Canada A320 at Calgary on Dec 2nd 2016, continued takeoff despite aircraft crossing runway
Last Update: February 5, 2018 / 18:13:03 GMT/Zulu time
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 2, 2016
Classification
Incident
Airline
Air Canada
Flight number
AC-221
Departure
Calgary, Canada
Destination
Vancouver, Canada
Aircraft Registration
C-FDQV
Aircraft Type
Airbus A320
ICAO Type Designator
A320
The Canadian TSB reported the SA-226 had been cleared to cross the runway when the A320 was about 2200 feet into the takeoff roll. The Canadian TSB opened an investigation into the occurrence rated "risk of collision".
On Feb 5th 2018 the TSB released their final report concluding the probable cause of the serious incident was:
Findings as to causes and contributing factors
- The runway incursion occurred after the combined ground controller cleared C-FGEW to cross Runway 29 while Air Canada flight 221 was departing on Runway 29.
- Due to a strong habit intrusion error, the combined ground controller reverted to the frequently practised routine of instructing the aircraft to cross Runway 29 without prior coordination with the combined tower controller.
- The infrequent use of Runway 29 during the day, together with the absence of relevant training scenarios or simulation of Runway 29 operations, meant that controllers rarely encountered situations where the need to coordinate prior to executing crossings of Runway 29 was reinforced.
- The runway jurisdiction system did not provide a sufficiently compelling cue to ensure that the combined ground controller did not revert to the well-practised routine of clearing aircraft across Runway 29 without coordination.
Findings as to risk
- If proposed safety actions are not tracked to completion, there is an increased likelihood that identified safety risks will not be effectively mitigated.
The TSB analysed:
The combined ground controller was aware that the tower controller had jurisdiction of Runway 29, and that arrivals and departures were taking place on that runway. In the 15 minutes preceding the occurrence, the combined ground controller had received a transfer-of-position-responsibility briefing, prompted by the change in runway configuration. The combined ground controller had issued taxi instructions for ACA221 to proceed to Runway 29, and had provided taxi instructions to 2 other aircraft that had already landed on Runway 29.
The combined ground controller intended to coordinate with the combined tower controller prior to clearing C-FGEW to cross Runway 29. However, at the time when C-FGEW was approaching Runway 29, the combined ground controller automatically instructed the aircraft to cross without coordinating with the combined tower controller.
Since the introduction of the parallel runway operation, Runway 29 has been used infrequently for daytime operations. It is usually under the jurisdiction of ground controllers, and aircraft frequently cross it. As a result, controllers have developed a strong schema for automatically clearing aircraft across without coordination. Further, in the moments before clearing C-FGEW to cross Runway 29, the combined ground controller’s attention had been devoted to ensuring that there would be no conflict between C-FGEW and the CRJ900 at the intersection of taxiways A and J.
All of the criteria for a strong habit intrusion error were present. The controller was carrying out a well-practised task in familiar surroundings, he intended to depart from routine, and to do so, he had to overcome a strong schema for the usual pattern of actions.29 In addition, the controller’s attention was devoted to another aspect of the task at the moment when an attentional check should have been expected. Due to a strong habit intrusion error, the combined ground controller reverted to the frequently practised routine of instructing the aircraft to cross Runway 29 without prior coordination with the combined tower controller.
While this type of error is common, it is also predictable and can be prevented. Potential mitigations include memory aids that ensure that attentional checks are conducted at the appropriate time, and training that reinforces the alternate schema through practice.
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 2, 2016
Classification
Incident
Airline
Air Canada
Flight number
AC-221
Departure
Calgary, Canada
Destination
Vancouver, Canada
Aircraft Registration
C-FDQV
Aircraft Type
Airbus A320
ICAO Type Designator
A320
This article is published under license from Avherald.com. © of text by Avherald.com.
Article source
You can read 2 more free articles without a subscription.
Subscribe now and continue reading without any limits!
Read unlimited articles and receive our daily update briefing. Gain better insights into what is happening in commercial aviation safety.
Send tip
Support AeroInside by sending a small tip amount.
Related articles
Canada A320 near Toronto on Jul 17th 2016, brakes inoperative
An Air Canada Airbus A320-200, registration C-FDQV performing flight AC-411 from Montreal,QC to Toronto,ON (Canada) with 150 people on board, was on…
Air Canada A320 near Toronto on Aug 26th 2013, flaps don't like hot water
An Air Canada Airbus A320-200, registration C-FDQV performing flight AC-404 from Toronto,ON to Montreal,QC (Canada) with 123 people on board, was…
Air Canada A320 near Toronto on Oct 1st 2012, fuming oven
An Air Canada Airbus A320-200, registration C-FDQV performing flight AC-272 from Winnipeg,MB to Toronto,ON (Canada) with 112 people on board, had…
Canada BCS3 at Boston on Aug 26th 2024, control handling event, direct mode activated
An Air Canada Bombardier C-Series CS-300, registration C-GMYU performing flight AC-766 from Toronto,ON (Canada) to Boston,MA (USA) with 142 people on…
Canada B772 over Atlantic Ocean on Jul 16th 2024, multiple systems related indications
An Air Canada Boeing 777-200, registration C-FNND performing flight AC-42 from Toronto,ON (Canada) to Delhi (India) with 280 people on board, was…
Canada A333 near Montreal on Jul 11th 2024, hydraulic leak
An Air Canada Airbus A330-300, registration C-GHKR performing flight AC-301 from Montreal,QC to Vancouver,BC (Canada) with 309 people on board, was…
Air Canada E190 at Toronto on Mar 11th 2013, did not follow two instructions to go around
An Air Canada Embraer ERJ-190, registration C-FLWH performing flight AC-178 from Edmonton,AB to Toronto,ON (Canada), was on final approach to…
Canada B789 over Atlantic on Jul 8th 2024, burning smell on board
An Air Canada Boeing 787-9, registration C-FSBV performing flight AC-864 (dep Jul 7th) from Montreal,QC (Canada) to London Heathrow,EN (UK), was…
Newest articles
Qantas B738 at Sydney on Nov 8th 2024, engine failure on departure sets grass alight
A Qantas Boeing 737-800, registration VH-VYH performing flight QF-520 from Sydney,NS to Brisbane,QL (Australia) with 181 people and dry ice on board,…
Hainan B789 at Rome on Nov 10th 2024, bird strike
A Hainan Airlines Boeing 787-9, registration B-1119 performing flight HU-438 from Rome Fiumicino (Italy) to Shenzhen (China) with 249 passengers and…
Subscribe today
Are you researching aviation incidents? Get access to AeroInside Insights, unlimited read access and receive the daily newsletter.
Pick your plan and subscribePartner
A new way to document and demonstrate airworthiness compliance and aircraft value. Find out more.
ELITE Simulation Solutions is a leading global provider of Flight Simulation Training Devices, IFR training software as well as flight controls and related services. Find out more.
Your regulation partner, specialists in aviation safety and compliance; providing training, auditing, and consultancy services. Find out more.
AeroInside Blog
Popular aircraft
Airbus A320Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-800 MAX
Popular airlines
American AirlinesUnited
Delta
Air Canada
Lufthansa
British Airways