Airbus A320-211 incident near San Francisco, California, July 8, 2017
On July 8, 2017 at about 6:56 am local time, a 1992 Airbus A320-211, registered CFKCK, was involved in an incident during approach near San Francisco, California (San Francisco International airport). It was flown under foreign airline rules (Part 129). The NTSB record does not give the injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The flight crew's misidentification of taxiway C as the intended landing runway, which resulted from the crewmembers' lack of awareness of the parallel runway closure due to their ineffective review of notice to airmen (NOTAM) information before the flight and during the approach briefing. Contributing to the incident were (1) the flight crew's failure to tune the instrument landing system frequency for backup lateral guidance, expectation bias, fatigue due to circadian disruption and length of continued wakefulness, and breakdowns in crew resource management and (2) Air Canada's ineffective presentation of approach procedure and NOTAM information.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- July 8, 2017 · about 6:56 am local time
- Place
- San Francisco, California · San Francisco International · map
- Type
- Incident
- Injuries
- The NTSB record does not give the injuries.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Airbus A320-211 211, built 1992 · all A320-211s on the register
- Registration
- CFKCK · no longer on the register · serial 265
- Damage
- Not recorded
- Flight
- Flight · foreign airline rules (Part 129)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
NTSB investigators traveled in support of this investigation and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft incident report. The NTSB's full report is available at http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AccidentReports.aspx. The Aircraft Incident Report number is NTSB/AIR-18/01. On July 7, 2017, about 2356 Pacific daylight time, Air Canada flight 759, an Airbus A320-211, Canadian registration C-FKCK, was cleared to land on runway 28R at San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, California, but instead lined up with parallel taxiway C. Four air carrier airplanes (a Boeing 787, an Airbus A340, another Boeing 787, and a Boeing 737) were on taxiway C awaiting clearance to take off from runway 28R. The incident airplane descended to an altitude of 100 ft above ground level and overflew the first airplane on the taxiway. The incident flight crew initiated a go-around, and the airplane reached a minimum altitude of about 60 ft and overflew the second airplane on the taxiway before starting to climb. None of the 5 flight crewmembers and 135 passengers aboard the incident airplane were injured, and the incident airplane was not damaged. The incident flight was operated by Air Canada under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 129 as an international scheduled passenger flight from Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Airport, Toronto, Canada. An instrument flight rules flight plan had been filed. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the incident.
The complete narrative as the NTSB published it. The NTSB's docket holds the report as a PDF and any photographs, statements and other documents from the investigation.
The factual record from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English
What happened, in order
- Wrong surface or wrong airport during approach defining event
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Identification/recognition › Flight crew
- cause Environmental issues › Operating environment › Airport facilities/design › Runway/landing area condition › Awareness of condition
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of available resources › Flight crew
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Flight crew
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Expectation/assumption › Flight crew
- factor Personnel issues › Physical › Alertness/Fatigue › Circadian rhythms or jetlag › Flight crew
- factor Personnel issues › Physical › Alertness/Fatigue › Lack of sleep › Flight crew
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Communication (personnel) › CRM/MRM techniques › Flight crew
- factor Organizational issues › Management › Policy/procedure › Adequacy of policy/proc › Operator
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Navigation system › (general) › Design
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Indicating/recording systems › Data recorders (flight/maint) › Capability exceeded
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 82,427 hours
- Last inspection: approved inspection programme, June 25, 2017
- Maximum gross weight: 166,449 lb
- Seats: 154
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Cfm CFM56-5A! (turbofan); 79,303 hours total
- Engine 2: Cfm CFM56-5A1 (turbofan); 69,225 hours total
- Operator: Air Canada
The flight
- Departed from: YYZ Toronto OF
- Destination: SFO San Francisco CA
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 28R, 11,870 ft by 200 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: night, dark
- Wind: from 290° at 9 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 61°F (16°C), dew point 48°F (9°C)
- Altimeter: 29.92 inHg
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
53 documents, released by the NTSB on May 2, 2018. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.
The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.
Everything on this page comes from the NTSB's public records. The narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words; the coded tables behind the report are written out in plain English, with pilots' ages, home towns and medical details left out. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, shown as the NTSB released them. This site's own text never names anyone involved. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.