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 2nd Jan 2024, 09:33
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
photo showing damage to the A350 which gives you an idea of the impact.
poppiholla is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:34
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rkenyon
The main fire initially was further down the runway where the cost guard plane was hit. The fire services would have attended that first. Once they'd dealt with that, they could move onto the JAL plane.
If you scroll to the start of this video:
the initial firefighting stage shows one firefighter with a single hose (which doesnt appear long enough) trying to fight the left engine on his own.

This is incredibly poor, you can't sugar coat it any other way sadly.

Compare it to this archive footage:
where multiple trucks are fighting the fire with remote equipment.
milhouse999 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:36
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 13 Posts
The video from inside the aircraft has disappeared from the thread.
PC767 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:36
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From the videos I've seen, it looks like the coastguard plane was hit around the C3/C4 areas around 34R. The coastguard plane's nose is still intact (you can still see the paint scheme on it). Airport fire department are crawling all over the wreckage.

It looks like the nose of a Saab 340 to me.

Nose is pointing to the left of frame and is banked over about 80 to its left. One of the firemen is standing in the right side of the cockpit window.
Kabobble is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:38
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: EDLB
Posts: 364
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
They had to fight two fires at the same time. One from a most likely full fuel Dash-8 on the runway and one from the A350 with my estimate a least 1 hour worth of fuel. We might see in the next days what (little) is left from the Dash-8. Regardless two plane on one runway is one too many. Will be interesting who screwed up here, as there are several holes in the cheese needed for this outcome. At least at some point the tower must have seen that there is a problem. Visibility was not bad, so even the A350 should have seen some lights from the Dash.
If you have none person missing in the A350 and 5 missing in the Dash it is clear where the priorities for firefighting and rescue operations are.

Last edited by EDLB; 2nd Jan 2024 at 09:48.
EDLB is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:40
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 13 Posts
Originally Posted by poppiholla
photo showing damage to the A350 which gives you an idea of the impact.
This photo suggests that impact was on the nose. Had the second aircraft lined up on the centre line? My initial thought was either an aircraft crossing the runway or stopped too close.
PC767 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:43
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Forest Hill
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yoshinori Yanagishima, Japanese Coast Guard Spokesman, has apparently said it's rego MA722, which is a Dash 8.
ViceSergal is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:47
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The JAL plane was being heavily foamed just after the crash.
shonandai is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:48
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: EPWA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The videos show, that they were already on ground during rollout phase when the planes colided.
konradeck is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:49
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 51N 17E
Posts: 34
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What made this airplane's on-deck stuff look so flammable?
Bahrd is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:50
  #71 (permalink)  
Xhi
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Location: Rome area
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Compton3fox
Fuselage looks mostly intact..
Visible dent in left engine cowling
Xhi is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:52
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Playback on FR24 shows the JAL to have been the first in a sequence of arrivals onto that runway. No arrivals for some time before that. It definitely appears to be heading for the correct runway as it was arriving simultaneously with a Solaseed Air 738.
AirportPlanner1 is online now  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:52
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 907
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It can be very difficult to see aircraft on the ground at night, especially when their strobes are not switched on.

“Another matter investigated by the NTSB was why the pilots of the two planes did not see each other in time to avoid the collision. Although the Metroliner didn’t have a cockpit voice recorder, rendering it impossible to say what the pilots were doing, it was hard to imagine that they could have seen a plane which was directly behind them. The USAir pilots, however, should have had an opportunity to spot the Metroliner. After all, it was a perfectly clear night, with at least 25 miles of visibility. But in his testimony before the Board, First Officer Kelly, the only surviving pilot from either plane, stated that the runway appeared perfectly clear — it was like the Metroliner wasn’t even there.

To understand why, investigators waited until a night with similar weather conditions, then positioned an identical Metroliner at intersection 45 on runway 24L at LAX. The investigators then flew several simulated approaches to runway 24L in a helicopter while the pilots of the Metroliner tested different lighting configurations. What they found was that if all of the Metroliner’s lights were turned on, it was possible to discern the aircraft, but in most configurations, it would blend almost perfectly into the runway lighting.

The Metroliner was equipped with an anti-collision beacon on the tail, navigation lights on the wingtips and tail, a taxi light on the nose, strobe lights on the tail and wingtips, and landing/recognition lights on the wings. However, normal Metroliner procedures called for the strobes, taxi light, and landing/recognition lights to be turned on only after receiving takeoff clearance. That left only the anti-collision lights and the navigation lights. An examination of the light bulbs confirmed that only these lights were illuminated at the time of the crash.

Testing showed that if these were the only lights on the Metroliner, it would have been very difficult to see. The navigation light on the tail blended perfectly with the runway centerline lighting, and the red anti-collision beacon was surprisingly dim. It was possible to spot the Metroliner if one knew it was there, but if one didn’t, it would have been a challenge. The findings therefore confirmed that it was unlikely that the pilots of USAir flight 1493 could have avoided the accident by seeing the Metroliner.”

source: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/...s-5d24ab5fec46

10002level is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:52
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rumours that the coastguard plane was Dash-8 JA722A.
This tallies with https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ja722a
Kabobble is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:54
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Birmingham
Age: 60
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fortissimo
Correct decision. There was a firefighter killed at DXB in 2016 when the wing of a fully evacuated B777 cooked off and he was hit by a large chunk of wing panel. Needless death.
Quite right too - these plastic aircraft full of Lithium ion Batteries and various pressurized accumulators should, once all pax and crew off, be cordoned off and left to burn. Also, there is residual fuel in the empty aux/tail tanks and probably 20% fuel in the main tanks.

Foam does not prevent Lion Batteries self sustaining....
Diesel_10 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:54
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Location: lancaster
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Congratulations to the crew

Im no expert other than an Aeronautical Eng degree but one thing I would say is to pay tribute to how well the cabin crew appear to have done in evacuating the A350. Its a large aircraft and looks like some exits were not useable. Im sure the facts will become clear soon enough but it seems people have lost their lives here and my thoughts to them and their families. Anyway shout out to the professionalism of all cabin crew. I wish some passengers would remember they are there primarily for their safety.
Paul Fisher is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:58
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,984
Received 155 Likes on 95 Posts
Just read that the pilot of the coastguard plane made it out, and they have found the other five but there is no word on their condition. This usually means in Japan that they are sadly awaiting a doctor to make an officially legal pronouncement.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 09:58
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jolihokistix
379 cabin crew + pax all safe.
A good testament to cabin crew professional with evac, and hopefully overall pax compliance with not taking onboard small wardrobes (or fiddling about trying to get them to disembark, sigh].

And hopefully this news event will encourage the bone-headed pax on other flights who ignore safety briefings as they "know it all" to at least give a minute or two's damn attention, even if just as a mental refresher, as whilst one hopes it will never be needed in life, it might be the best minute or so's reflection you make.

The post-report evaluation will be interesting reading I dare say on many levels.

My heart sank when I saw the news flash on our local [country] news sites and saw the first image.

luoto is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 10:00
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Birmingham
Age: 60
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you have none person missing in the A350 and 5 missing in the Dash it is clear where the priorities for firefighting and rescue operations are.[/QUOTE]
Meaning what exactly? I doubt if a fully loaded A350 hits a 20 ton Dash 8 with its NLG at speed, there was anything left of it to conduct a rescue.
Diesel_10 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2024, 10:04
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All arrivals at the time were using 34L. This was the only aircraft to land on 34R which was operating departures.
flt001 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.