IndiGo-KLM planes' 2016 air scare: Preliminary probe points out ATC lapses

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : May 10 2017 | 9:07 PM IST
A preliminary inquiry into an air scare involving an IndiGo and a KLM aircraft last year has pointed out several lapses on the part of the Air Traffic Control, including delayed response and use of wrong call sign to communicate with one of the airlines.
The IndiGo plane from Delhi to Bengaluru and the KLM airline from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur narrowly averted the mid-air collision on November 2, 2016.
The probe found five errors on the part of the Air Traffic Control (ATC).
As the lateral and vertical distance between IndiGo's IGO 977 and KLM 811 flights reduced beyond permissible limits, an automated warning or Predicted Conflict Warning (PCW) went off.
However, as per the probe, the ATC ignored this for 82 seconds.
At this point, "the required standard lateral and vertical separation which should be 10nm and 1000 feet was reduced to 3.6nm and 200 feet, respectively," said the report.
Further, as the ATC tried to communicate with the IndiGo plane to reduce its height, it used a wrong call sign at least five times, it said.
"The controller instructed IGO 977 to descend to FL340 but inadvertently used call sign as Vistara 977. Controller used wrong call sign five times. Subsequently, the controller instructed KLM to ascend to FL360," said the report.
In the meantime, the IndiGo aircraft continued to climb, thereby, further reducing the distance between itself and the KLM plane. This continued until the pilot realised that the ATC instructions were meant for it and not Vistara, it said.
The inquiry has also pointed out that standard coordination procedures between different controllers were not followed and that there wasn't proper handing-over or taking- over between different ATCs.
The probe also blamed the ATC for "inadequate surveillance" due to which it assigned the same height to the IndiGo aircraft at which the KLM plane was already flying.
The report also threw light on how the controllers are overworked.
It said that the particular controller being probed had put in four times the number of days and more than double the number of hours he is mandated to.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: May 10 2017 | 9:07 PM IST

Next Story