JAL incident at Haneda Airport
See one of my later posts why.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: just off the M27
Age: 48
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the controller's use of No.1 to the outbound, it suggested the mental plan was there, land the inbound, squeeze the departure, then late landing clearance to come for the next.
I can't help wondering though if adding "No.1" to the outbound aircraft's taxi clearance might have set positive expectation bias in the Coastguard crew that they'd be the first movement (in or out) once they reached c5.
Sad outcome, but kudos to the JAL crew.
I can't help wondering though if adding "No.1" to the outbound aircraft's taxi clearance might have set positive expectation bias in the Coastguard crew that they'd be the first movement (in or out) once they reached c5.
Sad outcome, but kudos to the JAL crew.
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Craven Arms
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume that the ICAO phraseology will be changed after this accident. Hold short (stop on taxi way), position and hold (stop on the runway but no take off clearance), holding position (stop on the taxi way) are too ambiguous and can be mixed with clutter on the frequency or wishful thinking of a tired crew.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: LSZG
Age: 52
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not yet all answers covered - I still want to hear what the guys in the Dash 8 were thinking when they overran the hold C5 and entered the runway. I assume that the PM was discussing with PF of what to do next, assuming that being No1 the had time for discussion and if it was a mistaken runway incursion, goes back to my other theory, strobe was off at that time as they might not had planned to end up on the runway. A350 had no chance to see a strobe on runway. CVR of the DH3 will give a clue on this.
Anybody able to pick up the original trustworthy transscript and paste it into a post? Just the last 5 Minutes and the 2 relevant a/c marked bold?
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EDIT: obviously the transcript makes clear that JL516 was cleared to land before JA722A was instructed to taxi to the C5 holding point.
Last edited by Iron Duck; 3rd Jan 2024 at 14:20.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
8 Posts
Just to clear any potential misunderstanding, JAL166 is NOT the landing aircraft involved in the accident (which is JAL516) but is the next aircraft in the approach sequence. It can be assumed that it flew a missed approach.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
8 Posts
For any pilot familiar with Haneda, are the statements "spot 18" and "spot 21" referring to parking pre-allocated spots? Is there a requirement to state the parking spot in the first message sent to the tower?
Possibility below:
Atco mental plan anticipated coastguard 722 to get out ahead of 516.
722 isn’t on frequency as hoped.
Mental plan changes 516 given clearance to land.
722 now on freq instructed no1 and to hold at C5 holding point.
Plan now of 722 going in gap between 516 and 166 hence min approach speed instruction to 166, and notice of traffic to depart ahead.
Note from time stamps 722 may not have heard 516 landing clearance, but will have heard ‘slow down’ instruction due departure ahead to 166.
Then the final holes line up, (full reasons to be determined), including, confirmation bias’s and in particular, unserviceable stop bar protecting the active runway.
edit to improve sequence above
Last edited by jumpseater; 3rd Jan 2024 at 14:44.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Source is this bloomberg article. I believe it's the transcript mentioned earlier today by Reuters, that has been released specially by the Japanese transport ministry in relation to this accident, hence only the short excerpt.
Another article I could read also says it has been released by the Japanese transport ministry
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2024/01/...-tokyo-runway/
Maybe I'm being pedantic, but to me the inclusion of some following comments on the transcript would rule a better line under it than this slightly open ended look.
But I don't know the exact time of the collision, so maybe it is complete enough, and I needn't be asking. Apologies if my question looks dim to some readers
I OCR converted into text, rearranged and marked bold the passages of the two accident aircraft. Please somebody crosschecked for OCR errors
The last line is MY comment, that's the impact time. It coincides with the CCTV timestamp, I hope that's accurate
17:43:02
(JAL516): Tokyo TOWER JAL516 spot18.
(Tokyo TOWER): JAL516 Tokyo TOWER good evening RUNWAY 34R continue approach wind 320/7, we have departure
17:43:12
(JAL516): JAL516 continue approach 34R.
17:43:26
(DAL276): Tokyo TOWER DAL276 with you on C, proceeding to holding point 34R
(Tokyo TOWER): DAL276 Tokyo TOWER good evening. taxi to holding point C1.
(DAL276): Holding point C1, DAL276
17:44:56
(Tokyo Tower): JAL516 RUNWAY 34R cleared to land wind 310/8
17:45:01
(JAL516): Cleared to land RUNWAY 34R JAL516.
17:45:11
(JA722A): TOWER JA722A C.
(Tokyo Tower): JA722A Tokyo TOWER Good evening, No.1, taxi to holding point C5
17:45:19
(JA722A): Taxi to holding point C5 JA722A No.1, Thank you.
17:45:40
(JAL179): Tokyo TOWER JAL179 taxi to holding point C1.
(Tokyo Tower):JAL179 Tokyo TOWER good evening, No.3, taxi to holding point C1
(JAL179): Taxi to holding point C1, we are ready JAL179.
17:45:56
(JAL166): Tokyo TOWER JAL166 spot 21.
(Tokyo Tower):JAL166 Tokyo TOWER good evening, No.2, RUNWAY 34R continue approach wind 320/8, we have departure, reduce speed to 160 knots.
17:46:06
(JAL166): Reduce 160 knots RUNWAY 34R continue approach, JAL166 good evening
17:47:23
(Tokyo Tower):JAL166, reduce minimum approach speed
(JAL166): JAL166
17:47:27
(comment by waito: Impact Landing JAL516 A350 into waiting JA722A Dash-8)
The last line is MY comment, that's the impact time. It coincides with the CCTV timestamp, I hope that's accurate
17:43:02
(JAL516): Tokyo TOWER JAL516 spot18.
(Tokyo TOWER): JAL516 Tokyo TOWER good evening RUNWAY 34R continue approach wind 320/7, we have departure
17:43:12
(JAL516): JAL516 continue approach 34R.
17:43:26
(DAL276): Tokyo TOWER DAL276 with you on C, proceeding to holding point 34R
(Tokyo TOWER): DAL276 Tokyo TOWER good evening. taxi to holding point C1.
(DAL276): Holding point C1, DAL276
17:44:56
(Tokyo Tower): JAL516 RUNWAY 34R cleared to land wind 310/8
17:45:01
(JAL516): Cleared to land RUNWAY 34R JAL516.
17:45:11
(JA722A): TOWER JA722A C.
(Tokyo Tower): JA722A Tokyo TOWER Good evening, No.1, taxi to holding point C5
17:45:19
(JA722A): Taxi to holding point C5 JA722A No.1, Thank you.
17:45:40
(JAL179): Tokyo TOWER JAL179 taxi to holding point C1.
(Tokyo Tower):JAL179 Tokyo TOWER good evening, No.3, taxi to holding point C1
(JAL179): Taxi to holding point C1, we are ready JAL179.
17:45:56
(JAL166): Tokyo TOWER JAL166 spot 21.
(Tokyo Tower):JAL166 Tokyo TOWER good evening, No.2, RUNWAY 34R continue approach wind 320/8, we have departure, reduce speed to 160 knots.
17:46:06
(JAL166): Reduce 160 knots RUNWAY 34R continue approach, JAL166 good evening
17:47:23
(Tokyo Tower):JAL166, reduce minimum approach speed
(JAL166): JAL166
17:47:27
(comment by waito: Impact Landing JAL516 A350 into waiting JA722A Dash-8)
Last edited by waito; 3rd Jan 2024 at 15:43.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
I think that the last transcript entry (for 17:47:27) is along the lines of "3 seconds of silence" (assuming that Japanese uses these characters similarly to Chinese). There are then 5 lines of footnotes identifying the aircraft - JAL516 is the first arrival, JA722A is the first departure, JAL166 second arrival, DAL276 second departure, JAL179 third departure - all of which is already known to anyone who's been following the story, but it all makes the page look complete to me.
17:44:56
(Tokyo Tower): JAL516 RUNWAY 34R cleared to land wind 310/8
(Tokyo Tower): JAL516 RUNWAY 34R cleared to land wind 310/8
17:45:11
(JA722A): TOWER JA722A C.
(Tokyo Tower): JA722A Tokyo TOWER Good evening, No.1, taxi to holding point C5
(JA722A): TOWER JA722A C.
(Tokyo Tower): JA722A Tokyo TOWER Good evening, No.1, taxi to holding point C5
17:45:19
(JA722A): Taxi to holding point C5 JA722A No.1, Thank you.
(JA722A): Taxi to holding point C5 JA722A No.1, Thank you.
Assuming it takes 7-10 seconds from Holding Point C5 to come to the assumed stop-position and assuming 45s for waiting at that position
then at passing the HP C5, the approaching A350 was 2.5NM out.
Crazy that the RHS didnt clear the area visually with a 350 all lit up on 2.5nm final… I would assume the Coast Guard operates into strange places so used to keeping eyes outside….
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: oakland
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Europe, "Clear to Land" by ATC means the runway is clear and will remain clear until after you land, whereas in the US, it's still "buyer beware", and there may well be approved aircraft movements on and across the runway,, before you land.
What is it in Japan?
What is it in Japan?