Harrison Ford does it again ...

Isn’t this the second time he’s misunderstood ATC instruction? Might be time to hang up his headset...
 
i would guess that this, coupled with the runway issue at sna he is looking at a 709 in his future.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Hearing aids? Best to start using them sooner than later as it is easier for the brain to adapt to them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have them, just lazy about wearing them around the house. Do make a point to wear in work or social setting where it is more important. Haven't worn flying, nor noticed issue hearing ATC (over and above all the other issues over engine noise, static, etc). Right now sitting in spare bedroom/home office while son #2 practices tuba in adjacent room, which reinforces my laziness.
 
Velocity173 said:
Sounds like “continue” and not “can” to me and I would not have used continue in that instance. I would have simply said “(type) niner hotel uniform, hold short runway two five, traffic on the runway.

I believe “continue holding” is only used for LUAW at USAF / USN facilities. @Timbeck2???
Click to expand...

Only at USAF/USN? I don't know. I've heard it a few times when I've flown out of Tucson so I don't think it's limited to just AF and Navy.
 
FlySince9 said:
Why would a controller ask that question? Especially with someone evidently on final. Should have been an instruction... "Hold Short of runway XX for landing traffic!" IMO
Click to expand...

Edit: Comment withdrawn because I "ass"umed this was a LAHSO error, not a taxiing error.. Carry on. :D
 
Last edited:
Audio clip is horrible, but controller said to get across the runway quickly, then said I hold you to hold short. Clearly he started across after being told to hold short, but an ass chewing while he's still crossing including the words "hold short" seems to make a bad situation potentially worse. Having said that, Ford sounded like he just woke up from a long nap.
 
Stan Cooper said:
If it is his age, I'd better watch out; he's a month younger than I. :(
Click to expand...
A couple of years ago I bought a RV9. The nice fellow who owned it was an anesthesiologist. As we were going up for a test/checkout flight, he mentioned that he was 81, but he still worked at the local hospital 4 days per month "to keep myself sharp". He flew well and had good tips on flying the Vans. He was 6'3" but could slide in and out of the RV with ease. Not everyone can do that, I'm finding. He had already purchased a nice looking 182 which was in the same hangar. Said he needed more seats to haul grandkids, but was sad to lose the speed of the RV. I want to be like him when I'm 81.
 
The exchange I heard was:
Ford (presumably responding to the hold short instruction): Hold short at Hotel
ATC: Continue holding short of 25, traffic on the runway.
Ford: Crossing 25
ATC: *Starts chewing him out*

He acknowledged the hold short instruction. The next thing you would expect would be an instruction to Cross 25. I don’t think it would take much to get the two confused— “c— short 25, traffic on the runway” and a little confirmation bias and I think any of us could make the same mistake. He read back what he heard, followed what he heard, and the controller didn’t have time to correct him.

I know I’ve made dumber mistakes on the ground, and the brief chewing out I got from the controller was more than enough. I agree a compliant attitude should be enough to close this one, but who knows.
 
Velocity173 said:
I don’t know if it’s time for Ford to hang it up but you can see in interviews that he’s just not that sharp anymore. Talks slow, has trouble remembering things, etc. A busy Class D is no place for someone that is starting to lose their edge. What sucks is, unlike the rest of us, if we make a mistake or two it doesn’t get broadcast in the news. Everything he does will get looked at with a microscope.

We all get there at some point and we have to know when to call it quits. I’ll be done flying for hire at 62 and probably will drop it as a hobby not long after that.
Click to expand...
My instructor two years ago was 89 and I was going to fly with him this year from NY to OSH. He takes his Cardinal out every few weeks. Most of the members of my flying club are over 70. I never tallied it, but I would guess the overall average is 73. At 36, I am just a baby among them.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
My instructor two years ago was 89 and I was going to fly with him this year from NY to OSH. He takes his Cardinal out every few weeks. Most of the members of my flying club are over 70. I never tallied it, but I would guess the overall average is 73. At 36, I am just a baby among them.
Click to expand...

Sure everyone is different. Some can delay the inevitable better than others and some push it to far when they should’ve hung it up.

My comments were mostly about getting out of the game before having a debilitating medical emergency in flight and not necessarily cognitive degeneration. There is no red auto land button for my crew, so I’d like to minimize the chances of this happening.

https://www.jems.com/2019/12/26/pilot-killed-in-alabama-medical-helicopter-crash/
 
Larry in TN said:
This shows the problem with using "continue" in a taxi clearance. Does it mean continue to taxi or continue to hold? Too much opportunity for miscommunication.
Click to expand...

I agree with Larry and Bluesky.

After listening to the audio it's obvious Ford was holding short had just correctly read back the hold short instruction.

Ford was most likely expecting a further instruction to "taxi", "continue to taxi" or "proceed across 25" from the controller - after several more seconds to maybe a minute of holding. The controller had successfully communicated that - and gotten a correct readback - and just needed to stay silent until ready for him to "taxi across 25", "continue to taxi across 25", or "proceed across 25".

However, immediately after Ford's correct read back, the (very rapid talking) controller immediately said "continue holding short of 25, traffic on the runway", which I understood more or less clearly after listening to it three or four times from the comfort of my arm chair. Less is usually more, and in this case the extra and totally unnecessary communication by the controller using non standard phraseology actually precipitated the event.

Here's why:

I strongly suspect Ford interpreted this second communication as an instruction to cross runway 25, and more importantly to expedite the crossing as there was traffic on the runway.

Why would he do that?

Because he had just given a readback to hold short, and a fast talking controller immediately launched into a second instruction starting with the word "continue". Coming immediately on the heels of Ford's readback to hold, ANY further instruction would NOT be expected and hearing one starting with "continue" would potentially catch the pilot off guard and cause the pilot to assume his read back to hold was incorrect and that he was to cross - all before being able to process the rest of the (totally unnecessary and totally redundant) instruction.

In short Ford's thinking would have been something along the lines of "If my read back was correct, why his he giving me another instruction? Oh <insert favorite expletive>...he wanted me to continue across 25 before the traffic on the other end of the runway gets here", and thus his immediate reaction is to cross 25 and expedite the crossing.

----

Even without the immediate response to a read back, a pilot holding short of 25 is expecting the next instruction to be to Taxi", "Continue taxiing", or Proceed across 25", and making the second needless instruction and starting it with "continue" is just asking for a miscommunication.

Taxi instructions should be limited to “taxi” “proceed” or “hold” to avoid any ambiguity, but "continue taxiing" is an instruction mentioned in the FAA's publication on air traffic procedures - Taxi and Ground Movement Procedures. "Continue to hold" is not.

The controller then chewing him out and telling him he needed to "listen up" was neither professional, nor appropriate, and I suspect the controller is going to get just as much or more dumped on him than Ford. And the controller probably knew it.
 
Larry Vrooman said:
I agree with Larry and Bluesky.

After listening to the audio it's obvious Ford was holding short had just correctly read back the hold short instruction.

Ford was most likely expecting a further instruction to "taxi", "continue to taxi" or "proceed across 25" from the controller - after several more seconds to maybe a minute of holding. The controller had successfully communicated that - and gotten a correct readback - and just needed to stay silent until ready for him to "taxi across 25", "continue to taxi across 25", or "proceed across 25".

However, immediately after Ford's correct read back, the (very rapid talking) controller immediately said "continue holding short of 25, traffic on the runway", which I understood more or less clearly after listening to it three or four times from the comfort of my arm chair. Less is usually more, and in this case the extra and totally unnecessary communication by the controller using non standard phraseology actually precipitated the event.

Here's why:

I strongly suspect Ford interpreted this second communication as an instruction to cross runway 25, and more importantly to expedite the crossing as there was traffic on the runway.

Why would he do that?

Because he had just given a readback to hold short, and a fast talking controller immediately launched into a second instruction starting with the word "continue". Coming immediately on the heels of Ford's readback to hold, ANY further instruction would NOT be expected and hearing one starting with "continue" would potentially catch the pilot off guard and cause the pilot to assume his read back to hold was incorrect and that he was to cross - all before being able to process the rest of the (totally unnecessary and totally redundant) instruction.

In short Ford's thinking would have been something along the lines of "If my read back was correct, why his he giving me another instruction? Oh <insert favorite expletive>...he wanted me to continue across 25 before the traffic on the other end of the runway gets here", and thus his immediate reaction is to cross 25 and expedite the crossing.

----

Even without the immediate response to a read back, a pilot holding short of 25 is expecting the next instruction to be to Taxi", "Continue taxiing", or Proceed across 25", and making the second needless instruction and starting it with "continue" is just asking for a miscommunication.

Taxi instructions should be limited to “taxi” “proceed” or “hold” to avoid any ambiguity, but "continue taxiing" is an instruction mentioned in the FAA's publication on air traffic procedures - Taxi and Ground Movement Procedures. "Continue to hold" is not.

The controller then chewing him out and telling him he needed to "listen up" was neither professional, nor appropriate, and I suspect the controller is going to get just as much or more dumped on him than Ford. And the controller probably knew it.
Click to expand...
I would suspect that the recording we heard was edited to remove silence and calls to other traffic. So it actually could have been even more confusing. After reading back the hold short instruction, Ford might have even seen another plane depart the runway and been expecting even more an instruction to taxi. Pure conjecture, but it illustrates that the brief recording we have isn’t nearly enough to convict him on.
 
Seemed to me it was his first call to Tower and he was relaying his position. Holding short on taxiway H.

Larry Vrooman said:
After listening to the audio it's obvious Ford was holding short had just correctly read back the hold short instruction.
Click to expand...
 
Larry Vrooman said:
After listening to the audio it's obvious Ford was holding short had just correctly read back the hold short instruction.
Click to expand...

There was nothing correct there, seriously? He was told to hold short, and read back "crossing".
 
Even with the bad audio, it’s clear ATC did not give him clearance to cross. Harrison doesn’t sound sharp at all. Kinda sad. He’s f’ing Han Solo after all!
 
I wonder how this got out? Was the controller required to report it, or did he elect to report it?

Did someone else overhear?
 
It should be noted that while these events are rare, they do happen. And if the pilot in this particular event had been named Farrison Hord, no one on this forum nor any other would be commenting on it nor speculating about it or the abilities of Farrison Hord to pilot an airplane given their age.
 
Ford keeps making headlines for all the wrong reasons.
 
Didn’t Farrison Hord play San Holo in Battlestar Wars?
 
Makes me wonder...what if Ford was still moving or stopped moving and then started moving again so the controller then quickly issued the "continue to hold" instruction now going off the script so to speak to prevent the incursion.
 
Velocity173 said:
Sounds like “continue” and not “can” to me and I would not have used continue in that instance. I would have simply said “(type) niner hotel uniform, hold short runway two five, traffic on the runway.

I believe “continue holding” is only used for LUAW at USAF / USN facilities. @Timbeck2???
Click to expand...

"continue" to me seems like the wrong word to use there (from the clip) the controller clearly followed it with "holding short" but hearing the word continue is usually followed with instructions to keep taxiing, not stop.
 
The controller hiccupped or stuttered on that continue, don't know why after Ford said he was holding that the controller said anything else about holding. I suspect that the controller was worried about Ford, possibly they know each other. That hardly qualified as a chewing out though, unless there is more of it not in that recording.
 
PlasticCigar said:
Seems like a stupid question, but wouldn’t a NASA form get you out of this?
Click to expand...
The firm answer is probably, sometimes, maybe. In this case, what would he say he did wrong? Misheard, or misunderstood?
 
PlasticCigar said:
Seems like a stupid question, but wouldn’t a NASA form get you out of this?
Click to expand...

Might not need to get out of anything. Didn’t hear if ATC filed a pilot deviation. If they did, with the FAA’s compliance program / just culture, not like a punishment will be coming down anyway. Besides, if “continue holding” isn’t in ATC phraseology (other than LUAW), Ford has a case to be made.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
The firm answer is probably, sometimes, maybe. In this case, what would he say he did wrong? Misheard, or misunderstood?
Click to expand...
I would say what he did wrong was he heard "Continue," and he started to go before competing his read back.
 
Lindberg said:
I would say what he did wrong was he heard "Continue," and he started to go before competing his read back.
Click to expand...
Ironic. I've been repeatedly chastised (mildly) for not reacting immediately to a directive from ATC, even before I had time to read back. "They are expecting you to do it immediately" was what I was told.
 
Salty said:
Ironic. I've been repeatedly chastised (mildly) for not reacting immediately to a directive from ATC, even before I had time to read back. "They are expecting you to do it immediately" was what I was told.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Aviate. Navigate. Communicate. Especially in high traffic areas.
 
Salty said:
Ironic. I've been repeatedly chastised (mildly) for not reacting immediately to a directive from ATC, even before I had time to read back. "They are expecting you to do it immediately" was what I was told.
Click to expand...
I have occasionally been told to execute a takeoff or runway-crossing clearance "immediately or hold short."
 
This is amusing. No one here knows the facts pertaining to this event, or what was even filed by ATC (called a PD, Pilot Deviation). No one has even seen the CEDAR (Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting) attachments. I doubt anyone here even knows Mr. Ford personally.

Yet we now have the armchair guys deciding and telling us what happened, and we have others that are making wild claims to the mental capability of Mr. Ford.

Sorry to interrupt, ya'll may proceed now.
 
Lindberg said:
I would say what he did wrong was he heard "Continue," and he started to go before competing his read back.
Click to expand...

Salty said:
Ironic. I've been repeatedly chastised (mildly) for not reacting immediately to a directive from ATC, even before I had time to read back. "They are expecting you to do it immediately" was what I was told.
Click to expand...

Agreed. From Ford's perspective, I think that's a key point.

If there was no gap edited out of the clip that's available, then he got a second repeat of the instruction starting with "continue" that would have implied his readback was incorrect. Even if there was a delay that was edited out, he was expecting the next instruction to be to continue across the runway, and with traffic on the runway, he'd need to expedite it, not delay for a read back before complying.

"Expecting you to do it immediately" is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation as it conflicts with the requirement to read back the instruction to ensure you properly understood it.

If there's a lesson here, it's to not bother trying to make the controller happy with an immediate action, especially in a hold short situation where there is no imminent danger if you continue to sit there. Just wait to comply until you are sure of the instruction and have read it back, with a brief pause to ensure the controller doesn't have an issue with the readback being incorrect.
 
Doc Holliday said:
This is amusing. No one here knows the facts pertaining to this event, or what was even filed by ATC (called a PD, Pilot Deviation). No one has even seen the CEDAR (Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting) attachments. I doubt anyone here even knows Mr. Ford personally.

Yet we now have the armchair guys deciding and telling us what happened, and we have others that are making wild claims to the mental capability of Mr. Ford.

Sorry to interrupt, ya'll may proceed now.
Click to expand...
We're just kibitzing, but thanks for the reminder. ;)
 
Interesting that he didn't read back the landing clearance. Its my understanding you always need to repeat that you are cleared to land (or option or whatever) and the assigned runway. Maybe that is not exactly the case?

There is talk of him being slower / older / etc. I don't get that from the live audio. He seems to talk a bit "low" or quiet which could be attributed to some hearing loss or maybe that is just his radio voice/speed these days.

I'm still thinking the controller saw him rolling and perceived him about to cross a hold short line and quickly issues the continue to hold short. Why else would a controller even do that. If hes not watching him, there was nothing in Mr. Ford's response to indicate he didn't fully understand and acknowledge the initial hold short - heck he repeated that back pretty much perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top