RUNWAY INCURSION | Takeoff Canceled + Go Around at Washington

07/MAR/2023
_____________
Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASAviation
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/

[@VASAviation]

Note to self: don't read something back that doesn't sound like an instruction for you too quick. Kill 'Confirmation Bias'

[@thomasdalton1508]

I think the lesson is not to assume that what you've heard is what you expected to hear. They assumed the clearance was to cross the runway they were expecting to cross and didn't check the number.

[@VASAviation]

@@thomasdalton1508 Absolutely. Confirmation bias.

[@maurice_walker]

While Brickyard of course f'ed up by reading back 4 but then crossing 1, shouldn't the controller have stated "change of plans" more explicitly? Would definitely have avoided this. It's not like confirmation bias is unheard of. (Asking as a total amateur.)

[@smgibb]

@@thomasdalton1508 While I agree, shouldn't a safety measure be the control tower noting that current instructions are not going to jive with previous instructions. Something like "cancel previous instructions. continue down taxiway....etc"

[@tomgreene9098]

The hold line on the taxiway at that location appears to be marked for both 1/19 and 4/22. Seems like the controller might have used "cross 4" to mean cross both since there is no where to stop in the middle, and obviously the pilots understood it that way. But I suppose the correct instruction would be something like "cross runway 1, cross runway 4"

[@ValNishino]

Whatever resulted in the incident, at least the call to cancel and the abort were timely and assertive. Looked like there was more safety margin left with this than with some of the others.

[@robertzeitz3924]

Thankfully the transmissions to stop weren't stepped on by someone else making a call. If they had been, this incident could have been different. Can't depend on good luck indefinitely.

[@hotlavatube]

I remember another incident in 2017 where the pilot of Air Canada 781 didn’t respond to SIX radio calls telling them to abort their landing as the runway still had a plane on it. ATC even tried a last resort warning light aimed at the plane but no response. ATC had to hustle a plane across the adjacent runway (which also had a plane landing) to clear the taxiway to get the other plane off the runway of the non communicating plane. The plane landed fine, and claimed radio problems but I think the prevailing theory was they had switched to ground radio frequency early.

[@paulnieuwkamp8067]

@@robertzeitz3924 It sounds like it WAS stepped on, by UAL2003 themselves transmitting their aborted takeoff. Tower and pilots noticed the problem at the same time, and the pilots let the tower know DAL2476 couldn't land.

[@sleepyjay2664]

Love the photo overlay of the airport layout. Makes it very easy to see the relative positions, and understand what happened. VAS Aviation rules!

[@OppositeOpinion]

yeah, the visuals are great especially that SHADOW - it is so super!

[@CheatOnlyDeath]

The FAA is holding an emergency summit to investigate this recent increase of runway incursions and close calls. So it's not just something that happens at this rate without drawing this much attention. It's real. It's a problem. And it has been recognized by the FAA.

[@hewhohasnoidentity4377]

While the FAA simultaneously claims this is the safest time in the history of aviation.

[@2011blueman]

@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 Statistically it is the safest time in the history of aviation.

[@sbirish25]

I think there's been 6 or 7 close calls/runway incursions just this year

[@alexandernordstrom1617]

@@2011blueman That depends on your time window and how you define safety. Statistically, Russian roulette is safe, until it isn't.

[@morganghetti]

So a bunch of people completely removed from the day to day operations at the airports will discuss what's going on at the airports.

[@joelleerickson2642]

I flew into LAX a few years ago on the north complex and needed to taxi to the south complex. The Tower flat-out told me to cross the wrong runway. I knew what he meant, since I was holding short of the parallel runway, but I was not going to move those tires one inch until I heard the correct runway on frequency. Sounds like this was an excellent study in confirmation bias for the pilots in the face of a confusing ATC instruction.

[@jaraujo1021]

This is a little bit different than that. Have you seen a sign array when you are crossing multiple runways like these guys did. I worked at an airport that had one and even the controllers would flip flop from time to time which runway they were instructing me to cross.

[@rickyjanzen6684]

​@@jaraujo1021 If there are two runways stacked on top of each other, clearance should be given for crossing both every time. Unless you want planes to make friends with each other, then by all means, shorthand instructions into ambiguity.

[@mrgiggle5164]

@@rickyjanzen6684 I know what should happen I’m just telling what sometimes happens. And the fact that the pilots were given an instruction to cross a runway that they did in fact need to cross probably contributed to this misunderstanding.

[@nitehawk86]

@@rickyjanzen6684 Either way, the ATC said "cross 4 at J", but brickyward wasn't on J, it was on F, which is the taxiway that crosses both 1 and 4 and leads to 33. Both parties were wrong though I feel that a plane crossing an intersection they were not ordered to cross is "wronger".

[@RaspySquares]

9 out of the last 20 videos posted on this channel have been similar close calls.

[@Arcadiez]

All in the USA

[@Cadence-qt2ux]

USA hooray

[@forsyth8296pti]

​@@Arcadiez is that a dig at the United States? What other country in the world handles 45000 flights a day?

[@mando074]

​@@forsyth8296pti who cares if it's a "dig" or not? What matters is the events occurred and also the safety of everyone involved. I'd rather the U.S. receives criticism and gets better at operations than no criticism and a disaster happens.

[@luschmiedt1071]

​@@forsyth8296ptihow dare he criticise the glorious United States of America! The US is the best, even in pilot deviations, and if we want to crash a plane due to negligence we will do that because PATRIOTISM! No one is as good as we are, even at being bad at stuff.

[@QuovatisPS]

At the end the tower confirmed they had permission to cross the runway, but they didn't (following their own instructions). In an extended version, the tower comes back and says "I was told to give you a number" as if they still didn't understand what happened.

[@waffle911]

The tower controller (in charge of runways) and the ground controller (in charge of taxiways) were clearly not on the same page here.

[@hotlavatube]

(supervisor smacks ATC on back of head) "Uh... I was told to give you this number."

[@aarondoty2210]

​@@hotlavatube lol😅

[@joshuadolan3811]

He was told to cross rwy 4…he turned and crossed 1. Pilot error

[@hotlavatube]

@@joshuadolan3811 It's both ATC and pilot error. ATC fouled up first by giving them conflicting instructions. ATC gave them instructions to head to runway 33 (Juliet to Foxtrot to 33, hold short 1), but later gave them instructions to head to runway 1 (cross 4 at Juliet). One of those two instructions was wrong. The ATC failed to recognize their mistake at the readbacks. The pilots should have asked ATC to "confirm" the conflicting order (triggers ATC to review what they just said) and to ensure they had clearance to cross 1&4 at Foxtrot, as that was the original path told to them. The pilots should have known they were not crossing 4 at Juliet, which was their last instruction. The pilot's final mistake was entering runway 1 without clearance. The ATC's final mistake was not realizing what he had done as he obviously had to be reminded by a supervisor who belatedly made him inform the pilots about the possible pilot deviation.

[@AADFWspotters2]

In the mind of the crew of the E -jet, this looks like confirmation bias. Very powerful

[@roderickcampbell2105]

Hello AADFW... Agreed. Confirmation bias is all powerful. It seems like all humans are born with it and even the best of humans are susceptible to it. An abundance of caution is ideal, but of course we are all in a hurry.

[@VASAviation]

Indeed. They had "cross 1 at F for 33" in mind probably since even requesting taxi (we brief taxi route before taxi) and that last instruction - even with a readback - was definitely not for 33.

[@sredgate35]

Was their clearance from ground to “cross RWY 4 at J” their only indication of a RWY assignment change? Either way I agree with what you guys said, they did hear what they were expecting about crossing 1 for 33. I feel bad for the pilots. Sounds like no one told them expect RWY 1 for departure now. They probably wouldn’t have had that confirmation bias happening if that was the case.

[@kiwiflyer2190]

@@VASAviation Agreed that the pilot should have caught the change, but they also didn't receive an amended clearance. I've found that general radio competency in the US is lacking, both from an ATC and pilot perspective. Everything should be crystal clear and not open to any interpretation, especially in an extremely busy environment. The fact that runway 1 was active makes any runway crossing more dangerous, and I question whether they really should have been cleared to cross from a taxi spot, and perhaps a hold short would have been more appropriate given the very active runway. I suspect ATC will get the blame, as ground and tower weren't on the same page, and Brickyard had a prior clearance to cross that was not canceled. If they were going to change the runway, they should have said sometime like "Brickyard 4736, cancel taxi clearance, Now departing on Runway 1, Taxi by Juilet, cross runway 4, hold short of runway 1 at Echo." They were set up for a runway 33 departure, so they would have to rerun the numbers and rebrief the departure anyway.

[@AADFWspotters2]

@@kiwiflyer2190 competency maybe not, but complacency and slang and non Standard phraseology is what I’ve been hearing the most while I’m flying, which just exacerbates read back, hear back issues.

[@tirwin75]

This sounds like a controller communication issue. Ground not getting updates from tower and tower not getting updates from ground.

[@jazzi_0453]

In my opinion that was just ground being stupid. His instruction "cross 4 at J" was save and United 2003 could have departed regardless. But it conflicted with the initial taxi clearance to runway 33 for the Brickyard. Ground didn't pay attention and the brickyard pilots didn't catch the error.

[@jazzi_0453]

Very confusing instructions by the ground controller

[@VASAviation]

Clear instructions but definitely not for the intended departing runway...

[@PatrickSennett]

Either the Tower and Ground controller weren't talking, or the Tower blew it. Either way, it's on the controllers and not the aircraft crews.

[@richwightman3044]

@@VASAviation I don’t think you’ve ever actually been in a cockpit.

[@mrjaycam18]

@@PatrickSennettdisagree he said clear cross runway 4 at J and they read that back. Initially they were cleared to cross runway 1 at hotel. They should’ve verified

[@TiagoSeiler]

@@PatrickSennett He said "Cross 4 at J". He never looked at the sign next to the rwy which would have said "F 19 1"

[@ToxicScorpionnnn]

How the controller went from a calm state to panicked while telling United 2003 to abort takeoff is terrifying

[@tpb5542]

The buck does stop with the pilot because this incident was caused by failing to comply with the one taxi instruction that wasn't countermanded, (short of runway 1 at J) but ground control needs to own their contribution to this mess because they gave the conflicting instructions which was likely a key factor in this close call happening. Glad to see tower was on the ball here.

[@Q1776Q]

The incident could have been avoided if the controller stated ... 'cancel previous and continue straight on Juliet to the end, cleared to cross RWY 4'.

[@ikefork2606]

Yep....an amended taxi clearance to a different runway demands cancellation of a previous taxi clearance.

[@courgettee]

but then he couldn't say "crossforatjuletmontar" as fast as possible

[@mikelp72]

I don’t think the Ground Controller realized/remembered that plane was on its way to RWY 33. He just lost track of who was going where, hence the bad taxi clearance.

[@Q1776Q]

@@mikelp72 Yes..

[@joachim2464]

Why did ATC say they had cleareance? Clearly they did not.

[@jazzi_0453]

Because who cares, it already happened, no need to discuss on frequency

[@guywithsocks]

Tower cleared them to cross 4. I’m sure the pilots being busy in the cockpit “heard” the original instruction to cross 1

[@DISOPtv]

They did have clearance, runways 4 and 1 intersect there and they could say cross 1 or 4 and the plane would have clearance. It's very confusing and a hot spot for sure.

[@VASAviation]

@@DISOPtv Taxiway J does not cross runway 1 anywhere over there

[@DISOPtv]

@@VASAviation Right, true, F does and they were told originally to hold short of 1 at F, so in their head crossing 4 would have made sense, but yeah, very confusing.

[@bdon661]

This is getting out of hand. Experienced pilots AND experienced air traffic controllers are retiring at unprecedented rates. The aviation industry has been trying to wish the demographic disaster that is now upon us away for two decades and is now trying to play catch up by hiring people with historically low levels of experience and credentials and then rushing them through training programs that are cut to the bone. Add to this the pressure of increasing the capacity of already obsolete airports not by adding runways and infrastructure, but simply by increasing the ops tempo or frequency of takeoffs and landings. This is a recipe for disaster.

[@areza15143]

At 0:35, Ground gives them an instruction inconsistent with their prior clearance. They should’ve come to a halt at that moment and asked for clarification. Even with their first clearance, they were told to hold short of runway one, though not as clearly as that. “Hold short of one” is different than “hold short runway one.” Despite the controllers’ mistake, it’s up to the PIC to understand and follow clearances.

[@davidgraham7932]

Interesting one. I can completely understand why the pilots thought they had clearance to cross, given the instructions they received. Surprised this hasn't happened more often at this airport.

[@Quick_Bisquick]

But they were given clear instructions, HOLD SHORT runway 01 then it was changed to cross 4 at Juliet. There are signs all over the place showing that they are on Juliet, as soon as they turned they would have seen the runway identifier sign showing 19-01 in big bold characters on a red sign, they also would have seen a taxi way identifier showing them turning onto foxtrot. if they were told to use 04 as a taxiway to cross 01 then I would understand but the controller only mistake is he did not state that he was going to 01 instead of 33.

[@cageordie]

​@@Quick_Bisquick Followed immediately by 4?

[@Quick_Bisquick]

@@cageordie I don't follow. Runway 04 is not active so he was not told to hold short he should have continued straight crossed over 04 then rejoined the Juliet taxiway.

[@YaroslavNechaev]

@@Quick_Bisquick runway being active or not doesn't matter at all. You are crossing both 1 AND 4 if you were going to 33, so the instruction from the controller must have looked to pilots as a sloppy phraseology but otherwise making complete sense. Yes you are crossing at F instead of J in this case but controllers make such mistakes all the time and if you don't tell the pilot that they are suddenly going to a different runway - this is what is going to happen. It's a controller issue - they probably forgot they've assigned runway 33 to the airplane in question

[@Quick_Bisquick]

@@YaroslavNechaev but he wasn't told to cross 01. If he was kept on the f taxiway and held short he would have been told. Cross runway01 continue on f cross runway 04 continue f and hold short 33. They would not have said cross runway 4 only.

[@kristin7146]

That was such a cluster that I had to rewatch several times to figure out wtf was going on.

[@StephenCole1916]

Geez, my home airport. They run the arrivals and departures really close at DCA!

[@ikefork2606]

Yep....Aircraft on approach 2 miles out for runway 1......when UAL cleared for takeoff on runway 1. That's really, really close at 140 kts Vref+10.

[@jxlars]

All day, everyday. The controllers there are ridiculously good with spacing and ensuring one in, one out every 3-4nm on the same strip of pavement. Also while controlling numerous medical, police. and military helicopters.

[@sarahalbers5555]

Same.

[@180mph9]

Nice to see the local controller was on top of the situation 150%, nice work sir.

[@180mph9]

Thank you VAS for the nice presentation.

[@davemcddd]

The graphics are a fantastic addition!!!!

[@pesetamaya3509]

I like the new explanation setup brother it gives better perspective of the incident great job 1 million comes up to your channel as always and may God keep you safe in the air captain

[@ikefork2606]

....ATC improperly amended Brickyard 4736's taxi instructions .....from runway 33 to runway 1.....and clearance by transmitting "Brickyard 4736, cross 4 at Juliet, monitor tower."

[@guywithsocks]

Tower dropped the ball? Pilots busy in the cockpit read back on automatic? Ouch 😬

[@sebastiantowles2106]

SUper well made, this needs some more views

[@427SuperSnake1]

It’s about time, it’s been a few hours since the last one…

[@diegoramirez8674]

The controller was clueless. They were instructed to cross runway 4 and they went into runway 1. Then the controller told them that they were indeed cleared to cross 1 when they weren’t.

[@Eoraph]

Great visualization, thanks

[@2Phast4Rocket]

The controllers at the various airports are short staff, because of retirement or something else. They sometime want airplanes to expedite taxiing, either because they are inexperience or short of staff and they have to monitor more traffic than usual. Two years ago, during covid, the pacing on the ground was very normal. starting the middle of last year and now, I am kind of scared of complicated taxiing instructions because the controllers want to rush airplanes into positions and I had to be a lot more vigilant about runway crossing these days.

[@ammar20665]

The FAA issued a Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) two days ago about the recent RWY incursions. It is good to see that actions are taken promptly.

[@sfalpha]

The pilot expect permission to cross 1 and 4 from prior instructions, but not expect runway change. Any pilot could think ATC was mistaken J for F in this case. ATC should explicitly notified the Runway Change to forbid existing instructions and tell pilots to expect something NEW, not just permission to cross runway from old instructions.

[@marsgal42]

I would have expected an instruction along the lines of cancel taxi to runway 33, change to runway 1, taxi via juliet. They were cleared to cross runway 1 and that clearance was never cancelled. Edit: I stand corrected. And can see how the flight crew got confused.

[@SportyMabamba]

They were cleared to hold short of 1

[@VASAviation]

Brickyard was never cleared to cross runway 1, but to cross runway 4.

[@floatinflyinandfishing]

runway 4 is closed indef…should atc be giving crossing instructions for a closed runway? equal fault for both pilot and controller

[@lornes7526]

​@@floatinflyinandfishing FAA rules are that aircraft shall not cross inactive or closed runways without ATC instruction.

[@floatinflyinandfishing]

@@lornes7526 I couldnt remember, havent flown in a loooong time. either way atc should have known what rwy they were cleared for and pilots should have been paying better attention. This is getting scary

[@pistonburner6448]

Did you see my comment, VASAviation? I asked if it was you or KZbin who is censoring my comments here? Great new graphic representations by the way!

[@NiceLasers]

This is starting to get scary

[@a_goblue2023]

I live in the DC area and we have had really strong winds outta the northwest lately which is why they are using Runway 33. It’s usually rarely used because it’s only 5000ft. The usual instruction for going to runway 1 is take Juliet, cross 4 at J and hold short of 1 . I think the tower thought he had given Brickyard the normal instructions which is why he said cross 4 at J. Brickyard was likely confused and crossed Runway 1 and 4 at Foxtrot. So both parties are wrong in this case. Brickyard was never cleared to cross Runway 1

[@sfulibarri]

At least this one seems like an honest misunderstanding of not the clearest taxi instructions as opposed to planes being cleared to land on short finals before planes on the runway are even rolling.

[@PHX787]

Another one

[@barbaram5694]

Wow these incidences with the large commercial flights are becoming too close for comfort imho “scary” ✈️😱

[@javiercaselli]

Whatever the mistake was, the situation was (luckily) handled promptly and professionally.

[@VASAviation]

The TWR guy was indeed ready to cancel at any time looking out the window monitoring his runways

[@goldboy3505]

Tough situation. Didn't have clearance to cross RWY 1 but RWY 4 at J. This would have been confusing for the pilots as they thought they were still taxiing out to RWY 33 which also requires crossing RWY 4 so it likely didn't register as an abnormal crossing especially since the controller didn't give a a new clearance limit of RWY 1 instead of RWY 33. This will be mostly pilots fault with some blame to the controller for not updating the clearance limit to the new RWY and route.

[@markmartin9346]

before lining up or crossing any runway, even with clearance, I've always looked to see if it was clear. Have seen aircraft approaching the wrong runway like DFW taking off 17R and landing 17C

[@JuanPerez-vv5lk]

wow, this runway incursions are more common that what I expected.

[@justalostneko]

Apparently from extended voice recordings we hear that the ATC had previously confirmed that brickyard was to line up for runway 33 and there were no change to previous plans for taking off from 33; but the ATC changed them from 33 to 1 without notifying the pilots and obviously the pilot also made a mistake and read back without confirming and just crossed what he expected/thought he was cleared for...

[@brysonwilliamson6269]

Error provocative environment created by the controller instructions. At one point, it sounds like controllers changed, possibly adding more confusion. The FAA has to take a deep dive on this matter and get past the human error aspect of fault. It's much more complex in nature.

[@northmaineguy5896]

I reviewed this a couple of times and this is a clear-cut pilot deviation. Brickyard was cleared to, "Cross Runway 4 at Juliet" and he turned too soon and turned onto the active runway instead. Forget about what the controller said when the pilot asked if he screwed up. If it matters, I am a retired ATC and a 50-year professional pilot.

[@GarldBonkdonk]

Exactly this. Confusion or not, "Cross 4 at Juliet" has only one possible location to cross. It's not 'Cross 1 at Foxtrot' at any point. If Brickyard was confused, they chose to act instead of clarify. That's on them. They never received a 'Cross 1' or 'Foxtrot', so that turn was a deviation even if they were confused if they had clearance or not.

[@kentd4762]

What a nightmare. All those crossing runways...

[@AaronShenghao]

Ground probably should emphasize change of runway. I do quite understand how come the pilots got confused, they are probably quite busy configuring the airplane while holding short at 1. Then as they got clearance to cross they tried to move as soon as they got clearance… throwing cross which runway out of the windows.

[@buddycheck84]

Seems it was clearly the fault of 4736. The change in runway, meaning cross Runway 4 was not clarified as a change but was repeated back exactly.

[@davethenerd1369]

At the beginning, Brickyard is cleared to 33 and told to hold short of 01. At around 0:35, Brickyard is cleared to cross 04 (heading towards 01 I presume). The ground controller should have told Brickyard there was a change of runway. Brickyard heard first a hold, then 30 seconds or so later, a clear to cross and assumed the same runway.

[@GarldBonkdonk]

"Cross 4" isn't "Cross 1". Crew should have understood the difference and knew they were crossing the wrong runway then they were cleared for.

[@tedsaylor6016]

Crew should have stopped aircraft and asked questions when they were told to cross wrong runway from original clearance. These days you've got to be extra careful.

[@MidEx216]

I don't believe there was a change of runway. I think the ground controller saw Brickyard taxiing down Juliet, and gave him the next instruction for a 1 departure, forgetting he was going to 33. Then when the Local controller asked what happened, the Ground controller took the blame, saying "I told him to cross", not realizing he had told him to cross a different runway. My opinion.

[@BIGCHRIS7600]

So question to all the pilots and aviation geeks; I heard the plane taking off is supposed to turn on those EXTREMELY bright lights🌞🌞🌞 after they're cleared for take off. If that's true, shouldn't that be a warning to surrounding aircraft to stay out of the way - this guy is getting ready to take off??? I mean those lights are so bright you have to literally have to be blind not to see them, and we'll exclude heavy fog too in this scenario.

[@AviationJeremy]

I can absolutely see where the tower’s instructions confused the pilots. They expected to cross 04 after crossing 01, so in being cleared across 04, they thought that they were also cleared across 01. The pilot’s dropped the ball by failing to read back the assumed clearance to cross 01, which would have stopped the chain of events in it’s tracks. *What’s more, tower did not specify an intersection that might have alerted the crew, nor did the crew read one back. Fortunately, the tower was very quick to prevent the incursion from becoming a crash. *Thank you @Toneale for correcting me: I missed the “at Juliet”.

[@YaroslavNechaev]

Yea reading back the clearance as you understood it in-full even when ATC uses some non-standard short-hand stuff is super helpful. I got "cleared for takeoff" clearances without specifying the runway way too many times but I always read back the runway I intend to takeoff from just so that controller can double check on their side that I'm at the right place.

[@toneale]

Actually, the tower controller said cross Rwy4 at Juliet. The previous clearance was Rwy1 at Foxtrot. Nevertheless, that was an incorrect instruction. If I get a hold short instruction and then am told to cross, I may miss the change as well. This wasn't intended to be a change, it was a ground control error.

[@AviationJeremy]

@@toneale I missed that, thanks for the correction.

[@dew9103]

and btw it's ground who issue cross 4 at Juliet not tower

[@bridgecross]

"We did have clearance to cross that runway, right?" "Affirmative." yeah, just not *that* runway!

[@DISOPtv]

Very confusing intersection there with 1 and 4 crossing at the same point, so a clearance to cross 4 would also apply to 1 it would seem as they are intersecting at F. ATC should know this is a hot spot and choose their instructions carefully.

[@ethanbrandt1827]

He said cross 4 at Juliet. Earlier he said hold short of 1. They should have the runway diagram out and have been confused when he said cross 4 at J because that didn’t match where they were going earlier.

[@waynep343]

I wonder if this happens less at LAX. Because they installed in pavement lights along the runway at the taxiways that come on when the runway is cleared for take off and landings. This prevents ground vehicles from crossing runways there too.

[@chrismercadante8684]

Also, none of the runways themselves intersect. Sure you have taxiways and crossings, but the intersection risk is cut to 0.

[@billywhizz6483]

Why are there not barriers like the pop up poles at car parks, with great big flashing lights on, at every junction going across the active runway? ATC could lower them to let a plane cross when safe to do so.

[@rakeemGTR]

Wow that could have been extremely disastrous

[@rubenvillanueva8635]

It appears the controller forgot which rwy Brickyard was assigned for departure. The initial taxi clearance was correct. He, then later gave permission to cross Rwy 4 at Joliet, this is the error. Taxiway Foxtrot, crosses both Rwy 4 and Rwy 1. It appears Brickyard, just selectively heard cross Rwy 4, even though he he was entering Twy Foxtrot, and continued across Rwys 4 and 1. Had Brickyard, been more aware if the taxi chart, they could have questioned the controller, as Twy Joliet crosses Rwy 4, further south and would not take them to Rwy 33. All involved should better start listening up to what is being transmitted, and question if in doubt.

[@Jonfocus03]

This hurts my head.

[@brucesato7511]

From my perspective it’s a pilot deviation. Was told to go to runway 33 via N J and to hold short of runway one at F. Sometime in the middle of the middle of the taxi they were given a different taxi instruction to continue on J cross a different runway (In this case 4) they were not at all given clearance to cross runway 1 only clearance to cross runway 4 so based on that it’s a pilot deviation. Pilots were assuming they were cleared to cross runway 1 but when in fact they weren’t.

[@ricklowers8873]

Um, I didn’t hear ground say ANYTHING about a runway change to 1. He simple told Brickyard that they were cleared across rwy 4. UNFORTUNATELY, no one caught it. Looked/sounded like Brickyard made a BAD assumption (Not for me to determine cause; only state my observation). There’s ALWAYS more to the story than you can get from these recordings. But yes, this appears to be happening far to often anymore. DCA can (is) a real challenge. As for myself; anytime I went through there! I’d refuse using rwy 15/33. Partly because of exactly this scenario…takeoff or landing.

[@dre-aguto]

The three plane shuffle!

[@eugeniustheodidactus8890]

Ground control pulled a fast one on Brickyard who wasn't paying attention. NO MORE TEXTING WHILE TAXIING.

[@sturmovik1274]

Not that it particularly matters, but for those who are interested Brickyard 4736 was an E175 to Raleigh/Durham, United 2003 was an A319 to O'Hare and Delta 2476 was an A321 from Detroit.

[@jaysmith1408]

Republic for United?

[@sturmovik1274]

@@jaysmith1408 Republic operates for American Eagle, Delta Connection and United Express. In this case they were either American or Delta, as those two have service from DC National to RDU and United does not.

[@buttersPbutters]

Even the instruction to United to turn left on Alpha and hold short of runway 1 is not technically correct. The inflection of the pilot's readback indicates some confusion at the hold-short part. The pilot would have to assume based on the situation that the taxi route in proper phraseology would be "Alpha Juliet Charlie, hold short of runway 1." That's what the controller undoubtedly meant, although it's not what they said, and the United pilot figured it out from context. A lot of the time, being casual about phraseology works out okay in an English-speaking country. The intent is still understood. But sometimes it's not, and that's why we have these communication standards.

[@gastonpossel]

In the relevant pathway to runway 33 that the pilot had in mind, he had to cross 1 and 4 in tandem, but via taxiway F not J. He was on J already. I think the controller made a mistake in the clearance (giving directions to a different runway than planned), and the pilot did not pick up the confusion. Since the crossing of 4 and taxiing through J was part of the original itinerary, the pilot failed to realize that the clearance was for a different intersection. Confirmation bias. I also would add that the word 'Juliet' in the clearance is unrecognizably fast, but the pilot did read it back correctly.

[@gordonfranken4985]

I fly out of DCA often and listen to ATC while I’m there. Runway 33 is rarely used - only the smallest regional jets can use it. It’s pretty standard practice for ground to handover to tower as planes cross rwy 4 heading to 1. It seems like the controller was on auto-pilot when he saw the plane approaching the handoff point and forgot that they were going to 33. The pilot also didn’t catch the incorrect clearance.

[@Falcon-um7vo]

What the actual hell is going on lately with all these ATC and pilot screwups on takeoffs? I never remember so many incidents in such a short frame of time!

[@SP-qo1so]

It's because VAS is searching for a publishing more of these.... they have always happened

[@JetFixer003]

its always happening we just dont hear about it

[@AADFWspotters2]

1700-2000 surface movement events (incursions) per year, but the vast majority are not in the severe category. Incursions do have categories, look them up you will see the different parameters. The ones recently have been A or B on the severity, hence the increased attention.

[@Falcon-um7vo]

@@SP-qo1so I know they've always happened, but I'm fairly certain not at this _rate_ . Has VAS made any such statement or are you just guessing? Why would they just recently start focusing on a certain issue?

[@jmanuel625]

FATIGUE

[@pilotandy_com]

Lots of holes in this block of swiss cheese all lined up perfectly

[@dashriprock4308]

Brickyard should have questioned whether there was a runway change. I would have stopped and asked for clarification when he said cross RWY 04 on J. The ground controller failed to amend his taxi instructions and point it out to Brickyard; then Brickyard inexplicably started to cross runway 01 thinking I don't know what. Decades ago we had started our takeoff roll on 33 but then the tower told us to stop. He had us back taxi on 33 and do it again because he misjudged the speed of a AAL MD-88 landing on 01. Good times, good times.

[@beyondinsanitybr]

I understand the confusion from both sides, the confirmation bias, the unclear instructions from ATC, that should just have said: amend your route, continue on juliet and cross rnwy 4 on juliet and all. But what happened with Clear to the left and Clear to the right before crossing an active?

[@soccerguy2433]

Maybe we should expedite CPDLC. Text instructions can't be blocked or stepped on. No accents etc

[@ejn1011]

The North-seeking arrow pointing right had me all kinds of confused.

[@theprof73]

The whole ground system needs an overhaul. They should use a system of waypoints and put them in the airnav system

[@joshuadolan3811]

Plane i fly has Garmin SafeTaxi. What a game changer. Basically shows the picture of the Vasa airport diagram. Can zoom in and out. Better than foreflight moving map If Brickyard had that he would have known that left turn was a mistake.

[@yohanauguuste]

He definitely has it.

[@scottycatman]

If this is real time, that mistake was caught very quickly, kudos to the controller

[@sfmc98]

This shows you that simply parroting something back does not mean that the person has internalized it. You can easily say things and a separate part of your brain is controlling executive function. This procedure is based on old school understanding of how the brain works and needs to be updated with modern science. Otherwise, it's just a way to pin the blame on pilots without caring about safety.

[@mutsam4278]

The ATC (GND) did not emphasise to Brickyard that there taxi route had been changed. - - clear under-communication from the ATC there - - But then again, Brickyard didn’t hold short of Runway 1 as initially instructed regardless.

[@hadenshaffer9674]

I'm highly surprised no one caught a number to call right then.

[@khrenaud]

In longer videos of this event the tower gave the pilots a number to call.

[@scotty523]

Great save by DCA tower. Bad instructions from DCA GND but RPA4736 should have paid more attention and challenged DCA GND on which runway for departure.

[@andrewlindop2606]

“Cross 4 on J” omg brickyard 🙄🙄🙄

[@sonoftherepublic9792]

The need for radio expediency is understood - but everyone needs to s l o w down enough to speak clearly and concisely. The trophy for who can talk the fastest is easily tarnished by catastrophe.

[@jameshawkins6201]

It seems like there are more and more of these incursions/near misses recently.

[@johnthompson5741]

There should’ve been, from ground, a clearance chance from 33 to 1 and an instruction to amend taxi instructions, as well as from the pilots, a red flag raised after being told to hold short runway 1 but then instructed to cross runway 4. I can’t tell what was intended by ATC but a lot of holes that led to this. They did well to fix the problem though

[@bwakser]

RPA 4736 did NOT have clearance to cross R1; why did ATC tell him after the incursion that they did?

[@BillySugger1965]

Pilot error contributed to by change in clearance mid-taxi. Pilot should have caught the change, but we’re all human. Excellent preventive action by controller and crew on takeoff roll.

[@TheRealJackAvalon]

Watch the FAA decide to up the Total Time requirement for ATP to 2500 hours because yet another 1k hours flying Cessna's and Piper's will prevent this....

[@wintercame]

🤔😟😟

[@andychatton7609]

Here we go again!!! Who's got the popcorn?!

[@Boodieman72]

Sounds like another ATC error. Sounds like the airport has runway incursion monitors based on the rapid ATC response.

[@world2give77]

I'm sure this has been said 600 times in the comments already, but ground control pulled a fast one on Brickyard and changed their departure runway without directly telling them...

[@consortiumxf]

When United reads back "Cleared for takeoff, rolling, United 2003" - is it possible they read it back this way (not common format for read-back when cleared for takeoff) because United saw the other plane beginning to turn on the (incorrect) taxi way that intersects the runway they are cleared for?

[@aarondoty2210]

To be fair the controller should have said "Brickyard 436 continue on J , cross runway 4 at J hold short runway 1, monitor tower." This would have cleared any confusion or "autopilot actions" of the pilot(s).

[@aarondoty2210]

Also, mentioning that there is a runway change would have helped too.

[@christophermercado5466]

On the 14th of March, I was behind a Delta flight out of Charlotte. They had a fuel leak and had to turn back. Do you have that tape?

[@Joe4USMC]

Why the increase in runway incursions? A confluence of factors including too few ATCOs due to retirement, not enough money to hire and train replacements, and a similar demographic push on the pilot side. A large portion of the most experienced pilots are aging out (due to the Age 65 Rule) and there aren't enough *experienced* pilots to replace them; inexperienced pilots are being put into positions that were previously held by more experienced aviators. TL;DR -- Lack of experience on both the ATC side and the pilot side, combined with overwork and burnout because there simply are no replacements on staff.

[@bigdpurser]

WOW 😳

[@HMweather]

I saw some comments about strong winds resulting in RWY 33 being used. I have never in my entire DC life seen anything but RWY 1 used, interesting if that is correct.

[@othername1000]

At this rate they're going to have to go with a surface trolley system with safety interlocks and a controller. Maybe somebody figures all they have to do is let this get bad enough to the point where a giant accident happens. Then they can mandate the redesign and installation of the ground tow system for all surface movement, and then they'll save all that taxi fuel and thereby "Save the Earth", at the cost of only 600 lives or something.

[@Neil_]

If you're going to amend taxi clearance and runway mid taxi, be clear about the fact that it's an amendment.

[@porgo61]

DC runs fast and landings + departures go out in quick timings where people are already have engines spooled and ready to go quick when called. Always verify you have the right runway cross clearance no matter how congested that ground controller gets. Who cares if they yell at you for holding up a line of guys taxiing to the runway. Easier to explain why you stopped to the FAA.

[@danielmcconnell5902]

Dammit Ground!

[@WinterTM]

This is why when saying anything about a runway you should be very vigilant about the read back and what you're supposed to do