Pilot Asks Permission to Break Rule

I was a bit surprised by this clip. I think the Citation crew knew full well they couldn't land. They were maybe trying to get the ATC to acknowledge their error without coming across as obnoxious. If ATC had have replied "you are still cleared to land" I believe the Citations crew would have just gone around anyway

Kelsey As a retired controller, and also someone who is intimately aware of KSAN airport I wanted to add some insight. First of all I will agree that the controller messed up on her priority of duties, and that was the primary cause here. Here are some mitigating issues particular to SD. There is a very large 6 story parking garage just over 700 ft from the arrival end of the runway, it sits about half way up a hill from the runway and is a primary reason for the displace threshold. Prior to its construction the available landing length was about 500ft longer. The biggest issue is the garage blocks the view of runway end for some distance. If this occurred in the afternoon or evening the sun would be right down the runway making it even harder to see someone taxiing into position. It is likely possible that while entering the runway a pilot might not see someone on a 5 mile final as well for similar reasons. The lower to the ground either pilot sits the harder it is to see. I can see a scenario where the landing aircraft doesn’t see the departing one until inside of a mile. And as you will admit, the initial reaction by the pilot might be “did we miss something” prompting the question. The question by SWA about the reason probably had more to do with his thinking “okay you messed that one up, he’s going to be out of the way, why can’t I go. For those of you who write the comments about “here’s a number for you to copy”. I assure you this controller will be getting the ATC equivalent of that call.

Is it possible that the "verify clear to land" call was intended as a polite way of telling the controller they messed up and that they had no intention to land even if the answer was yes?

Yeah the Citation was taking the tactful route…. He was saying that he knew the SWA was still on the runway and asking what she wanted to do about it. They most likely weren’t planning on landing. The bigger story is the controller forgetting that she had the SWA in position and starting doing other less essential things.

"It's like you took a pimp suit and wrapped an airplane in it," is perhaps the most S-tier description of our livery I've ever heard. Thank you, Kelsey, for making my day.

Perhaps this is just my desire to think the best of people, but I interpret the Citation's "Please confirm" call as a subtle way of saying "Uhhh - lady, there's a problem here, WTF?" Which if true, worked. We will obviously never know but I choose to believe that if the tower had said "go ahead and land" the Citation would have called the go-around on their own.

I am a retired FAA controller. A single runway and crossing runways operations increase the opportunities for errors. The safest runway operations are parallel runways for just arrivals and just departures.

Every morning when I'm driving to work and pass by the airport, I'm going to see those Southwest planes and think "pimp suit," and snicker to myself. 😂

I feel like the citation pilot asking if there were still cleared to land was a way of calling the controller an idiot, like 'you cleared me to land and then put someone on the runway in front of me?'

Is the Citation pilot really intending to land or, seeing the Southwest, just asking about the clearance as a passive way to get the tower to notice something isn't right?

Kelsey, I can see the Citation pilot asking to verify they are still cleared to land. I think it was a non-invasive way to point out to the controller there was a plane on the runway. Had the controller reaffirmed the landing clearance, the Citation pilot could have come back with, “You have an airplane sitting on the runway. We’re going missed.” The Citation pilot’s request could be similar to when you are flying off your assigned heading and the controller says, “Kelsey74, verify you’re flying heading 340.” You turn to 340 because you were on a 360 heading and tell the controller you’re sorry and on 340 now. Just my two cents.

Maybe "Confirming clearance to land" was just nicer than, "Hey dingbats! There's a big ole jet on my landing strip!"

Clearly that confirmation of clearance was three pilots way of redirecting the controller to the issue that was building.

This is some really unbelievable decision making.

If I remember correctly, the Air Canada flight that nearly landed on the taxiway with several airliners on it also asked several times to verify cleared to land, because he was seeing something and wasn't sure. Then someone spoke up, Air Canada went around and didn't create one of the largest disasters in aviation history. Basically, asking the tower to verify you're cleared to land is saying, "something smells fishy around here, please verify it's clear on your end".

9:40 I don't believe the Cessna was "asking for clearance." I believe he was alerting the controller to the fact that she seemed to have forgotten ... That she had an airliner already sitting on his runway.

Kelsey: I’m a retired military controller who’s worked both single runway and multiple runway operations. I found the single runway operation to be harder. But I was taught to NEVER give a landing clearance when I had an aircraft in position and hold. I was taught to tell the inbound aircraft to “continue” until I sorted out the aircraft on the runway.

pimp suit and wrapped a plane in it !!!!!!!! priceless :face-blue-smiling::face-blue-smiling:

Kelsey, your style and production quality are really ramping up! Just wanted to let you know it is noticed and appreciated. Thanks for all you do!

Kelsey throwing shade at SWA "looks like a 73 in a pimp suit" LMAO!