On the morning of Tuesday, 25 February, a Flexjet Challenger 350 crossed Chicago-Midway’s runway 31C, leading a landing Southwest Airlines 737 to initiate a go around. Southwest flight 2504 landed safely on its second approach. Laterally, the aircraft we separated by approximately 2,050 feet before Southwest began its go around and climbed back into the sky. When it passed over the Challenger downfield, the 737 was between 200 and 250 feet above ground level.
“Tower, Southwest 2504, how'd that happen?”
In the video below, we’ve combined the ADS-B data and audio captured by LiveATC.net. The Flexjet aircraft was communicating with the Midway ground controller and the Southwest flight was on the Midway tower frequency.
The ground controller clears Flexjet from its parking area to hold short of Runway 31C on Runway 04L. Southwest was cleared by the tower controller to land on Runway 31C.
Flightradar24 data
CSV and KML files for each flight are available for download below. Additionally, playback of both flights in Multi-select view (web only) is available here.
Aircraft information
Southwest Airlines flight 2504 was operated by a Boeing 737-800 registered N8517F.
Flexjet 560 was operated by a Bombardier Challenger 350 registered N560FX.
Investigative updates
18 March 2025
The NTSB released its preliminary report on the incident on 18 March, detailing the sequence of events and providing updates on the post-incident interview with the FlexJet pilots.
According to post incident statements, the flight crew of LXJ560 indicated that as they turned left onto runway 4L/22R, the sun was impeding visibility from the right side of the aircraft, however they did not recall seeing any hold short line/pavement markings or any other signs for the 31L intersection as they taxied onto runway 04L/22R. They stated that taxiway F and runway 13R/31L were in close proximity to each other and by the time the nosewheel had straightened out, they were likely halfway across runway 13R/31L. They further stated that runway 13R/31L appeared to have a very similar width to taxiways and that they had not recognized it as a runway. The captain stated that as he approached runway 13C/31C he had thought it was runway 13R/31L. As they approached the runway intersection the crew stated they both looked to the left and to the right and did not observe the SWA airplane on final.
![An example full flight summary response from the Flightradar24 API: { "data": [ { "fr24_id": "0987654321", "flight": "SK1415", "callsign": "SAS1415", "operated_as": "SAS", "painted_as": "SAS", "type": "A20N", "reg": "SE-DOY", "orig_icao": "ESSA", "orig_iata": "ARN", "datetime_takeoff": "2023-01-27T05:15:22", "runway_takeoff": "12R", "dest_icao": "EKCH", "dest_iata": "CPH", "dest_icao_actual": "EPWA", "dest_iata_actual": "WAW", "datetime_landed": "2023-01-27T06:15:10", "runway_landed": "27L", "flight_time": 3600, "actual_distance": 1007.74, "circle_distance": 6245, "category": "Passenger", "hex": "4A91F9", "first_seen": "2023-01-27T05:06:22", "last_seen": "2023-01-27T06:18:10", "flight_ended": "true" } ] }](https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Flight-summary-API-cover-300x148.jpg)
![An example full flight summary response from the Flightradar24 API: { "data": [ { "fr24_id": "0987654321", "flight": "SK1415", "callsign": "SAS1415", "operated_as": "SAS", "painted_as": "SAS", "type": "A20N", "reg": "SE-DOY", "orig_icao": "ESSA", "orig_iata": "ARN", "datetime_takeoff": "2023-01-27T05:15:22", "runway_takeoff": "12R", "dest_icao": "EKCH", "dest_iata": "CPH", "dest_icao_actual": "EPWA", "dest_iata_actual": "WAW", "datetime_landed": "2023-01-27T06:15:10", "runway_landed": "27L", "flight_time": 3600, "actual_distance": 1007.74, "circle_distance": 6245, "category": "Passenger", "hex": "4A91F9", "first_seen": "2023-01-27T05:06:22", "last_seen": "2023-01-27T06:18:10", "flight_ended": "true" } ] }](https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Flight-summary-API-cover-768x378.jpg)
35 Responses
We had a similar experience a few years ago coming into Philadelphia (PHL) on US Airways from Manchester (MAN). As we descended, a light aircraft flew across the runway in front of and below us. We did a go around and the pilot said over the PA, “Sorry about that folks. Things weren’t quite right, so we’re going around.” I only know the reason for the go around as I was sitting in a window seat and saw the light aircraft approaching from our left and go under us.
Hope that flexjet pilot has his license revoked. How many people did he almost kill??
Flexjet 560 did not clearly understand from the beginning of the audio playback. Great job plot of Southwest 2504, quick response….
The pilot in the right seat of the 350 had no eyeballs?
Excellent reporting. Details of the event once again illustrate the critical need for flight crew and ATC communications. Southwest’s reaction was outstanding.
Time to punish these guys and companies that employ them. Either financial or licenses.
FlexJet was WRONG & crew should be disciplined, SEVERELY!
I’m not a pilot but ATC verbal instructions to Flexjet/Chll3nger were very clear … serious pilot mistake. Pull his license before he kills people.
Being taxied along a runway (04) probably didn’t help. Being on a runway and then crossing 31C I would like to see the signage at the approach to this point as it is not an intersection for either 04 or 31C so I would think no stop bars.Also is not a marked taxiway i.e. no yellow taxiway markings. Having said that the Flexjet crew actions are questionable, taxi briefing?Situational Awareness? and that clear right/ clear left check before crossing a runway active or not and even when cleared?
They are marked. It’s very clear!
You probably don’t have this information, but I am curious about a tower follow-up to Flexjet. Will NTSB investigate? Be interested what they have to say.
“The ground controller clears Flexjet from its parking area to hold short of Runway 31C on Runway 04L. Southwest was cleared by the tower controller to land on Runway 31C.”
I am not an aviation expert.
If Flexjet was told by the ground tower to “hold short of Runway 31C on Runway 4,” I interpret that to mean that Flexjet was told to not cross 31C. Is this correct?
Thank you.
Well, there is no quick fix to the situation, they need to step up recruitment of air traffic control controllers.
At only 60′ wide, MDW’s runway 31L /13R is a dinosaur. It can’t be used by anything bigger than a Beechcraft 1900D. And apparently it can be mistaken for a taxiway by pilots who aren’t paying attention.
Has anyone noticed how the layouts of runways and taxiways at Midway may have contributed to this near-disaster?
The Flexjet Challenger was told to (1) taxi (from the FBO at the west side of the airport) along Runway 4 Left, (2) cross Runway 31 Left, and then (3) (still on Runway 4 Left) hold at Runway 31 Center until the SWA flight had landed on 31 Center.
I’m looking at a Google Earth Pro image of the airport. Let’s suppose that the Flexjet taxied out of the FBO on the east-west taxiway with the markings “22R-4L.” Following the yellow line, when they got to 4 Left they would have made that (roughly) 45° turn to the left, onto the Runway. From what I see on the image, having made that turn they would have almost immediately crossed a NW-SE taxiway that also bears the markings “22R-4L”. About 70 yards later, they would have found themselves on the center-line of Runway 31 Left. However, in the image I see, this Runway barely looks like a runway. Unlike Runway 31 Center, it seems to have no skid-marks from frequent landings. Also unlike 31 Center, it has no white-lines along its boundaries that cut-off the “white dashes” along the center-line of 4 Left. To my inexpert eye, it looks like another taxiway. To a flight crew that is confused or disoriented, it might look like another taxiway. And from their interactions with the tower, it would seem that they were in fact confused and/or disoriented.
So perhaps this was what was going on, on the Flexjet’s flight deck:
1. They left the FBO, taxiing east.
2. They turned 45° left onto Runway 4 Left.
3. They crossed the taxiway that parallels Runway 31 Left (to its right), but did not realize they had crossed it.
4. They crossed Runway 31 Left — thinking that they were simply crossing a taxiway.
5. When they reached Runway 31 Center, they thought they were coming upon Runway 31 Left. Which they were told to taxi across. So they didn’t hold (and perhaps get yelled at, again, for holding too soon) — they just kept going, at a slow taxiing speed.
6. While the SWA flight was landing on 31 Center.
Now, what about markers for runways and taxiways at Midway that would be visible to flight crews a few dozen feet off the surface of the ground? Just because Google Earth doesn’t show any at Midway, doesn’t mean they aren’t there. One would think that they should be there.
Of course, a confused/disoriented flight crew might have mis-read those markers, too.
So. A possible scenario.
P.S. Who am I, to talk about such things? I’m a retired Navy submarine officer, who has worn glasses since third grade. Decades ago, I managed to squeeze several dozen hours of private pilot instruction into an otherwise hectic life. I flew most of those hours out of a tiny uncontrolled airfield outside Bremerton WA. And I have been, well, a fan-boy of aviation since … forever. So I *know* that I’m no highly-experienced professional and/or expert. But I can look at a satellite image, and I can try to make sense of it.
The LXJ560 crew had the instructions read to them twice. They repeated the second set. At least one of them should have realized where they were and what they were doing. Anytime you’re taxiing its always a good idea to have you nose out of the panel and off the departure procedures. Plenty of time for that once you line up. Back when I was a student pilot, my instructor always had me put the plane into a position in which I could see both ends of any runway I was crossing or cleared for even at controlled airports just to be sure.
I hope the next set of instructions the FJ crew receive are “Fries cook for 2 minutes. Take them out, salt them, and then bag ’em.”
The Flexjet pilot’s readbacks are not only incorrect and messy, but they also sound somewhat detached, inconcerned as if the pilot’s attention was diverted and he didn’t care that much.
I hope this incident also acts as a red flag to ATC policy makers. They might want to be somewhat stricter on the implementation of ATC-conversation rules for pilots.
This conversation certainly does not sound very reassuring to me as a passenger.
It looks like the Pilots of 560FX will not be receiving the Master Pilot Award from the FAA after this violation and all the media hype about mishaps.
Nice coverage of a very near miss. Whew!
Flexjet 560 Pilot should be taken his flying license away. He is obviously NOT able to follow instructions. 🙁 No more flying for him or he will potentially Kill a lot of people.
Jez man, that pilot needs to go back to training school and stopped from flying until he can understand instructions. Or he is going to kill a lot of people.
Highlights the importance of read back and orientation of where you are at all times.
What part of “hold short of runway 31C” didn’t the Flexjet jockey not understand!?
So what happens when a pilot doesn’t follow instructions at an airport.?
Two commercial and probably experienced pilots first of all do a wrong read back of their taxi instructions, including crossing clearances and then, after being corrected and reading back everything correct the second time the instructions are given.
How ever is it possible that within about one minute after the correct read back that they cross the runway they were instructed to hold short of!! And above all that they cross that active runway without looking outside, where they both could have seen a 737 on very short final.
In my opinion they both should never fly again.
That was very lucky that they almost crashed. And Southwest was going very fast 🚴三
Personally I think the Flexjet 560 pilot was inexperienced and clueless.
Sounds like distracted pilots, human error. Tower told them TWICE to hold… REVOKE their licenses….
Watch this beatuty! Those were the days… oops, no picture? Bad, really bad!
Ive been using flightfadar for years, love it.
Hello from Switzerland,
Crossing an active runway must be the responsibility of the controller, who gives the take-off and landing clearance for that runway.
Ground responsibility should end at the holding point at the intersection before crossing the runway.
In other words, you should not cross an active runway without clearance from the tower.
Furthermore, if too many crossing and holding short taxi clearances are issued for different runways at the same time, there is a very good chance that the pilots’ short-term memory will not be able to cope.
Ground should issue taxi clearances up to the holding/crossing point of the active runway, and pilots should be advised to contact the tower frequency controlling that particular active runway to cross.
Runway incursions and close calls will continue until the FAA recognises this small but important difference between ground and tower responsibilities.
Why can’t we just pay attention and listen to ATC it is not that hard to do.
Dana Netherton’s comments sound right to me.
A big accident that very nearly happened.
Top marks to the Southwest crew.
How about banning runway crossings & intersection takeoffs. Make them go the long way around. These incidents seem to be more common & lives lost needlessly.
Retired Part 135 pilot here – there is absolutely no excuse for this. Here’s why –
My mandatory (FAA) yearly refresher computer based training always included a module on runway incursion. Which pilot was on the controls? Which pilot initially and incorrectly repeated the readback instruction? The command “HOLD SHORT” is key.
The incursion is evidence that neither pilot understood where they were because they indeed did not hold short of runway 31C. Pilots are trained to query controllers if there is any question as to their clearance. Both of these pilots not only apparently did not know where they were but also apparently thought they did know.
Did either pilot have previous experience at Midway? If so they would have been familiar with the taxiway/runway layout. If not, did they review the layout and expected instructions prior to taxiing? The initial readback points to their unfamiliarity with the environment.
It’s not uncommon to fail a readback; in this case, though, it’s the first clue as to their lack of situational awareness. Runways and taxiways are clearly identified. (Mandatory training also includes a taxiway/runway signage module.) It has been suggested that sunlight glare may have been a contributing factor that inhibited their ability to see the taxiway/runway identifiers. Even if this were the case (doubtful) it demonstrates that both pilots were lacking situational awareness, and should have asked the controller for guidance.
This is such a gross violation that at minimum the captain’s commercial certificate should be revoked and the first officer be retrained. As a result of PRIA (Pilot Records Improvement Act) it is highly unlikely that, even if both pilots retain their certificates, that neither will ever fly again under CFR Part 121 or 135. No employer will risk their company’s solvency on hiring a pilot with a known gross violation such as this. Imagine a future accident where the investigation reveals the pilot had a history of runway incursion.
According to https://nbaa.org/flight-department-administration/personnel/pria/ “The Pilot Records Improvement Act (PRIA) was enacted primarily as a result of certain airline accidents attributable to pilot error.” And https://www.ngpa.org/understanding_faa_pria_records_by_swayne_martin “It’s a way for the FAA and employers to track records relating to pilot qualifications, experience, performance…”
When your son or daughter starts looking around for a flight training academy and they notice one older instructor in the midst of the younger ones they should not assume this is a highly experienced aviator – it might just be one of these two aviation failures.