This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss
Back to Squawk list
  • 61

Horizon flight lands on taxiway instead of runway; FAA is investigating

Submitted
About 3 miles from the airport, the crew positioned the aircraft for landing and attempted to activate the remote-controlled runway lights, said Horizon Air spokesman Ray Lane in an email. "The crew having not been informed of the non-operational runway lights, misidentified (the taxiway as the runway), lined up to it and safely landed," Lane said. (lmtribune.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


ptcassidy21
Too bad Han Solo wasn't flying, it wouldn't be a big deal.
gearup328
Peter Steitz 3
Company Dispatch gives the crew NOTAMS. Obviously, the crew didn't read them. Did this airport have an instrument approach? If so, why did the crew not set it up and use it as confirmation of an actual runway. Pilots have a tendency to not use All Resources and simply call "airport insight. Why did they line up with blue taxiway lighting? Were ALL the lights out? If so. no lights---no go.
brewmeister47
greg lueke 3
Is it not correct, that when complying with FAR Part 121/135, that runways lights are required to be operative at time of landing (during nighttime hours)? If so, why did they land, or did they forget this requirement?
jumbofe
It is part of complying with the regulations & general airmanship knowledge.
MIKESWICK
MIKE SWICK 0
and what were their alternatives?
Jhoman0318
Jason Homan 2
KLWS, KALW, KPSC, KRLD...to name a few.
jet4ang
jet4ang 5
Great! In order to read this entire article we have to submit to a payed subscription?
jumbofe
No, just the facts as they are.
qv22buhrz
Louis Warcraft 4
I would think that when they were low enough to the ground for their landing lights to shine onto the ground, they would think "Crap, this isn't a runway" and go around.
wreckhvswings
wreckhvswings -1
Don't have details on prevailing wx conditions. Even on clear nights, taxiways are nearly invisible on short final, and difficult to identify when crossing the fence. Crossing the fence and touchdown is less than 15 seconds at 80 KTS CAT I. These guys are coming in at CAT III (>120 KTS). It's too late once you've positively confirmed a taxiway to abort IMO.
MultiComm
From my two 121 training programs I have been in, it routinely consisted of practicing "balked landing" or also called a rejected landing during the flare. It is very possible and not unsafe.

Also ... just to avoid confusion from those reading, don't confuse CAT I, II, III (weather) with CAT A, B, C, D (groundspeed on approach).
jumbofe
No it's not. Your landing zone is about 1500 feet down the runway for touchdown. What would you do if an aircraft, vehicle, or object was on the runway?? When you cross the fence, you should be able to see the runway environment & decide whether to land or not.
jumbofe
What would you have done if a vehicle or another aircraft was on the taxiway?? Continue the landing?? No I don't so. Upon idenfiying it not the runway, you do a go-around immediately. Both pilots did a big mistake. No excuse can explain this. Very poor airmanship.
arptopns
Chris Graham 2
Both pilots must've had cranial rectal inversion. Or better yet, get their color vision checked. How? I lined up once with bridge street lights, they were white, caught my mistake, did a go around (helicopter) and shot the approach again.
electronpusher9
Isn't there a color differentiation between taxiway (blue) and runway (white) edge lights? I am an aircraft buff not a pilot. Would you be able to see this upon approach?
aellman
Alan Ellman 5
I think you may want to reread the article. The lights were not on, which is the whole point of the story.
jumbofe
I was aware of that! Was caused by a flooding issue that shorted electrical box.
tjperez927
Tony Perez 8
They were inop.
electronpusher9
Were all inop?
aellman
Alan Ellman 5
Yes. Apparent many of the posters are inoperative.
Forensics1
Forensics1 2
Alan,

Before you go setting everyone straight read crk112 below. The runway lights were out, not the taxiway lights. Get it?
jumbofe
Just the lightning for the entire runway.
PLANESOLUTIONS
PLANESOLUTIONS 3
If some lights are blue and some are white then that would be a color differentiation.
roettgten
Bill Roettgen 0
Such perceptive analysis. What would we do without you?
jumbofe
The correct thing you do is go missed approach/go-around & go into holding & talk to SEA Center/ Departure & get things squared away. Knowing the Airfield lightning is required when making an approach to mins & you have to be able to ID those runways lights to call the runway in sight to land.
crk112
crk112 2
Yes, upon approach a pilot should be able to easily identify and differentiate between a taxiway and a runway based on the colors of their lighting. There's no excuse for an airline crew to make this mistake, even at night.
MultiComm
IMO, doesn't matter what happened the to the airport lights. Unless justifiably exercising emergency authority, there is no explanation for landing on a taxiway. The lights are so methodically designed (to the point you can determine the last 3, 2, 1 thousand feet be comparing the centerline lights - if installed - with the edge lights) not to mention how much brighter runway lights are compared to taxiway lights. With less than 1 hour back to SEA, it sounds a bit anti-authority and a little hotel-itus was at play.
Hurman
In the immortal words of “Gabby” in Blazing Saddles, HURRIMFF!!!
If I were the aircrew, I would go with the Harrison Ford defense, he did it in broad daylight at a very busy airport and walked away with not even a slap on the wrist. Lets s e how the FAA handles nobodies versus celebs.
MultiComm
Bad precedent may just be the "ace up the sleeve" to get away with this one.

I don't think certificate action is necessary. I just say there is no excuse for the Hotizon crew to land on a taxiway considering what information we know about the situation.

The result will be whether or not it was deemed intentional and how cooperative the crew is in the investigation.

In the 121 world it may be remedial training but in Fords case it could have meant a 709 ride. All I could dig up was that he was required to complete "awareness training"
ADXbear
ADXbear 1
There's a dispatcher explaining what info he or she provided the crew regarding the field CONDITIOND, CT hours and esp NOTAMS..
ZeroGee
James Carter 1
No, there is no requirement for the landing surface to be lit during night operations. 50 years ago I was taught how to use the moon and ambient light to orient myself for landing on un-lit runways. With infrared and low-light night vision devices available today it is much safer, but rarely done outside the military, law enforcement, or public safety environment.

Keep in mind that aircraft are required to have lighting for flight during night operations and that includes landing lights to illuminate the runway and taxiway.
lcire1
Eric Rindal 2
Most of the Horizon fleet flying to Eastern WA is equipped with their "Fog Buster" technology. If so this would have shown the taxiway lights as two lines of heat spots which may have been confused as the runway lights since both would have normally been display as white on black spots. Since only the taxiway lights were lit, this may have been all that where visible on this equipment? Once one mentally decides that what they are seeing on a virtual display is what they expected to be seeing....landing on them, in this case the taxiway, may have been a foregone conclusion.
stratocruiser
James Nichols 1
Click on more instead of newspaper link and it will give you the entire story.
jet4ang
jet4ang 1
Thanks!
chrisrobey
CHRIS ROBEY 1
CTAF is Common Traffic Advisory Frequency.
TWA55
TWA55 1
Been there many times, a small airport and not one to be making mistakes. I would love to know what they were doing, or did on the approach. There is such a thing as minimums and RVR and the weather is still probably called by station agents. Many of these regional airports in the NW have a tower but they are usually closed after 11:00 pm or sooner.
jumbofe
The airfield lights were inop/OOS & the pilots still landed?? No less, on a taxiway?? What part of if lights are inop/OOS & your landing at night or in IMC conditions, did the crew not understand & do a go around to sort things out. No lightning at night or in IMC conditions is a real game changer. It changes your approach mins. Who's authority did the crew have to operate & what happened to the NOTAM or at least a heads up from Seattle Center?? Give me a vector Victor. Oh, the airport lights are out, oh hell lets just continue with the vector Victor. Why didn't the dispatcher advise the crew on the preflight paperwork/flight brief?? OOPS, BIG OOPS!!
lcire1
Eric Rindal 1
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Horizon air lands on Taxiway

Airport staff unaware runway inop. DASH 8 lands on Taxiway which remained lit.

http://www.khq.com/story/37231236/electrical-short-forces-plane-to-land-on-taxiway-at-pullman-moscow-regional-airport
MikeMohle
Mike Mohle -3
Was someone unplugging the "Extension Cord" connecting the power cord in the tower to the runway lights (like in "Airplane")? Sounds like that would be more reliable than the existing system currently in place!
justinoclemente
justin chavez 3
There are thousands of night operations, probably tens of thousands, globally every night. Thats not reliable enough for you?
MikeMohle
Mike Mohle 2
I did not mean that PCL systems do not work, but the system at the airport was flooded and apparently substandard.
jbsimms
James Simms 1
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 0
Did the crew do their training in a Starspeeder 2000 or 3000? That could explain it.
teslataildragger
Willie Wonka 0
In many ways I am surprised this type of error doesn't happen more often. Anytime you have human beings interacting with machines and electronics under all sorts of conditions you will have errors. Considering the huge number of operations everyday just within the borders of the United States the percentage of these events has to be very small. It leaves us the quandary of deciding if it is a system problem or is it a problem that cant be predicted or fixed with system changes. If it isn't a system problem the best we hope for is to learn from this event to prevent a duplication in our own operations.
jbsimms
James Simms 0
The rural airport in the Palouse region is the primary air link for its two land-grant universities, Washington State University in Pullman and the University of Idaho in Moscow. Both universities use the airport for jet charters from Alaska Airlines, Frontier Airlines, and Allegiant Air for their intercollegiate athletic teams.
gerardogodoy
gerardo godoy -4
This shows the shambles the American Airline Industry is in. From beating up people in the cabins to pilots forgetting where to land in an airport. High danger flying there.
MikeMohle
Mike Mohle -3
Not really an airline problem, more of a facilities/infrastructure issue.
MultiComm
I disagree. Faulty equipment is not an excuse to do the wrong thing. No lights = No land.

The idea to make up ones own rules is absurd. As I mentioned above, unless exercising emergency authority (not enough fuel to return to suitable airport) then a landing should not have been attempted. Shoot in an emergency ... land on a unlit runway before choosing to land on a taxiway (at least you have approach guidance and more payment to negotiate should something go wrong with the plane.).
jumbofe
Its BOTH. No airfield lightning at night or in IMC conditions changes your approach mins. NO lights, its go-around time. Complete the missed approach/go-around per procedures, contact approach & get some answers. Simply. You don't have the authority to land unless an emergency is declared & this was no emergency. Poor crew resource management.
scott8733
scott8733 -1
....cue the stale Harrison Ford jokes.
tbpera
Tom Pera -3
tower? is there a tower there?
MikeMohle
Mike Mohle 2
Article said it was PCL, so probably not unless after hours.
aellman
Alan Ellman 1
"Pretty Crappy Landing?"
PLANESOLUTIONS
PLANESOLUTIONS 2
No control tower - all operations by self announce on CTAF.
tjperez927
Tony Perez 3
"Pullman-Moscow Regional. Horizon 2184 turning final for taxiway, full stop - Pullman-Moscow."
jumbofe
Factor of the matter is that it was likely a nighttime operation & no airfield lightning or VASI either!! Captain, GO-AROUND now.
aellman
Alan Ellman 0
There is no tower, but there is a "hut," similar to the ones in Nigeria referred to by Trump this week.
Andjohn1961
John Anderson 1
"We have no tower, sir."

"No tower?"

"Just a bridge."

"Why the hell aren't I notified about these things?"
RDLoven
Richard Loven -3
I’ve never done this myself but it could happen and has. What I don’ understand is how everyone knows about it. My guess is the only ones who recognized the mistake was the Pilots when they were landed and taxing in. Did they want absolution for their sins and confessed? If no one was hurt and nothing damaged, then the rule that covers this is. “What people don’t know won’ hurt them”.
arptopns
Chris Graham 0
OK, so the REIL's were inoperative. There are still runway centerline lights (white), versus green taxiway centerline and blue edge lights. And let us not forget about the runway markings. There are real big white boxes (150' x 50') called aiming points on either side of runway centerline. Plus you also have Landing Threshold markings for 3000 feet on each end of a precision approach runway. I do have to say this though, They did real good landing on a 75 feet wide pavement versus a 150 feet wide pavement, at night, with no edge lights.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!