Pilot Refuses to Land 

No kidding. He basically said, "you would have almost crashed, but not quite. I do this for a living."

Try not to be too hysterical. When a controller says something like that, they are not talking about a collision, they’re talking about a “loss of separation“, which actually just means we did not give them the spacing that our rules require. If that departing air India Was only 5900 feet down the runway instead of 6000 feet down the runway, then by the controllers rules it would not have “worked“. But you would’ve never known the difference as a passenger and 5900 feet instead of 6000 is not dangerous, except to one’s career! :-) at least that’s the way it used to be. Nowadays FAA management laughs about operational errors. One of the reasons I retired earlier than I had to.

@@lukeball4937The same excuse used by every tailgater until they need to emergency brake and slam into the car in front.

LaGuardia ops are tight all day, every day. If you hate delays, get used to tight ATC situations.

​@@lukeball4937 That's not very comforting either. Willingly exceeding defined operational limits is reckless and challenges the safe conduct of air traffic control.

Pilots always in charge in the air, he can override air control under safety grounds .

As a passenger, I just want to be SAFE. I shouldn't wind up dead or in a hospital to save some controller's ego.

Exactly. Most ATC are not pilots, and have no experience actually flying an aircraft. Not saying they don't know their jobs or they are bad at thier jobs, it's just different being in an aircraft VS sitting at a radar display. The Delta pilots made a judgement call based on THIER experience as pilots, and i'd rather they do their jobs rather than let the ATC "backseat quarterbacking" the call. ATC might have been correct, but maybe they weren't. We'll never know, because the pilots made a call that precluded a potential accident. And in my opinion, preventing an accident from happening in the first place, is much better that trying to mitigate an accident in progress.

@@TurboLoveTrain Thanks for the ugliness. What a world in your head.

@@TurboLoveTrain Evidence?

He's a professional. Good on him.

He sounds Ex Air Force....

Calm and confident.

You're probably right. But, better the ATC be embarrassed, than the pilot and everyone on his plane be dead.

@@GMLGMD let’s not take it too far. Unless the departure aborted, the pilot chose to do the least safe thing left. If he had chosen to land, and the departure did not abort, the worst case scenario is that he rolls out with a loss of separation. In that scenario, only the controller would get into trouble, although the pilot would have to answer some questions, but since he chose the safest thing to do, it would just be some questions. By going around, he is now in a takeoff envelope flying right into the wake turbulence of the departing heavy. You really don’t want to be trying a lot of evasive actions in takeoff configuration while flying into turbulence. That’s why we have rules about wake turbulence. Yes, any good controller considers a go around because of a possible loss of separation as a failure. But good controllers also know, when you’re running minimum separation, sometimes it’s not going to work.

@@lukeball4937 And then there's the punishment factor where ATC sends you to a holding pattern, until they can fit you back in with the flow. Happened to me going in to LAS. Coming in from the east, they turned us on final at less than 5 miles...in front of all the SWA planes coming in from LAX. We were still doing 250 knots and trying to get a 777 slowed while trying to loose some altitude is challenging. I called for gear and final flaps, knowing our airspeed was still above landing flaps speed. But, most airplanes have a safety feature that prevents over-speeding the flaps but as you slow down, the flaps will extend. It was actually one of my better landings...

Controller are strange folks in the US. This is the wrong place for competition and they shouldn’t care about this…

​@lukeball4937 Minimum separation is the essential safety buffer - without that it's all in the lap of the gods. And by trying to coordinate such a tight dep / landing scenario, there's really not much latitude for error or failure in the expected normal ops. You said that in the case of an aborted take-off the worst would be that the ATC would suffer the consequences of a separation breakdown. But what if the dep Air India was slow to roll, had performance issues &/or assorted the landing AND say the landing Delta touched down late &/or had braking issues so rolled longer. Perhaps the Delta was heavy & knew they'd need a long roll-out. You only need 2 Swiss cheese holes lining up to make an accident. And I might be wrong, but I don't remember an Expedite instruction from the ATC to the Air India aircraft - only advice that the Delta was on a 2.5 mille final. The Delta PF or PIC couldn't be blamed for making the GA call in that situation.

And the pilot wants to CONTINUE flying everyday!

One of them probably has longer breaks between longer continuous shifts.

Pilot: Has thousands of hours of training in flying in general, and to know the capabilities of the exact vehicle that he's responsible for controlling, as well as a halfway decent knowledge of the airport he's landing at. ATC: Knows the runways like the back of his hand, but otherwise just has a wheelie chair and some screens. Yeah, uh, I dunno about you, but I know who I'm trusting here.

@@Dee_Just_Dee what does "halfway decent knowledge" mean? are you telling us that pilots in general do not have "decent" knowledge of airports theyre landing at? you speaking like an actual civilian that has never been in a pilot's world. pilots are on average more decent at understanding an airport than most ATC that work there. and if you dont think thats true, then you simply would be wrong.

​@@housemana calling something halfway decent is commonly considered to be saying that it is above average. Fairly common use of those words when they're kept together. On their own "halfway" and "decent" mean "average" unless we're using halfway to measure distance of course

Agree 100%. ATC should have just let it go and said nothing more. On top of that, he knew the reason for the go around so why did he even ask?

Yeah. Only been happening for the last 30 years that I know of

@@GigaGear-tv5jk😊😊

​@@GigaGear-tv5jkNot true. I've seen it back in the 80s & 90s, too. Even told the incoming aircraft to 'make S turns on final' to get more spacing!

How to make a join in a half copper water pipe

You’re 100% correct. Unfortunately, there are other cultures (other than Americans) who have a stronger tendency to defer to Authority, and will follow what they perceive are orders from Authority, such as ATC. And, there are those who may also become complacent when certain practices become routine, even those that might not be ideal. We see this in all areas of life, when what was once deemed unacceptable just a few years ago, becomes more acceptable later. Some old school pilots with decades of experience would better recognize these types of changes, than perhaps newer, less experienced pilots. And as each year passes, that newer group will eventually make up the vast majority that have no experience with what used to be the accepted way of doing things.

Yep.

In this case, the person saying it would not have been the one ending up in the graveyard.

I was going to comment that. But agreed the atc wouldn't have ended up in the ground it would have been the pilots

Stand back, I'm a professional here.＼(^^)／

That, and, "Hold my beer."

I think you mean 'filled by' people who say that.

He's also not the one dying either

when your staring out the windshield at 160 knots two and a half miles is not far trust me im a msfs simulator pilot

@@jasontipton8430 golf clap

"Controller is not the one going to take the heat for that" As I put it to my kid when I was teaching him to drive, "If you're waiting at an intersection for a break in traffic so you can make a turn and the car behind you honks, that's not an offer by them to pay your insurance deductible if they are wrong."

@@marcmcreynolds2827 or take the heat literally if it is more than a than a fender bender

Murphy’s Law. Better safe than sorry

That was my biggest concern as well, as a (not professional) pilot. If everything works, everything works. If anything goes wrong, it goes really really really wrong. Why risk it? It's not Delta's fault, or even ATC's, it's the Citation that was too slow getting off the runway.

​@@markeewell Absolutely! The Citation was NIT clear if the runway BEFORE he cleared the other aircraft for take off. 'Sntucipated separation' in not supposed to be with a departure and an aircraft on roll out. (Retired ATC. Unless they have a major change to 7110.

Let me just stipulate, that I am neither a pilot nor an ATC. But it is never good practice in life in general to plan after everything being the best case scenario. Especially when lives are involved. And just practically, when ATC cut it too close to try to save a few seconds here and a minute there, he just creates more work and more delays all around. Doing ur task properly in the first go instead of rushing it is always the quickest solution in the long run. And the safest in this case.

Yep. A pro.

Amen.

ATC trying to blame the pilot makes him the moron here yea.

Yep, though a “So do we.” would have worked as well. ATC could have reasonably be reminded that they are not the only professionals doing their job here.

Mature and responsible on the Delta pilot's part...not so much for the atc.

I think the controller was concerned that he was going to get written up.

@@Flies2FLL No, it wasn't that. He was upset that his plan to make things go extremely efficiently just fell apart and will cause him even more work and inefficiency.

@@Flies2FLL I agree. Do controllers not get 'graded' by how much tin they move per hour, per shift? The more they move, the more they get paid? There must be some incentive. Same with pilots, no? Isn't there $ incentive to deliver more pax on-time, every day? Otherwise everybody relaxes, spreads out, fewer flights landed, fewer folks moved, plane travel gets worse (again).

Controller ought to be reprimanded for baiting a pilot into an emotional reaction when the pilot is dealing with all kinds of last minute changes, a few hundred feet off the ground. Either it's the pilot's call or it isn't, and if it is, controller should stfu and stick to his job.

​@@press2701is there? There shouldn't be. As a passenger, you would rather crash than go around?

even less professional when he whines about the pilots decission... he is NOT on the plane and he is NOT risking his life when he does stupid decission like this... Pilot did brilliantly and kept his cool in his replies.

ATC was a product of the East Coast, and couldn't swallow their pride for a MORE correct decision than their own.

"Thank you, but I don't do 'tight', I do 'safe'."

​@@Steve264511 ..or, "I made a statement - NOT a request for comment or opinion of yours."

@@Steve264511 Great comment 👍👍

Why is air traffic control using one runway for take-offs AND landings at the same time?? When I used to fly, I seem to remember airports having dedicated runways for either take-offs or landings; not both at the same time. It's exactly to prevent this kind of disaster. What is air traffic control thinking?

@@williamyoung9401 $$$

This is my motto too. When passengers are getting mad or freaking out about flights not going for weather or mechanical issues I just say "hey, if the pilot doesn't want to fly do you REALLY want to??" 🤔

​@@tatlowtimes, I was a flight attendant. People complained about weather and mechanicals all the time and my response was always, "Safety first. The alternative (dying) sucks." Not in those words, exactly.😂

Pilot remembered there were hundreds of people's lives at stake, while the controller was seeing puzzle pieces needing to be fit.

@@matthewb3113 BINGO! Exactly. It's not a game, not a puzzle.

Reminds me a little bit of Captain Sully. "Make it human". They operated the whole case based on numbers and NOT the reality of the situation. Same thing here, ATC is seeing numbers and lines assuming the system is gonna keep working, not taking into account the HUMAN factor of what's actually happening in real life.

On point.

I think the pilot's decision is fine, however the controller has likely seen those numbers before and in the past it was tight but it worked. Both pilot and controller can be correct in this case. It could have worked, but the pilot did nothing wrong by going around. If the timing is so tight that controllers shouldn't be asking pilots to do it, that should be codified somehow.

Yeah, I thought, it was tight, but could be managed just fine with the Delta about 2 minutes behind the Citation. But trying to have a 777 heavy take off in between? I dont know, how ATC thought, that was ever going to work.

ATC: It's a squid not an octopus. Pilot: *counts 8 legs*

I imagined a Blooper, like from Mario Kart, obstructing the pilot's view. 😂

Tower is primarily a visual position

@tboneisgaming ...although he's still not going to see the octopus because of the cephalopod's ability to camouflage. 😁

@@Fadamor Heh...you said pus.

Always give yourself time, driving or flying. Time gives you thinking and space to work out problems

Just be careful with that "Never" phrase. Say you just diverted because of weather, then did a go-around at your alternate, now you don't have enough fuel to go-around and make another approach. Better make that last one count.

Kelsey's own experience tells you otherwise. In his case he thought that a go around *would* have been the worse decision.

@@Fastvoice point being that he decided NOT to go around, so not really countering my comment at all.

@@flightcamps9041 then one would hope there was no need for a go around. Quite frankly if you get to that stage on fuel there needed to some much better decision making well prior to that point.

It's akin to 'hold my beer' lol. It's a dare.

It's the sound of arrogance.

And it's scary, one day it won't work.

@@chongtak fluffy pink teddy bear territory.

@@tjthill me no understand

And, "minute and a half" ... ATC was pushing it more than "close" at 2.5 nmi for that 777 entering the runway. At 150knots that's 1 minute flat.

@@ErnestoM2002 always cool to hear from the old timers. In this case that’s literal as well as figurative. :-) I got in an 85 and we always use some type of radar or visual, but occasionally had clearance void times. Things certainly changed in my 26 years, but it’s really hard for me to see all these people thinking that this Delta pilot prevented a collision and deaths, or that a loss of separation meant a collision. I tried to explain it to a few people, but I was just confusing them with facts and experience. But if the initial descriptions were correct, it was pretty obvious, this one was not going to work.

@@lukeball4937 I agree. I think the fact this situation has even become a talking point is because of the hurt ego talk back from ATC, which is at a minimum highly unprofessional, but is being interpreted as his committing unsafe traffic sequencing. At a major UK airport it is quite normal to be cleared to "land after" an aircraft currently accelerating on it's take-off roll in good visibility. The landing aircraft is accepting the role of judging that it is clear to land, that the other aircraft has taken off, before actually landing. I have been landing a 737 and whilst in the flare to touchdown checking that the wheels of the aircraft taking off have actually left the runway (several thousand feet away at the other end!) and it is in the climb out before my wheels touch down. In the event that they aborted we would have rejected the landing and climbed away whilst making a 90° turn away on the missed approach, just as we would if we had seen a vehicle enter the runway in error. Also, I have often heard ATC give tailor made go around instructions to landing aircraft in the event that it may "get tight", such as "BigJet456 in the event of a go around, maintain runway heading, climb altitude 3000 feet", so as to ensure that if his plan doesn't work out he knows exactly where the aircraft will be going. As a side note, at my airport without a displaced threshold, I'd be alert for a potential go around if I hear a departing aircraft getting line up clearance when I am at 3 miles, as long as they don't delay it will be fine, so hearing it at 2.5 miles with a displaced threshold I would be thinking "Oh, come on?!" I just wouldn't want ATC taking the chance that we will have to go around and do it again, adding 15 minutes to an already long day and delaying the arrival of our aircraft on stand. (Belaboured detail for the lay person's benefit, not yours!). The only thing that I feel is unsafe in this video is the snarky come back from ATC, which could emotionally distract the pilots from the high workload go around they are currently trying to fly and monitor whilst raising flaps and ensuring they are tracking correctly and climbing to the correct level off altitude, etc. This, I feel, is the one factor that really stands to degrade safety.

@@CatalinaAVX i’m not hearing anything I disagree with. Cherry on top we’re talking about a couple of heavies. Similar to trying to get a 900 series Boeing 737 to slow down, it’s just not gonna happen. I absolutely agree with you, I tried mentioning what you’ve listed in various other posts but the people with their movie level knowledge of air traffic control, frustrated me into terminating and deleting the threads. As you know, “squeeze plays” go on all the time every day at airports that share pavement between arrivals and departures. Something like this, every pilot involved should have their instructions before they enter the critical stage of flight. Any experienced controller knows If a crew has to go around, they’re too busy flying the plane to comply with a bunch of controller instructions to avoid the plane they just went around for. Good controller,knows, you always leave yourself an out just in case the departure aborts or the GA citation dawdles down the runway, or misses their turn, or pulls a head fake where it looks like they’re turning off the runway, but then they decide that they want to go to a subsequent intersection. The unspoken part that a lot of people miss is that they seem to think that, why not just wait? As if there isn’t another plane a couple of minutes behind these guys. I 100% agree, I am embarrassed for the profession by what the controller said. It wasn’t the place or the time, and it didn’t matter anyway. The situation was resolved. The controller could’ve been right. It might’ve been a squeeze play that did work and was a legal operation by the book, a good controller would’ve moved on. I could see asking if the go round was for a mechanicalor wake issue, but you don’t have judgment discussions on the frequency, that’s what the telephone is for.

@@lukeball4937 totally agree with all you said, and also a pleasure to listen to a professional speak. I had not heard the term "squeeze play", but now I'll think of it every time my finger is hovering over the TO/GA button! As the Queen used to say, "Never complain, never explain.", our controller in this video could have taken some high ground and benefit of the doubt by replying "Roger(.)". Hope you have a great day.

If the air traffic controller had to ask the pilot "Why" he didn't land, he needs a vacation and some re-training. His 'Obvious-Detector' was malfunctioning that day.

Very well said.

@@williamyoung9401 When a pilot conducts a missed approach, a controller needs to asscetain the reason for the missed approach for reporting matters.

@@ilyer4199 that part is fine, but I do not think ATC needed to add the additional commentary of "it would have been tight, but it would of worked"

Glad you and everyone else made it down safely and had a good pilot.

A go around is always the right thing unless you fly for PIA and land with gear up.

PIC?

@@K1OIK What don't you understand?

@@aaronbrown6266 PIC? Like water PIC?

@@K1OIK Pilot In Command.

It was 100% defensive and irritated though; And I'm not sure how well irritated and safty go together.

he gave him a # to call. That means a report. The Captain has full authority of his ship.

@DaftyBoi412 The ATC gave the Pilot a #. Not the other way round. Which means an incident report.

@@DaftyBoi412 PS You're daft boy.! Did you even listen.

The default setting for JFK controllers is "snarky".

ATC cares deeply what the flight attendants think😂

@@timinclt7895 👍🏽🤣🤣🤣💀

@@sherrinunya4079 i don´t trust that pilot from Malaesia

I NOTICED YOU SAID “HAD” TRUST OF THE DELTA PILOTS? WHAT CHANGED FROM “HAVE TO HAD” TRUST IN DELTA PILOTS?

@@davidlangford9107 Because he is retired now and has no way of knowing the skills of current pilots are you dumb or what

That set of a fire alarm in my brain. The ego on that guy, and he even admitted he was pushing it. Hopefully he learned to back off a little bit because after all it is the airline who is paying to land there, the pilot doesn't have to change their risk tolerance or owe anything to the ATC until he lands.

“It would have worked as long as nothing went wrong.”

Ya if he said “you had plenty of space” then the atc guy is just wrong. Acknowledging it was going to be tight shows the ATC guy has reckless habits. Tight leaves no margin for error

It would have been tight...but within safety margins is what he meant. Not that it would have been tight to not crash in to the other plane.

​@@zachansen8293 Please explain how you land on a runway that has a plane on it without crashing. Is Air India known for takeoff reliability when they already sound stressed as Kelsey replayed for us?

I saw one were the pilot told the ATC yeah I'm going need a number to call when I land.

Thanks for this video. I now have another insight into why take off and landing are such critical times on the flight. As the passenger, keeping the blue side up is my mission, too so I'll be buckled up tight and praying harder that all you pilots get exactly what you want while flying us in and out and all around the world and that towers everywhere remember that the same situations can present differently on the screen and in the sky. Safety First.

China as to u.s.a ...... China not profit operations for reason of existence.......u.s.a. profit for existing...as to subject of video only ...hey just maybe ?!!!!!!!! Ha ha ...get it !!!!

Bro it looks okay on radar the dots haven't merged yet lol.

"I do this every day, it would have worked" reminds me *so hard* of dispatch talking to drivers in the 18-wheeler world.

him and mentor pilot are the two I follow

Hi! Do you know Pilot debrief? Hoover is such a concientious guy. Try him once a tell me if you like him.​@@DenseGrowthOfTrees

(1-1/n)^n chance of success goes to about ⅔ chance of failure. Controller does what, 200 shifts a year? 20 years, 4000 shifts, ask pilots to take 1-in-4000 risks once per shift about ⅔ of controllers will cause an accident during their career, that is *wildly* unacceptable. Google tells me one in about 3000 takeoffs are aborted.

@@tjthill You missed the comment, try to read it again or get a third party to assess your understanding of the comment. I understand, you are neurodivergent.

@@eaglemach9992 Did you know kettles are shiny? Like, you see yourself when you look at them?

Seeing how this is being covered by channels like this, this was made into an incident report. This controller getting retrained / changing career may very well save lives.

It’s almost like someone’s job is constantly higher pressure than another…..🙄

This is why I fly Delta. I trust them.

Controller was out of line. “I do this every day.” So does the pilot, jackass.

If pilots accept this "squeeze" by ATC , only more will come... someone has to be an advocate for safety, the pilot whose life, and that of his passangers, is ideally positioned to push back against this ridiculous situation....

suppose that pilot has been in that situation a few times before. at this airport.

You're always going to land, but you might not be able to take off again...

From ATC and often also the airport management that sells more slots to airlines.

"Deadly game" ... hmm, let's take a closer look under the hood of the current hiring practices of the FAA oh my

@@TurboLoveTrainthat is not how this works. No matter who the FAA hires (if you’re trying to hint at diversity hiring) there is still competency-based certification and hundreds of hours of training. The pilots and controllers will always have to certify based on strict standards. For pilots it’s the ACS. No matter what they LOOK like if they don’t meet the standard they don’t work. Cut and dry. I would like to know your experience with aviation to make you think that diversity hiring causes most of these problems?

​@@eugenemccary4748 in my experience what you are saying is partly true. There are many fine pilots regardless of genetics. The reality is that DEI quotas have led to lower selection and competency standards. This is true for ATC the Airlines and the Air force. All of which I have worked in 40 years in aviation.

@@eugenemccary4748 If you don't meet the standards those standards will be lowered until you can. This isn't new. I worked in cabin systems, signal deconfliction, then moved on to material stress testing and component design for fracture critical systems like landing gear and jet engine fan blade attachments. Cost cutting and hiring policies have lead to lower standards across the board and the results are observable--more equipment failures and "near misses" like this. I left the aerospace industry because this was happening and I don't fly anymore.

Did he just become a captain?

He's been a captain for several several months now😊​@@CoolioAlert

@@CoolioAlertno. It’s been a bit. Look back at the videos. He never announced it just showed up with the new bar 😊

@@CoolioAlert he’s been a captain for a while, but I still like reminding him that we all think is awesome

@@angelraburn4401 Yeah, that was a moment, right? All of sudden, we are pausing the video to double check what we saw...wait, what?? Wow!

It might've worked if the India flight didn't need to abort takeoff. ATC must understand that they can't have multiple planes on the same runway at the same time -- basic common sense. Too many flights in too little time is going to result in a bad crash eventually. ATC is playing games with people's lives.

It's not even that. It's not about the pilot being more of an expert (even though they are), it's the terrible reasoning by the controller. "It's worked before, therefore it'll work now" is one of the oldest logical failures we know about. It's more well-known as a post-hoc fallacy. Just because he's done it so many time doesn't mean it's going to work _this_ time. The point shouldn't be experience, but position. The pilot is flying the plane. The controller is giving directions. The pilot has the final say, _always._ That's the expected respect that a controller should give. Even without the logical failing in the reasoning, it's still overstepping their bounds to suggest their say should have been the final one, as the controller did here. The quick response should have been, "confirmed, [instructions for the go-around/landing]". Then again, unless they did it for data collection purposes or whatever, the controller probably shouldn't be asking anyway. Again, pilot has final say. If they ask for a go-around, then that's their call.

Would you elaborate on the meaning of zip-point-squat please?

@@Ilgenfixit80 his ego means zip-point-squat (0.0).

​@@Ilgenfixit80zip is a colloquial word for zero. Squat is also a colloquial word for zero. "Zip-point-squat" is "zero point zero" (0.0), or nothing, which means he's saying "Your ego means nothing."

Congratulations Captain Kelsey. Well deserved.

Would worj on me too! And I´m not even a pilot!

"without REFUSAL." Learn simple 3rd grade words. We don't want to be punished by your ignorance.

@@user-dh6bj2me5p corrected it before but I’m glad I finally got a personal smartass here by my side. 🙌🏻

😂😂😂

​@@user-dh6bj2me5p And yet, somehow you comprehended what they said and what they meant. Stop being a third grader.

" Personally, I felt this guy knew what he was doing and relaxed,", do you ever get on an aircraft thinking the pilot doesn't know what he's doing?

​@@colinpotter7764 nah, but sometimes you realize halfway how sh.t they are. i survived eg. a flight where the pilots did full flaps!! mid-flight. on cruise height. on an a320. it was insane. pure insanity. they also did not use the autopilot the entire 3-hr flight. i said so many thanks to engineers after that flight, there must be so many backup safety systems on an a320 that ensured we didn't die from the stupidy of the pilots that day. (it was in SEA on a smaller airline.)

Guy sounds like a real pro

Agree

Obviously depends on the biscuit 😉

It's important that there be agreement. The controller minimums should be what pilots are practicing and training for. Seeing disagreements like this means there's a breakdown in communication somewhere.

That’s not “Snappy”. It’s NYC and actually very polite …😂

Absolutely, in the moment, if you're uncomfortable with the situation, don't do it. ALSO, if the pilot isn't comfortable with Kennedy-level traffic, then he either needs to get more comfortable somehow or stop going there. But that's a "think about later" problem. The best thing the pilot did there was decline to pick up the argument bait on air.

In the UK, You do not get a clear to land until the preceding aircraft is clear of the runway

@@CDB8939 That doesn't mean you're not deep down in the approach to the runway. This was an approach into 09L I recall (definitely from the west), and I think we'd cleared the M25 (which is about 1 mile from the aim point) when the power went back on and we headed back up into the murky weather.

@@abarratt8869 In the USA they clear aircraft to land that are number 3 in the line, at least here the pilots know they are not cleared until the runway is clear

I think the pilot is too professional for childish comments like that.

No, that would have been the most overused "joke" on ATC videos ever.

@@zachansen8293 nearly every ATC video has that “joke” nowadays, it used to be funny, now it’s so repetitive, just like the comment “first”.

@@colinpotter7764 Shake and bake.

No. There are far too many of such ego fights. The real problem of that is, an ATC man quarreling is an ATC man NOT DOING HIS NORMAL JOB. And that is wrong. It is! Being a pilot, you talk over the radio as short as possible. There can be a pilot waiting for you to shut up. Do not bla bla bla nice weather up here bla bla bla.

The title is Click Bait he didn't refuse to Land it was a go around The pilot didn't say I refuse he said there going around

Same thing.

If the pilot thinks it's too close it's too close. If it doesn't look good it doesn't look good. You're also dealing with wake turbulence. What's the wind? Right you don't know. Should always make a choice according to what you're comfortable with. Something doesn't feel right don't do it.

Seems to me that I've heard over and over better to reject a landing than risk a crash. Go around is a safe decision.

@@glennchartrand5411 Glenn if you're a pilot I'd suggest you find another hobby

Caution! Wake turbulence!

​@@jamesoshea580yes. This is the comment i was wanting to see!