Plane carrying Michelle Obama gets too close to military cargo jet due to error with air traffic control [Updated]

This post has been corrected. See note below for details.

A plane carrying First Lady Michelle Obama came dangerously close to a military cargo jet Monday due to a mistake by air traffic control personnel.

The Washington Post is reporting that the Boeing 737 with Michelle Obama onboard was preparing to land at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland when air traffic control instructed the White House plane to execute a series of S-turns so it would not collide with a 200-ton C-17.

When it became a greater possibility that the C-17 wouldn't be able to get off the runway quickly enough for the White House plane to land, the Andrews controllers instructed the 737 to abort its landing.

"In the grand scheme of things, events like this happen fairly frequently," a federal official who works with the air traffic control system told the Post anonymously. "Unfortunately, this one involves a presidential plane."

A second FAA manager told the Post that the error began with an air traffic controller at the Potomac Terminal Radar Approach Control facility in Warrenton, Va. "Not only did he get them too close, he told the [Andrews controller] that they were farther apart than they were," the manager said.

[For the record, 3:20 p.m.: An earlier version of this post said the plane was trying to land at Edwards Air Force Base.]

[For the record, 4:12 p.m.: This post originally said the first lady's plane "nearly collided with the military jet". In fact, the military jet did not clear off the runway soon enough as the White House plane was on approach. Obama's plane was 3 miles from the airport when the order came for it to do a 'go-around.']

RELATED:

Photos: Michelle Obama, fashion icon

Rush Limbaugh criticizes First Lady Michelle Obama's weight, nutritional campaign

President Obama and first lady paid $453,770 in taxes, donated 14% of income to charity

Note: Andrew Malcom is on vacation.

-- Tony Pierce
twitter.com/busblog

Photo: First Lady Michelle Obama speaks to members of the military and their families at Camp Lejeune, N.C., Wednesday.  Credit: Shawn Rocco / Raleigh News & Observer

Comments

[Hugh Elliot]

Andrews Air Force base, in Virginia NOT Edwards AFB in California...A controller in VA would not tell a plane that was landing in CA to abort it's landing...would it?

[RuhRoh]

Sleeping or watching a movie?

[Stephen Ruiz]

So where was the plane landing- California or Maryland??? I know it's the digital age, and the fastest one to print wins, but this is a pretty sloppy excuse for editing.

[zygion]

Scary.

[woof-woof]

3 miles apart is not "nearly collided."

[DM]

This first comment by Bolita is disgusting. Wishing the First Lady dead is ok with the LA Times?

[WhyEyeOughta]

I don't know which is more frightening - the near accident or the classless comment by Bolita.

I'm just thankful that all ended well and that our First Lady is safe!

[eddo]

No big deal. This occurs very frequently and there is little or no risk involved.

[kell]

so how much did the taxpayers foot?

[eddo]

I wonder if Michelle is going to say that this is the first time she has ever felt proud to have an FAA?

[jsa26]

As a pilot all I can say is, no big deal. It does happen all the time.

[eddo]

The LA Times either has a server operating at about 75 bps or they don't like my posts!

[Dennis C]

I am a C-17 pilot. This situation hardly warrants the phrase "nearly collides" in the headline. Occasionally during approach landing one plane is going much faster than the one in front of it and will get instructions to slow down or S-turn (thereby making the distance over the ground longer and taking more time) on final. If that isn't enough, the second plane will be instructed to go around. This happens ALL THE TIME. Heck, this story doesn't even deserve to be a story at all, First Lady or not.

[mike peters]

The tower simply told the plane with the First Lady aboard to do a go-around or something. I remember when I was flying a little Cessna and the Air Traffic controller had me land in front of a big F-105 fighter jet (those babies burn up fuel). The fighter pilot was mad because he had to wait for me. I would of let him go first, after all they have to set up their approach, they've got high wing loading, etc. and I could've done a side slip and skidded and jinked around and landed on the Colonel's front lawn but we followed protocol...

[Fernie]

Bolita (3:15 PM),
What, were you hoping to date her husband?

[CommonSense]

Actually, yes it is woof-woof. A car traveling at 60 mph, can cover that distance in 3 minutes. A plane at 500 mph? Do the math buddy. Maybe we should put Bolita on a crashed-destined flight.

[Adam]

Truly discusting Bolita

[Marley]

Bolita there is a GOD and I don't he is happy with you or your twin Marilyn Davenport. Tacky hag. Maybe next time it will be you.

[KENNETH JAMES PRICE]

It would appear that "Bolita" is not an american, because an american would never want anyone in the political arena harmed just because they differ in their political perspective. Very sad!

[d]

Please remove the disgusting comment by Bolita. What a pitiful little fool you are Bolita.

[d]

Please remove the disgusting comment by Bolita.

[Crazy Horse]

To "woof-woof"......stick to being a poodle. Three miles apart with airplanes that big and moving that fast, is indeed 'nearly colliding.'

[vmspecht]

Any FAA Controller who sleeps on the job, watches movies on the job or otherwise pulls a dum dum stunt should be fired immedicately.

[Andrew]

Perhaps it was the confusion between Andrews and Edwards AFB that caused the problem in the first place.

[Lance]

REALLY:

It's pathetic that you would post a header that talks about a near collision as that simply isn't the case.

3 MILES isn't a near collision. Dribble Dribble Dribble.....

GROW UP... and yes I'm pilot....

[Mark]

Common Sense, just what kind of "common sense" makes you think any aircraft on approach is doing 500mph??

Give me a break people, use your heads. This isn't a big deal, it is just the media trying to make something out of literally nothing.

BTW, I fly B-767s. As every other pilot has stated. No big thing.

[jon]

You all just love to sit around like a bunch of sheep waiting for the slaughter, reading misinformation so you can get all excited about something.

It disgusts me that they burn all that jet fuel and a perfectly good BBJ on that woman. I means seriously, look at her.

[blackone]

Only a few years ago, an amateur photo like that absolutely, 100%, could not get you hired. Anywhere.

[lark]

Maybe it was a Tea Party racist fanatic in the air traffic control tower. Wouldn't surprise me. Same jerks that like to carry guns in public.

[Rutegar]

Completely frivolous 'gotcha' headline here, just surprised this came from the LA Times....

[Lisa]

The First Lady should have been on the cargo plane to save money.

Ooops, I forgot, the Obamas don't care about saving OUR money, only spending it.

[MikeH]

Sorry, Bolita. That comment was in the poorest of taste regardless of how you feel about the administration. I think it should be deleted by Times admin. as inappropriate. Period. I wouldn't mind if comments were disabled for this type of story due to the extremely poor judgement exercised under your first amendment rights. Race or politics should have nothing to do with wishing someone physical harm or death. Wrong comment to post on so many different levels. Think about it. What if someone said something similar about you or one of your loved ones. A little more judgement before hitting the "post" button next time. LA Times, this one's on you too. Did you moderate and approve such a tasteless comment? Why? If this had been about any previous First Lady would you have allowed this comment to stand? If the answer is yes, then I have to question your moderator's judgement as well. Let's then make sick jokes about our young men and women serving our country in harms way as well. Same thing. Guess that's moderated and approved as well. Someone in the digital group needs a meeting with the manager on letting this one slide by. Not doing your job very well. What if it was the President's plane, regardless of administration. Would that have been moderated and approved as well. Sometimes we carry this First Amendment thing a bit too loosely. It protects your right to say or write anything but, as one interpretation yielded, you do not have the right to yell, "fire" in a crowded theater if there is none. So much for the people the LA Times hires these days. Moderator, yeah, right! NYT or even Washington Post would have called it differently, I think. Much better publications as well. Even their comments show some thoughtfulness and class. This was low as a human being can probably go, unless we're talking about some lowlife criminal or murderer. This is the wife of our elected leader, the mother of two children herself, as well as a man's wife. We the civilized mourn the loss of life or are thankful when someone's is spared. Not wish them death in a possible fiery crash, even if it's veiled in a so called clever quip. That's just disgusting. Crappy story editing as well. Remember Dan Rather and CBS and the shooting of President Reagan? Dan should have really taken the time to verify before going on the air like he did. Then the embarrassment of having to redact his earlier report. ABC and NBC got it right. He was the death for that news organization's credibility. Walter Cronkite handled the assassination of President Kennedy with more integrity. The late Edward R. Murrow himself would be flabbergasted with this type of reporting. Times, what seems to be the problem here? Even in a digital realm, trust but verify before putting it online.
Back to basics of the 5 W's. Don't get too lax just because the City of Bell got you a nod for the Pulitzer. You can blow it with carelessness, just to be first.
Now let me go read the Washington Post to see what really happened.

[me too I'm a pilot]

No wonder flight are always late, all the pilots are here leaving comments! My flight leaves in two hours, get to work you losers!

[joe S]

just one of the hundreds of much to do about NOTHING,the media loves to bark about, stick to the real truths about our goverment is screwing up ordinary americans, not this every day thing, in the world of air traffic controll!

[blackone]

This wasn't one of the Air Force's? Considering the technology available to the First Family, this is amazing. Wonder what the military wants from Obama?

[2 cents]

can you imagine that in the morning with no make-up on?

[Katie]

Was the controller a Republican?

[scallywag]

What if the same thing had happened last night with someone other than these two? Would the media have scrapped the story? Or to put it another way, names and personas sitting in challenged planes aside- how often are the incidence of near misses and what does the FAA intend to do about it- or should we just discount it as one of the unappetizing risks of flying that every traveller must be willing to accept when they board a plane- even if that plane happens to be a US air force presidential plane?

http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2011/04/plane-carrying-michelle-obama-narrowly-escapes-crashing-with-cargo-plane/