DUDE YOUR VISUALS ARE SO GOOOD HOLYYYYYY. Showing how close they were like that was really neat!...Thanks for the awesome video!

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Cheers, glad you liked the 3D visualisation!

@plethoraOinformation

2 жыл бұрын

@@AirTrafficVisualised I concur! Tried to subscribe again, not realizing I had already, just because of the visualization piece. Nice work!

@Mike.The.Jeweler

2 жыл бұрын

They weren't actually that close, they were within 200 feet vertical altitude, but over a mile separated.

@Qusin111

2 жыл бұрын

@@Mike.The.Jeweler more like 500 - 600 feet in elevation, (he showed it in meters)

Awesome video. I’m a controller in Chicago and this could legit be used for training. A couple things I noticed: when EDV5201 got airborne they got pushed south pretty good towards DAL504’s flight path, which may have spooked the controller, and combined with DAL684 saying “say again” when midfield, caused the controller to issue the right turn too early. That and a lot of coordination going on behind the scenes could have helped lead to this situation.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind words! Thanks for offering your perspective as a controller, it's interesting to hear what you picked up that others might have missed.

@william0203usa2

2 жыл бұрын

What happens to the controller after something like this?

@outside7

2 жыл бұрын

From my feeling as a non professional the controller should've more confidently repeated the correction after saying 6000.

@jacquesleroux5069

Жыл бұрын

Its all about timing - a/c position, airspeed, ATC radio comms without overlap etc.

By far the best video on this incident - you are the only one that explained and visualized why there was a TCAS RA.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Cheers Barry, I always try and add that little bit of extra context!

This is THE best ATC visualized site. Great job!

ATC turned those planes into each other. Thank God for TCAS!

Holy moly, glad everything was fine but that was too close of a call!

Imagine being a passenger listening on freq and hearing “Uh, are you sure about that?”. Very confidence inspiring.

@gaguy1967

2 жыл бұрын

Delta doesnt have that on their audio do they? United use to

@galady8632

2 жыл бұрын

@@gaguy1967... you are correct, Delta does not.

He turned Delta 684 way too soon, he should have extended their upwind before he have them a turn. But hindsight is always 20/20 as they say.

for most planes (not sure if for all) when calculating your max crosswind you have to use the gust component. In this case they were on runway 09R or a heading of 090 with winds at 17026G35, which would make it a 34 knot crosswind. at 1:22 you hear DAL684 also say they have a maximum gust limit of 33 knots or less, hence the go around. A 34 knot crosswind is pretty insane.

Fantastic visualization on the near miss. Thank you.

Awesome video!! Visualization of just how close this was -- incredible!! Loved how you showed the 2 aircraft to scale. This was truly a little too close for comfort!! ATC was to blame for this error IMO. . . Great work!! Thanks!! 💕✈✈💕

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks Diane! Glad viewers are appreciating the 3D aircraft graphic! Thanks for your dedicated viewing and commenting!

At 2:56 why didn't 684 turn 140 as directed instead of responding 'Are you sure about that?' paths wouldn't have crossed then.

@everolarcherii5517

2 жыл бұрын

He was being a smart ass

Brilliant production. Clear, concise and thought provoking of a difficult situation. When looking at the time lapse intro of the airport it make me hold my breath and marvel at the pressure everyone would be under and how important regulations and procedures are. Respect to all involved.

This is a great format. Keep doing these!

This happens. I was on a flight a couple years ago. Nobody on the plane in the area I was sitting at had seen what I just witnessed. Another plane cross right above us (perpendicular) at a distance so close that I couldn’t believe what just happened. I mean, this wasn’t hundreds and hundreds of yards. It happened so fast nobody really noticed but it felt as close as this reenactment. I’d hate to think this happens all the time.

@More_Row

2 жыл бұрын

Does it really happen that often?

@_HMCB_

Жыл бұрын

@@More_Row I don’t know. I’m not a frequent flyer and it happened to me. I’ve only flown 6-7 times in the last 15 years. And there about 5,600 flights daily in the USA. So it probably happens more frequently than we think. Of course, there’s always a chance my experience was 1-up 🤷🏽

@j134679

Жыл бұрын

At cruise altitude (high up with level flights), 1000ft of separation can look really close, but the pilot are aware and it's normal. It's more dangerous during landing/takeoff because multiple planes are changing directions & altitude.

What a graphic..... so clear to understand... Love this...

Your graphics are mind blowing. Amazing.

Always obey TCAS.

This is amazingly well done. I love the visual representation...so good.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Cheers, thanks for watching!

BEAUTIFULLY done!! New subscriber

Great upload...certainly did subscribe. Thanks!

Just watching this video was nerve wracking!!! Good stuff

Sir, your presentation is FROM ANOTHER WORLD!!! AMAZING!!!! IMPRESSIVE..!! and all in between....!!

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much 😀

visualizations are incredible. underrated channel - new subscriber here.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard and glad you enjoyed the video!

WOW that was close! You can really tell with the visuals!

Wow the visuals are amazing! Keep it up 👍🏾

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Will do!

Wow I’m impressed. Everyone was direct and nobody got upset with each other. Kinda rare over the radio

Wow, this was awesome.

D504 was instructed to turn to 170, then 240, but waited until they reached 4000 to initiate the turn. ATC then gave D684 the turn to 170 on their go around, but this crew turned immediately. With the D504 delay in turning, this set up the crossing flight path. Why did D504 interpret their clearance to turn as "after reaching 4000", when that was not part of the clearance? This is what set up the crossing conflict. D684 did exactly as cleared, and turned to 170 WHILE climbing to 4000. I'm not sure if the controller assumed the second plane would extend like the first one, thus eliminating the conflict, but if so, that is something that should be cleared up. The callout should be clear, either turn immediately while climbing, or turn after reaching altitude. Both aircraft should have the same clear instruction. The D504 crew must assume part of this responsibility since they delayed their turn until 4000, thus extending their track, without specific instruction to do so. IMHO.

@jsunflyguy

2 жыл бұрын

I disagree, If you watch the speed of DAL504 they are losing speed in the climb possibly due to windshear/downdrafts or just due to the max performance go around they did due to the last minute go around over the threshold. For contrast DAL684 initiated their go around at 400agl and were clearly expecting it based on the wind check, a better energy state and no startle for the crew. Easier to make that turn ASAP. It is perfectly within the crews discretion to level off and accelerate before turning the aircraft (which would increase stall speed, undesirable in these conditions), if it is unsafe to do so. it is perfectly reasonable for the crew to recover the airplane *then turn*, the crew readback they would comply when able, which was a brief indication to the controller they can't do it *right now*. I will say I was more direct in stating that than 504, but the controller needs to be listening to the readbacks. A total delay of 20 seconds in this context is a little long but not unacceptable. Regardless, The controller set themselves up by giving DAL684 the 170 heading. DAL504 had already been issued a converging course and had already rolled out on the heading, so it isn't as though the crew changed the dynamics at that point. ATCs job is to deal with reality, if a pilot messes up and you run into them after they correct then it is on the controller for not separating traffic He put them on a converging course with no vertical separation, violating positive separation that is ingrained from day 1. Aircraft will perform differently, that's unavoidable especially in bad weather or when one crew is high stress vs one that isn't. Clearly DAL504 took about 20 seconds to initiate the turn and the controller lost scan and roboted off the SOP heading. To sum up my point: 504 delayed turning, for what could be legitimate reasons due to adverse weather. There was no excessive delay in the turn 504 was established on a southwest heading when DAL684 was given the conflicting heading Tower failed to establish any separation prior to issuing the conflicting heading

@gordonelwell7084

2 жыл бұрын

@@jsunflyguy All good points. The turn to 240 coupled with the second aircraft turn to 170 was the biggest part of the conflict (along with the same altitude assignment, but that might be the only go-around altitude option the tower controller had)

@gbedford

2 жыл бұрын

Delta 504, when they received the instruction to turn to 170 - did acknowledge and also say 'when able' - So they were aviating first and communicating that as well.

First of your vids I've seen. Top Notch...subscribed.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Cheers, welcome aboard!

Best graphics in the business. Wish you more subs!

I'm not particularly interested in planes, but after finding this channel earlier today I am HOOKED. These are so riveting, it's like watching a crime scene reenactment but with positional data, timestamps and everybody is mic'd up.

Awesome and subbed.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard!

Great ATC 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

@bawzzzz

Жыл бұрын

Well didn't the ATC put them on a crash course in the first place?!

You can tell by the captain of 504's reaction that he knew he had heard something through the blocked transmission.

Every night was a near miss for me carrying bank work into KATL. We flew light/med twins into and by far the smallest planes. A typical night was speed talking ATC and if you missed a call often they would take you out to the back. On the loc "keep your speed up" was common. We ran no flaps or gear almost to the threshold. Bathed in the mini suns of 747's lights, we went full flaps, gear down forcing the nose from rising. First right off 26r iirc only to see these monsters blow by. This was when Eastern nested there.

@michaellusk2856

2 жыл бұрын

LOL! Yeah, would be rather exciting...to say the least! I tried visualizing your experiences...keep the old heart beat going.

Thank goodness for TCAS!

I was on a flight coming back to Atlanta from Texas when delta still had the md-88s. We we’re coming in from the east and a md-88 past right under us uncomfortable close and went to the far right side runways on the north side of the airport. They must have switched runways last minute

This is what is known as an "operational error." Not knowing ATL procedures it is difficult to determine where and why the breakdown occured. They will figure it out.

@n118nw

2 жыл бұрын

If I had to guess, Tower should have kept 684 on runway heading but instead had him turned right away

Amazing video just subscribed. Although ‘near miss’ is always used, technically it’s a near collision… they did miss lol

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

"Near miss" is used correctly. You can find some interesting context on how we got the phrase "near miss" here: www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/near-miss-near-hit-word-history-usage

@justinstrickland5382

2 жыл бұрын

@@AirTrafficVisualised fascinating! Learn something new every day. Thanks for taking me to school lol

GREAT SITE!

thank god everyone was safe and no accident. when things are hectic just goes to show how easy an accident can occur. Thank god the air traffic man caught it right away and the pilots were on there a game. Also shout out to TCAS!!!!

I’m an Atc and as soon as he gave a 170 right hdg to DL684 with no vertical separation I knew he f*cked up.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Listening to the full recording, the controller seemed task-saturated. With the additional task of coordinating DL684's diversion to Augusta at the crucial moment, it's understandable that he didn't see the conflict right away.

@outlawimmortalz6393

2 жыл бұрын

@@AirTrafficVisualised I got u, but coordination is the assistant’s job, I’m pretty sure they have atc assistants in ATL .

@colt10mmsecurity68

2 жыл бұрын

@@outlawimmortalz6393 “Pretty sure.” You weren’t even there and yet your guessing…. More like Monday morning quarterbacking.

@jsunflyguy

2 жыл бұрын

@@outlawimmortalz6393 it's always a good time to whip out the "make your request with the next controller"

I think you should've NOT left out what happened first to the DAL-1217 landing in front of DAL-504, and what they did on the RUNWAY that triggered the emergency Go-Around in the first place. In my opinion what the DAL-1217 did, caused a Domino effect on DAL-504 and DAL-684.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

DAL1217 missed the high speed exit and took too long vacating the runway. Thus the Tower controller called for 504 to go around. 01:54:46Z - DAL1217: "1217, missed the high speed [exit]." 01:54:50Z - TWR: "Alright DELTA 1217, no delay down to K; left turn at K, hold short runway 9L." Always difficult deciding what to include and what to cut. Thanks for the feedback, I'll keep it in mind going forward.

@karend1577

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I was wondering why 504 was told to go around. I thought the Delta behind him was overtaking him.

@gordonelwell7084

2 жыл бұрын

What 1217 did, although triggering these events, is not relevant to what and how the go-arounds were handled. If he blew a tire, or had some other problem, the go arounds would have happened as well. It is the handling of the go arounds by the controller and the pilots of the two aircraft that needs analysis.

@gerardmoran9560

2 жыл бұрын

That's true, however 1217 isn't at fault. When you're cleared to land, unless you accept a LAHSO landing clearance (land and hold short of) the whole runway is yours. Most flights make the 2nd high speed turnoff, a few make the 1st and rarely one rolls to the end. On very windy days pilots include additives to the approach speed for winds- at Delta it's half the steady state plus all of the gust. On most windy days this doesn't change the ground speed that much since most of the wind is a headwind, on this day it was essentially all crosswind. ATL ATC does a great job and packs them in. At peak hours during VMC you're coming up on or over the approach lights as the preceding flight takes the turnoff, you get used to it and are always ready to go-around. I've only done a half dozen go-arounds due to spacing in many years. Thankfully this was a rare event that resulted in a loss of separation with an RA saving the day. I expect there will be lots of debriefing and follow up, as there should. Finally, hats off to AirTrafficVisualised for a great presentation!

@A.J.1656

2 жыл бұрын

@@AirTrafficVisualised There are a few airports where I will almost always add, "be ready to go around for the landing traffic ahead on the runway" to my visual approach briefing. LAX, ORD and SFO come to mind. I've probably gone around landing 24R at LAX more than any other runway for this reason. You have to get on the brakes quickly to hit Yankee or Zulu, but if you brake for those exits and they are occupied by traffic waiting to cross 24L, it can take a long time to get down to AA.

TCAS may tell the pilot to take action conflicting with ATC. Always follow TCAS because it is telling both planes how to avoid each other. Also, the controller likely hadn't been working Atlanta long because he didn't seem to understand the situation. Delta prohibits landing attempts when the crosswind is past the manufacturer certified windspeed. Other airlines don't recommend landing but encourage it until there is an accident and then they will blame the pilot. Delta prohibits the attempt to land. When the winds are just over the limit there is a workaround that can prevent go around and diversions. The ATC watches the wind readings and announces a lower number when it appears. A Delta pilot can be heard on the recording trying to say he needed 33 or less but the radio was blocked. Company policy and regulations allow for the pilots to say what they need and ATC to announce when they see a reading that meets the pilot's needs. It is true at that moment.

Great visuals. Do near misses like this get reported/investigated?

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

yes

Gotta feel for the controller. He sounded really harried.

Turned him on a heading too early, he should have maintain runway heading for at least 5 miles out

@hmbpnz

2 жыл бұрын

504 took his sweet time turning, and 684 didn't take the vector to keep him clear. But of course people are going to only point at the controller.

If DL 504 had changed frequencies they might not have gotten accurate info…Phew!

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

TCAS would've still intervened though!

dang, too close for comfort

What is the fast jet at 0:44 , they seemed to have priority status too, wow....

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Just an error in the ADS-B data; generally aircraft can't cut into short final like that!

LOL Delta504 pilot: 'Tower i have a number for you to call when ready to copy number'

After the freq got stepped one, the controller was behind .

Yikes… that was close

Should had kept him on runway heading till the very least past the runway. Tough job that's why there are systems to prevent this and it worked

Wow

Wouldn't DAL504 also gotten an AR also to climb? If they did.. I'm surprised they didn't do it or say anything.

Why did 504 have to go to Augusta? Winds too strong in ATL?

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

yes

So it looks like he told delta 684 to make a right turn, too soon I don’t understand why he didn’t let him climb out and make a right turn around the same time 504 would have following the same flight path for the go around

DL 684 was taking his time before reacting and descending which created this near miss!

I may have just missed it but what initially caused the go around for both?

@AndyGarcia-ch1ci

2 жыл бұрын

Think it was the wind

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

out of limits crosswinds

Why did DAL684 divert and 504 didn't? Wind? The 739 is only slightly shorter than a A321.

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

different aircraft have different crosswind limits, 684 may have been lower on fuel too

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

at around 1:22 you hear 684 say through a blocked transmission that they had a gust limit of 33 knots, and the reported gusts were 35, hence the missed approach

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

DAL684 had already performed a missed approach earlier and then recieved extended radar vectors for spacing. By the time they went around a second time (the subject of the video), it's likely that fuel limitations required them to divert.

Flying into a U.S. Airport from two other US Airports but we measure the separation distance in meters why is that?

Hire more tower controllers!!!

Why did 684 have to divert?

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

If you look at the beginning of the video (around 0:20) you can see that DL684 made an approach to Atlanta at about 1:25Z, which they had to discontinue. They received extended vectors for spacing, leading up to a second attempt about 25 minutes later (which is the subject of the video). After going around again due to the gusty conditions (plus a TCAS RA), it's likely their fuel was becoming a concern and conditions were forecast to worsen, so they made the call to divert to Augusta.

This may be great for training however this is way to close and doesn’t give me a warm fuzzy feeling about flying.

I don’t understand the divert to Augusta for DAL 684. Can someone enlighten me?

@slappymcgillicuddy7532

2 жыл бұрын

winds out of limits, at 1:22 one of the pilots says his max gust is 33 or less and the gusts were at 35

@Dawgator

2 жыл бұрын

@@slappymcgillicuddy7532 Copy that; equipment limitation for conditions 👍

You'll find that controller at the nearest unemployment line

someone got a deal on that one...

TCAS resolution advisories always override atc. No ifs ands or buts

It’s not a near miss, it’s a near hit. - George Carlin

Actually, it was a near hit!..George Carlin,1992

should be called 'a near hit' or 'a near collision', wonder why Delta 684 diverted to Augusta and not join up with the arrival queue?

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

If you look at the beginning of the video (around 0:20) you can see that DL684 made an approach to Atlanta at about 1:25Z, which they had to discontinue. They received extended vectors for spacing, leading up to a second attempt about 25 minutes later (which is the subject of the video). After going around again due to the gusty conditions (plus a TCAS RA), it's likely their fuel was becoming a concern and conditions were forecast to worsen, so they made the call to divert to Augusta.

Whew

Love the separation graphic. It really drives home a near catastrophic event. Meanwhile, this controller was overloaded during some challenging weather in ATL. But that's no excuse and he should be terminated.

@colt10mmsecurity68

2 жыл бұрын

Don’t be stupid. It’s called being human. Controllers are human too.

@michaelfullerton2368

2 жыл бұрын

No, he learns from this and never makes that mistake again. sentence him to more training.

@chrisschack9716

2 жыл бұрын

Loss of separation was mostly on the controller, though Delta 504 helped set it up with the late turn. Additional training, I'd say.

@larrysmith1568

2 жыл бұрын

Sir, you know not of what you speak. If at fault, the controller would be immediately relieved from the position and possibly put in remedial training for a few days.

@colt10mmsecurity68

2 жыл бұрын

@@larrysmith1568 I know that. I never said otherwise. What I said was it’s “stυρid” to call for the firing of the controller. Can you read son?

Better then VASAVIATION

The awesome thing is about todays technology, is this would have been within inches of a mid air collision 30 years.

This is Vasa Aviation on Steroids 💪

Several months ago at a layover in DCA I witnessed a departing delta flight cutting in front of an arriving SW flight. The north land is kinda near as they follow the Potomac River to avoid flying over the White House. Delta cuts in front and SW peels off to the east n circled back right over White House 😬

@galady8632

2 жыл бұрын

I am surprised that wasn't on the news

Holy shit... That was close. So close to a disaster. Needs thoroughly investigating. Seems like ATC was overwhelmed...

its a miss not a near miss , a near miss is a hit

Great job, but that is a click bait and counterproductive to nervous flyers.

Gusting 35..... you are not even getting into windshear environment. I throught the limit is 50 on the nose.

Near HIT, not miss. They obviously missed each other,

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

"Near miss" is used correctly. You can find some interesting context on how we got the phrase "near miss" here: www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/near-miss-near-hit-word-history-usage

That was fugly

It wasn’t that close..!! ..

lousy work by ATC. Its ATL and this guy sounds in over his head and that aint even busy or complex. Sorry state of FAA.

@jesusimnothingwithoutyou5531

2 жыл бұрын

It's only gonna get worst from here as more of the old heads retire. I concur with that "sorry state of the FAA" statement lol

@toddw6716

2 жыл бұрын

@@jesusimnothingwithoutyou5531 some day they will figure it out hopefully. ATC is a skill, like baseball. You either can catch and hit or you can’t. Intelligence, sex, or race, has nothing to do with it.

I like this, but the music is weird. I would change it.

@AirTrafficVisualised

2 жыл бұрын

Can you explain what you mean by "weird"? I composed it so I happen to think it's pretty good and not weird at all.

@THATFlightSimDude

2 жыл бұрын

Music gave me Pushing Tin vibes. It was fitting.

The pilots and controller should be investigated. This is close is not good enough. Perfection is required. Lack of clarity should be grounds for demotion. No accountability.