NTSB Preliminary Report: Las Vegas Mid Air Collision 17 July 2022

I'm getting caught up around here, this was shot on 15 August, just released today. Very busy summer.
LINKS:
NTSB Preliminary Report: data.ntsb.gov/...
ATC Audio: • Video
PATREON: www.patreon.co...
Learning The Finer Points: www.learnthefi...
om/
Flying Eyes: flyingeyesopti...
Theme: "Weightless" www.arambedros...

[@theresacaron4238]

A simple solution would be to modify one of the runway numbers. Instead of 31L and 31R, where feasible designate one as runway 31 and the other one either runway 30 or 32. For IFR approaches the actual heading is on the approach plate and would not affect the approach to the assigned runway. As far as the word "right" it should be limited to directions and not confirmations.

[@flyjarrett]

There was also a personal conversation over the frequency with the Malibu - “Hello Carol! Where are you coming from?” That was answered by the Malibu pilot. That potential distraction could be a contributing factor and further illustrates Juan’s mention of the need for more professionalism with comms.

[@malcolm20091000]

Where did you find this out? Was this conversation on final? If so, that's some very sloppy communications.

[@MattyCrayon]

I’ve heard a lot of unnecessary communications in my own flying and on KZbin vids too. Most of it coming from GA pilots. Other pilots shouldn’t be calling out his favorite KZbin pilot, when heard on frequency and we all need to practice using just the precise coms that provide the best situational awareness.

[@flyjarrett]

@@malcolm20091000 look on the air safety institute channel on the video entitled “midair at north Las Vegas.” The exchange happened right around the time when the Malibu was crossing midfield. It’s unclear if the other party was in ATC or another pilot on frequency. I’m assuming the latter.

[@RLTtizME]

Doubtful.

[@virginiaviola5097]

That’s exactly what I think, and it has a parallel with the Truckee accident where the pilot was already on the ground in his chatting with ATC and lost track of his altitude and airspeed. As soon as that guy surprised her with a totally irrelevant question at a crucial point of landing he broke her concentration just long enough for calamity. Can’t imagine how he must feel.

[@stephenpage-murray7226]

Impressed by the British ATC, very impressed.

[@gonetoearth2588]

North Las Vegas is my home airport. That was a great analysis Juan. Those two runways are 700 feet apart and I’m sure this accident will dissuade ATC and probably get a mandate from the FAA not to perform simultaneous parallel approaches. Even at SFO when I fly in they rarely perform the SOIA Approaches simply because most likely there are a lot of variables to consider. A staggered parallel approach is safer and gives more time for ATC to understand projectaries of some of these aircraft. In addition I always back up any arrival with the instrument procedure and I fly to needles all the way down to the runway. Thanks again and we were all sad when this happened. My condolences to all the families.

[@bryanthompson12]

what equipment are you on?

[@douglashart5059]

+Gone To Earth sorry you are misinformed. This is not simultaneous parallel approaches. One aircraft is VFR.

[@gonetoearth2588]

@@douglashart5059 Yes. I didn’t mean parallel approaches in the true sense as they are charted for IFR flights. But at North Las Vegas it’s very common for two planes to approach the runway ends next to each other which is essentially VFR simultaneous parallel approaches

[@mytech6779]

Doesn't a simultanious parallel approach require visual contact of at least one aircraft to the other?

[@douglashart5059]

@My Tech Doesn’t apply here. Only 1 aircraft IFR on a “visual approach” here. The other aircraft is VFR in the pattern.

[@mikeboulant8911]

This is my home airport. The pilot of the Malibu is local as well. The husband and wife that were flying are both pilots. I didn’t know them, but I’ve spoken to a couple of their close friends, including the gentleman who said “Hello Carol”. They were well known and had many friends at the airport. This was a tragic accident that shouldn’t have happened. The overhead approach for 30L is common when the 30s are being used and entering from the northeast. I’m sure they have made this approach many times. 30L/12R is the runway that is generally used for departing and arriving traffic. 30R/12L is typically used for pattern work (not always the case, but most common). It would be very odd to be cleared to land on 30R when given the overhead entry to left pattern. if I thought I heard 30R, it would definitely prompt me to clarify with ATC to make sure I didn’t hear wrong. We can speculate on why he lined up for 30R, but I don’t know if we’ll ever know why. Did he simply overshoot? Was there a disconnect between the wife on the radio and the husband flying? This was a very sad day at the airport and for the city of Las Vegas.

[@lakerenegadepilot6211]

I’m from Vegas too and I’m with you, it seems they overshot. All of us familiar with VGT know the area well so I don’t buy they lined up with the wrong runway.

[@christopherleveck6835]

Okay so what I heard was that he wasn't with his wife he was with his girlfriend and that his hearing is really bad so she was working the radios for him. My understanding is she was not a pilot but was used to relaying the information so that he could still fly. Apparently he's been checked out several times when he shouldn't have been and couldn't fly alone because of it. It seems to me that the miscommunication was probably inside the cockpit between him and the woman working the radio. So I guess depending on how you look at it it was wrong for a lot of reasons but one thing seems clear to me he probably shouldn't have been flying to begin with. Which I think puts the blame squarely on him and the people that continued to say he could fly when he shouldn't have been.

[@wicked1172]

@@christopherleveck6835 I think that you should post this as a comment, not as a reply.

[@gravesclayton3604]

@@christopherleveck6835 I have to agree 100% with your suspicions. If what MikeBoulant says is true, it would have been very likely that the Malibu pilot didn't hear the ATC call to land 30L at all, and just lined up with 30R out of habit. The lack of coms discipline on their part was almost certainly the deciding factor as to the Malibu pilot's actions. Inevitably this man wasn't going to quit flying until it killed him. Unfortunately, he took the lives of 3 others in the process.

[@Ryanboy2020]

I agree Juan! Flying into London I am always impressed with how ATC and radio traffic is handled. This accident demonstrates how critical it is that you keep landing traffic in sight especially on a parallel runway.

[@mbrownie22]

I was ATC for 25 years and I concur that phraseology between ATC and Aircraft is very poor, we are taught as a controller to use approved phraseology but many controllers don’t adhere to those procedures and are guilty of using non standard phraseology. Great breakdown of this tragic situation.

[@janofb]

When ATC said "I think I said that right, 30 left" my heart sank. Radios are bad to begin with coupled with someone else cutting in on the transmission and that could easily have been received as "I said right 30". They should have said "I think I said that correctly, 30L"

[@FrickinLaserBeams]

Should ATC perhaps try to stagger the landings of both aircraft on approach to parallel runways? If one or the other aircraft was delayed by, oh I don't know, 10? 15? 20 seconds to stagger the landings, not only would that give ATC more time to consider a situation, but even if the one aircraft had incorrectly approached the same runway as the 1st aircraft to land on it, then that 10-20 second window meant a reduced chance of collision, and for ATC to react.

[@josephkelley8641]

God Bless mbrownie22 unbelievable - would not be able to handle that kind of stress.

[@NicolaW72]

@@janofb Indeed, exactly!

[@F1fan007]

@@FrickinLaserBeams that sounds like a good idea

[@steveturner3999]

Hard to imagine what the Cessna pilot thought since everyone repeated back the proper instructions. He obviously wasn’t expecting to have a conflict. God only knows what the Piper pilots were thinking. R.I.P. to all. Thanks Juan!

[@marlinweekley51]

Clearly they (the piper pilots) weren’t thinking. Repeated multiple time they were landing on the left runway then lined up on the right with no apparent backup/cross check to ensure they were on the left runway centerline. Even the cheapest handheld gps’s provide an extended runway centerline - certainly that Malibu had a decent gps .

[@ItsAllAboutGuitar]

That's the danger of assuming someone is going to do what they say they're going to do. I ALWAYS look and verify and never trust.

[@airtrafficmike2865]

Had traffic been exchanged by the Tower controller it may have never happened. Since it wasn't, we'll never know.

[@jameswiddowson3976]

As a Brit, thank you for using LHR as an example of good practice. Here in the UK, LHR is a much maligned airport, particularly by us Brits! At least we are getting something right and keeping the flying public safe.

[@vernicethompson4825]

You Brits might be less critical of Heathrow if you all watch the KZbin series of documentaries about it, produced by the BBC. It seems like a well-run airport that handles all sorts of planes and passengers from all over the world and keeps them moving in spite of many challenges. Btw, my ancestry is entirely British!

[@jonljacobi]

That British ATC gal is excellent. It makes everyone else respond in kind.

[@islandlife756]

Thanks Juan, excellent video as usual. This reminds me of a fatal crash here in New Zealand in the late 1990s where the sole pilot in his panic during a mayday call said either thirteen or thirty miles from the shore instead of one three or three one (I forget which it was.) It was a routine, scheduled commercial island hopping flight in a Britten Norman Islander with about 9 or so pax. [Edit: the aircraft was a Cessna 401C Utiliner, reg ZK-VAC, crash date 19 August 1998].] After the call he ditched in the sea and got everyone out alive, but not everyone had a lifejacket and some died, including him, in the very cold water while awaiting rescue. The rescue boats lost vital minutes because of the navigation error. It turned out he had miscalculated his fuel and run out. So, two errors: the fuel, and the confusion with numbers on the radio call. Changes were made to procedures after that. Despite his errors he was rightly lauded for the successful ditching and getting them all out alive. For those involved in the Las Vegas collision, may they RIP. And may we all learn from it and the other recent collisions.

[@dougfraser77]

I recall that incident very well. ZK-VAC. The pilot indistinctly said "thirteen" rather than one-three. Then, on the phone to SAR, the controller said "thirty" instead of three-zero. There was initially some misunderstanding about whether the plane went down over land or water. Vital minutes were lost. Five people died and the five who rescued were severely hypothermic. I recall public interest was so high that the local newspaper, The Southland Times, actually published a detailed transcript of the SAR communications.

[@NatedoGP]

He didn’t get them all out alive though

[@Ellie-rx3jt]

@@NatedoGP They were alive when they got out of the aircraft

[@islandlife756]

@@NatedoGP The fact they all exited the aircraft alive was particularly tragic for us onlookers at the time. They had a chance to live, but didn't make it. I understand that ditching safely in water requires considerable skill. I will always be impressed by that.

[@islandlife756]

@@dougfraser77 Thanks for the info, I wasn't expecting anyone out there to know about this crash. August 2023 will be the 25th anniversary. I googled ZK-VAC and found a good write-up at the Aviation Safety Network site. My memory was that he had run out of fuel, and that the company didn't require really sharp written record keeping of fuel intake and use. He might have believed there was enough fuel, I don't know. I had also gotten the type wrong, it was a Cessna 401C Utiliner. Most of the time they used the Britten-Norman Islander. I have taken the trip once, it's a beautiful place.

[@markboettcher5682]

You are definitely right on controller's, I've heard some awesome approach controllers good and bad and I'm still learning. Probably my favorite was a woman in Nashville during some big thunder storms, had all of us working around cells, giving basically everyone any deviation they asked for or she saw coming on radar, all this while keeping sequencing perfectly. she was amazing all while setting up north and south traffic into the patterns. she didn't stop for a half hour or more. Then a guy took over and he was good but not like she was. Tough job.

[@pinkdispatcher]

Thanks, very insightful, as usual. Looking at the aerodrome chart, it seems that both runways are nominally the same width, and 30L is actually longer (5000') then 30R (4199'). It's also great to hear the London radio discipline. The controller even says the units, every time, to make it even less ambiguous, and never says "to". "Turn left heading one-eight-zero degrees", "reduce speed one-five-zero knots". Impeccable.

[@billnelson3732]

Great video analysis as usual, Juan - thanks for all you do. 37 years of ATC (USAF and FAA). We actually don't have a No Transgression Zone at most airports with parallel runways, except for those operating a PRM system where an additional pair of controllers specifically act as final monitors and help protect that airspace and its the PRM radar that detects the "blunders" that may enter that protected area (ILS/PRM Approach). The controller will then make a call on that second frequency to be used by flight crews as per the approach plate. Regarding traffic to parallel runways such as at Northtown, I always trained controllers (SJC, PDX, SFO, MSP) to issue traffic to both aircraft any time they were turning in simultaneously to at least make the pilots aware of the other aircraft. TCAS for the big boys is fantastic, but the GA aircraft really do depend on us.

[@alantoon5708]

No matter what the tower says, it is up to you to see and avoid. And fly defensively.

[@747-pilot]

Exactly! And that’s even true if you are flying IFR *_in VMC_* conditions!

[@billtisdale6122]

Expectation bias. Parallel runways with one runway threshold displaced from the other. Rounding the corner from left downwind to left base, pilots pick the first runway the see. In this case the far 30R runway and they stop looking. 97CX was based at the airport, at least the woman pilot on the radio was familiar with standard operations at VGT. As you mentioned, we don’t know which pilot was flying, and no cockpit voice recorder on the Malibu. The Cessna was ahead of the Malibu and got overrun from behind.

[@ridernotrunner]

It's scary to fly a Cessna in the pattern these days when higher performance (typically low wing) aircraft are operating. Watsonville too.

[@Andrew-13579]

@@ridernotrunner That's what I was just think, too. I think the 172 may have requested and made the short approach hoping to de-conflict with that Malibu. But the Malibu made a short approach and at the faster speed, not to mention to the wrong runway, and spoiled the 172's effort...very unfortunately. But I could be wrong there.

[@Andrew-13579]

A lesson to learn from this might be to extend downwind and stay up at pattern altitude, maybe until the faster traffic is in sight and you can fly so as to keep them in front of your 3-9 line...or until they're behind it going away from you. If you're in a 172, these faster planes are going to overtake you. Keep 'em in front, if possible. Or if you feel the heebee-jeebees with them behind on the parallel and overtaking, maybe go-around and offset your runway to the outside. That way if they do take your final by mistake, you won't be there. Good to practice go-arounds, too.

[@teleclasster]

Love the detail regarding verbal usage of "correct" rather than "right". As a retired project manager, anything I wrote would be carefully screened before sent to insure there would be no ambiguity.

[@YodpilotID]

Yep I have to catch myself sometimes with words in the cockpit. "Two Eight zero climbing two nine zero" "Climbing " vs "for"

[@gerardacronin334]

At 1201:57 the local controller transmitted “seven Charlie x-ray I think I said it RIGHT…….” Using the word “right” may have caused anchoring of that word in the pilot’s mind, even if the person on the radio heard the instructions correctly.

[@dewiz9596]

Very good point. “Correctly” would have been clearer. . .

[@satoshimanabe2493]

Bad choice of words, I agree, but the readback was correct that it was 30L. But it seems to imply the controller thought the aircraft was turning wide, perhaps that should have been communicated?

[@patchmack4469]

one of the reasons i think its suggested in the video, as to who was flying and who was on radio (in the PA46, i think was two pilots?? if i heard that correctly, see what i did there, i nearly said right), who ever was speaking is in full command of the language being used, while the pilot might have heard the word RIGHT and stuck to that, perhaps but this too does raise an interesting point in radio speak internationally, while all airlines are asked to use English, its also worth noting to use correct wording, such as Roger for yes or affirmative, or correct which might also be misheard as incorrect with a slight crackle on the radio, who knows the best answers to the issues

[@DamonJohnCollins]

Seems to me that the controller clarified because he noticed the PA46 crossing the left runway centerline. It's odd that the controller didn't further explain that is looked like he was turning final for the right runway.

[@marlinweekley51]

Humm - I think they expected to see a big runway and when they turned in out of a wide sweeping constant rate turn there was on in front of them. You’d think if you were going to land on the left runway you’d want to verify it by at least visually locating the right runway - there was no runway to the right of the one they lined up for. In short - they screwed up big time. Very tragic. 😞

[@VLove-CFII]

I can’t even imagine how this happened. Everyone says they know what runway they are to land on. And then they don’t. Maybe the Piper overshot 30L and rolled out of that base to final turn right in front of 30R out there in front and just got fixated on it. Perhaps there was talking in the Piper during the landing phase, and maybe they were tired from the long flight. We’re never going to know. So much for situational awareness and see and be seen. My sincere condolences to everyone involved and their families. So sad. 🥲. Thank you Juan. This gives us one more tidbit of experience to store for future landings on parallel runways.

[@j-flyerpg65]

Great video. May I add one thing I’ve been seeing all to frequently with these midair’s and near midair’s lately. People are rushing their patterns and seem to be hurry to get down as fast as possible. If the Piper would have extended the pattern a little bit longer for a more stabilized approach then this could have been avoided. This crash is all to similar to the one that just occurred in Northern California last week. More emphasis should be put on stabilized entries and no being in such a rush to land. I see this on landing and departures. Thank you for all the work!

[@michaelfabert1639]

I flew this overhead enter left downwind pattern for 30L in a phenom 300 at night. Never been there before. Very challenging. Had the tower cycle the runway lights to make sure we had the correct runway. By the way there is no instrument approach to dial in as a backup.

[@georgewchilds]

Wow, if there was no instrument approach as back up, no wonder it had the potential to go bad.

[@NicolaW72]

@@georgewchilds Indeed.

[@Bill_Woo]

No instrument approach as a backup?!

[@mytech6779]

​@@Bill_Woo It is full desert, they have annual IFR measured in hours not days. Instrument approaches are expensive to develop, install, and regularly inspect. The FAA has a fleet of highly instrumented planes used to inspect every variation of every published approach on a regular schedule. This requires substantial flight time because all extreme edges and center of the designated obstacle free flight path must be checked for signal accuracy and strength (including GPS signal), in addition to spotting new unreported obstructions [and tree growth]. They may also use ground survey equipment at the airport to check final approach slope and buffer zone clearance if this area is close to limits. Then add on office time for analyzing and documenting the collected data.

[@alexhidveghy2816]

@@Bill_Woo What some mean is that you are essentially doing a VISUAL approach in VFR conditions. However, it is always a good idea (as other suggestions above from other pilots and ATC controllers) to back up your visual approaches with instruments. In my previous life as a Part1 21 air carrier pilot, our landing brief always included the words, "....expect a visual approach to RWY 30L, backed up by the ILS, NDB, VORTAC....etc". Yes, I know that particular RWY does not have ILS, not all runways do (even at LAS). Bottom line, you get taught certain things in aviation and there is ALWAYS a good reason why. Such as in this tragic case. I am also quite familiar with VGT since I used to instruct there many moons ago and have flown out and in to there many times. One needs to get totally familiar with an airport and use proper ATC phraseology. Anything that does not sound right should ALWAYS be questioned, if only to confirm the instruction. Many times in my operational experience I have come across a correct read back, but that's NOT what the pilot did and ends up as a pilot deviation and a call to the tower or TRACON supervisor. Sadly this one went much further and cost 4 lives, unnecessarily.

[@jonathanbanks7744]

Juan- Just wanted to say thank you for the incredible videos. There's no doubt in my mind that the information and lessons you teach help pilots to be safer everyday. I know they've certainly helped me to be cautious and aware the past couple months as I started my flight training. Keep up the great work!

[@charleshaggard4341]

Interesting that both mid-air collisions in the last 2 months have been where one of the planes was traveling at a much higher speed than the other and the slower ones were run over.

[@davidbiagini9048]

If you're referring to the Watsonville, CA collision as one of the two, then both collisions also involved high- and low-wing aircraft.

[@thomasaltruda]

Bingo! Both cases, the faster plane is hot-dogging it. At VGT, the Malibu flew a pattern more appropriate for a Pitts Biplane, not a large, turboprop. The other one in California, the twin was flying almost 100 knots too fast, no way was he landing that, I would bet he was going to “Buzz” the field.

[@waltreamer1871]

Years ago (1970's) I was a USAF air traffic controller. Lots of things have changed since then, but I think the basics are still there. I concur with your assessment that the ATC phraseology was loose. You mentioned that, both aircraft being on the same frequency, each should have been aware of the other's presence and should have been looking out for one another. But we don't really know what was going on in the cockpit of either aircraft, and matters within the cockpits could have caused each pilot to tune out a transmission that wasn't directed to them. It doesn't sound like the pattern was busy, so even if it may not have been necessary, I wonder why the local controller in the tower didn't issue a traffic advisory to both of them, and ensure that each of them was aware of the other.

[@iamthevanavator281]

I was in there about 2 months ago in a Cardinal C-177 for the first time in about 10 years. Very interesting experience. Came in from the east over Lake Mead was handed off to Nellis who kept me high at 7500 I believe. I immediately asked for lower and then was handed off to the tower who had me fly over mid field at 3500 and enter the left downwind for 30L. There were 4-5 aircraft in the pattern, entering the pattern, etc. While this was happening the tower controller was dealing almost exclusively with this woman in a DA-20 who could not follow his instructions and/or repeat them back just totally tying up the frequency. Knowing that I was dealing with parallel offset runways I was on high alert and made damn sure I did not inadvertently drift over onto 30R. I squared off my downwind to base and final which is a huge help in this situation where one can get disoriented quite easily. It looks in the accident in question that rather than square it off that the Malibu pilot made a descending circling turn to final in which the only runway he/she saw was 30R and “assumed” he/she had the correct one. If you’re in a Malibu you really have to be on your game to pull this off doing this circling approach. Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t the female pilot 76 years of age and her male companion pilot 82 years of age? Not uncommon where I fly in Tucson at KTUS for a pilot cleared for 11R to overshoot and line up for 11L which is the main runway for large aircraft, F-16’s etc. The controllers here are hyper vigilant about that.

[@jimk5145]

Looking at the flight track of the Malibu, it looked like they were circling more to intersect 30L but corrected and shot for 30R. Would this be because they thought they missed 30L and tried to put it down on 30R for urgency? Would they have been able to execute a missed approach knowing that they couldn't line up with 30L? To OP's point, when shooting for *L on a left turn, wouldn't you need to have *R in sight before leveling out your turn?

[@iamthevanavator281]

@@jimk5145 No one will really know, even after the NTSB report comes out. Brain fog 😶‍🌫️, confusion, expectancy bias, lack of proficiency in aircraft control, distraction, could be anything. All I can tell you is when I flew in there and came in over the top I planned my rollout onto downwind such that I was approximately 1/2 mile from 30L. I confirmed that when I turned left base at approximately a 45 degree angle with the threshold of 30L, I needed to see both runways and the runway closest to me was 30L which I had been cleared to land on.

[@gravesclayton3604]

I agree 100% with "squaring off" the base and final turns, which demonstrates a concise, calculated landing process. This habit of faster aircraft doing a "swoop & loop" all-in-one base/final is an indication of a rushed, undisciplined maneuver. It limits the pilot's ability to even spot other aircraft close in the pattern, and other traffic from reacting in time, even when they can see it coming.

[@batguanisky6322]

"THOUGH SHALT NOT FLY AN OPPOSING BASE LEG." I googled the phrase "opposing base legs" - most of the results are directed to ATC protocol. But, as this accident shows, it's naive to rely ATC for your safety. The rule stated above is self-enforcing - an application of the "see and be seen" rule. Of the "lessons learned" here, "situational awareness" is paramount.

[@tomkinsey4195]

Juan, I've said this before thank you for these. Your videos are great learning opportunities though the event was unfortunate. When you tall about expectation bias we're all guilty of this. I was on a flight this summer approaching the airport from the south. I was expecting a left downwind for 23R in my head. The controller gave me right downwind 23R I read it back and continued on my way. When I got closer ATC gave me left downwind as there was no traffic for the left runway. This saved me, because until that moment I was going to enter a left downwind. I fly at this airport all the time and am very familiar with the area. My point is this can happen to anyone, and we always need to be alert especially in our own back yard. We all make mistakes, but it's what we learn from them that makes us better pilots!

[@BillDeFalcoGFE]

Thank you for this very well-done review of this tragic mid-air collision accident. As pilots, we are taught to learn from the mistakes of others. This is yet another very important Heads Up Lesson that every pilot flying into an airport with parallel runways needs to learn about. This accident review should be included as a standardized part of every basic flight training program for new pilots and every recurrency flight training program as well.

[@bobrauscher7244]

At 13:20 of your video, you brought up exactly what concerned me during your readback of the tower saying, "I think I said it right, runway three zero left." I would think the use of the word right to mean correct would be prohibited for exactly this reason. Even though the pilot read back that it was three zero left, he's now got the word RIGHT in his mind which could have added to the problem. Just my thought.

[@terryboocock5961]

A first class investigation in to a challenging issue . Congratulations on the clear presentation of the formal report and your specific interpretations based on your valuable independent experience. Thank you Juan.

[@flak1939]

In addition to expectation bias, there is also target fixation. If you're looking at 'your' runway instead of the airport and noting your relative position, you are focused on one detail instead of the whole picture. It seems neither pilot in the PA46 actually 'saw' the airport, they both just saw the one runway threshold.

[@donadams8345]

I suspect one pilot (likely the wife) was communicating while the other pilot was flying the Piper and there was minimal communication between the two of them. The pilot that was flying likely became fixated on the runway that stood out the most and from the photos that was runway 30R. I was once flying in the right seat with a relative and we were cleared to land straight in from about 10 miles out (this airport wasn't busy) on Rny 29. I noticed my relative was lining up on Rny 26 instead so I corrected him. Unfortunately people are human and occasionally make mistakes. We have to always recheck ourselves to prevent those errors.

[@walterm5787]

This reminds me of the incident that had two parallel runways. During busy times they would split the runways duty to two different ATC on different frequencies. The scarcest landing I ever had was at LV. Once on the ground the pilot took the first exit. It was a hard fast turn and shoved me in the back of the seat in front of me. Looked out the window and there was a plane taking off at the same time. Thank you South West for that.

[@jt8578]

As someone who flies to KVGT somewhat often, I think the offset of the two runways definitely played a part in this. It is so much easier to see 30R.

[@a.n.7863]

One would think the pilot would have looked down at least once during the mid-field flyover to get a feel for the layout if he or she was unfamiliar with the airport.

[@russellhltn1396]

I wonder if the pilot of 97CX saw the taxiway and mistook it for the right. Left is quite a ways from the airport.

[@mikefinnegan4290]

To add to Jarrett's comment. I wrote him (Well done, Jarrett. I just stumbled on the AOPA report last night after watching Juan's report earlier in the week before I saw your comments this morning. She flew over the field very confident, she knew where 30L was, I couldn't tell if she was aware of the touch and goes on 30 R. I hope the speaker of " Hello, Carol" identifies himself as pilot or ATC for the NTSB. My condolences to all the family members of those who lost their lives.) A picture is worth a 1000 words. ATC is tasked to speak a few words to sketch an image in the pilot's mind so the pilot sees the right picture that lays ahead of his/her view. Juan and other expert aviators try to pass along tips and tricks on how they do it. Thanks Juan B.

[@hughmarloweverest1684]

Thank you and I wanted to add that both “pilots” of the Piper were elderly, and like you said, we do not know who was flying it versus who was on the microphone. I am 71 years old. The male pilot was in his 80s. The female in her mid 70s? There may have been a desire to use the restroom which might have affected the judgement of the Piper folks. Just sayin’.

[@nancychace8619]

Akin to what I was saying. If they'd been in the air a long time, fatigued, hungry, all would be a factor.

[@adjuaadama6623]

Great as always. I also thought about the fact that the left runway’s threshold is further up than the right runway, and in a left bank toward the landing approach the incorrect right runway appears in your field of view first. If they turned too soon from the overfly, with a faster approach speed, the bank would need to also be tighter, and the arc would be wider. They may not have seen the left runway at all until shallowing the turn, and by then they were probably fixed on the right, incorrect runway.

[@nicklaslundgren]

I would say the Malibu did a very short downwind leg, almost coming in via a circle path. Thats no good. Hard to identify the error in time for the controller. And hard to become established on final for the pilot. Set up for problems!

[@floatinflyinandfishing]

I was about to say the same thing…even though they were cleared to land, and were not told to enter a downwind they most certainly could have as opposed to the nearly 225 degree turn. the distraction of the “hi carol” call didnt help. the response broke sterile cockpit and likely added to the break in concentration

[@ikefork2606]

Yep....the high-performance Malibu doing a "yank & bank" circling approach maneuver was undisciplined and borderline "hot dog" flying.

[@shoersa]

+1 Nicklas, Larry, and Ike. Not a stabilized approach in any sense of the word.

[@richb313]

Thanks for explaining the requirements of correct verbiage.

[@TheGospelQuartetParadise]

I once heard it said that assumption is the mother of all snafus [rated g term]. The Cessna pilot assumed the Piper pilot was going to do what he said. Reminds me of the Watsonville midair. That Cessna pilot assumed that the 340 wasn't going to be flying up his backside at 176 knots on final. Noone knows why this pilot was landing at fighter jet speeds on a short final at low altitude. By the time the 152 pilot realized it, he didn't even have time to pray. RIP to all those lives lost in both midair collisions.

[@tonyphillips910]

Juan, I'm surprised you didn't mention it. The Piper crossed the field at or very near pattern altitude, and the tower gave no crossing altitude restriction. In my opinion (yes, opinion), Piper should have come in at TPA plus +500 (at least) and descended only after crossing his assigned runway and establishing his downwind. Also, your descriptions show perception bias perhaps the same as theirs. The 30L is the longer by 900' and they're both the same width. Great video!

[@Willoz269]

am so glad you raised the differences in radio discipline between the US and the rest of the world....

[@kristensorensen2219]

I'm glad you brought up radio phraseology. My gripe is too much repeat of everything. Thinking is left out for what used to be to keep radio traffic to a minimum. Example squawk 1234 in the old days was just dial it in. I find the lack of thinking remains a problem despite what is said and this accident is why.

[@flyingpiper676]

Precise review and airmanship reminders for us all. Thanks

[@slowsteve3497]

Good job with this. Did you ever find out if the gear and flaps were down for the 340 that crashed into the Cessna in Watsonville. You suggested it might have been a high speed pass.

[@yamashill]

Regarding expectation bias, I fly to KVGT for work a few times a year, and nearly every time I'm cleared to full stop on 12R. It's the longer of the two runways, and it's closer to the transient ramp. It's also on the right side, and because the runways are significantly offset longitudinally, it's the runway that is closer to you on final. In May I flew to KVGT in my Cessna 340 and they were landing to the North. I got the exact same clearance as the Malibu - "Cross midfield and enter Left Downwind for 30L. It felt odd to NOT land on the closer, righter runway. I understand that the pilots were familiar with the airport, but I can also imagine full stopping on the wrong runway because you see a picture that looks right and you subconsciously do what you always do. Like when you start to turn towards your office and your kid asks, "so Dad, are you taking me to school or no?"

[@merrillevans392]

The Malibu got clearance for 30L, not 30R, as you state.

[@yamashill]

Thanks for highlighting my typo. It wouldn’t have made much sense the other way.

[@camsmeltzer9388]

I’m a student and have been on base with a aircraft landing on the parallel runway with my instructor trying to point out aircraft and I not seeing them until right off the nose because they were blending into background. We had control tower directing and my instructor had traffic in sight to begin with but personally I feel that extending my downwind for perhaps another twenty seconds would have been better solution. Keep your head on a swivel!!

[@motorTranz]

Tragic. May God comfort the families of those who perished. My condolences. Thanks again Juan for another superb analysis.

[@vernicethompson4825]

Thank you for the video from Heathrow Airport in London. There is a series of documentary videos on KZbin about the operations at Heathrow, produced by the BBC. This series is fantastic for anyone interested in how a busy airport operates. The professionalism you describe from the ATCs there may be due to the lack of disruption in the training and hiring of them for some 70 years. I think that here in the U.S. the mass firing of the ATCs in the 1980s during the Reagan administration was a major disruption to that continuity and had a long-lasting and profound effect on air traffic communications here that the UK never experienced. That's my personal opinion from decades of observation and interest. It would be great if there were international standards for air traffic communications that all controllers and pilots had to learn.

[@amritlohia8240]

There *are* ICAO standards for ATC phraseology, followed by pretty much everywhere except the US...

[@ridernotrunner]

Thanks for this Juan. It hits close to home as a student pilot in Vegas. I've mentioned elsewhere, and I'll say it again. I think we're in the midst of disturbing trend in GA with fatalities which appear to be caused by confident and experienced pilots, poor radio communication, and nonstandard entries to final by high performance aircraft... Watsonville, although unique in its own way, shares many similarities. The multiple crashes near Gillespie (on approach to MYF I believe?) also come to mind. All very experienced pilots committing grave errors. And I still see no solution in place to the very common "high wing, low wing" factor in collisions. I think there's a lot more happening here that needs to be carefully considered by everyone in the industry. Flight training for pattern entry procedures and currency standards may need to be reevaluated to emphasize competence in a dense traffic environment and the danger of nonstandard pattern entries. Perhaps that's the wrong approach - I'm no expert. But the conversation must be had.

[@johnathanasiou9284]

From the NTSB report, the Piper appears to have read back 30L multiple times. The idea of a transgression zone is a super fantastic one as this also helps maintain separation. Sure, as pilots we can all improve comms but I don't feel comms was the issue per se here, more a lack of spatial awareness, overconfidence, lack of concentration or, "get there itis". Sounds like the Piper was somehow distracted, overshot the approach straying into 30R. With all these similar mid airs happening ie one recent with the much faster plane screaming in 150+ knots colliding with the high wing Cessna in the pattern, maybe we need to possibly mandate ADS-B & TCAS to further warn pilots early enough of traffic in their blind spots or accidental incursions. Another idea is to extend final so that pilots on parallel runways or vastly different speed airplanes are better sequenced giving pilots even more time to detect approach anomalies & take evasive actions. Had they been far higher up in altitude & pilots detected an imminent midair, might be easier to do a slip & lose altitude fast. RIP to the people who lost their lives

[@josephbuckley1574]

I did many a touch and go years ago at PBI with two parallel runways (9/27 L&R). Short finals alongside DC-9's and B-727's in the pattern. I takes some keen awareness and scanning the sky to watch for other aircraft in the pattern and to stay "in your own lane"!!!

[@Palmit_]

Oxford, UK for the record. Brize (for the jets and heavy lifting), and Benson for Appache, Chooks etc. I'm super lucky to be in position that they both pass overhead at relatively low altitude. Well, Brize varies. not often a northern approach. but spectacular viewing when it is.

[@sandymj3w633]

Thanks for playing the London tape. I'm just a civie but my thinking is save idle chit chat for on the ground. It's not like driving a car & being able to pull over. Maybe the pilots are too comfortable? RIP to those who died & prayers for their families.

[@wolfpack4694]

The ADS-B trace looks like a sloppy pattern was flown by the Malibu and that contributed to the midair, in my opinion. Looks like they did a circle to land rather than entering downwind and flying downwind, then a 90 degree base, then another 90 degree turn to final. Being a much faster airplane, I'm really wondering why they cut their downwind and base so short. Were they told to hurry up due to other traffic inbound for 30L? Good advice about getting that other aircraft in sight and keeping them in sight Juan! Very sad.

[@scottp.5161]

Maybe the Malibu pilot had to poop?

[@charwin7168]

I live in Canada where we don’t have ads-B. I thought one of the advantages of ads-B was traffic alerting capability. Seems to me this is pretty busy airspace. I’d be curious to know why the traffic alerting via ads-B in this case didn’t work. A lot of us up here have installed ads-B just so we can travel to the USA. It would seem more needs to be done to make this more effective as a tool for close in operations at airports

[@JohnBare747]

My take on it exactly. Did the Malibu somehow hear that short approach that was called for the Cessna and think it was for them as they did a short approach for sure.

[@acchaven]

Yes, looks like the 'finals' by the malibu were practically non existant. If they were obliged to do, let's say 2 miles finals then both they and the controller would be in a far better position to verify correct runway was being approached. Seems to me low standards that such an approach as was used is legal.

[@mmeyers111]

No doubt the Piper pilot was the primary cause of this accident. There are a couple of factors that limit how far you can extend your downwind leg namely, you will risk penetrating the LAS Class B Core circle. The other thing to consider is there are a couple of radio antennas that (in my opinion) are dangerously close to the runway 30 approach. The ATC instruction to cross runway 30 mid field and enter a left downwind for 30L is SOP for this airport. All four pilots were based out of this airport and would have been familiar with this approach.

[@michelebouvet8074]

Halleleuja someone finally said it. Appalling communication. ATC and pilots speak at lightening speed, slurry speech and they both trail off their voices at the end. A recipie for disaster!

[@dannyfowler7055]

Such a tragic and totally unnecessary loss of life. Thank you Juan for your straightforward reporting.

[@michaelharper4989]

In the summer of 2001 we were returning from Paris and I got to listen to ATC all the way back to SFO. I concur about ATC in the England zone. ATC was rapid fire and seemed calm and collected. Quite a difference over Canada where the controllers seemed happy to have someone to talk to. It was also interesting that the crew kept telling us that we would have to land to refuel at various times. Those calls kept moving further and further west until we landed at SFO.

[@patrickunderwood5662]

Learned to fly at Centennial; the parallel runway situation was emphasized from the beginning. Very exciting to take off and land opposite the exotic traffic that frequented KAPA, but sobering as well. Confirm L//R, eyes open, head on a swivel, clearing turns, no overshoots etc. etc. etc. And yet this exact situation continues to occur at Centennial.

[@scotabot7826]

You're exactly right Juan, I hear some controllers that sound no better than a 20 hour 150 pilot. Kinda scary!!

[@landen99]

Always have your eyes on nearby aircraft. You know they are there, the controller has confirmed they are there, your digital display shows they are there, so your eyes must watch them like a hawk. How do you watch them? Match their altitude, or rock your wings every so often. Better to go around because you couldn't see them than to collide and die. Just because they are supposed to be close, doesn't mean that you can't keep watching them. Or extend the downwind to stagger the landings; think ahead, anticipate the problem.

[@garyreed2206]

I believe 'High Wing/Low Wing' only played a minor part in this. Yes, the Cessna would have difficulty seeing the Piper coming from behind (but he's not looking back) BUT the Piper pilot sits at the wing leading edge, so I believe the LONG NOSE on the piper played more of a role in blocking the Piper pilot from seeing the Cessna; not the low wing.

[@billy4072]

Glad you didn't say. Big nose... I'll get life of Brian , flashbacks..

[@Jumpingoffthecliff]

It's possible the Piper confused the 30R taxi way for the right runway and thought they were lined correctly in 30L. This used to happen in Lincoln Nebraska where the left and right runways were on opposite sides of the terminal. Eventually they changed the numbering so one is 36-18 and the other is 35-17.

[@omisokaomisokas5095]

I did all my training at KVGT and it can get very very busy in the pattern. Often they'll switch all the traffic that are working patterns on 12L/30R to another frequency (119.15 I believe it is) and the main tower frequency 125.7 remains working with arriving and departing traffic. Controllers are always very professional and do a great job at KVGT, even when using the two tower frequencies configuration, they will always let you know there is another traffic on the parallel. Also, there is an antenna very close to the left base and final sectors for 30L, we were always very conscious and cautious about that particular antenna. Unless I missed Juan's saying something about it, it's not clear if indeed they were using the two tower frequencies configuration that maybe could've hinder the situational awareness for the pilots not knowing there were opposite traffic in the parallels. I wonder if these two elements could've play a part in this tragedy. Condolences to the families.

[@ParadigmUnkn0wn]

This reminds me of that Cirrus that flew through a Metroliner on approach to parallel runways. Kinda makes me wonder if procedures need to be looked at for landing parallel runways like this at smaller airports, presumably with non-radar towers. At the big Class B airports I've always seen approaches to parallel runways staggered, albeit with less separation than they would need if they were sequenced for the same runway.

[@Andrew-13579]

Yep, I was thinking the same thing.

[@SMcda]

So, a couple of things I think differently about this accident. I fly this identical aircraft so I do have some knowledge of what should and should not be done in the pattern when flying a JetProp. 1) I don't believe they were lined up for the wrong runway. The pattern they flew was too fast and too tight and too low. I think what happened Was they came around when they leveled off they realized they were too low and lined up on the wrong runway. At that point the 172 descended right in front of the PA-46. I expect the PA-46 was 40kts faster so no time to react. 2) Speeds and ALT: overlying the field they are 555ft low and +-35kts too fast. On downwind they are ~1000 low and +- 39kts too fast. on base they are ~400 ft too low and 15-20kts too fast. 3) I know from flying this plane the circle rather then rectangular pattern will not allow you to maintain visual on the runway and WILL DEFINITELY prevent you from seeing traffic low and at your 9 o'clock going to 12-1 o'clock. There is a reason the standard pattern is not a circle. You need to go wings level to assess your surroundings, make a left turn go wings level again, assess your surroundings and then make a final left turn to final. The Carrier landing does not allow for the visualization necessary. 4) In the experience I have flying into parallel runways, my experience is the protocol for the tower is to alert you of landing traffic on the parallel runway if there is any. In listening to the ATC communication I do not hear the tower mentioning landing traffic on the parallel runway. Based on their speeds and altitude I'm not sure it would have made a difference. I'm certainly not the NTSB just my observations.

[@ridernotrunner]

Thanks for your very clear and cogent analysis. Piper 7CX was cleared to land on 30L, but because of the angle of the Piper's tight turn to final from the overhead entry, the Piper didn't see Cessna 0RA under their right wing. I'm not personally familiar with this cockpit, but photos show there are enough obstructions to lead me to suspect that 7CX leveled the wings 10 seconds early. That put 30R directly in front, with the Cessna ahead (at 7CX's one or two o'clock) and slightly below (visually behind the panel or pillar) with the displaced 30L threshold hidden behind the left pillar... Unfortunately, that sounds like a too-common case of "tunnel vision" (expectation bias) from one of two very experienced pilots, after a long trip from Washington, hours cruising at 23,000 ft, probably tired and anxious to get on the ground... You can finish the thought. It's a recipe for disaster, even before you consider the Controller's apparent failure to provide useful traffic advisories in the period from 1900 to 1903Z (collision was approximately at 19:02:50 UTC, around noon here). 0RA never saw it coming. Plenty of fuel for pattern work. 7CX didn't explode because most of the fuel would have been spent on the trip, but it also decelerated from a much faster speed with magnitudes more force. Deeply tragic and preventable, and a very clear illustration of a disturbing trend in recent crashes and midair collisions (Gillespie/Montgomery Fields come to mind).

[@SkyhawkFlyer]

I've thought before the pattern for a faster bird seemed rather tight and a little fast. As I said before, things are happening fast. There's no time for unnecessary chatter that does not contribute to the safety of flight. I know there are those pilots who like to make things tight and short. More often than not they're being cheap, lazy and irrational for not providing for the distance for the safest outcome. They likely did it a number of times and got lucky... until they were not.

[@Av8or7]

Juan, I haven’t pulled the IFR plates for this airport, but early on people were saying the ILS was into the right runway. My first thought was the Piper was on an IFR flight plan. I’m thinking that the pilot could have set his radios for the ILS to the right runway. If he was mentally expecting to intercept and verbally said runway Left, the pilot of the Piper wasn’t going to get his instrument scan to show what he expected to see. That was one of my first big mistakes during instrument training. ILS approach to the big runway with a visual side step to the short one.

[@cageordie]

These accident reports are always sad, they almost always seem to have been avoidable. It is really surprising how attached people are to casual communications here. My pilot friends in the UK took pride in sounding like retired RAF pilots. Yet here I get told that "good enough" is all that's needed. I'm glad you like the London controllers, I learned what to expect listening to NCL (EGNT) and then later RAE Bedford (RAF Thurleigh, where the USAF was first based in the UK during WWII) when I was a student there in the early 1980s. We had a radio in our lab and listened to our tower all the time, when we weren't listening to actual test flights. So that's where I got my expectations. USAF often visited and sounded just as professional as RAF and ETPS pilots.

[@dcxplant]

Respectfully, this is a Human Factors bonanza for teaching. Parallel runways, close together, one narrower one wider. High performance turbo prob, low performance recip. Left pattern and right pattern. High wing aircraft, low wing aircraft. Cross country flight, training flight. IFR aircraft, VFR aircraft.

[@tomcorniche3844]

I always used to visualise my approach even when ifr. I'd take a mental snapshot of what comms were going on around base leg or long final & play the image forward. A lesson I learned from my very first flying instructor, way back when aircraft were steam powered.

[@John-ru5ud]

"First fly the plane." And that includes the necessity to be fully aware of the situation, including any other aircraft possibly in the area.

[@islandlife756]

Good point. Aviate, navigate, communicate. So often it seems that communicate is leaned upon too much. Hearing is easier than doing, in some situations.

[@gregmarchegiani6656]

Excellent comment about radiotelephony!

[@yetiatlarge555]

Thank you so much for the hard work you do with this channel not only do I find it incredibly informative but the quality of your audio and video production are inspiring to a new contact creator I was recently separated from a career in public safety and I wanted to prove that I could learn a new skill so I've been posting videos to KZbin right brain left brain kind of thing you're example Apple paves away from me to be informative accurate entertaining and yet produce equality product so again thank you

[@markdaniel8740]

I was thinking that since the Malibu was on an IFR flight plan that it may have has the ILS dialed in and using it as an aid. But that would only explain it if the right runway was for precision approach. Then you mentioned that the right was the bigger runway, so probably the where the ILS took them. Then you mentioned that you also reference the ILS on visual approach and if two of us do that, the Malibu might have.

[@charlesbrantley6421]

As 747, 767, A330 career Airline pilot and currently fly a Malibu, I’ve been to VGT and LHR many times. Witness the threat of Complacency at home field and Expectation Bias for Malibu. I always verbalize Left or Right AND associated foot tap the floor while verbalizing. Still after 4 decades of flying, I find myself guilty of complacency and expectation bias….all gets back to Human Factors and the way we wired I guess.

[@boeingpilot7002]

Another great video, Juan! Looking at KVGT on Google Earth, RWY 30R does look like the bigger & wider runway. In reality, RWY 30R is exactly the same width as RWY 30L, but due to the wide, darkened areas to the left & right along the length of RWY 30R (paved, or perhaps loose asphalt?), it looks wider. As was previously mentioned, RWY 30R is actually shorter (4,199' minus 199' displaced threshold = only 4,000' usable for landing); RWY 30L has 5,000' available for takeoff and landing, since it has no displaced threshold. Looking at the ADSB data, it appears to me that the Piper turned downwind a little too close to the airport, for a high performance aircraft. I believe that had the pilot tried to correct to RWY 30L, at the last minute on the base-to-final turn, it would have required an excessively steep-banked turn, close to the ground. Juan, you're right -- expectation bias is an insidious factor that can make someone believe that they heard a clearance correctly (airspeed, altitude, heading, call sign, etc.), or to make them believe, contrary to the facts, that the aircraft is lined up on final approach to the "CORRECT" runway. I believe that we need to extricate the word, "RIGHT", meaning "CORRECT", from aviation language -- not only on the radio, but in the cockpit, as well. "RIGHT" should only be used in reference to direction: "Turn RIGHT to a heading of...", or "Make a RIGHT turn at Taxiway Alfa...", Captain to First Officer, while taxiing, so the F/O can visually clear the turn: "I'm turning RIGHT on Taxiway Charlie", etc. It's unfortunate that there was no CVR in the Piper that could have helped investigators understand the pilots' thought process.

[@hobnob4224]

I don't see any confusion here over the meaning of "right" ("correct" vs "starboard"). The crucial direction was "left," which the controller gave to the Piper, and which the Piper acknowledged: "yeah affirmative runway three zero left that's what I heard." The issue, as I see it, is why the devil couldn't the two people in the Piper tell the left runway from the right when they were in plain sight?

[@rob_smith]

Earlier in my training I tried to line up for the wrong runway a few times (not L/R but the wrong direction when I expected a different flow than the airport was using). Now I have a new item on my landing checklist: enter the correct runway and VFR pattern entry into Foreflight. The VFR pattern feature in Foreflight is awesome and allows you to setup for a midfield downwind, straight-in, or overhead entry to a given runway. This step allows me to visually see my pattern and ensures I'm not confusing my directions, and makes it really easy to confirm I'm lined up for the correct runway on final. And as a bonus it doesn't require the runway to have an instrument approach or an IFR-capable airplane, you can do this for any airport and runway.

[@davidstuart4489]

I'm surprised to hear your complaint about ATC/Pilot communications. I used to fly into Teterboro weekly, and have flown into John Wayne a number of times. Coast Control was very precise, very busy and similar to what you played. Only in the dead of night when things were not busy at all was there any deviation from that discipline. I've flown into Detroit Metro, Dulles, BWI, and others and can't recall a bad or sloppy experience. This was all in the 80s and 90s - so maybe things have just gotten bad since then. If so, I'm really sad to hear that.

[@mickbroadhead7698]

Nearby parallel runways are also a problem. San Jose A.P in California has a nearby small airport (Reed-Hillview). I've witnessed an incoming jet start his approach to KRHV on final. The KSJC ATC alerted him to the wrong airport early enough for him to realign to KSJC . The seem to kinda watch for that. Both are dual rwys in a similar alignment. Of course much different length.

[@nancychace8619]

Thanks for sharing - good report. May sound a little off-base, but I wondered if dyslexia could have been a factor here. I noticed, also, that when the controller tried to confirm his directions he said "right?" instead of "correct". That might have caused the Piper pilot to zero in on "right" runway instead of left, especially if he/she was tired. How far is it from Coeur d'lane to LV? How long had they been in the air? Were they hungry? If blood sugar was down this can cause some cloudiness of thinking. On a long flight, keep your blood sugar up. Take some protein snacks or bars. Sad accident, important lessons. Condolences to all family and friends. RIP.

[@Dwightstjohn-fo8ki]

the older I get the more I am looking for physical "issues" with drivers: undiagnosed or non-linear development of mental lapses. buddy has been a drinker/smoker most of his life. in his car, I'm now noticing a VERY fast drop off in his cognitive abilities. and that's a CAR, not a plane. I'm staying out of his car.

[@lockedin60]

I learn this from another salesman who had been in the high stakes pharmaceutical commissioned sales business. He always made sure that someone understood what he was talking about. For a correct answer he never used the word "right" he always used the word "correct". I would say it would even be more critical when you have Two Parallel Runways. Correct eliminates confusion.

[@josephkelley8641]

Always an honor, Juan - love these.

[@josephkelley8641]

Loved the comment: "You have experiences/UN experienced pilots up there." "Responsible and not so responsible." Like on the 405 in Los Angeles. Or maybe the 10 West or 10 East. Frightening whether you're up there or down here.

[@josephkelley8641]

"Visually remove my expectation bias..." @ 8:25

[@josephkelley8641]

I don't know how Richard W. did it. (hometown friend from back in the day) But spent 30 years in the Tower. Probably a great ATC in his own right. Massive respect.

[@airtrafficmike2865]

Juan, what stood out to me was there was no traffic exchanged with either pilot from the control tower. For the record, I had extensive experience working parallel runways at KMEM. The exchange of traffic is one way to reinforce the landing assignments. That's one way to mitigate "expectations". Technique wise, I wouldn't have issued a clearance for a "short approach" to the C172. With parallel runways that close there's little time to correct the situation from the tower. No matter what, there are no winners in this situation including the Tower controller. There's just a lot of sadness.

[@thomaslawlor4556]

Great explanation, I have been enthralled by the professionalism and plain and clear displayed by you. I was just wondering why the airports use the same number, just adding left or right to it. Would it not be clearer to use a different number? Maybe 30 right and 90 left ?? Maybe a FAA thing ? Please keep up the invaluable information!!

[@gdubactual]

The runway numbers are based on the direction the runway is pointing relative to a magnetic heading. For example, runway 30L is approximately aligned with 300 degrees.

[@islandlife756]

I wondered that too.

[@captaindunsel2806]

The runway numbers are based on the magnetic heading. So runway 4 would be heading 40 degrees, 30 would be 300 degrees and 90 would be .... confusing.

[@truckerhershey7042]

As someone else stated, make the one with the instrument approach 30, and the other one 31, with BIG NUMBERS at the end. Might help, but see my other comment.

[@a.n.7863]

@@truckerhershey7042 there are already big numbers and big Rs and Ls painted on the end of the runway. The only way to miss that from the air is not to be paying attention.

[@Joe_Not_A_Fed]

I agree that radio discipline is massively important...in this case, radio discipline was not the issue. I definitely agree with your 'confirmation bias' assertion. The readback from the Malibu clearly indicated that they knew what runway they were supposed to land on. Perhaps they usually land on the right runway but they read back 'left' at least 3 times. This is almost a carbon copy of the Cessna 340/Cessna 152 accident in California...and they both graphically illustrate that hours, certs and training do not always equal safe. In both instances...high performance aircraft with 2 (presumably well trained and current) pilots on board were the aircraft flown by the pilots most responsible for these accidents and students properly flying circuits, were run down. For a low time student pilot, the cockpit is a stressful place. Sure...they are taught to carefully look out for potential conflicts but no doubt something will be lost. Also, new pilots have a tough time spotting aircraft, especially fast ones. In the case of the Las Vegas accident...I think simultaneous parallel runway operations in a GA environment, is asking for trouble. This kind of accident has happened before. I also think that there's an 'I'm a super duper pilot in a fast airplane and my crap don't stink' attitude that needs to be rooted out of cockpits.

[@davedoe6445]

Right, I think the issue is more like "I'm flying in such a manner that I don't need to worry about joining the pattern or looking out for other VFR aircraft"

[@Joe_Not_A_Fed]

@@davedoe6445 Different chapter of the same book.

[@robbiestruys9127]

Hey Juan. Interesting case. Although you stress clarity (or lack of) in communications or phraseology, this does not seem to be the root cause of this tragedy. Like you stated yourself, over the radio it was clear that the Malibu was cleated for the left runway. No misunderstanding there. They simply flew too wide a left turn and lined up with the right runway. Questions : did they not see both runways and question their position ? Did they not consult any charts beforehand and notice there were parallel runways ? Did they listen to atc communications and observe another acft was cleared for a parallel approach...? Rip to all.

[@mikeboulant8911]

The Malibu pilot and copilot were local to this airport. They were both pilots and very aware of the 2 runways. It’s hard to imagine why he lined up for the wrong runway. This is a common approach and I’m sure they have done it many times. Like you, I believe he simply overshot the final for 30L.

[@doctorartphd6463]

Thank you, Juan. You gave a great presentation.

[@mikemaloney5830]

As I student in a 172 ( a long time ago), I set up to do pattern work.... 11right at kbjc airport. Right turns. A crosswind from my left was pushing me close to my intended runway. There was landing traffic lined up one after another for the parallel runway 11L. The controller said “ I’ll call your base” leaving me, a newbie, to fly an extended downwind with a crosswind from my left moving me towards the intended landing runway. By the time the controller called my base leg turn the runway was well behind me and out of view (old strait back 172 had minimal view behind). I turned base and quickly turned final ( guessing because the right wing blocks the view). The crosswind from the left ,the extended downwind, and the nonexistent view behind conspired to put me right in front of the fast moving parallel traffic. Situational awareness is NOT optional. A student pilot,( I’m now a CFI) needs to be made aware of the SPECIFIC DANGERS AT A GIVEN AIRPORT. An experienced pilot needs to be on his toes landing in an unfamiliar setting. Haze can obscure a parallel runway, especially at a low oblique angle, making a runway with a parallel taxiway appear to be the correct runway. (Harrison Ford ?). Good job Jaun, let’s all keep learning.

[@NicolaW72]

Thank you very much for the very informative analysis!

[@davidmerwin7763]

Well done Juan. Tragic accident. Good lessons, thanks.

[@tomcook5813]

Having worked at VGT for a bit, we had a mechanic that commuted daily in his plane, a very cool Cessna with a round vertical fin. Once in a while he’d get confused and enter the pattern backwards 😅. He was an awesome human being. I think the only issue with the Malibu is it has become a bit of a status symbol. Pilots climbing the ladder quick to attain one with maybe not enough hours to handle it.

[@dalen.8413]

Retired ATC here. Used to be, we would be alerted to “high-performance airplanes with low-performance pilots” by other controllers. The pilot usually made some error in communication or navigation earlier in the flight that would trigger a “hey, watch this guy”. Extra attention would be given to the flight tracking until he/she was leaving your airspace.

[@perossichi1]

In the video Juan calls 30R the long and big runway and he calls 30l the skinny and short runway. Actually both are the same width 75’ and 30l is longer by about 800 ft. So I would say I’m going to land on the left mist runway with a threshold offset relative to 30R.

[@1marktanderson]

Good technique. It’s easy to get suckered into the big Wrong Rwy!

[@GeorgeWMays]

An flight engineer friend told the story of the pilot on MIA approach announcing his position over Hialeah as "at the $2 window." For those of you who are unfamiliar with that area, Hialeah is famous for its race track.

[@steveb1739]

Ja, this is a bad one. Surely as the Malibu pilot crossed overhead, there would have been a good look at the AF layout, and put put the picture in your mind, and deliberately keep you orbit tight to make sure you wind up on the left, and way a way from the transgression zone. It's what I do. VFR or IFR I ALWAYS have a 3D pic etched into my mind, relative to the field / waypoint or whatever. RIP to all.😥

[@ianjameshodges2999]

Not just London Heathrow.. Take a look. at Istanbul as to how precise and well disciplined and organised ATC is in dealing with aircraft from all over the world..

[@Planeviz]

Perhaps it should be standard procedure for the FAA to have different numbers for parallel runways, similar to what they do at LAX. In this case runways 30 and 31. Also, this controller said "I think I got that right…" which is probably not the best phraseology to use in this situation.

[@gregkarson]

Excellent analysis. Thank you.

[@Charon58]

When landing on a parallel runway it is really important to identify BOTH runways so you don’t think the runway you see is the runway you want when it isn’t. A couple of thoughts. 1) The Piper basically did a long circle to final and never really entered a true downwind with segmented base and final. which might have helped them properly identify the two runways. As if they were in a hurry to land…hurrying is probably a bad habit. 2) I didn’t hear that controller give the Piper the Cessna traffic on the parallel Runway. That process might have have gotten the Piper pilots looking for traffic and when they didn’t see it or the parallel runway (since they had miss identified it) they may have become cautious. 3) Where was ADS-B in all this? Shouldn’t they have been getting a warning?

[@CLTmech]

For question/item #3; ADS-B information is an output of GPS position, speed, heading, altitude as part of the transponder system to ATC to augment radar data for controllers. It can be received by other aircraft if the transponder has an ADS-B In capability, and the multi-function display to show it. ADS-B system should not be confused with TCAS, due to sharing some data and components, but are separate systems (with different operating parameters). If I remember correctly, all aircraft are now required to have ADS-B out functionality, but TCAS is still optional.

[@billmoran3812]

Situational awareness! I always listen to other aircraft on frequency and ATC’s instruction to them. Using the ILS as a backup is a great safety tool. I find that ATC comes at smaller airports is often much more casual and non-standard. Very high traffic areas like New York approach are much more precise.