United v Skywest possible nmac SFO May30

Let'sgoflying!

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
21,873
Location
west Texas
Display Name
Dave Taylor
Home Airfield
KMRF
I say ‘possible’ b/c of the usual concerns about journalistic embellishments. (this could well be a nothing burger, idk)

Anyone know the usual SIDs used on those rwy’s?
Got to wondering if the errant a/c had the wrong rwy selected for the SID, commenced what would have been a correct turn, for the other rwy.
 
According to Flightaware, it was filed TRUKN2 SYRAH JSICA Q130 PNH MDANO VKTRY2

Here's the TRUKN2 departure, note the right turn to TYDYE:
TRUKN2.JPG

The textual description is:

TAKEOFF RUNWAYS 1L, 1R: Climb heading 014° to 520, thenright turn direct TYDYE, cross TYDYE at or above 3000, then ontrack 043° to TRUKN. Thence on (transition). Maintain FL190. Expect filed altitude10 minutes after departure.

The track shows them turning left, producing roughly a 291°magnetic track (nearly parallel with runways 28L/R, which are at 284°) before ATC turns them back to the north. UA1152 5-13-25.JPG
NOTE: the track shown here is in true heading - that area is about 14°E Magnetic variation, thus the roughly 291° magnetic track.

According to the audio, the crew stated to ATC they were "on the TRUKN."

The initial left turn to a 291 track doesn't make sense when compared to any published SID if runway 1R was selected. GAPP7 would be a left turn, but only to intercept the SFO 350 radial, and they would have blown right through that with that aggressive an intercept angle. SSTIK5 would also have them turn left after reaching 520' but then direct SSTIK, which is a flyover waypoint and is well to the north of where they ended up. The other 1L/R SIDs are a right turn. The track does also not align directly with any runway 28L/R waypoint (WESLA, GNNRR, KYNNG, or NORMM), but comes close to the initial 284° (runway) heading, which those waypoints would be on if the aircraft had departed 28L or 28R.

However, it isn't immediately clear what stopped the aircraft briefly on this track - it could have been whatever was feeding the autopilot, but could just as well have been briefly stopped when the instruction came from ATC to turn back to the north and they were in the process of reversing the turn (it was only on that heading for about 7-10 seconds). This is only to caution that as far as we know, the left turn may have continued if ATC had not intervened.
 
Last edited:
Was there a runway change?
The turn puts them very close to the 28 rwy hdg.
I could see them having the heading bug accidentally left on 284° if they originally thought the were taking off west, then got switched to rwy 01.
 
During parallel runway takeoffs with RNAV SIDS, the controller is required to state the first fix.

The controller stated, "United 1152, wind 260 at 21, runway 1R, cleared for takeoff."

The takeoff clearance should have been, "United 1152, wind 260 at 21, RNAV TYDYE, runway 1R, cleared for takeoff."

The same lapse occurred with Skywest's takeoff clearance.

If the UAL crew had the wrong SID programmed in the FMS, the error would have been caught had the controller used correct phraseology.
 
Last edited:
I say ‘possible’ b/c of the usual concerns about journalistic embellishments. (this could well be a nothing burger, idk)

Anyone know the usual SIDs used on those rwy’s?
Got to wondering if the errant a/c had the wrong rwy selected for the SID, commenced what would have been a correct turn, for the other rwy.
That's not a nothing burger, UAL 1152 screwed up. If you depart 1R, you turn right. If you depart 1L, you turn left. It's just that simple. I've done the TRUKN off of 1R a gazillion times, often with a 1L departure close by on my left wing... these guys should've known the flow. To just blindly turn left, holy crap...
 
During parallel runway takeoffs with RNAV SIDS, the controller is required to state the first fix.

The controller stated, "United 1152, wind 260 at 21, runway 1R, cleared for takeoff."

The takeoff clearance should have been, "United 1152, wind 2601 at 21, RNAV TYDYE, runway 1R, cleared for takeoff."

The same lapse occurred with Skywest's takeoff clearance.

If the UAL crew had the wrong SID programmed in the FMS, the error would have been caught had the controller used correct phraseology.
That’s been around for quite a while. I can’t find the 7110.65 reference though. Do you know it?
 
"punches the FMS.....approach to aviating....

Nah, everyone has either dicked up the FMS (although we're supposed to have several verification points to mitigate this) or had something commanded that wasn't intended. This is more a "follow the FD blindly" approach to aviation. As @jbDC9 said, you should have the SA to at least have a general sense of which direction you need to be going.
 
Listened to about 30 departures this morning on SFO tower. Typical configuration of arrivals on the 28s and departures on the 1s. Not a single departure was issued an initial heading or SID waypoint. Perhaps SFO has superseding local procedures.
 
Listened to about 30 departures this morning on SFO tower. Typical configuration of arrivals on the 28s and departures on the 1s. Not a single departure was issued an initial heading or SID waypoint. Perhaps SFO has superseding local procedures.
They must have an exemption from that requirement. It's always an RNAV departure off of 1L/1R.
 
Yup, children of the magenta stuff. Nothing that wasn't already fully expanded on in 1997 by said CA at the AA training department. I default to both his nuance and comments on the topic (forever captured by the internet) for the sake of brevity.

What I'm more interested in is the OJT angle. Some RUMINT on the internet suggests another example of 121 (de facto or literal) OJT FAFO games? I emphasize rumor because it's difficult to say from the outside of that testudo formation. Given the visibility in public via pairings like UA702, F9 3506, FA1326 and 9E 4819, I'd say the question deserves more gravitas than some are willing to entertain. Legit curious whether OJT dynamics in present day 121 could have played a role in this particular instance.
 
They must have an exemption from that requirement. It's always an RNAV departure off of 1L/1R.
Why? What would be the point? Maybe they don't follow it because of institutionalized complacency.

Nah, everyone has either dicked up the FMS (although we're supposed to have several verification points to mitigate this) or had something commanded that wasn't intended..
The one mile at a time article said the CA talked to the controller and told him that the FMS commanded the left turn and the FO followed it. The CA said he felt it wasn't right. He probably had a startle response and took awhile to intervene.
 
They must have an exemption from that requirement. It's always an RNAV departure off of 1L/1R.
My understanding is that the fix callout is for when there’s a different fix for each parallel runway. All of the departures off of 1L & 1R at KSFO use the same initial fix.
 
My understanding is that the fix callout is for when there’s a different fix for each parallel runway. All of the departures off of 1L & 1R at KSFO use the same initial fix.
No, they don't. If they did, the nearly simultaneous parallel departures would converge.

Rwy 1R Departures.
TRUKN. Right turn to TYDYE
NIITE. Right turn to MDBAY

Rwy 1L Departures.
SEGUL. Left turn to SEPDY
SSTIK. Left turn to SSTIK

If they are not doing parallel departures, you can use either runway for each departure. During a push, they are doing parallel departures. Runway assignment is based on which departure you will fly.
 
No, they don't. If they did, the nearly simultaneous parallel departures would converge.

Rwy 1R Departures.
TRUKN. Right turn to TYDYE
NIITE. Right turn to MDBAY

Rwy 1L Departures.
SEGUL. Left turn to SEPDY
SSTIK. Left turn to SSTIK

If they are not doing parallel departures, you can use either runway for each departure. During a push, they are doing parallel departures. Runway assignment is based on which departure you will fly.
I was referring to bot runways using the same departure procedure…1L and 1R both go to TYDYE on the TRUKN Departure, and all of the other departures use one fix for both runways.
 
I was referring to bot runways using the same departure procedure…1L and 1R both go to TYDYE on the TRUKN Departure, and all of the other departures use one fix for both runways.
Skywest 5273 was departing 1L flying the SSTIK5. First fix SSTIK.
 
I was referring to bot runways using the same departure procedure…1L and 1R both go to TYDYE on the TRUKN Departure, and all of the other departures use one fix for both runways.
They don't do that. The departures that turn left are assigned 1L, those that turn right are assigned 1R.

If they do one that turns the opposite direction for the runway then they don't do a departure off the other runway. They wouldn't do that, except for operational necessity, when traffic is busy.
 
They don't do that. The departures that turn left are assigned 1L, those that turn right are assigned 1R.

If they do one that turns the opposite direction for the runway then they don't do a departure off the other runway. They wouldn't do that, except for operational necessity, when traffic is busy.
And the end result is they wouldn’t give a fix in the takeoff clearance because it would be a different DP, not a different fix on the same DP.
 
They don't do that. The departures that turn left are assigned 1L, those that turn right are assigned 1R.

If they do one that turns the opposite direction for the runway then they don't do a departure off the other runway. They wouldn't do that, except for operational necessity, when traffic is busy.
also, most of the departures that are going east,especially longer flights, go off the rights as the numbers are better for that runway.
 
And the end result is they wouldn’t give a fix in the takeoff clearance because it would be a different DP, not a different fix on the same DP.
No, they would give the fix. It is to verify that the correct departure is loaded in the FMS. When parallel departures are in progress, it is required, even when the aircraft are on different departures. SFO must have an exemption from that rule for some reason.

also, most of the departures that are going east,especially longer flights, go off the rights as the numbers are better for that runway.
TRUKN would be all of the eastbound and northbound departures. SSTIK is all of the southbound departures. NIITE is used, at night, for noise abatement. It goes north and east. I'm not sure what they use for westbound (Hawaii). Possibly the GAP? I've never departed SFO for Hawaii.
 
And the end result is they wouldn’t give a fix in the takeoff clearance because it would be a different DP, not a different fix on the same DP.
No, that is not the end result. The policy states, "When conducting simultaneous parallel runway departures utilizing RNAV SIDs, advise aircraft of the initial fix/waypoint on the RNAV route." It doesn't say anything like "if they are both using the same SID." They wouldn't use the same SID on two different runways at the same time anyway (and if they did they have the same first fix anyway) ... which means the version of the rule you are imagining in your mind would never apply.
 
No, that is not the end result. The policy states, "When conducting simultaneous parallel runway departures utilizing RNAV SIDs, advise aircraft of the initial fix/waypoint on the RNAV route." It doesn't say anything like "if they are both using the same SID." They wouldn't use the same SID on two different runways at the same time anyway (and if they did they have the same first fix anyway) ... which means the version of the rule you are imagining in your mind would never apply.
Thank you for finally addressing my post.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top