FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

United Parcel Service Boeing 767 34AF incident

12 Apr 2015 · Miami, FL, United States

Boeing 767 34AF and Netjets Sales Cessna 750 · Incident: near midair/TCAS alert/loss of separation on approach

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
OPS15IA017
Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
Incident
InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
Completed
Event fatalities
Unknown
Ground fatalities
Unknown
OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
Airline
WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
Visual Meteorological Cond

Aircraft 1 · Boeing 767 34AF

Aircraft type
Boeing 767
Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N342UP
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Augusto C. Sandino (Managua) International Airport (MNMG), ManaguaTo Miami International Airport (MIA), Miami, FL
Aircraft age
About 4 years (built 2011)
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Part 121: Air Carrier
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Approach · IFR final approach
Defining eventThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
Near midair/TCAS alert/loss of separation
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
None

Aircraft 2 · Cessna 750

Aircraft type
Cessna 750
Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N900QS
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Miami International Airport (MIA), Miami, FLTo Chub Cay Airport (MYBC), Chub Cay
Aircraft age
About 15 years (built 2000)
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Unknown
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Taxi · into takeoff position
Defining eventThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
Runway incursion (vehicle, aircraft or person)
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
None

Cause areas

  • Personnel issues › Action/decision

Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

This loss of required air traffic control separation resulted from the LN/LS controller issuing a landing clearance to UPS357 to a runway occupied by N900QS in position on the same runway. This resulted in UPS357 overflying N900QS by about 475 feet. Contributing to the error was the local controller's non-compliance with traffic advisory procedures, and insufficient requirements for use of memory aids to track arrival and departure operations.

When issuing a landing clearance to UPS357, the local controller did not ensure the runway was clear as required by FAA Order 7110.65, Air Traffic Control, paragraph 3-10-3, Same Runway Separation and, the local controller did not advise UPS357 that an aircraft was in position on the landing runway as required by FAA Order 7110.65, paragraph 3-10-5c, Landing Clearance.

Contributing to this incident was the lack of required memory aids for arrivals. Miami Air Traffic Control Tower procedures required controllers to use memory aids to indicate that an aircraft had been directed to line up and wait (LUAW), when an aircraft was issued a departure clearance, and to indicate that a runway was occupied by an airport vehicle. However, flight progress strips or memory aids were not required for arrivals and arrival flight progress strips were not used. The data available via the radar presentation on the tower display workstation (TDW) was the only information used for arrival sequencing. While the LUAW memory aide is beneficial to prevent a controller from issuing a takeoff clearance for a runway that is occupied by an aircraft in LUAW position, it did not prevent the controller from issuing a landing clearance to UPS357 nine seconds after he had directed N900QS to LUAW. There were no visual aids utilized to indicate an aircraft was on the runway to which an aircraft had also been cleared to land. According to controller interviews, the "rule of thumb" or unofficial procedure for arrivals to a runway occupied by an aircraft in position was that if the arrival reached two miles and the aircraft in position had not started departure roll, the arriving aircraft would be sent around. However, there were no visual clues or memory aids to remind the controller that an aircraft was in position on the runway except where a controller may decide to write down call-signs of arriving aircraft at the control position.

Probable cause

The controller's issuance of a landing clearance to an arriving aircraft while another aircraft was in position on the same runway. Contributing to the incident was the controller's non-compliance with traffic advisory procedures, and insufficient requirements for use of memory aids to track arrival and departure operations.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record OPS15IA017
Event ID
20150416X33824
Case number
OPS15IA017
Dataset
full-current
Source SHA-256
5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
Source notes (4)
  • Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
  • Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: investigation status, damage. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date, which is the same as the UTC date the NTSB stores.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: 988ab75e4076a567c437abd9e7559e61b43300cde0cc5bbd8df22a56b7c96923; retrieved 2026-09-13T18:23:56.114Z.