wrong, it goes really really really wrong. Why risk it? It's not Delta's fault, or even ATC's, it's the Citation that was too slow getting off the runway.
@@markeewell Absolutely! The Citation was NIT clear if the runway BEFORE he cleared the other aircraft for take off. 'Sntucipated separation' in not supposed to be with a departure and an aircraft on roll out. (Retired ATC. Unless they have a major change to 7110.
Let me just stipulate, that I am neither a pilot nor an ATC. But it is never good practice in life in general to plan after everything being the best case scenario. Especially when lives are involved. And just practically, when ATC cut it too close to try to save a few seconds here and a minute there, he just creates more work and more delays all around. Doing ur task properly in the first go instead of rushing it is always the quickest solution in the long run. And the safest in this case.
Youre right and if the situation changed we would have adjusted. because thats what were trained to do.... what a silly way to look at it. you can say the same for anything. Controllers can call go arounds too... things change ALOT. we have to change our plans and sequences ALOT. ive had 4 people sequenced to land and had to cancel ALL of them because some one else in the pattern declared an emergency. you adjust. seasoned controllers are always planning for the "what ifs" thats why when he called go around he told him what altitude to climb to and which direction. so that it wasnt a conflict with the departing aircraft. happens all the time. you guys are making it out to be something its not. its silly.
Delta did the right thing. As a twenty five year flight attendant, I know being a responsible pilot weighs heavily on the decisions they make. Thank you for always educating the public. Most passengers that fly have little knowledge of how things safely operate.
Flight attendant here too. They think it's like getting on a Greyhound bus. Not quite.😂 I had a reporter from a famous TV news magazine onboard looking for a story. He had questions about overwater equipment, blah, blah, wanted to talk to a pilot (who both said no😂). I told him "The media is always doing negative stories on the airlines, you're either trying to scare or piss off our passengers. How about a positive story? How about explaining the miracle of flight---go over the whole routine of getting a flight off, beginning to end, showing the coordinated effort of the many, many people it takes to make it happen. It's amazing, it's *not* like getting on a bus." He said "Hey, that's a great idea." Still waiting to see it.😂
@maggieb4736 Well said, as far as I know, crew members are supposed to avoid providing the media with any information like that. Next thing you know, it will all be held against us, and we will be the ones to lose our jobs.
@@karinhirtenstein3765 , the pilots simply said "tell him to take it up with the FAA, their rules." They wanted no part of that guy. I knew I was spitting into the wind when I suggested a positive story.
I was flying from west Texas to Oklahoma City earlier in the year and my pilot had to go around twice and we were running the racetrack for about 10 minutes before we could land but because I watch these videos regularly I was legitimately not concerned while the rest of the passengers in the plane nearly had a heart attack. I was like “everybody relax, as long as the pilot is using that Chuck Yeager voice and the blue side is up we’re good!”
If the pilot thinks it's too close it's too close. If it doesn't look good it doesn't look good. You're also dealing with wake turbulence. What's the wind? Right you don't know. Should always make a choice according to what you're comfortable with. Something doesn't feel right don't do it.
I found your explanation of the Delta pilot making a decision to go around and the exchange between ATC and Delta regarding that decision very interesting and highly relatable. I drive a gasoline tanker truck. Our typical gross weight runs around 80,000 pounds and gas/diesel are quite flammable. We, too, are forced to defend our actions in a court of law should something happen, and in the event of a negative outcome we may face some heavy fines and possible prison time. It's amazing how similar things seem here when our dispatch team gets upset because we drivers make a decision they don't like. The problem in our segment of transportation is it's highly unusual for a company to back a driver's decision made purely on the basis of safety assessment when it conflicts with a dispatch expectation, even when the outcome is positive. I guess transportation is transportation whether it's on the ground or in the air.
Brilliant video, I loved to hear from the pilot's perspective. So many aircraft in the air coming/going that the stress levels for the ATC must be high.....and they SHOULD not make any mistakes, otherwise the consequences are lethal.
I'm a former trucker and just came to say the same thing. My rear end is the one in the driver seat, so I'm the one in charge of this truck. 100% same goes for the pilot landing that plane.
@@the_homun_system my post was as uncalled for as his or your post was. We've all done something uncalled for. The ATC really wasn't even really that uncalled for as far as uncalled for stuff goes
To my understanding, according to ICAO Annexes ATCs can't really tell pilots to do anything, we can only give them "advice" it's also stated clearly that the final decision is for the PIC to make. Delta's PIC made his decision and us ATCs can only acknowledge and continue to service that plane. Delta's PIC handled it flawlessly. That reply to the ATCs tantrum was so calm and collected "We needed to go around". Respect ps. I'm studying ATC in college
No, if a pilot is given a clearance, they are to comply with it unless an emergency exists or will be created. I can also clear someone to land instead of a touch and go if I want them down. Back to the point of telling pilots what to do, you should take a look at the documentary of the Gander controllers on 9/11. They were telling pilots that they would not enter US airspace.They were going to land and that the pilots did not get to choose what their diversion in port was going to be
@@cecontroller I mean there are differences btw instructions and clearance and in the ICAO annexes havent stated this issue clear enough, Been talking to a handful of ATCs about if we can really force a pilot to do something and they all have different point of view, I get your view man, I've told vfr flights to full stop instead of TGL too but that's different.
@whan_gcf752 At the end of the day, ATC instructions are in-fact legally binding unless it is deemed to be unsafe. A pilot has to argue that the instruction would have created a significant risk to adhere to. That is often very hard to do. It sounds like you are outside of the US as you keep referencing ICAO, which we do not follow or have to adhere to.
@@cecontroller Yessir I'm from Thailand, we use everything actually LMAO (ICAO, FAA, EASA, IATA) but yes we mostly stick to ICAO. When you mention the pilot having to argue to defend himself that it poses risk, it does make alot of sense actually. Thanks for the insight, its stated quite vague here from my perspective.
@@cecontroller If you don't mind me asking, are you both pilot and controller?? Saw flying vids on your channel and your username is also controller. if so it's awesome man, would be striving to be like you
When I was flying several times a week, I buttonholed a gray beard Captain at a coffee bar, introduced myself and asked a question sure to put a Pilot in Command on the spot: 'Captain, what do you do if an Air Traffic Controller gives you an order that you *know* is unsafe?' The Captain replied, "Son, when I am the Pilot in Command, I *own* the sky. I alone am responsible for all the souls aboard and I will do whatever I must, to protect their lives, and the safety of my aircraft. I will *tell* the ATC what I am going to do and they must deal with it." This video certainly seems to be an example of my Captain's view.
and what pilots want is free snacks. more seriously, sounded like the controller was thinking best case, and the pilot was thinking worst case. I know which one I'd rather have making the decisions, if something goes wrong.
Props to the pilot for taking safety first. The tower didn't factor in another reason why Delta did a go-around. Another factor could be if Delta were to experience an emergency on landing, such as the nose wheel collapsing. Meanwhile, Air India was still on the runway because they decided to abort their takeoff. Those are just some factors I can think of.
It is my understanding that ATC is trying to keep to a spacing range decided on by the airport as recommended by the FAA. It's therefore the airport that factors in the safety margin for such possibilities.
ATC: I do this everyday, Sir.
Pilot: I do this everyday too.
And the pilot wants to CONTINUE flying everyday!
One of them probably has longer breaks between longer continuous shifts.
Pilot: Has thousands of hours of training in flying in general, and to know the capabilities of the exact vehicle that he's responsible for controlling, as well as a halfway decent knowledge of the airport he's landing at.
ATC: Knows the runways like the back of his hand, but otherwise just has a wheelie chair and some screens.
Yeah, uh, I dunno about you, but I know who I'm trusting here.
@@Dee_Just_Dee what does "halfway decent knowledge" mean? are you telling us that pilots in general do not have "decent" knowledge of airports theyre landing at? you speaking like an actual civilian that has never been in a pilot's world. pilots are on average more decent at understanding an airport than most ATC that work there. and if you dont think thats true, then you simply would be wrong.
@@housemana calling something halfway decent is commonly considered to be saying that it is above average. Fairly common use of those words when they're kept together. On their own "halfway" and "decent" mean "average" unless we're using halfway to measure distance of course
The land or go around judgement is the pilot’s alone, not the controller’s. No matter how long the controller’s been doing the job. If the controller can’t make enough space for the pilot to be comfortable landing, he has no basis to complain when he goes around. The pilot’s job is flight safety alone, not traffic management.
I think the controller was concerned that he was going to get written up.
@@Flies2FLL No, it wasn't that. He was upset that his plan to make things go extremely efficiently just fell apart and will cause him even more work and inefficiency.
@@Flies2FLL I agree. Do controllers not get 'graded' by how much tin they move per hour, per shift? The more they move, the more they get paid? There must be some incentive.
Same with pilots, no? Isn't there $ incentive to deliver more pax on-time, every day? Otherwise everybody relaxes, spreads out, fewer flights landed, fewer folks moved, plane travel gets worse (again).
Controller ought to be reprimanded for baiting a pilot into an emotional reaction when the pilot is dealing with all kinds of last minute changes, a few hundred feet off the ground.
Either it's the pilot's call or it isn't, and if it is, controller should stfu and stick to his job.
@@press2701is there? There shouldn't be. As a passenger, you would rather crash than go around?
The certainty of "I do this every day" has been proven disastrous many times, in many professions - not just aviation.
Excellent call by the captain - and a simple announcement of "Ladies and gentlemen, we decided to go around because of heavy traffic in the ground ahead of us, we are landing shortly."
would have just sorted everything out.
Idk if I’d mention there being a plane in your way to your passengers lol
Wouldn’t the fact that the pilot does it everyday and noticed what was happening make that false?
Yeah, that’s hubris. I strongly dislike that in anyone involved with transportation safety.
Sounds like one of those lines most often spoken before death :)
The pilot should have politely replied, " Next time, I'll defer to you because yesterday I was flipping burgers at McDonald's."
I worked in ATC almost half a century ago. The minimum separation was then six minutes; later it was reduced to three, and today (if I am informed right) it is a minute and a half. Modern technology makes that possible, and today's traffic volume makes it a necessity. I learned I could only grant a clearance to start or land when absolutely nothing was on the runway. In this clip the controller says "There will be a heavy Boeing 777 between you and that traffic ... [you are] cleared to land." That is absolutely shocking to me. I also learned that ATC is a service and the captain is the Pilot in Command; his/her decisions count. The behavior of this controller is not OK.
And, "minute and a half" ... ATC was pushing it more than "close" at 2.5 nmi for that 777 entering the runway. At 150knots that's 1 minute flat.
@@ErnestoM2002 always cool to hear from the old timers. In this case that’s literal as well as figurative. :-) I got in an 85 and we always use some type of radar or visual, but occasionally had clearance void times. Things certainly changed in my 26 years, but it’s really hard for me to see all these people thinking that this Delta pilot prevented a collision and deaths, or that a loss of separation meant a collision. I tried to explain it to a few people, but I was just confusing them with facts and experience. But if the initial descriptions were correct, it was pretty obvious, this one was not going to work.
@@lukeball4937 I agree. I think the fact this situation has even become a talking point is because of the hurt ego talk back from ATC, which is at a minimum highly unprofessional, but is being interpreted as his committing unsafe traffic sequencing. At a major UK airport it is quite normal to be cleared to "land after" an aircraft currently accelerating on it's take-off roll in good visibility. The landing aircraft is accepting the role of judging that it is clear to land, that the other aircraft has taken off, before actually landing. I have been landing a 737 and whilst in the flare to touchdown checking that the wheels of the aircraft taking off have actually left the runway (several thousand feet away at the other end!) and it is in the climb out before my wheels touch down. In the event that they aborted we would have rejected the landing and climbed away whilst making a 90° turn away on the missed approach, just as we would if we had seen a vehicle enter the runway in error. Also, I have often heard ATC give tailor made go around instructions to landing aircraft in the event that it may "get tight", such as "BigJet456 in the event of a go around, maintain runway heading, climb altitude 3000 feet", so as to ensure that if his plan doesn't work out he knows exactly where the aircraft will be going. As a side note, at my airport without a displaced threshold, I'd be alert for a potential go around if I hear a departing aircraft getting line up clearance when I am at 3 miles, as long as they don't delay it will be fine, so hearing it at 2.5 miles with a displaced threshold I would be thinking "Oh, come on?!" I just wouldn't want ATC taking the chance that we will have to go around and do it again, adding 15 minutes to an already long day and delaying the arrival of our aircraft on stand. (Belaboured detail for the lay person's benefit, not yours!). The only thing that I feel is unsafe in this video is the snarky come back from ATC, which could emotionally distract the pilots from the high workload go around they are currently trying to fly and monitor whilst raising flaps and ensuring they are tracking correctly and climbing to the correct level off altitude, etc. This, I feel, is the one factor that really stands to degrade safety.
@@CatalinaAVX i’m not hearing anything I disagree with. Cherry on top we’re talking about a couple of heavies. Similar to trying to get a 900 series Boeing 737 to slow down, it’s just not gonna happen. I absolutely agree with you, I tried mentioning what you’ve listed in various other posts but the people with their movie level knowledge of air traffic control, frustrated me into terminating and deleting the threads. As you know, “squeeze plays” go on all the time every day at airports that share pavement between arrivals and departures. Something like this, every pilot involved should have their instructions before they enter the critical stage of flight. Any experienced controller knows If a crew has to go around, they’re too busy flying the plane to comply with a bunch of controller instructions to avoid the plane they just went around for. Good controller,knows, you always leave yourself an out just in case the departure aborts or the GA citation dawdles down the runway, or misses their turn, or pulls a head fake where it looks like they’re turning off the runway, but then they decide that they want to go to a subsequent intersection. The unspoken part that a lot of people miss is that they seem to think that, why not just wait? As if there isn’t another plane a couple of minutes behind these guys. I 100% agree, I am embarrassed for the profession by what the controller said. It wasn’t the place or the time, and it didn’t matter anyway. The situation was resolved. The controller could’ve been right. It might’ve been a squeeze play that did work and was a legal operation by the book, a good controller would’ve moved on. I could see asking if the go round was for a mechanicalor wake issue, but you don’t have judgment discussions on the frequency, that’s what the telephone is for.
@@lukeball4937 totally agree with all you said, and also a pleasure to listen to a professional speak. I had not heard the term "squeeze play", but now I'll think of it every time my finger is hovering over the TO/GA button! As the Queen used to say, "Never complain, never explain.", our controller in this video could have taken some high ground and benefit of the doubt by replying "Roger(.)". Hope you have a great day.
As a passenger on airplanes, the comment "it would have been tight" does not comfort me. Good for the pilot not taking unnecessary risks.
No kidding. He basically said, "you would have almost crashed, but not quite. I do this for a living."
Try not to be too hysterical. When a controller says something like that, they are not talking about a collision, they’re talking about a “loss of separation“, which actually just means we did not give them the spacing that our rules require. If that departing air India Was only 5900 feet down the runway instead of 6000 feet down the runway, then by the controllers rules it would not have “worked“. But you would’ve never known the difference as a passenger and 5900 feet instead of 6000 is not dangerous, except to one’s career! :-) at least that’s the way it used to be. Nowadays FAA management laughs about operational errors. One of the reasons I retired earlier than I had to.
@@lukeball4937The same excuse used by every tailgater until they need to emergency brake and slam into the car in front.
LaGuardia ops are tight all day, every day. If you hate delays, get used to tight ATC situations.
@@ectem... could you and the Pippit whippet above try to be just a little less hysterical? Who said anything about exceeding defined performance or operational characteristics? At busier airports, the described situation happens at least dozens of times a day everywhere across the country, where airports are arriving and departing the same piece of pavement. I acknowledge that this particular situation is a bad plan and a bad decision from the moment the controller was talking to them. You used to be able to expedite heavies, but it’s against the rules now. Not familiar with the airport layout, but if the GA ramp was down at the far end, you have to tell the citation while he’s still out on final that you need him off the runway ASAP, otherwise they will dawdle down the runway to exit closer to their ramp. The arrival should’ve been slowed on initial contact with emphasis that spacing could be minimal. But it’s a bad plan from the start because if you have a heavy departing while another heavy is going around, you have actual wake turbulence issues going on all over the place in a terminal environment, also known as planes really close to the ground in their most difficult flying configurations. But the controller Really had no business comparing his judgment to the pilots, the controller just needed to know if it was for a mechanical issue or something else. As described by our debriefer, the pilot thought it was safer to put it on the ground, then to fly up the back of the departure, another judgment call that could’ve backfired if the departure had to abort. All those judgments are being made in real time in fractions of a second. most times they’re right!
Over the last 30 years I have been a passenger during 4 go-arounds. It always made me feel better knowing the pilot was alert, was being careful and might be saving our lives. My dad taught me that.
I regularly get a flight to the point that I know the approach and landing cause im a plane enthusiast.. On one of our flights we were very far right of where we usually are.. and i was thinking "this isnt right..we're off here".. I was seeing buildings on my left that are usually to the right of us when we're landing.. so was getting a bit tense.. but sure enough a few seconds later the engines flared and we were going back up. Soo GG to pilot was clearly off decided to not go for it and went around. :)
As a passenger the Pilot can go around as many times as he likes, not keen on getting into unsafe situation at all. The old saying better safe than sorry. Actual playing with lives not a card game.
Yea, if something went wrong the pilot cant say "cuz the controller told me it would work". Controller is not the one going to take the heat for that
He's also not the one dying either
when your staring out the windshield at 160 knots two and a half miles is not far trust me im a msfs simulator pilot
@@jasontipton8430 golf clap
"Controller is not the one going to take the heat for that" As I put it to my kid when I was teaching him to drive, "If you're waiting at an intersection for a break in traffic so you can make a turn and the car behind you honks, that's not an offer by them to pay your insurance deductible if they are wrong."
@@marcmcreynolds2827 or take the heat literally if it is more than a than a fender bender
Delta pilot did the right thing and handled it brilliantly. Always remember, ATC isn't on the airplane.
Pilots always in charge in the air, he can override air control under safety grounds .
As a passenger, I just want to be SAFE.
I shouldn't wind up dead or in a hospital to save some controller's ego.
Exactly. Most ATC are not pilots, and have no experience actually flying an aircraft. Not saying they don't know their jobs or they are bad at thier jobs, it's just different being in an aircraft VS sitting at a radar display.
The Delta pilots made a judgement call based on THIER experience as pilots, and i'd rather they do their jobs rather than let the ATC "backseat quarterbacking" the call. ATC might have been correct, but maybe they weren't. We'll never know, because the pilots made a call that precluded a potential accident.
And in my opinion, preventing an accident from happening in the first place, is much better that trying to mitigate an accident in progress.
@@TurboLoveTrain Thanks for the ugliness. What a world in your head.
@@TurboLoveTrain Evidence?
As a pilot, it's essential to remember that the final decision always lies with us, not with ATC. This fundamental principle is one of the first things we learn. While some ATC folks might get their egos bruised, that's not our concern.
I've encountered this attitude at places like LAX and Long Beach, where some ATC officers seem more focused on their authority. However, safety is paramount, and sometimes that means deciding to go around when it doesn't feel safe. This decision is never made lightly, nor is it about undermining ATC. It's about ensuring we all fly safely.
ATC is there to guide us, but the ultimate call is ours.
You’re 100% correct. Unfortunately, there are other cultures (other than Americans) who have a stronger tendency to defer to Authority, and will follow what they perceive are orders from Authority, such as ATC. And, there are those who may also become complacent when certain practices become routine, even those that might not be ideal.
We see this in all areas of life, when what was once deemed unacceptable just a few years ago, becomes more acceptable later. Some old school pilots with decades of experience would better recognize these types of changes, than perhaps newer, less experienced pilots. And as each year passes, that newer group will eventually make up the vast majority that have no experience with what used to be the accepted way of doing things.
@@GuyNAustin There is a case when Soviet Union lost a whole bunch of admirals due to a pilot's inability to say no. In that case it caused a failed take-off due to an overloaded aircraft with insufficiently secured cargo.
Some Piliots are weak.
@deerock7
Exactly!
Not a go-around case, but last week, several of my adult children had a flight delayed because the pilot felt uneasy about the aircraft originally scheduled, so he requested to change aircraft. The original plane had been repaired, but the sensor still showed the fault (fuel feed, I think). Maintenance said it was just a faulty sensor, pilot still decided against taking that aircraft. I thank this unknown pilot for bringing my family safely to me.
@@mssixty3426Smart Pilot. To stay on that plane could have been disastrous, so he made an excellent call.
Class act on the part of the Delta pilots. I wish the controller had not made the unnecessary comment in the end. The fact that the controller said, “It would’ve been tight” is a red flag. I completely agree with Kelsey…when you’re operating in a tight environment, the slightest unexpected event could be catastrophic. Delta decided it wasn’t worth the risk. Good decision.
Agree 100%. ATC should have just let it go and said nothing more. On top of that, he knew the reason for the go around so why did he even ask?
Yeah. Only been happening for the last 30 years that I know of
@@GigaGear-tv5jk😊😊
@@GigaGear-tv5jkNot true. I've seen it back in the 80s & 90s, too. Even told the incoming aircraft to 'make S turns on final' to get more spacing!
How to make a join in a half copper water pipe
Great video as always. Really appreciate the Delta pilot not clapping back at ATC. The subtext of just responding “we needed to go around” says it all.
Yep. A pro.
Amen.
ATC trying to blame the pilot makes him the moron here yea.
Yep, though a “So do we.” would have worked as well. ATC could have reasonably be reminded that they are not the only professionals doing their job here.
Mature and responsible on the Delta pilot's part...not so much for the atc.
My two cents, airline pilot here: As you said, controllers get very good at spacing out landings and departures. It's a source of pride. But sometimes, they cut it just a tad too close for comfort for the pilot, and when that happens, and the pilot goes around, it embarrasses them in front of the tower crew. I could hear the embarrassment in his voice.
You're probably right. But, better the ATC be embarrassed, than the pilot and everyone on his plane be dead.
@@GMLGMD let’s not take it too far. Unless the departure aborted, the pilot chose to do the least safe thing left. If he had chosen to land, and the departure did not abort, the worst case scenario is that he rolls out with a loss of separation. In that scenario, only the controller would get into trouble, although the pilot would have to answer some questions, but since he chose the safest thing to do, it would just be some questions. By going around, he is now in a takeoff envelope flying right into the wake turbulence of the departing heavy. You really don’t want to be trying a lot of evasive actions in takeoff configuration while flying into turbulence. That’s why we have rules about wake turbulence. Yes, any good controller considers a go around because of a possible loss of separation as a failure. But good controllers also know, when you’re running minimum separation, sometimes it’s not going to work.
@@lukeball4937 And then there's the punishment factor where ATC sends you to a holding pattern, until they can fit you back in with the flow. Happened to me going in to LAS. Coming in from the east, they turned us on final at less than 5 miles...in front of all the SWA planes coming in from LAX. We were still doing 250 knots and trying to get a 777 slowed while trying to loose some altitude is challenging. I called for gear and final flaps, knowing our airspeed was still above landing flaps speed. But, most airplanes have a safety feature that prevents over-speeding the flaps but as you slow down, the flaps will extend. It was actually one of my better landings...
Controller are strange folks in the US. This is the wrong place for competition and they shouldn’t care about this…
@lukeball4937 Minimum separation is the essential safety buffer - without that it's all in the lap of the gods. And by trying to coordinate such a tight dep / landing scenario, there's really not much latitude for error or failure in the expected normal ops.
You said that in the case of an aborted take-off the worst would be that the ATC would suffer the consequences of a separation breakdown. But what if the dep Air India was slow to roll, had performance issues &/or assorted the landing AND say the landing Delta touched down late &/or had braking issues so rolled longer. Perhaps the Delta was heavy & knew they'd need a long roll-out. You only need 2 Swiss cheese holes lining up to make an accident.
And I might be wrong, but I don't remember an Expedite instruction from the ATC to the Air India aircraft - only advice that the Delta was on a 2.5 mille final.
The Delta PF or PIC couldn't be blamed for making the GA call in that situation.
As a passenger, I remind myself that the pilots want to land safely just as much as I do. Props to the Delta pilot for using his experience to keep all on board alive to fly another day. ATC needs to check his ego at the door.
Why is air traffic control using one runway for take-offs AND landings at the same time?? When I used to fly, I seem to remember airports having dedicated runways for either take-offs or landings; not both at the same time. It's exactly to prevent this kind of disaster. What is air traffic control thinking?
@@williamyoung9401 $$$
This is my motto too. When passengers are getting mad or freaking out about flights not going for weather or mechanical issues I just say "hey, if the pilot doesn't want to fly do you REALLY want to??" 🤔
@@tatlowtimes, I was a flight attendant. People complained about weather and mechanicals all the time and my response was always, "Safety first. The alternative (dying) sucks." Not in those words, exactly.😂
@@williamyoung9401 thats the silliest thing ive ever heard... you must be GA only? you know thers airports with only one runway too right... there might be several aircraft on an approach while someone else is taking off. its called anticipated separation. the other guys gonna be gone before they show up.... theres also same runway separation. the requirement is 6000ft and airborne for any jet aircraft. that means the aircraft departing needs to be 1nm and off of the ground before the follwoing landing aircraft crosses the landing threshold.... you clearly dont have a clue on the workings of air space management and the national airspace system, maybe dont speak on it.
Graveyards are full of people who said "don't worry, I do this every day".
In this case, the person saying it would not have been the one ending up in the graveyard.
I was going to comment that. But agreed the atc wouldn't have ended up in the ground it would have been the pilots
Stand back, I'm a professional here.＼(^^)／
That, and, "Hold my beer."
I think you mean 'filled by' people who say that.
I love your wrap on this. We pilots, by nature, are very sure of ourselves, so making us happy makes the world just right. I got squeezed into that box in STL one day, back in the days when TWA was still there and STL was a major speed bump in the system. The arrival had us fast with a last-second slow down programmed. Tower put a 777 onto the runway in front of us. It took its jolly time spinning up to roll. The parallel (12L) wasn't available. In the crunch, I kept it as slow as possible, began the go around as late as practical, and sneaked a bit to the right to keep the 777 in sight. Tower and approach weren't happy with me. The trip around to pattern to get back on short final was about 45 minutes. So many airports can get like this at times, making it quite tempting to press things ("It would've been tight, but...") to the limits, but pressing to the limits is for flight test and combat ops - not for flying your friends and neighbors safely across the country. Nice video. Thanks.
An irritated controller is a disadvantaged controller. Great job by the Delta pilot. Great video and commentary, thanks
ATC: "Looking good on radar!"
Plane: Has a giant octopus attached to the windshield.
ATC: It's a squid not an octopus.
Pilot: *counts 8 legs*
I imagined a Blooper, like from Mario Kart, obstructing the pilot's view. 😂
Tower is primarily a visual position
@tboneisgaming ...although he's still not going to see the octopus because of the cephalopod's ability to camouflage. 😁
@@Fadamor Heh...you said pus.
I was on a plane that did a go-around for a different reason: wind sheer on the ground that made the pilot decide he wasn't on a good approach; he essentially told the tower their judgment of the wind wasn't correct as pertained to his plane.
But his explanation to us passengers was that he wanted to give us a more comfortable landing so he was going around to get a better angle. That made people relax, and most of us actually enjoyed the go-around because it gave a view of the snowy countryside and the light snow falling.
Better to have a view of the countryside without being part of the countryside…
"I do this all the time" is the sound of complacency. That's not part of safety culture.
It's akin to 'hold my beer' lol. It's a dare.
It's the sound of arrogance.
And it's scary, one day it won't work.
@@chongtak fluffy pink teddy bear territory.
@@tjthill me no understand
One of the first things I was taught; a go around is NEVER a bad decision, and whoever makes the decision is never going to be countermanded or criticised. One of my early landings I got into PIOs, my instructor was just about to take the controls when I decided I was going around, he just came off the controls and left me to do it. Afterwards I was told “good call”.
Always give yourself time, driving or flying. Time gives you thinking and space to work out problems
Just be careful with that "Never" phrase. Say you just diverted because of weather, then did a go-around at your alternate, now you don't have enough fuel to go-around and make another approach. Better make that last one count.
Kelsey's own experience tells you otherwise. In his case he thought that a go around *would* have been the worse decision.
@@Fastvoice point being that he decided NOT to go around, so not really countering my comment at all.
@@flightcamps9041 then one would hope there was no need for a go around. Quite frankly if you get to that stage on fuel there needed to some much better decision making well prior to that point.
ATC to Flight Crew: "Do this". Flight crew: "Unable". End of story. Thanks 74 Gear for providing perspective!
ATC added a new hole to the Swiss cheese model by adding the triple into the mix while the Delta was on a configured and stable final approach. I appreciate ATC there are overwhelmed, but adding risk to flight doesn’t always end well. Crazy. Kudos to the Delta.
Yeah, I thought, it was tight, but could be managed just fine with the Delta about 2 minutes behind the Citation. But trying to have a 777 heavy take off in between? I dont know, how ATC thought, that was ever going to work.
@@dfuher968 hard to say if it was or wasnt with out seeing what the actual radar said and where the aircraft was
At least Kelsey is doing the debrief and not Hoover 🫡
The moment ATC said 'It would have been tight' rings the warning bell. That is a roll of the dice. The Pilot was very professional.........The ATC was not.
even less professional when he whines about the pilots decission... he is NOT on the plane and he is NOT risking his life when he does stupid decission like this... Pilot did brilliantly and kept his cool in his replies.
ATC was a product of the East Coast, and couldn't swallow their pride for a MORE correct decision than their own.
"Thank you, but I don't do 'tight', I do 'safe'."
@@Steve264511 ..or, "I made a statement - NOT a request for comment or opinion of yours."
@@Steve264511 Great comment 👍👍
1:13 "I'm just making up numbers. I don't fly the 767 [I'm not a peasant]" 😂😂😂
I really love the calmness in the Delta pilot's voice when he announces he will go around
He's a professional. Good on him.
He sounds Ex Air Force....
Calm and confident.
@@edwardfletcher7790 Very much !
he was calm all the way
As an American controller in a very busy airport, as of the last few years he doesn't have any credibility in the "IT would have fit bro trust me" department. So many VASAviation videos are just ATC screwing up and packing planes too close and trying to get themselves out of a corner.
What happens when you get the planes on the verge of losing separation, because you got them so tight, and then the landing aircraft gets a windshear alert and starts a windshear escape maneuver and a go around? Whoopsy, the landing, light on fuel plane is going to be going to TOGA power and closing quick on the aircraft climbing out, Now ATC would have two planes in regimes of flight where they really shouldn't be turning (
I saw one were the pilot told the ATC yeah I'm going need a number to call when I land.
Thanks for this video. I now have another insight into why take off and landing are such critical times on the flight. As the passenger, keeping the blue side up is my mission, too so I'll be buckled up tight and praying harder that all you pilots get exactly what you want while flying us in and out and all around the world and that towers everywhere remember that the same situations can present differently on the screen and in the sky. Safety First.
China as to u.s.a ...... China not profit operations for reason of existence.......u.s.a. profit for existing...as to subject of video only ...hey just maybe ?!!!!!!!! Ha ha ...get it !!!!
Bro it looks okay on radar the dots haven't merged yet lol.
"I do this every day, it would have worked" reminds me *so hard* of dispatch talking to drivers in the 18-wheeler world.
I used to know an air traffic controller at Newark Airport. He was also a great video game player, but he once told me, "The times that you LOSE a game always involve greed..., like when you go after a power-up you don't need."
He applied his gaming philosophy to his ATC decisions.
Sounds like a very wise person...
Enough already!!
That first story.. Is a clear example of the controller seeing just numbers and the pilot is living in the real world.
Pilot remembered there were hundreds of people's lives at stake, while the controller was seeing puzzle pieces needing to be fit.
@@matthewb3113 BINGO! Exactly.
It's not a game, not a puzzle.
Reminds me a little bit of Captain Sully. "Make it human". They operated the whole case based on numbers and NOT the reality of the situation. Same thing here, ATC is seeing numbers and lines assuming the system is gonna keep working, not taking into account the HUMAN factor of what's actually happening in real life.
On point.
I think the pilot's decision is fine, however the controller has likely seen those numbers before and in the past it was tight but it worked. Both pilot and controller can be correct in this case. It could have worked, but the pilot did nothing wrong by going around. If the timing is so tight that controllers shouldn't be asking pilots to do it, that should be codified somehow.
I love how you explain things so people with no knowledge of flying can understand.
This is the first of your videos UA-cam has brought to my attention in quite some time. As usual your analysis is SPOT ON.
I also noticed you have a new pair of shoulder boards, Congratulations Captain!
Congratulations Captain Kelsey. Well deserved.
As a passenger, I'm delighted when my pilot doesn't want to try "tight" landings....
if 6100 ft is too tight when the standard is 6000ft than youre a little helpless
"His opinion, I'm sorry, doesn't matter"
It made me chuckle
Thanks for your videos Kelsey. As an A&P mechanic who never went into the industry and as a casual observer I find all of your videos interesting. Additionally, my son is currently studying to be a commercial pilot at UND. I share your videos with him and have conversations on the topics from time to time. Appreciated!!!!
Great work putting this together. The use of clear graphics and the overlapping replays of radio traffic kept everything in context. Thanks.
As a military helicopter mechanic 40 years ago, I learned the phrase "General Flight Safety always has the command." Nobody can break, speed up, or change this command.
That was a very good decision by the Delta pilots. The ATC needed a kick in the butt to remind us to always maintain our safety margin, because we never know when we will need the margin.
If the air traffic controller had to ask the pilot "Why" he didn't land, he needs a vacation and some re-training. His 'Obvious-Detector' was malfunctioning that day.
Very well said.
@@williamyoung9401 When a pilot conducts a missed approach, a controller needs to asscetain the reason for the missed approach for reporting matters.
@@ilyer4199 that part is fine, but I do not think ATC needed to add the additional commentary of "it would have been tight, but it would of worked"
In the case mentioned here I am sure it would have been "safe" to land anyway but what if a tire to the landing gear, or worse a landing gear itself where to give out on that other plane before in the queue? An incident like that and getting the plane out of the way in time may be a problem. Clearly the pilot made the right call.
I love these videos. I will probably never fly again, did too much in the 1980s and 1990s. but I also spent 1981-1992 working for a flight simulator company, worked on radar simulators for US military aircraft. And so I have this enduring love for aviation. I also worked with US Navy trainees and instructors, and acquired a great deal of respect for pilots. Mind you, that was nearly back in the Pleistocene...but still, pilot quick thinking saves lives.
What you described on your approach and why you chose to land just happened last week. A pilot decided to go around (justifiably IMO) and the vertical separation between the plane going around and the plane taking off was like 700’. It was all over the news. My first thought when I saw the story, with video footage of the planes, was “I can’t wait for Kelsey to do a video about this.” I hope someone has sent you the video. It was remarkable.
There are other reputable aviation channels but somehow Kelsey is able to bridge the gap between professional and cool.
It feels like just one of the guys telling you how it is. Never get any morally superior vibes from Captain Kelsey. Very refreshing to listen to a human.
him and mentor pilot are the two I follow
Hi! Do you know Pilot debrief? Hoover is such a concientious guy. Try him once a tell me if you like him.@@DenseGrowthOfTrees
@@DenseGrowthOfTrees Those are the 2 I follow as well. My FIL was Marine Corps pilot during WWII and Korea. Then a Flight Safety Inspector with the FAA for the rest of his career. He’s been gone for a while now but I find watching Kelsey and Mentor bring back warm memories.
My dad was a Controller in the 70s in the DFW Regional airport and had to go to a school to learn the new equipment for the new DFW Int'l Airport being built. It was a stressful job even then.
PIC is exactly that. Pilot In Command. He/she has ultimate authority regarding the aircraft, passengers, and overall safety of that flight.
A go around is always the right thing unless you fly for PIA and land with gear up.
PIC?
@@Capecodham What don't you understand?
@@aaronbrown6266 PIC? Like water PIC?
@@Capecodham Pilot In Command.
Delta pilot was absolutely cool. Didn’t sound shook or ticked off in any way. When asked why the go around, perfectly appropriate answer in a non accusatory tone in any way. Absolute pro pilot, no doubt. 👍🏻😎👍🏻
Yep.
Final responsibility is in the hands of the Pilot in Command.
The pilot used the brain ! Well done
Did a trip as passenger from Copenhagen to London Heathrow a few years ago in a BA 767. It was a bumpy trip and I knew with Heathrows East-West runways there would be a big crosswind. Sure enough on finals there was a lot of turbulence and the plane did a go-around. Several passengers expressed alarm and the captain made a brief announcement to apologise for the extra air time and the turbulence. Personally, I felt this guy knew what he was doing and relaxed, knowing he wasn't going to risk the lives of his passengers and crew. The second attempt was perfect. I wish I had been in the jump seat to see how he did it.
" Personally, I felt this guy knew what he was doing and relaxed,", do you ever get on an aircraft thinking the pilot doesn't know what he's doing?
@@colinpotter7764 nah, but sometimes you realize halfway how sh.t they are. i survived eg. a flight where the pilots did full flaps!! mid-flight. on cruise height. on an a320. it was insane. pure insanity. they also did not use the autopilot the entire 3-hr flight. i said so many thanks to engineers after that flight, there must be so many backup safety systems on an a320 that ensured we didn't die from the stupidy of the pilots that day. (it was in SEA on a smaller airline.)
As a now retired former Delta flight attendant, I had 100% trust in the flying skills of all our pilots.
The captains of the planes always have the last word on decisions made onboard the aircraft.
ATC, not as much.
ATC cares deeply what the flight attendants think😂
@@timinclt7895 👍🏽🤣🤣🤣💀
@@sherrinunya4079 i don´t trust that pilot from Malaesia
I NOTICED YOU SAID “HAD” TRUST OF THE DELTA PILOTS? WHAT CHANGED FROM “HAVE TO HAD” TRUST IN DELTA PILOTS?
@@davidlangford9107 Because he is retired now and has no way of knowing the skills of current pilots are you dumb or what
Last night, I flew into Hannover with BA978, I sat in 15f above the wing, 20 mins into the flight, the motors for the flaps started screaming, soon after the captain called the cabin staff to the cockpit, before we landed, he informed us that the plane had malfunctioned and we shall see if we can get to the gate. The plane landed, no reverse thrust, heavy braking on and off, we used most of the runway, emergency services awaiting to spray foam. Once the services said all was ok, a tug then pulled us to the gate. Apparently, hydraulics had failed, the air braking flaps remained at an obtuse angle, remaining flaps extended and the baggage doors could not be opened. The captain and crew were great, calm, reassured the pax until we finally disembarked. I collected my bags this morning and was told the plane had been grounded.
Glad you and everyone else made it down safely and had a good pilot.
I'm not sure the controller's response to the Delta's go-around quite reached 'snarky', but it wasn't far off. I'm 100% behind the pilot.
It was 100% defensive and irritated though; And I'm not sure how well irritated and safty go together.
he gave him a # to call. That means a report.
The Captain has full authority of his ship.
@DaftyBoi412
The ATC gave the Pilot a #.
Not the other way round.
Which means an incident report.
@@DaftyBoi412
PS
You're daft boy.!
Did you even listen.
The default setting for JFK controllers is "snarky".
In the UK when landing at a airport with an information service like EGCB (Manchester Barton) the FISO will say "land at your discretion" as even without traffic, as a pilot if I'm not happy then it is 100% my call if I land or not. This pilot did 100% the right thing and acted in the most professional of manner. Well done :)
Loved your commentary and explanation. Thank you for sharing this. I was ATC for 33 years and for people who don't have your experience (or Delta's) you provided a valuable service to the flying public.
This has become more and more common and it is a deadly game that ATC is playing.
From ATC and often also the airport management that sells more slots to airlines.
"Deadly game"
... hmm, let's take a closer look under the hood of the current hiring practices of the FAA
oh my
@@TurboLoveTrainthat is not how this works. No matter who the FAA hires (if you’re trying to hint at diversity hiring) there is still competency-based certification and hundreds of hours of training. The pilots and controllers will always have to certify based on strict standards. For pilots it’s the ACS. No matter what they LOOK like if they don’t meet the standard they don’t work. Cut and dry. I would like to know your experience with aviation to make you think that diversity hiring causes most of these problems?
@@eugenemccary4748 in my experience what you are saying is partly true.
There are many fine pilots regardless of genetics.
The reality is that DEI quotas have led to lower selection and competency standards.
This is true for ATC the Airlines and the Air force. All of which I have worked in 40 years in aviation.
@@eugenemccary4748
If you don't meet the standards those standards will be lowered until you can.
This isn't new.
I worked in cabin systems, signal deconfliction, then moved on to material stress testing and component design for fracture critical systems like landing gear and jet engine fan blade attachments.
Cost cutting and hiring policies have lead to lower standards across the board and the results are observable--more equipment failures and "near misses" like this. I left the aerospace industry because this was happening and I don't fly anymore.
10:13 (JFK Tower) "I do this every day sir. It would have worked"
(Delta 45) "Oh, I'm sorry. Surely you have MUCH more experience flying this aircraft than I do. My bad."
Hopefully this controller was given a sit-down with his supervisor and they discussed how his ego means zip-point-squat when it comes to the safe operation of an aircraft.
It might've worked if the India flight didn't need to abort takeoff. ATC must understand that they can't have multiple planes on the same runway at the same time -- basic common sense. Too many flights in too little time is going to result in a bad crash eventually. ATC is playing games with people's lives.
It's not even that. It's not about the pilot being more of an expert (even though they are), it's the terrible reasoning by the controller. "It's worked before, therefore it'll work now" is one of the oldest logical failures we know about. It's more well-known as a post-hoc fallacy. Just because he's done it so many time doesn't mean it's going to work _this_ time.
The point shouldn't be experience, but position. The pilot is flying the plane. The controller is giving directions. The pilot has the final say, _always._ That's the expected respect that a controller should give. Even without the logical failing in the reasoning, it's still overstepping their bounds to suggest their say should have been the final one, as the controller did here.
The quick response should have been, "confirmed, [instructions for the go-around/landing]". Then again, unless they did it for data collection purposes or whatever, the controller probably shouldn't be asking anyway. Again, pilot has final say. If they ask for a go-around, then that's their call.
Would you elaborate on the meaning of zip-point-squat please?
@@Latter-Day-Aint his ego means zip-point-squat (0.0).
@@Latter-Day-Aintzip is a colloquial word for zero. Squat is also a colloquial word for zero.
"Zip-point-squat" is "zero point zero" (0.0), or nothing, which means he's saying "Your ego means nothing."
I just LOVE the way you are "nuanced" about the various positions and judment from different perspectives. The world needs more people like you (not only in the aerospace world... EVERYWHERE...) understanding the others view! BRAVO... Please continue! Problems and issues get solved by understanding the different points of view and finding the best tradeoffs.
"it would have been tight" is not what ATC should ever say
“It would have worked as long as nothing went wrong.”
Ya if he said “you had plenty of space” then the atc guy is just wrong. Acknowledging it was going to be tight shows the ATC guy has reckless habits. Tight leaves no margin for error
It would have been tight...but within safety margins is what he meant. Not that it would have been tight to not crash in to the other plane.
no contingency
that's what the pilot said..
If that Delta Pilot ever sees this, shout out to you sir. The right call was made.
Really a great video from somebody in the biz……also I noticed 4bars on your shirt……congrats for them, but when did you get it. Didn’t notice it before. Keep up the great work you provide so often. I myself am up in age, but one time in the early seventies I worked at JFK, and that when my favorite, jumbo 747, started flying. Saw what was the frirst Queen landing around Kennedy, it was an Eastern one. This affirmed my love for anything to do with aviation. You confirmed my love for this great industry, thanks again. 17:03
I went to school with that Delta FO. (He's a hell of a trumpet player too!).
Guy sounds like a real pro
The Delta pilot remained completely professional in his communication, the ATC sighing and arguing .. not so much. Pilot did a great job.
It’s almost like someone’s job is constantly higher pressure than another…..🙄
This is why I fly Delta. I trust them.
Controller was out of line. “I do this every day.” So does the pilot, jackass.
If pilots accept this "squeeze" by ATC , only more will come... someone has to be an advocate for safety, the pilot whose life, and that of his passangers, is ideally positioned to push back against this ridiculous situation....
suppose that pilot has been in that situation a few times before. at this airport.
Big props to the pilot. Much better than the mindset to "land at all costs"
You're always going to land, but you might not be able to take off again...
2 things. I agree with you, whether flying a plane or driving a vehicle, it's best to avoid a possible danger and find out you didn't need to than not avoiding it and wishing you did. Then in you pilots' defense, as Captain Picard told his Admiral, "This might be your fleet, but this is my ship."
Always taught PIC is in command of Crew, Craft, Cargo, ATC is in command of a mike button.
I think you're downplaying it a little bit. Please try flying around New York without ATC guidance, capt Sully
As a 1.5 million mile NWA passenger and a former private pilot, I always appreciate a pilot with the fortitude to do the right thing in his or her mind. Good outcome, safe passengers, and safe crew. No dents on the big bird. Good job!
ATC is 100% going home tonight. If I’m 99% going home, I get to decide if I go around.
(1-1/n)^n chance of success goes to about ⅔ chance of failure. Controller does what, 200 shifts a year? 20 years, 4000 shifts, ask pilots to take 1-in-4000 risks once per shift about ⅔ of controllers will cause an accident during their career, that is *wildly* unacceptable. Google tells me one in about 3000 takeoffs are aborted.
@@tjthill You missed the comment, try to read it again or get a third party to assess your understanding of the comment. I understand, you are neurodivergent.
@@eaglemach9992 Did you know kettles are shiny? Like, you see yourself when you look at them?
Seeing how this is being covered by channels like this, this was made into an incident report. This controller getting retrained / changing career may very well save lives.
@@eaglemach9992 You sound like a woman
Good to hear the communication between the two. Good explanation of why the go-around.
*** Pilot chose safety first ! That's always the right decision !
I've been on a plane into Heathrow that had to do a go round for this reason and then after 24 hrs travelling because we missed our spot had to go round in circles for an hr until a spot opened up for us to land. We got there safe. Safe is better than dead. The delta pilot was great.
Those four stripes on your shoulder sure look good
Did he just become a captain?
He's been a captain for several several months now😊@@CoolioAlert
@@CoolioAlertno. It’s been a bit. Look back at the videos. He never announced it just showed up with the new bar 😊
@@CoolioAlert he’s been a captain for a while, but I still like reminding him that we all think is awesome
@@angelraburn4401 Yeah, that was a moment, right?
All of sudden, we are pausing the video to double check what we saw...wait, what?? Wow!
I can't believe that controller was snappy about it. He's responsible for the airspace, but the pilot is responsible for the souls onboard. I'd rather have a pilot exercise careful judgement and be safe than risk it for some ATC to get a biscuit. Thoughts?
Agree
Obviously depends on the biscuit 😉
It's important that there be agreement. The controller minimums should be what pilots are practicing and training for. Seeing disagreements like this means there's a breakdown in communication somewhere.
That’s not “Snappy”. It’s NYC and actually very polite …😂
Absolutely, in the moment, if you're uncomfortable with the situation, don't do it. ALSO, if the pilot isn't comfortable with Kennedy-level traffic, then he either needs to get more comfortable somehow or stop going there. But that's a "think about later" problem. The best thing the pilot did there was decline to pick up the argument bait on air.
Great video and great to give insight into the professionalism of pilots making the right call for their safety and the safety of everyone on board
Bravo Delta pilot. Definitely, professional and makes perfect sense for the cargo which are people. Safety first always.
Had something a little like this landing (as a passenger) at Heathrow once. An aircraft in front landed and was supposed to vacate the runway, failed to make the requested exit and stopped on the runway (I guess to ask instructions).
Our Virgin Atlantic pilot went around (LHR ATC trying to get planes landing as closely as possible), and when settled explained that our sluggish departure from Narita had been caused by this same plane being hesitant taxiing out. We'd then followed it all the way over China / Russia. And then we got held up again due to hesitancy on the ground.
The pilot did an excellent job of conveying being totally and utterly narked off without explicitly saying so, remaining professional. You had to be properly British to understand it.
In the UK, You do not get a clear to land until the preceding aircraft is clear of the runway
@@CDB8939 That doesn't mean you're not deep down in the approach to the runway.
This was an approach into 09L I recall (definitely from the west), and I think we'd cleared the M25 (which is about 1 mile from the aim point) when the power went back on and we headed back up into the murky weather.
@@abarratt8869 In the USA they clear aircraft to land that are number 3 in the line, at least here the pilots know they are not cleared until the runway is clear
Fantastic explanation as always Captain Kelsey. LOVE the shots from the flight deck at night. Breathtaking.
To add to other comments, the ATC isn’t physically responsible for the passengers or the airplane. The Captain is… another brilliant lesson learned from Captain Kelsey. ❤😊❤❤❤
Atc even admitted it was unsafe by saying “it would’ve been tight”. That’s one thing as a passenger on a landing jetliner I never wanna hear!
Tight is subjective
Thank you for continuing your videos even though you don't have the time like you did during covid. They put a smile on people faces. "Ask me how I know".
Eliminate ALL Variables!!! That's my motto, and what i teach my apprentices in the electrical field on how to get our work done efficiently! they will learn over time, and some are smarter than others, but that is my number one rule in how we approach our process of work in general! from bending conduit, planning the size of wire we run, to how we approach the order of work that we send our guys in to do, in order to get the job done on schedule.
This rule, albeit i am sure it was done unconsciously, was the exact process that the pilot used, and i am proud of him, and without knowing the Sir, can definitively say, that he, Definitely eliminated ALL of the Variables!
The controller was depending on the situation being the best case scenario. In case of any number of problems, the scenario could have gone bad on them. Kudos to the pilot.
Murphy’s Law. Better safe than sorry
That was my biggest concern as well, as a (not professional) pilot. If everything works, everything works. If anything goes wrong, it goes really really really wrong. Why risk it? It's not Delta's fault, or even ATC's, it's the Citation that was too slow getting off the runway.
@@markeewell Absolutely! The Citation was NIT clear if the runway BEFORE he cleared the other aircraft for take off. 'Sntucipated separation' in not supposed to be with a departure and an aircraft on roll out. (Retired ATC. Unless they have a major change to 7110.
Let me just stipulate, that I am neither a pilot nor an ATC. But it is never good practice in life in general to plan after everything being the best case scenario. Especially when lives are involved.
And just practically, when ATC cut it too close to try to save a few seconds here and a minute there, he just creates more work and more delays all around. Doing ur task properly in the first go instead of rushing it is always the quickest solution in the long run. And the safest in this case.
Youre right and if the situation changed we would have adjusted. because thats what were trained to do.... what a silly way to look at it. you can say the same for anything. Controllers can call go arounds too... things change ALOT. we have to change our plans and sequences ALOT. ive had 4 people sequenced to land and had to cancel ALL of them because some one else in the pattern declared an emergency. you adjust. seasoned controllers are always planning for the "what ifs" thats why when he called go around he told him what altitude to climb to and which direction. so that it wasnt a conflict with the departing aircraft. happens all the time. you guys are making it out to be something its not. its silly.
Delta did the right thing. As a twenty five year flight attendant, I know being a responsible pilot weighs heavily on the decisions they make.
Thank you for always educating the public. Most passengers that fly have little knowledge of how things safely operate.
Flight attendant here too. They think it's like getting on a Greyhound bus. Not quite.😂
I had a reporter from a famous TV news magazine onboard looking for a story. He had questions about overwater equipment, blah, blah, wanted to talk to a pilot (who both said no😂). I told him "The media is always doing negative stories on the airlines, you're either trying to scare or piss off our passengers. How about a positive story? How about explaining the miracle of flight---go over the whole routine of getting a flight off, beginning to end, showing the coordinated effort of the many, many people it takes to make it happen. It's amazing, it's *not* like getting on a bus." He said "Hey, that's a great idea." Still waiting to see it.😂
@maggieb4736 Well said, as far as I know, crew members are supposed to avoid providing the media with any information like that. Next thing you know, it will all be held against us, and we will be the ones to lose our jobs.
@@karinhirtenstein3765 , the pilots simply said "tell him to take it up with the FAA, their rules." They wanted no part of that guy. I knew I was spitting into the wind when I suggested a positive story.
I was flying from west Texas to Oklahoma City earlier in the year and my pilot had to go around twice and we were running the racetrack for about 10 minutes before we could land but because I watch these videos regularly I was legitimately not concerned while the rest of the passengers in the plane nearly had a heart attack. I was like “everybody relax, as long as the pilot is using that Chuck Yeager voice and the blue side is up we’re good!”
74 Gear.. Leaving other channels in its wake.. Always #1
Caution! Wake turbulence!
@@jamesoshea580yes. This is the comment i was wanting to see!
Smart judgement Delta 🫡
Keep doing your new vlog thing, but I’m very happy to see this kind of video again! Thanks Kels!
How to make Kelsey always land without refusal: Offer free snacks at the gate.
Would worj on me too! And I´m not even a pilot!
"without REFUSAL."
Learn simple 3rd grade words.
We don't want to be punished by your ignorance.
@@AndrewBlacker-t1d corrected it before but I’m glad I finally got a personal smartass here by my side. 🙌🏻
😂😂😂
@@AndrewBlacker-t1d
And yet, somehow you comprehended what they said and what they meant.
Stop being a third grader.
"It would have been tight but it would have worked"
He rejected the landing because it was "tight".
Same thing.
If the pilot thinks it's too close it's too close. If it doesn't look good it doesn't look good. You're also dealing with wake turbulence. What's the wind? Right you don't know. Should always make a choice according to what you're comfortable with. Something doesn't feel right don't do it.
Seems to me that I've heard over and over better to reject a landing than risk a crash. Go around is a safe decision.
@@glennchartrand5411 Glenn if you're a pilot I'd suggest you find another hobby
@GamingWithMaddog64 it is the same thing but the pilot made a good decision
I found your explanation of the Delta pilot making a decision to go around and the exchange between ATC and Delta regarding that decision very interesting and highly relatable. I drive a gasoline tanker truck. Our typical gross weight runs around 80,000 pounds and gas/diesel are quite flammable. We, too, are forced to defend our actions in a court of law should something happen, and in the event of a negative outcome we may face some heavy fines and possible prison time. It's amazing how similar things seem here when our dispatch team gets upset because we drivers make a decision they don't like. The problem in our segment of transportation is it's highly unusual for a company to back a driver's decision made purely on the basis of safety assessment when it conflicts with a dispatch expectation, even when the outcome is positive. I guess transportation is transportation whether it's on the ground or in the air.
"There's no way that was going to work..." Good call sir! ATC failed, then rubbed it in.
It's edifying how you always think of educating the passengers who may be a bit nervous. Thank you!
I really appreciate how well you explain these scenarios. You would make a great instructor pilot, very relaxing as how you would teach. 👍🙌
Always a good Sunday morning when Captain Kelsey uploads.
This channel is so compelling. Explaining how air travels works with all the moving parts is incredible… and frightening.
Brilliant video, I loved to hear from the pilot's perspective. So many aircraft in the air coming/going that the stress levels for the ATC must be high.....and they SHOULD not make any mistakes, otherwise the consequences are lethal.
Brilliant. His tongue in cheek closing was exactly what I was thinking - but also tongue in cheek, mind. I quite enjoyed the presentation.
These videos feel so real and not like a PR trained executive speaking
Flying cargo has it's perks I guess.
@@jamesphillips2285 You get to cruise to the end of the runway after heavy braking 😅
Thank you captain…you are an Angel
The ATC sounded like a pissy little child throwing a tantrum that it didn't go the way he wanted.
💯
As a truck driver I can understand the go around decision. The pilot made a judgment call based on his experience.
I'm a former trucker and just came to say the same thing. My rear end is the one in the driver seat, so I'm the one in charge of this truck. 100% same goes for the pilot landing that plane.
I love your videos. I'm so glad I make them. I flew to AK not too long ago and I felt so much easier. No panic attacks.
What the controller said is uncalled for.
I am sure you've never said or done anything uncalled for
@@MidwestFarmToysthe video isnt about them its about atc and the pilots.
are you the atc otherwise no reason to be so defensive
@@the_homun_system my post was as uncalled for as his or your post was. We've all done something uncalled for. The ATC really wasn't even really that uncalled for as far as uncalled for stuff goes
To my understanding, according to ICAO Annexes ATCs can't really tell pilots to do anything, we can only give them "advice" it's also stated clearly that the final decision is for the PIC to make. Delta's PIC made his decision and us ATCs can only acknowledge and continue to service that plane. Delta's PIC handled it flawlessly. That reply to the ATCs tantrum was so calm and collected "We needed to go around". Respect
ps. I'm studying ATC in college
No, if a pilot is given a clearance, they are to comply with it unless an emergency exists or will be created. I can also clear someone to land instead of a touch and go if I want them down. Back to the point of telling pilots what to do, you should take a look at the documentary of the Gander controllers on 9/11. They were telling pilots that they would not enter US airspace.They were going to land and that the pilots did not get to choose what their diversion in port was going to be
@@cecontroller I mean there are differences btw instructions and clearance and in the ICAO annexes havent stated this issue clear enough, Been talking to a handful of ATCs about if we can really force a pilot to do something and they all have different point of view, I get your view man, I've told vfr flights to full stop instead of TGL too but that's different.
@whan_gcf752 At the end of the day, ATC instructions are in-fact legally binding unless it is deemed to be unsafe. A pilot has to argue that the instruction would have created a significant risk to adhere to. That is often very hard to do. It sounds like you are outside of the US as you keep referencing ICAO, which we do not follow or have to adhere to.
@@cecontroller Yessir I'm from Thailand, we use everything actually LMAO (ICAO, FAA, EASA, IATA) but yes we mostly stick to ICAO. When you mention the pilot having to argue to defend himself that it poses risk, it does make alot of sense actually. Thanks for the insight, its stated quite vague here from my perspective.
@@cecontroller If you don't mind me asking, are you both pilot and controller?? Saw flying vids on your channel and your username is also controller. if so it's awesome man, would be striving to be like you
Great job Delta. P.I.C. has a meaning.
When I was flying several times a week, I buttonholed a gray beard Captain at a coffee bar, introduced myself and asked a question sure to put a Pilot in Command on the spot: 'Captain, what do you do if an Air Traffic Controller gives you an order that you *know* is unsafe?'
The Captain replied, "Son, when I am the Pilot in Command, I *own* the sky. I alone am responsible for all the souls aboard and I will do whatever I must, to protect their lives, and the safety of my aircraft. I will *tell* the ATC what I am going to do and they must deal with it." This video certainly seems to be an example of my Captain's view.
This is sure good to know.
and what pilots want is free snacks.
more seriously, sounded like the controller was thinking best case, and the pilot was thinking worst case. I know which one I'd rather have making the decisions, if something goes wrong.
Exactly
I've never seen this sort of dissection of a situation. Fascinating. Thank you
Props to the pilot for taking safety first. The tower didn't factor in another reason why Delta did a go-around. Another factor could be if Delta were to experience an emergency on landing, such as the nose wheel collapsing. Meanwhile, Air India was still on the runway because they decided to abort their takeoff. Those are just some factors I can think of.
It is my understanding that ATC is trying to keep to a spacing range decided on by the airport as recommended by the FAA. It's therefore the airport that factors in the safety margin for such possibilities.