PDA

View Full Version : Can you say Fired!!!


747FOCAL
25th Feb 2004, 22:43
I thought Northwest did this a long time ago, but the guy that sent me the photos said it just happened back in January. Maybe they did it again.

Subject: FW: Unclassified Aircraft Parking

Northwest's little incident This happened on Jan 19th (Sunday). Two mechanics taxiing the A320 from remote parking into a gate
at New York's LGA airport. They were held out on the taxiway for a bit. When finally cleared, the mechanic, being irritated, pulled a bit to much power. Coming into the gate he now finds he has no brakes. The Left engine was put into reverse, but it was too late. He hit the towbar, then the tractor. They hit the tractor so hard the nose gear collapsed. This is after he wiped out the jetway. The left side by the cockpit has been ripped open by the jetway. The jetway is now laying on top of the left wing and left engine. The left wingtip is also wiped out. After losing control the left wingtip rammed into the side of a Boeing 757 sitting at the next gate, ripping a hole in the right side. Remarkably no one was hurt, though a few were badly shaken. Made quite a noise as the nose came down. Sort of shook the ground, you might say. Oooops!!!


http://home.comcast.net/~aeroman2/gear.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~aeroman2/leftside.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~aeroman2/northwest.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~aeroman2/rightside.jpg

Budgie69
25th Feb 2004, 23:07
I have never quite understood why the normal practice at JFK (and presumably LGA) is for mechanics to taxi aircraft, rather than use a tow truck.

dallas dude
25th Feb 2004, 23:07
747 focal

Didn't fly into LGA in Jan 2004 (so not 100% sure) but I'm fairly certain these pix are from the incident last year. I was there that day and remember as we taxied along Bravo towards RW31 that there was a strikingly tall, red, tail that stuck out from behind an airplane at an adjacent parking spot. The guy I was flying with speculated about NWA bringing A330's into LGA and this reminded us of the days when DC10's were a common sight there, too.

As we continued eastbound and the full view appeared it became apparent this was not a 330 but a regular 319/320 sized airplane in that had had an argument with a jetbridge and lost.

Not sure of the exact date (could look it up but doubt it's that important).

Cheers, DD

Macs
25th Feb 2004, 23:10
Ouch!

Can I ask why the brakes weren't working? Surely if the engines were operating,there would be operational brakes?

If it's a case of faulty brakes, is it really his fault?:rolleyes:

Jobear
26th Feb 2004, 01:08
Prob forgot to or already turned off the Hydaulics?

Jobear

Luv 744s
26th Feb 2004, 12:34
Probably referring to this Jan 19, 2003 accident at LGA:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20030129X00123&key=1

Young Paul
26th Feb 2004, 16:59
Jobear - if the engines are running, the hydraulics ought to be powered.

lomapaseo
26th Feb 2004, 22:30
Yes, these photos match the same incident of some year ago complete with same gate #

However, I think that is not fair to use either the word fired = as in to be terminated, or the word irritated since both words imply judgements not necessarily supported by facts.

Someday you also may be involved in an incident and still have a family to support.

747FOCAL
26th Feb 2004, 23:36
lomapaseo,

Don't you think that is beig a bit sensative?

If I had been responsible for a disaster on that level I would head right for my locker and grab my lunch pale and go home. And try and get another job before the word got out. :E

Honestly though, using the word fired was just for lack of a better one. come on now, you know as well as I do the guy at the controls was gone before the end of the day.

Our flight test pilots know that if you bang up an airplane, especially a new one, your gone before the airplane comes to a stop.

lomapaseo
27th Feb 2004, 10:44
747Focal

:p

well your spelling gave me a chuckle

Mine spelin arrows pail in comparison ;)

My names Turkish
28th Feb 2004, 02:07
Its an interesting question thats been asked but not answered, Why do Mechanics Taxi the plane and not use a tow truck?

BigHitDH
28th Feb 2004, 13:10
Its an interesting question thats been asked but not answered, Why do Mechanics Taxi the plane and not use a tow truck?

Lord alone knows.

Still, I would imagine it gives the mechanic something to talk about at dinner parties....:ok:

Rollingthunder
28th Feb 2004, 13:18
Usually done between hangar and ramp. Lack of tugs is often a factor. Sometimes last mtce checks are done on the way after servicing or mtce. Engineers who taxi aircraft are fully trained and certified to taxi.
Can't explain gate to gate taxiing as, unless your airline does reverse thrust pushbacks, there's not much point.

weasil
28th Feb 2004, 13:20
One of my friends works for American Eagle as a mechanic. Last week he told me about two mechanics in Texas - I believe - who were doing a full power run up when the a/c skipped the chocks and proceeded to slide across the snow and through a hangar. They made all the guys he works with go get taxi training in the simulators after that. He said they taxi them cause they can and it's fun.

747FOCAL
3rd Mar 2004, 21:27
lomapaseo,

I am a victim of spell check. Once the brain no longer has to worry about speeling right it goes soft. :E Or was it the beer?:}

av8boy
4th Mar 2004, 01:00
Once saw a Piper Saratoga getting a runup and final check after maintenance. The engine was running and the mechanic was in the seat looking at the panel, looking at a clipboard, looking at his elbow... hell, I don't know. All I know is that he wasn't looking out the window. The aircraft crept forward, unnoticed. I believe he looked up just as the prop began to dig into the side of the parked Jet Ranger, amidships.

Nobody hurt. Everything insured. Very cool to examine the damage and see all those things (evidence of who was doing what and when) you always read about in the NTSB reports...

Dave

BigEndBob
5th Mar 2004, 03:55
Blimey...one of those days...hey!

witchdoctor
5th Mar 2004, 17:35
I prefer the term "subject to headcount reduction" myself.:}