Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

JAL incident at Haneda Airport

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

JAL incident at Haneda Airport

Old 3rd Jan 2024, 01:37
  #301 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,190
Received 65 Likes on 53 Posts
From earlier footage analysis, we learnt the Dash entered the runway some 45 seconds before impact. It seems possible that,with dust3tl touch down, the approaching 350 may not have shown up clearly as lining up for 34R? In daylight the view would have been different.

Regading observations that the nose of the 350 was not more damaged by the vertical stab of the Dash, might that be due to the JAL pilot operating making an instinctive move of the control? There would probably have been only a second or two to realise the Dash was there. If the control was moved to the right, this may have avoided the tail, whilst starting the line that eventually took the off the runway.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 01:45
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
I'll be interested in knowing where the crew of the Coast Guard plane was from. I understand that they have a big base at HND, but given the Earthquake response, I think it's possible the crew were from another part of the country and may have been unfamiliar with operating from HND. While it seems they weren't given a clearance to enter the runway, everything else is still to be answered, did they know they were on the runway, did they intend to be on the runway?

Massive kudos to the JAL crew for remaining as much directional control as they could (with no nose gear), the aircraft has clearly come to rest on the sea wall side of the runway, if they deviation had of occurred earlier and more severely the outcome would have been much different.
logansi is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 01:53
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

For what it’s worth
armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 01:57
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 255
Received 22 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by DIBO
I think this will be THE atc instruction, moments before this accident .
Audio is very poor, so I tried my best to reliably transcript it.... this is my best shot (no pilot reply recorded):
==> BUT those wanting to give it a shot, listen to the audio in attached zip-file, before opening the 'spoiler' with my transcript
.
On your transcript I think the Controller is saying "Tokyo Tower" after the CG callsign and before "good evening".

I also believe you're right about the instruction and "abeam" could have used more clarification. That said, there was no mention of runway, as in "Runway 34R, Line up and wait".

PukinDog is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 02:17
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Bbtengineer
What do you mean did they know they were on a runway because it’s HND?

How is that a question?
You do know how many incidents and near misses involving runway incursions are a result of crews getting lost and ending up on a runway thinking it's a taxiway right, something far more likely to occur if a crew is unfamiliar with said airport.
logansi is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 02:18
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Oka
Posts: 46
Received 18 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by logansi
You do know how many incidents and near misses involving runway incursions are a result of crews getting lost and ending up on a runway thinking it's a taxiway right, something far more likely to occur if a crew is unfamiliar with said airport.
That has nothing to do with familiarity with the airfield. The problem lies elsewhere.

Last edited by Bbtengineer; 3rd Jan 2024 at 02:39.
Bbtengineer is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 02:51
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bottom of the Harbour
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
One thing that nobody has considered yet is the ATC transcript and the calls made that provide some situational awareness of what has unfolded here.

Was the A350 given a landing clearance with the DHC-8 on the runway?
Was the A350 told to expect a late landing clearance due traffic?
Was the A350 crew informed that traffic is about to roll on the same runway?
Was the DHC-8 informed that traffic is at X miles, expect a late take off clearance?

One thing I know the Japanese ATC were good for is communicating what was happening on the ground. I recall numerous times ATC telling me what was happening with traffic on the runway, and all of us were on the same frequency so we knew what was happening even if it wasn't broadcast!

Discussions on lighting and HUD is a distraction from the fundamental lack of situational awareness that has occurred in this accident!
KABOY is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 03:08
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The land of the Rising Sun
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Japanese news is reporting a serious discrepancy between what the Coast Guard Pilot claims he was instructed to do and what the ATC says they instructed him to do. Therein lies the key to the accident.
Old Carthusian is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 03:16
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Oka
Posts: 46
Received 18 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by KABOY
One thing that nobody has considered yet is the ATC transcript and the calls made that provide some situational awareness of what has unfolded here.

Was the A350 given a landing clearance with the DHC-8 on the runway?
Was the A350 told to expect a late landing clearance due traffic?
Was the A350 crew informed that traffic is about to roll on the same runway?
Was the DHC-8 informed that traffic is at X miles, expect a late take off clearance?

One thing I know the Japanese ATC were good for is communicating what was happening on the ground. I recall numerous times ATC telling me what was happening with traffic on the runway, and all of us were on the same frequency so we knew what was happening even if it wasn't broadcast!

Discussions on lighting and HUD is a distraction from the fundamental lack of situational awareness that has occurred in this accident!
I think we can reasonably suppose the Dash 8 was given clearance either to line up on the runway or hold short.

I think we can reasonably suppose the JAL flight was given clearance to land on the runway.

I think we can also reasonably suppose the landing clearance was not cancelled based upon the actual position of the Dash 8.

What remains, at least for me, is why the landing clearance was not cancelled based upon the actual position of the Dash 8, regardless whether the Dash 8 was cleared to be in that position or not.
Bbtengineer is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 03:42
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern Shores of Lusitania Kingdom
Age: 53
Posts: 861
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Acc some info JAL 350s have a tail and belly mounted cameras that can be viewed by the passengers through the IFE system.
Does anyone know if the footage from those cameras is recorded for possible later use, like an accident as this? Tks
JanetFlight is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 03:50
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: London
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Eh?

Originally Posted by Bbtengineer
That has nothing to do with familiarity with the airfield. The problem lies elsewhere.
Stop being so dismissive. Unfamiliarity with the layout of an airfield is a major contributing factor to lack of situational awareness - time spent glancing at taxiway maps on iPads or knee boards is time not paying as much attention to radios or to looking at the runway approach.

This board would be a lot better if people didn’t declare shoot down suggestions with cast iron (often wrong) “certainties”.
cjad100 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 03:58
  #312 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 2,965
Received 870 Likes on 261 Posts
Originally Posted by Bbtengineer
That has nothing to do with familiarity with the airfield. The problem lies elsewhere.
Expectancy will be a factor in this event, The coast guard v\crew is undertaking a relief operation which comes with actual but mainly peceived pressures. wile on the parallel taxiway they are given both "number 1" and then "hold abeam C-5'" as far as I can see. They were expecting to go to C-1 full length, but if they were busy, that could have triggered a slip in their mental model of the world. Looking at C-5 holding point, they would have observed there were no stop lights illuminated, and that could have triggered a failure of their SA, perceiving that as a tacit approval to line up. The stop bar lights were US by NOTAM.

In such a case, peceived time pressure would compound the SA failing, bringing forward final TO check items. All that is needed is a failure to look out the window, there was an aircraft less than 2nm away on final to the same runway, and TAWS should have been displayed to the pilots and to the tac crew.

Being home plate, in this case would act against the crew not necessarily for them.

It is easy to lose SA, it is harder to realise that it has occurred, and it is challenging to recover from it. As flight crew, we are dealing with this every hour of every day, only have to get it wrong once to make up for all the years of getting it right.

I would think that the toll in this case is 6; the captain of the coast guard aircraft will find it difficult to survive the awareness of the consequences of a simple failure of SA. A sad day all round.


fdr is online now  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 04:03
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hawaii
Age: 77
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone want to bet the fire crews responded to the fire on the runway,at the initial impact location.and expended all of their water which allows a containable fire to get out of control.
The A350 wasn't on fire at first, it's the remains the other aircraft.
hunbet is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 04:13
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: I would tell you, but my GPS keeps getting jammed
Posts: 169
Received 49 Likes on 20 Posts
Originally Posted by fdr
In such a case, peceived time pressure would compound the SA failing, bringing forward final TO check items. All that is needed is a failure to look out the window, there was an aircraft less than 2nm away on final to the same runway, and TAWS should have been displayed to the pilots and to the tac crew..
This is what I pointed out before, but the post for deleted for some reason.

I agree about the Captain's difficulty in being able to cope with this incident, particular with their culture.
VHOED191006 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 04:17
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 365
Received 7 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by hunbet
Anyone want to bet the fire crews responded to the fire on the runway,at the initial impact location.and expended all of their water which allows a containable fire to get out of control.
The A350 wasn't on fire at first, it's the remains the other aircraft.
In all of the images of the 350...it's on fire. I doubt there there was ever the slightest chance of it being containable, given that it mostly seemed to be deep in the belly.
mrdeux is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 04:23
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 2,022
Received 161 Likes on 98 Posts
I used to teach English to Japanese ATC staff in a regional airport control tower. Some of them had worked at Haneda, and we often discussed their experiences, difficulties, successes and problems with using varieties of world English. Part of the problem will surely lie in miscommunication related to use of language, as has been hinted at above.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 04:42
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by DIBO
I think this will be THE atc instruction, moments before this accident .
Audio is very poor, so I tried my best to reliably transcript it.... this is my best shot (no pilot reply recorded):
==> BUT those wanting to give it a shot, listen to the audio in attached zip-file, before opening the 'spoiler' with my transcript

Spoiler
 









Attached zip with the audio clip containing 3 times the instruction: original / slowed down / stretched.
thats quite clear.. “Taxi to Holding Point Charlie Five”. Did you have the read-back audio?
605carsten is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 05:20
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 830
Received 111 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by KABOY
One thing that nobody has considered yet is the ATC transcript and the calls made that provide some situational awareness of what has unfolded here.

Discussions on lighting and HUD is a distraction from the fundamental lack of situational awareness that has occurred in this accident!
First, one can only assume you didn't bother to read, or even scan, the thread before you wrote the first part.

Second, the discussions on this thread related to the HUD are EXACTLY about situational awareness.

grizzled is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 05:21
  #319 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 228
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DIBO
I think this will be THE atc instruction, moments before this accident .
Audio is very poor, so I tried my best to reliably transcript it.... this is my best shot (no pilot reply recorded):
Surely it won't be only moments before. The good evening in the message suggests this is the first contact, and then it takes a certain time to taxi that far

Has the frequency been listened to all the way through? This message would exist anyway, whether or not there is a subsequent instruction to the same aircraft.

I'm not saying there is or might be, but don't assume one found snippet on its own as the whole lot unless it's also clear there is nothing else. And the other frequency.

Last edited by aox; 3rd Jan 2024 at 05:38.
aox is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2024, 05:40
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apologies if anyone has already suggested this, but I reckon this aircraft entered at Charlie 4 and rolled up to stop abeam Charlie 5 (note the white light visible on the DHC8 moving forward for quite some time before it comes to a stop), and that ties with the instruction to 'taxi abeam Charlie 5, as mentioned above. Terrible miscommunication/misunderstanding if so. Feel for my Japanese friends in aviation.
SnapperBasil67 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.