Air Force C-17 mistakes 3500 foot runway for MacDill AFB

Velocity173 said:
This would explain why a different crew flew it out later in the day. Thank you.
Click to expand...
There is yet another much more plausible explanation - the crew was immediately grounded pending investigation hence a different crew had to bring aircraft to MCF. (I don't buy this '2 min. extra duty cycle' for a minute) :dunno:
 
Last edited:
olasek said:
There is yet another much more plausible explanation - the crew was immediately grounded pending investigation hence a different crew had to bring aircraft to MCF. (I don't buy this '2 min. extra duty cycle' for a minute) :dunno:
Click to expand...

Man, you really don't like those guys.
 
olasek said:
There is yet another much more plausible explanation - the crew was immediately grounded pending investigation hence a different crew had to bring aircraft to MCF. (I don't buy this '2 min. extra duty cycle' for a minute) :dunno:
Click to expand...

I should've put a :D at the end of my statement to indicate I was joking. Obviously no crew in their right minds is going to land at an unsuitable GA airport minutes from their Military destination with military pax on board simply because of duty day expiring. That error in judgement would be as bad as landing at the wrong airport to be with. The different crew later on could have been a duty day issue but as you said more likely an investigation.
 
MachFly said:
Man, you really don't like those guys.
Click to expand...
I have absolutely no likes or dislikes in this matter, and even contrary to some other opinions in this thread I don't think their career should be automatically extinguished.
 
Velocity173 said:
You'd think so but as Capt Thorpe's article shows, there are plenty of examples of aircraft equipped with advanced avionics that still landed at the wrong place. I flew with a guy (UH60) in Iraq who shot an approach 1.5 K short of our destination because he could swear it was the LZ. We were basically getting ready to land in some dudes back yard. Hilarious! Got it on film and everything. A lot of times once we see what we perceive as the destination, we disregard other references. If that's what happened in this case I can't fault these guys. When you're tired from flying all day sometimes even the routine can be a struggle.
Click to expand...

I've heard that quite a few military pilots, are carrying handheld Garmins, over in the middle east. I just brought up McDill AFB & Peter O. Knight on my Garmin 696.............and it would be impossible to make the mistake.

L.Adamson
 
L.Adamson said:
I've heard that quite a few military pilots, are carrying handheld Garmins, over in the middle east. I just brought up McDill AFB & Peter O. Knight on my Garmin 696.............and it would be impossible to make the mistake.

L.Adamson
Click to expand...

Not sure what your are getting at here? Are you saying they had TPF up instead of MCF? I don't know. I think think they actually had MCF up and still landed at TPF.

Those of you (a few) who think a professional military crew couldn't make the mistake of landing at the wrong airfield even with advanced avionics clearly have never flown in the military or for hire. They're exhuasted, been flying all day, they see what they believe is the landing area and then go for it disregarding any other references. Once again, READ Capt Thorpe's article.

As I stated earlier my bro works ABI approach. It's in close proximity to DYS with nearly the same runways. He's told me of countless cases of aircraft lining up with DYS when they should be at ABI and vice versa. All types F-18s, Regional Jets, GA, etc., all make the mistake and the controller has to step in and correct the situation. Just told me he actually had a BE58 land at Dyess before anyone could correct it. Big mistake considering the security at an Air Force Base. This stuff will continue to happen.

I would like to believe, if indeed this is a case of mistaken identity, that their CO will have a punishment that fits the mistake. Their careers shouldn't end because of this. A 30 day suspension, give some classes on air crew coordination and put them back in service.

Also, yes we all have Garmins in the cockpit in theater. Although a C-17 crew wouldn't need it because they have navigation redundancy out the arse.:)
 
L Adamson has clearly never been on long patrol. By long, I mean >24 hours. No way HE could ever make that mistake.

From the McDill Loc 22, both airports are just farther than a body of water. Knight is in line and under the loc, so if there is any haze or you are low (per Tampa approach) you might not see the next shoreline, nor certainly the distant runway. Then you convince yourself that you ahve acquired the runway. This is the definition of fatigue.

Still unsat, but doncha just love the quarterbacking?
 

Attachments

  • knight airport+McDill.pdf
    183.4 KB · Views: 19
Last edited:
Another good comment tonight here from someone...

"People see what they want to see. Kills pilots all the time."
 
Velocity173 said:
Not sure what your are getting at here? Are you saying they had TPF up instead of MCF? I don't know. I think think they actually had MCF up and still landed at TPF.

Those of you (a few) who think a professional military crew couldn't make the mistake of landing at the wrong airfield even with advanced avionics clearly have never flown in the military or for hire. They're exhuasted, been flying all day, they see what they believe is the landing area and then go for it disregarding any other references. Once again, READ Capt Thorpe's article.

As I stated earlier my bro works ABI approach. It's in close proximity to DYS with nearly the same runways. He's told me of countless cases of aircraft lining up with DYS when they should be at ABI and vice versa. All types F-18s, Regional Jets, GA, etc., all make the mistake and the controller has to step in and correct the situation. Just told me he actually had a BE58 land at Dyess before anyone could correct it. Big mistake considering the security at an Air Force Base. This stuff will continue to happen.

I would like to believe, if indeed this is a case of mistaken identity, that their CO will have a punishment that fits the mistake. Their careers shouldn't end because of this. A 30 day suspension, give some classes on air crew coordination and put them back in service.

Also, yes we all have Garmins in the cockpit in theater. Although a C-17 crew wouldn't need it because they have navigation redundancy out the arse.:)
Click to expand...

It's possible that they made that mistake. What I'm trying to prove is that we have absolutely no evidence that it was a mistake. The only thing we have is a video of a C-17 landing and then tacking off at TPF.
 
MachFly said:
It's possible that they made that mistake. What I'm trying to prove is that we have absolutely no evidence that it was a mistake. The only thing we have is a video of a C-17 landing and then tacking off at TPF.
Click to expand...

But we do have evidence of this being a mistake. The TPA spokesperson said the aircraft was suppose to land at MCF not TPF. You have to look at this from a point of how military aviation works.

First, when we're flown out of theater or catching an AMC flight out of say Germany, they don't fly us to our doorstep to some tiny uncontrolled GA field with a whooping 3,500 ft runway. The flight either goes to a major air base or a major controlled civilian airfield.

Second, when a military aviator plans a flight to a civilian airfield there are some important things to consider. Ironically we used to use the C-17 example in the Army Instrument Examiner Course. I never even flew C-17s but the question is given to get us in the pubs. The question in this case would simply be you're flying into TPF, can you land there? Well that's when we bust out the AFD or VFR sup and look up TPF. Yep, we can land there. Why? Because it's a public use airfield which allows transient military aircraft. OK that's half the battle but what about the runway. Now in the Army I could care less about the performance data of this particular aircraft. It's not in common pubs issued to pilots anyway. What we do have access to is runway weight bearing capacity information. This particular runway is designed for a single gear (Example F-15) type aircraft and a maximun weight of 20,000 lbs. So already you know it won't even take the load of a normally loaded F-15. The fact that it doesn't even show a C-17s type (TRT or 2T) landing gear means it simply wasn't designed for those type aircraft. It would be pure coincidence if the runway actually held up under the loads. If a C-17 was to intentionally plan a flight there they'd have to have first, approval from the airport owner and I suspect their chain of command. Both highly unlikely. Of course in the scenario the hypothetical question does not end there. The examiner will want to know why Macdill's runway can support our weight. Well, common sense it's Air Force, it must, right? Nope, the Runway at Macdill has a Pavement Classification Number (PCN) of 70. A C-17 has a max gross weight (worse case it) Aircraft Classification Number of 49. If the ACN is less than the PCN, well then I'm good to go for that runway. In this case the runway at Macdill can handle it.

So the only logical reason they would intentionally land at TPF when they already had filed for MCF would be an emergency or they were trying to show off for their girlfriends hanging out at the airport. Either way if I'm one of the 42 service members whose family is waiting to see me over at MCF, I'm mad.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
L Adamson has clearly never been on long patrol. By long, I mean >24 hours. No way HE could ever make that mistake.

From the McDill Loc 22, both airports are just farther than a body of water. Knight is in line and under the loc, so if there is any haze or you are low (per Tampa approach) you might not see the next shoreline, nor certainly the distant runway. Then you convince yourself that you ahve acquired the runway. This is the definition of fatigue.

Still unsat, but doncha just love the quarterbacking?
Click to expand...

Better yet (than approach plates), I'll take a GPS derived ....photo of both airports, where the "big picture" of shore lines, exact locations, and your aircraft's location are clearly shown. Haze doesn't exist in electronic databases. Quarterbacking or not, there are "now" better ways than just lining up with the loc & "eyeballs". As I previously said, both airports clearly stand out like a sore thumb............on my lowly Garmin 696. Please, argue all you want. BTW---- I do know an RV/777 pilot, who makes it no secret, that his RV has better "instant awareness" navigation equipment than the 777 he flies. Just thought I'd throw that in.......knowing your effection for Van's RVs.... :D

L.Adamson
 
L.Adamson said:
Better yet (than approach plates), I'll take a GPS derived ....photo of both airports, where the "big picture" of shore lines, exact locations, and your aircraft's location are clearly shown. Haze doesn't exist in electronic databases. Quarterbacking or not, there are "now" better ways than just lining up with the loc & "eyeballs". As I previously said, both airports clearly stand out like a sore thumb............on my lowly Garmin 696. Please, argue all you want. BTW---- I do know an RV/777 pilot, who makes it no secret, that his RV has better "instant awareness" navigation equipment than the 777 he flies. Just thought I'd throw that in.......knowing your effection for Van's RVs.... :D

L.Adamson
Click to expand...
You don't understand how cognition works, do you? Lack of insight is our biggest enemy. Remove the magenta line, and if you have insight, it's not a problem.

Fly exhausted on 20 hour flight, maybe even with a little flight Surgeon assisted picke-me-upper, and its' big trouble.

It's still an unsat. You can criticize after a year of 24 hour patrols. Maybe you'll get it, then. Maybe not so much.
 
bbchien said:
You don't understand how cognition works, do you? Lack of insight is our biggest enemy. Remove the magenta line, and if you have insight, it's not a problem.

Fly exhausted on 20 hour flight, maybe even with a little flight Surgeon assisted picke-me-upper, and its' big trouble.

It's still an unsat. You can criticize after a year of 24 hour patrols. Maybe you'll get it, then. Maybe not so much.
Click to expand...

I'll be sure to ask my son & daughter in law. Both are airforce, with time in C17s & C-130s. BTW--- why remove the "magenta" line. I know that some, still think it's "cheating". And electronic means of navigation have tremendously improved..........since that old & outdated "Children of the magenta line" video presentation....

L.Adamson
 
Let's also not forget that one of the biggest deals in the military is to compleat you mission.

Sure I suppose it is possible that the aircrew decided to disregard their mission to deliver passengers to McDill, knowing that they had just thrown away their wings and needlessly endangering themselves, the passengers and the general public.

Or they could have shot an approach to the first runway pointed the correct direction to emerge from the haze after a looooooooong day in the sadle.

I'll go with option two
 
jstro said:
No word from the AF yet, though the local aviation authority is stating to the media that the C-17 did land inadvertently at the wrong airport.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/329332

More theories, some silly, some more likely:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/milita...irport-elicits-theories-but-few-facts/1241869
Click to expand...

This is my bet - quoted from the comments section of the article you linked:

"TMZ broke this news: This was staged to divert attention so no one would notice Sarah FAILin' riding into town on horseback. She was riding and ringing bells to warn the Ex-Pat's that the British were coming by land."
 
Word from another forum is Gen Mattis was onboard. Bad timing to mess up, not that there is a good time. Zero fault military these days which isn't necessarily good. (Can only speak to Navy mindset).
 
jstro said:
I missed the article, I'll go back and read it. On one hand it's surprising, but after reading a lot of accidents reports I suppose you are right -- all the avionics in the world aren't a replacement for good judgement and a sharp mind.
Click to expand...

No, but given the scarcity of sharp minds, I'll take the automation.
 
This reminds me about a Chinese student who landed a Cirrus on a street and hit a few mailboxes, in part because the street was oriented the same way as runway at his destination.
 
bbchien said:
L Adamson has clearly never been on long patrol. By long, I mean >24 hours. No way HE could ever make that mistake.

From the McDill Loc 22, both airports are just farther than a body of water. Knight is in line and under the loc, so if there is any haze or you are low (per Tampa approach) you might not see the next shoreline, nor certainly the distant runway. Then you convince yourself that you ahve acquired the runway. This is the definition of fatigue.

Still unsat, but doncha just love the quarterbacking?
Click to expand...

Hell, IMO he didn't bend the airplane no harm no foul. I think his best bet would have been to just taken off and flown to MacDill and resigned "Sorry about that, no excuse".
 
MachFly said:
I think that a C-17 is better than what most of us here fly.... :wink2:
Click to expand...
This reminds me of local peacock showing off to dewy-eyed blonde, "See that C-130 out there? Well, I fly a C-172!"

I fly a C-172.
 
AuntPeggy said:
This reminds me of local peacock showing off to dewy-eyed blonde, "See that C-130 out there? Well, I fly a C-172!"

I fly a C-172.
Click to expand...

Wow, I think you just gave me a new line to use!
 
Anyone who hasn't at least lined up for the wrong runway hasn't done much flying.


But for the grace of God.. there go I
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top